Russia-Africa Ties: Kremlin for a Mideast Meet – -By Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal

Russia-Africa Ties: Kremlin for a Mideast Meet -By Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal





A continent not known for any extra energy resources, Africa has been ignored by neo-imperialist USA and European states who other wise speak about lack of “democracy” and seek “regime changes” for advancing their resources goal don’t bother about democracy and regime issues in Africa. But China and Russia are making diplomatic efforts invest in Africa for profits taking into account the cheap labour and raw materials in the region.



Russian President Dmitry Medvedev embarked on a four-day African tour on 23 June, covering Egypt, Nigeria, Angola and Namibia. Beginning with a visit to pro-West Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak for talks on economics and politics particularly the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the disputed Iranian elections, Medvedev is scheduled to have a hectic time. Medvedev’s trip appears focused on helping Russian companies gain additional access to the continent’s natural resources wealth. The president arrived in Egypt on 23 June, and then goes on to. The main focus is on key Russian export strengths, especially energy resources and nuclear power. His visit comes at a time when Russia is trying to strengthen its global, strategic role.


President Medvedev, in his first official visit to Africa, and the first by a Russian head of state for more than three years has met his Egyptian counterpart, Mubarak, in Cairo at the start of a four-day trip to Africa. Russia’s economic and trade ties, as well as the Middle East peace process, were expected to be high on the agenda in talks between Medvedev and Mubarak. Medvedev is due to sign a nuclear energy deal in Egypt, which is Russia’s top trading partner in the continent. He will later visit Nigeria, Namibia and Angola, where he will seek to promote Russian business interests, particularly in the energy sector.

Medvedev also seeks to rekindle the Soviet Union’s once-close ties with Egypt, which have been complicated recently by a dispute over the quality of Russian grain exports. Last month, Egypt declined to accept Russian grain after it said a 137,000-ton shipment contained an excess of insects and seeds. The Federal Phytosanitary Inspection Service, Russia’s agriculture watchdog, consequently rejected 168 tons of Egyptian oranges in the port of Novorossiysk after finding a large number of Mediterranean fruit flies in a shipment, but Russian Foreign Ministry officials said the grain dispute would not hurt relations.



Egypt is the world’s eighth-largest LNG exporter, but it wants to meet rising local demand before committing to any new export deals. The presidents have plenty to discuss, particularly economic ties that comprised just 0.3 percent of Russia’s overall foreign trade in the first four months of 2009. Energy tops the agenda, as both Energy Minister Sergei Shmatko and Rosatom chief Sergei Kiriyenko are accompanying Medvedev. Rosatom, the state nuclear corporation, is planning to sign a deal in Egypt that would allow it to bid for the right to build the country’s first nuclear power station and to explore for uranium. Gazprom has expressed interest in investing in Egypt and Nigeria, both members of the Gas Exporting Countries Forum. The group, which also includes Russia and Iran, is scheduled to hold its next meeting on June 30 in Doha, Qatar. Talks were held with Mahmud Latif, chairman of the Egyptian Natural Gas Holding Company, in December to discuss opportunities for Gazprom to join exploration and production projects there, including buying into Egypt’s two liquefied natural gas plants.



The visit comes on the heels of U.S. President Barack Obama’s well-received visit to Cairo earlier this month. But the situation in the region has already shifted, rocked by the mass protests, engineered by the US/UK-inspired opposition, over the Iranian presidential election, making Medvedev’s visit to the regional power broker “extremely timely”. At the same time, there is uneasiness in the relationship now; thousands of Russian students travel to Egypt to pursue Islamic studies and often “come back as radical Islamists”. Russians feel it is necessary for the countries to coordinate actions in preventing their radicalization. Thirty Russian citizens were detained in Egypt earlier this month during a police document check at a Cairo university. Four Chechens were deported to Russia last week despite concerns for their safety, and one of them, the son of a rebel leader, has not been seen since arriving at a Moscow airport.




Just last week, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev chaired three international summits, including SCO and the first meeting of the leaders of the so-called Bric developing countries involving Brazil, Russia, India and China.  At Bric meet in Russia, Dmitry Medvedev said that reserve currencies, including the dollar, “have not managed to perform their functions. Both Russia and China have questioned the role of the dollar in the world’s economy, leading to speculation that Bric might be considering the creation of a new global reserve currency. As the global recession bites, the four Bric nations are showing a growing willingness to work together and called for a bigger say in the global financial system.



Despite the relatively modest $600 million in trade from January to April, Russian grain exports and Egypt-bound tourists make it Moscow’s biggest economic partner on the trip. Medvedev and Mubarak signed five bilateral agreements in the spheres of security, justice, environment, culture and information. Russia and Egypt have already signed an accord in March 2008 on nuclear co-operation, possibly opening the way for Russia to construct nuclear power stations in the country. The first reactor, on the Mediterranean coast, will be constructed at a cost of more than $1.5bn (£750m). The Kremlin said: “The signing of an agreement on a strategic partnership between Russia and Egypt will become the central event of the Cairo summit.” Following talks, Mubarak said he supported Russia’s proposal for an international conference in Moscow on the Israeli-Palestinian dispute. The Kremlin declined to provide additional information on the trip. Spokespeople at the Egyptian, Nigerian and Angolan embassies in Moscow said they could not comment on the meetings. So, Russia is taken very seriously.
In Nigeria, Medvedev is expected to focus more on energy. After his two-day visit to Egypt, Medvedev heads to Nigeria, where Russia’s powerful gas giant, Gazprom, wants to secure contracts to build pipelines. In particular, the company is interested in the proposed Trans-Saharan pipeline, which would deliver Nigerian gas to Europe.  Gazprom was picked by Nigeria as one of 15 companies in April to be core investors in the exploration and production of its gas reserves, the world’s seventh-largest. In September, Gazprom and the state-owned Nigerian National Petroleum Company signed an agreement to look for joint projects to develop gas fields and transport the fuel. Gazprom also signed a memorandum of understanding with NNPC in April to analyze three oil blocks there for possible exploration. An agreement in Nigeria, which would allow the countries to cooperate in nuclear energy, will be signed.

After Nigeria, Medvedev will head southwest to Namibia, where he is scheduled to arrive Wednesday evening. In 2007, VTB, Viktor Vekselberg’s Renova Group and Tekhsnabexport, or TENEX, a unit of Rosatom’s Atomenergoprom holding for civilian nuclear assets, created a joint venture to produce uranium there. Representatives of uranium miner Atomredmetzoloto, another Rosatom unit, will be going to Namibia. The company established a joint venture with VTB and Russian private equity firm Arlan last year to explore uranium deposits in western Namibia. The Russian president has meetings arranged with well-known African figures, including Namibia’s founding father, Sam Nujoma, as well as a safari trip. The Namibia-Russia Intergovernmental Commission on Trade and Economic Cooperation is overseeing the new business partnership.


Medvedev’s last stop was Angola, Namibia’s northern neighbor, where Alrosa has a diamond branch in the capital, Luanda. The state diamond monopoly said in April that it was pulling out of its joint venture in Angola following the collapse of the world diamond market. Alrosa has also cut production in Russia, where state depository Gokhran has been buying all of the company’s output until prices recover.



Medvedev’s visit is only the second time a Russian president has traveled to sub-Saharan Africa. Former president and Russia’s strong man Vladimir Putin visited South Africa and Morocco in 2006, and he also met with Mubarak in Cairo in 2005. The long-serving Egyptian president elicited a frown from then-President Putin on his most recent visit to Moscow, in March 2008, when he joked that he saw “few differences” between him and President-elect Medvedev.
President Dmitry Medvedev while in Egypt on his Mideast tour said a Middle East peace conference before the end of 2009 would be convened a move backed by Egypt. Russia, which had proposed such conferences in the past but vould noy hold any so far, is a member of the Quartet of Middle East negotiators, along with the EU, the USA and the UN. Medvedev said after talks with Egyptian President Mubarak: “We paid special attention to Middle East issues. We highly appreciate efforts by the Egyptian president to create an atmosphere of trust and cooperation in the region,” He said at a joint news conference in Cairo that the Moscow Middle East conference, which they plan to hold before the end of the year, will also contribute to achieving this goal.
Outside the Islamic world, Russia is one among a few nations that support Hamas or, at least don’t oppose their genuine claims. Moscow is the only quartet member talking to Hamas, the group that controls Gaza but which is snubbed by Israel and the West. Yasser Abed Rabbo, aide to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, said, “We welcome the holding of an international conference in Moscow. But before it can go ahead, there must be real improvements.” This included stopping Israeli settlement activity on Palestinian land and an Israeli commitment to a two-state solution.


The Palestinians, like Egypt and other Arab states, have dismissed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s conditional proposal for a demilitarized Palestinian state. Medvedev’s trip to Egypt comes less than three weeks after U.S. President Barack Obama visited Cairo. Fascist Israel says it “would, in principle, agree to attend, provided, of course, that “anti-peace elements” such as Hamas and Hezbollah are not invited.” Israel seeks no peace in the region and hence the fascist leadership promotes state terrorism in Palestine, each time they invade, killing innocent Palestinians whose lands they occupy.  





Obviously, the Medvedev’s African visit is part of a bid to bolster Russia’s global role. The countries he was visiting are rich in natural resources. Rosneft, the largest Russian oil company, whose chief is joining the delegation accompanying Medvedev, has announced its intention to expand its African operations. The final two countries on Medvedev’s itinerary, Namibia and Angola , present new opportunities for Russian corporations in the spheres of diamonds, metals, hydrocarbons and uranium. Alrosa , Russia ‘s state diamond corporation has worked in Angola for almost two decades. It has stakes in two existing joint ventures, and wants to explore for diamonds and diversify its holdings in energy. Russian companies have technical licences to prospect for uranium in Namibia, where energy, uranium reserves and tourism present potentially rich pickings.


Egypt has become the center of diplomatic exercises by big and medium powers on account of its proactive role in the strangled Palestine issue. Egypt mediates between Palestine and Israel, on the one hand, and Hamas and Fatah, on the other. Leaders of USA, Palestine, Israel keep flocking to Cairo for diplomatic adventures to resolve the crisis in Mideast by establishing – and already much delayed- Palestine state. Perhaps no other international issue has brought together so many times to discus the same issue without any real outcomes Palestine issue has been and the cause is the stubborn Zionist regime to black any peace move to force the Israelis to surrender the ands and sovereignty to the Palestinians. Russia is also making its “legitimate’ bid to convene a peace meet on Mideast. Last year a proposal was mad by the Kremlin only to be shelved by Russia for unknown reasons.



The political dimension of Medvedev’s trip has not been stressed by Moscow. Instead, Russian businessmen have accentuated the potential for making money. They acknowledge just how far Russia has fallen behind the major investors in Africa, particularly China. The volume of trade between Russia and the African countries remains paltry. For example, the Russian Academy of Sciences estimates that trade with Nigeria is worth $300m annually – as opposed to China’s $11bn. Today, in terms of influence, Russia lags far behind China and the US – not just in Egypt but right across the African continent, where it once had considerable influence. As the battle for the world’s energy and mineral resources gathers pace, that weakness is one that Medvedev will be keen to address. Medvedev headed for Africa aware that Russia is far behind Western and Chinese companies when it comes to securing a share of the continent’s natural wealth.


It is all part of what the Kremlin believes should be a truly global role for Russia, in keeping with what Moscow calls a multi-polar world, with several strong regional spheres of influence. The Africa trip is in continuation of Russia’s efforts possibly to forge an international coalition to face the unipolarity move of US-led west. The Soviet Union’s ties with Africa were political and ideological. The continent was a key battleground in the stand-off between East and West, the battles fought most often by proxy. Russia’s relations with Africa declined so quickly when the Soviet Union collapsed. Now a newly-assertive Russia is trying to bolster a global role, often in regions far from its own borders. Most Russians believe both Putin and Medvedev would lead Russia back to the era of Soviet glory making the nation a real super power to promote real equality at home and to effectively challenge the unilateralism of neo-imperialism. 


Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal

Independent Researcher in International Affairs, The only Indian to have gone through entire India, a fraud and terror nation,
South Asia.


Iran thanks Saudi Arabia for not harming its Hajj pilgrims! A new reconciliation effort?


Iran thanks Saudi Arabia for not harming its Hajj pilgrims! A new reconciliation effort?

-Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal



Artificial dichotomy


Saudi Arabia is a Sunni Islamic kingdom with a tradition of close ties with the USA, the UK and France. Iran is a Shia Islamic Republic founded in an anti-Western revolution with close ties to Russia and China. Both Saudi Arabia and Iran are seen to have aspirations for leadership of Islam, and have different visions of stability and regional order. In the Syrian Civil War Iran has supported the Bashir Al-Asad regime militarily and with billions of dollars of aid, while Saudi is a major supplier of aid to rebel groups.

Relationship Islamic Republic of Iran and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has historically been strained over different geo-political issues such as the interpretations of Islam, aspirations for leadership of the Islamic world, oil export policy and relations with the USA and other Western countries.

Although Saudi Arabia and Iran are both Muslim-majority nations and follow and rule through Islamic scripture, their relations are fraught with hostility, tension and confrontation, due to differences in political agendas that are strengthened for their differences in faith.

Bilateral relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran have never been normal or smooth. Strains, tensions, diplomatic rejections dominated their ties and in recent times tensions have accelerated thanks to interferences from USA and Israel- leaders of other major religions treating Islam their common foe.

One gets the impression even if Judaism and Christianity merge together,  Iran and Saudi would still continue for furthering their “influence and  domination” in the Islamic world. Obviously, there is something wrong with their perception of Islam and in their own faith.

Both want to severe their ties for some at times vague reasons. The two countries severed diplomatic relations last after Iranians stormed the Saudi embassy in Tehran in January 2016 in response to Riyadh’s execution of a prominent Shia cleric.


Thank you Sirs!

Some 86,000 Iranian pilgrims took part last week in the Hajj and Iranian government is gratified that Riyadh protected and helped Iranian pilgrims. .

As a possible new phase of relations, Iran thanked Saudi Arabia on September 05 for its handling of the Hajj arrangements and operations this year, saying it opened the way for negotiations between the regional rivals. “We thank Saudi Arabia… for adopting a new approach in dealing with Iranian pilgrims,” said Ali Ghazi-Askar, the head of the Hajj organisation in Tehran.

Iranians were unable to attend in 2016 after talks collapsed over security concerns. Iran had been highly critical of Saudi Arabia’s organisation efforts in the wake of a stampede during the 2015 Hajj that killed up to 2,300 people, including hundreds of Iranians. The 2015 incident happened because of mismanagement, but Saudis seem to have fixed that,” he told Reuters in a phone interview from Mecca.

“There are always differences arising among countries but the important thing is for the parties to resolve differences through dialogue and negotiation,” said an official Ghazi-Askar. “Right now, after holding a successful Hajj, it is a good time for both parties to negotiate to resolve their bilateral issues in other fields.”

Just before the Hajj journey last month: “If our pilgrims come back satisfied, and if Saudi Arabia’s behavior is within religious and international frameworks, I think the situation would be more convenient to resolve the issues,” Iranian official was quoted as saying by state news agency IRNA.

As both continued to strain ties, on February 14, 2016, the government of Switzerland announced that it will represent Saudi interests in Iran and Iranian interests in Saudi Arabia. Switzerland has recently been the protecting power for Egypt and the USA since diplomatic relations were strained following the 1979 Islamic Revolution. After the Saudi diplomatic missions in Tehran and Mashhad were ransacked by Iranian protesters, Saudi Arabia broke off diplomatic relations with Iran on January 3, 2016.

The ‘thanks-giving’ news gives, rather misleads the world about a new era of bilateral relations between them. But Iran’s Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif remained circumspect, however, saying he had yet to see “a clear prospect for change” in the bilateral relationship. “If such a development occurs in the Saudis’ mentality, it will definitely be a positive development and will be met with Iran’s positive reaction,” he told Khabar Online newspaper.

Generally, Iran and Saudi Arabia are on a collision course thanks to US-Israeli intervention in West Asian politics. Saudi Arabia is seen moving closer to Israel, the common enemy of Arab as well as Iambic world, to defeat Iran.

Possibly as a follow up of hajj pilgrimage, there seems to be a mutual appreciation between the two powers. A Saudi Arabian delegation will visit Iran for the first time after Riyadh severed ties with Tehran last year, Iran’s foreign ministry confirmed. “The Saudi delegation simply comes to visit diplomatic buildings because the buildings have been empty after the two countries broke off relations. At the same time, we will visit our buildings in Saudi Arabia,” Press TV quoted foreign ministry spokesman Bahram Qasemi as saying. Qasemi confirmed that the visas for the Saudis have been issued long before, but for “reasons that are related to them, they have not come yet, and their travel has likely been postponed until after annual Muslim Hajj ceremonies. He added that the date for the Iranian delegation’s visit has not been set yet. “To be honest, the Saudis are doing a great job, working hard to deliver the best service,” said Pir-Hossein Kolivand, head of Iran’s Emergency Medical Services.


Saudi and Iran compete for global leadership. In a wide-ranging interview, Saudi Prince Mohammed bin Salman said there was no space for dialogue with rival Iran due to its ambitions “to control the Islamic world.” Framing the tensions with Iran in sectarian terms, the prince said the Saudis would not sit and wait for war but would “work so that it becomes a battle for them in Iran and not in Saudi Arabia.”

That the language of hatred for Islam. Very recently before the Hajj, on May 08, 2017, Iran’s defence minister lashed back at Saudi Arabia, slamming the kingdom’s deputy crown prince over belligerent comments that underscored the deep rivalries between the two powers.

Western media is fueling a war psychology between Iran and Saudi Arabia that could destroy the combined economy of Arab nations. Iran’s defence minister General Hossein Dehghan was quoted as saying that Iran would advise against “such a stupidity” of war on Iran because in that case, nothing would be “left in Saudi Arabia except Makkah and Madina,” the two holy cities.  Referring to a possible Saudi attack or invasion of Iran, he said he doesn’t “understand how they would attempt to do something like that… they must imagine they have a powerful air force to do so.”

Earlier, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani ordered the arrest and prosecution of individuals involved in the embassy attack, while also condemning the execution of Nimr. Asked at the press conference what other steps the Saudis would take against Iran, Jubeir said “we will cross each bridge when we will get to it”.  “We are determined not to allow Iran to undermine our security,” he said.

Ellie Geranmayeh, an Iran expert at the European Council on Foreign Relations, said the Saudi decision was likely to have repercussions for the region, particularly concerning the Syrian negotiations. Western powers must increase efforts to safeguard this process and encourage the Saudis and Iran to continue their participation in the Syria peace talks. “These events further set back the urgently needed rapprochement between Tehran and Riyadh, and spell further trouble for an already fragile region.”


Severing ties & tensions


Ties between Saudi Arabia and Iran have been strained since Iran’s 1979 revolution, and significantly escalated last year as Riyadh executed a leading Shia cleric in the kingdom. This sparked the ransacking of the Saudi Embassy in Iran by protesters, after which the two countries severed diplomatic and trade ties. The tensions between the two countries have now sharply escalated with Saudi Arabia severing ties with the Islamic Republic following attacks on Saudi diplomatic missions in Iran.

Diplomatic relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia have been tense since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, though there have been occasional thaws between the two rivals. The tensions have now sharply escalated with Saudi Arabia >severing ties with the Islamic Republic following attacks on Saudi diplomatic missions in Iran. Here’s a look at how relations between the two Mideast powers have shifted over the last decades.

Under the rule of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, Iran had rocky relations with Saudi Arabia, though they improved toward the end of his reign. Both were original members of the oil cartel OPEC.

After the overthrow of the Shah and the takeover of the US Embassy in Tehran, Saudi Arabia quickly became America’s top ally in the region. In the ensuing 1980s war between Iran and Iraq, Saudi Arabia backed Iraq despite its concerns about President Saddam Hussein. That war would go on to kill one million people.

In 1988, Saudi Arabia severed ties with Iran, citing the 1987 Hajj rioting and Iran’s attacks on shipping in the Persian Gulf. Iranians responded by boycotting Hajj in 1988 and 1989. The two countries restored diplomatic ties in 1991.

Relations between the two nations improved after Iranian President Mohammad Khatami, a political moderate, took office in 1997. Ties warmed further after historic visits by Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah to Tehran in December 1997 and Khatami to the kingdom in May 1999.

There have been issues that strained the relations between Saudi (Gulf-states) and Iran.

1987 Hajj riots


The annual pilgrimage to Islamic holy sites in Saudi Arabia, required of all able-bodied Muslims once in their life, saw bloodshed when Iranians held a political demonstration. Iranian pilgrims later battled Saudi riot police in violence that killed at least 402 people. Iran claimed 600 of its pilgrims were killed and said police fired machine guns at the crowd. In Tehran, mobs attacked the Saudi, Kuwaiti, French and Iraqi embassies, ransacking the first two.

2015 Hajj disaster: On September 24, a stampede and crush struck the annual Hajj pilgrimage in Saudi Arabia. While the kingdom said 769 pilgrims were killed, an Associated Press count shows over 2,400 people were killed. Iran said at least 464 of its pilgrims were killed and blamed Saudi Arabia’s “incompetence” for the deaths.




On January 2, Saudi Arabia executed Shiite cleric Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr and 46 others the largest execution carried out by the kingdom in three and a half decades. The execution of al-Nimr, a central figure in Arab Spring-inspired protests by Saudi Arabia’s Shiite minority, sparked protests across the Mideast and attacks on Saudi diplomatic facilities in Iran. Saudi Arabia responded by announcing it was severing diplomatic ties with Iran over the attacks.

Dehghan expressed suspicions over what he described as Riyadh’s close ties with the United States and also Israel, suggesting such ties go against “interests of Muslim nations.”

The Saudis seek to “please” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for the “purpose of provoking Netanyahu’s action against us.” Dehghan also urged Saudi Arabia to withdraw from Yemen, where a Saudi-led coalition of mostly Arab states has been fighting the Houthi rebels.

The conflict has worsened an already dramatic humanitarian crisis in Yemen and killed thousands of civilians, mostly by Saudi-led coalition airstrikes.

In January 2016, Saudi Arabia has announced it is severing diplomatic ties with Iran following Saturday’s attack on its embassy in Tehran during protests against executions in the kingdom. Adel al-Jubeir, the Saudi foreign minister, made the announcement on Sunday while the foreign ministry said it was asking Iranian diplomatic mission to leave the kingdom within 48 hours. The Saudi foreign ministry also announced that the staff of its diplomatic mission had been evacuated and were on their way back to the kingdom. Later reports said the flight carrying the Saudi embassy staff had landed in Dubai in the UAE.

Saudi Arabia’s interior ministry announced the execution of 47 people on terrorism charges, including a convicted al-Qaeda leader and a Shia religious leader. Many of the men executed had been linked to attacks in Saudi Arabia between 2003 and 2006, blamed on al-Qaeda.

Four of those executed were said to be Shia. Nimr al-Nimr, the Shia leader, was accused of inciting violence and leading anti-government protests in the country’s east in 2011. He was convicted of sedition, disobedience and bearing arms. He did not deny the political charges against him, but said he never carried weapons or called for violence. Nimr spent more than a decade studying theology in predominantly Shia Iran. His execution prompted demonstrations in a number of countries, with protesters breaking into the Saudi embassy in Tehran late on Saturday night and starting fires.

At a press conference in Riyadh, Jubeir said the Saudi diplomatic representative had sought help from the Iranian foreign ministry when the building was stormed, but the requests were ignored three times. He accused the Iranian authorities of being complicit in the attack, saying that documents and computers were taken from the embassy building. Calling the incident an act of “aggression”, he said Iran had a history of “violating diplomatic missions”, citing the attacks on the US embassy in Tehran in 1979 and the British embassy in 2011. “These ongoing aggressions against diplomatic missions are a violation of all agreements and international conventions,” he said, calling them part of an effort by Iran to “destabilize” the region.

The Saudi decision was “quite a surprise” causing the latest developments. “This is an escalation that will create havoc in the region.”

Nuclear dispute


Worries about Iran resumed in Saudi Arabia amid international sanctions against Tehran over its contested nuclear program and the increasingly harsh rhetoric of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Iran and Saudi Arabia each backed opposite sides in Syria’s civil war, as well as in the civil war in Yemen. Saudi Arabia also grew increasingly suspicious of Iran as it reaches a deal with world powers over its nuclear program. Riyadh has not yet fully recovered from the shock of Iran-US compromises.


Roots of tensions


Apart from divisions like Sunni and Shia, the difference of political ideologies and governance also divided both countries. USA and Israel play divisive role in making Sunni and Shia fight and kill each other.

After the Iranian Revolution, relations deteriorated considerably after Iran accused Saudi Arabia of being an agent of the USA in the Persian Gulf region, representing US interests rather than Islam. Saudi Arabia is concerned by Iran’s consistent desire to export its revolution across the board to expand its influence within the Persian Gulf region—notably in post-Saddam Iraq, the Levant and within further south in addition to Iran’s controversial, much debated nuclear program.

The founder of the Iranian revolution in 1979, Ayatollah Khomeini, was ideologically opposed to monarchy, which he believed to be unIslamic. Saudi Arabia’s monarchy, on the other hand, remains consistently conservative, not revolutionary, and politically married to age-old religious leaders of the tribes who support the monarchy and the king (namely the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques) is given absolute obedience as long as he does not violate Islamic sharia law. Saudi Arabia has, however, a Shia minority which has recently made bitter complaints of institutional discrimination against it, specifically after the 2007 change in Iraqi governance and particularly after the 2011 events that spanned the region. At some stages it has gone as far as to call for overthrowing the king and the entire system.

Tensions between the two countries have waxed and waned. Relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran soured particularly after the nuclear program, the 2011 alleged Iran assassination plot and more recently the execution of Nimr al-Nimr. There have also been numerous attempts to improve the relationship. After the 1991 Gulf war there was a noticeable thaw in relations. In March 2007 President Ahmadinejad of Iran visited Riyadh and was greeted at the airport by King Abdullah, and the two countries were referred to in the press as “brotherly nations”.


After March 2011, Iran’s financial and military support for Syria during the Syrian Civil War has been a severe blow to the improvement of relations. On January 3, 2016, Saudi Arabia’s embassy in Tehran, Iran was ransacked following the execution of Saudi-born Shia Islam cleric Nimr al-Nimr. The execution prompted widespread condemnation within the Arab World as well as other countries, the European Union and the United Nations, with protests being carried out in cities in Iran, Iraq, India, Lebanon, Pakistan and Turkey. Following the attack on its embassy in Iran, Saudi Arabia broke diplomatic relations with Iran and the Saudi foreign minister said that all Iranian diplomats are to leave the country within 48 hours.

The difference of political ideologies and governance has also divided both countries. The Islamic Republic of Iran is based on the principle of Guardianship of the Islamic Jurists, which holds that a faqīh (Islamic jurist) should have custodianship over all Muslim followers, including their governance and regardless of nationality. Iran’s Supreme Leader is a Shia faqīh.

The Islamic Republic of Iran is based on the principle of Guardianship of the Islamic Jurists, which hold that a faqīh (Islamic jurist) should have custodianship over all Muslims, including their governance. Iran’s Supreme Leader is a Shia faqīh. The founder of the Iranian revolution, Ayatollah Khomeini, was ideologically opposed to monarchy, which he believed to be unIslamic. Saudi Arabia’s monarchy, on the other hand, is conservative, not revolutionary, and its religious leaders have long supported monarchy were the king was given absolute obedience as long as he did not violate Islamic sharia law Saudi Arabia has, however, a Shia minority which has made bitter complaints about institutional discrimination against it, and whom at times has been urged to overthrow the king. Both countries are major oil exporters but have clashed over energy policy. Saudi Arabia, with its large oil reserves and smaller population, has a greater interest in taking a long-term view of the global oil market and incentive to moderate prices. In contrast, Iran is compelled to focus on high prices in the short term.

As far as the relationship between Saudi Arabia and the U.S. is concerned, both countries have been strategic allies for more than sixty years. Saudi Arabia sees itself as a firm and generous partner of the USA in the cold war and in other international conflicts. The visits by US President George W. Bush to the Kingdom in 2008 reaffirmed these ties. Yet Saudis have always distanced themselves from American foreign policy, particularly with regards to Iran. Even when there was growing criticism against the former Iranian President, Mahmud Ahmadinejad, for his alleged hostile foreign policy in connection to Israel, Saudi Arabia recognised that Iran was a potential threat, and a regional power that was in position to create trouble within their borders. Therefore, Saudi Arabia’s security over time required accommodation and good relations with its geographic neighbors notably Iran. Saudi Arabia has long since looked to the United States for protection against Iran.

Prior to this visit, Saudi National Security advisor Prince Bandar bin Sultan, seen as one of the most pro-American figures in the region, had made a trip to Tehran to voice his government’s interest in building harmonious relations with Iran. During Iranian President Ahmadinejad’s 3 March 2007 visit, he discussed with King Abdullah the need to protect the Islamic world from enemy “conspiracies.”

In 2007, President Ahmadinejad of Iran attended the first-ever annual summit of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), which was established in 1980 in part to contain the ambitions of revolutionary Iran. This visit by the President of Iran was an event which signaled a possible change in relations. Yet soon after the meeting, Saudi Arabia, the most senior member of the six GCC member states invited Ahmadinejad to Saudi Arabia to take part in the annual Hajj (pilgrimage) to Mecca.

In 2009, Saudi Prince Faisal said in a press conference with Hillary Clinton that the “threat posed by Iran demanded a more immediate solution than sanctions.” This statement was condemned by Iranian officials. On 11 October 2011 US Attorney General Eric Holder accused Iran of planning to assassinate the Saudi-Arabian ambassador to the United States Adel Al-Jubbair. In 2013, Saudi Ambassador to Britain Mohammed bin Nawaf bin Abdulaziz Al Saud wrote an editorial in The New York Times criticizing Saudi Arabia’s Western allies for not taking bold enough measures against Syria and Iran, thus destabilizing the Middle East and forcing Saudi Arabia to become more aggressive in international affairs. The Obama administration continues to reassure the Persian Gulf states that regional security is a U.S. priority, but, as of December 2013, the Gulf States express skepticism


Iranian action


Relations between Shi’ite-led Iran and Sunni power Saudi Arabia are at their worst in years, with each accusing the other of subverting regional security and supporting opposite sides in conflicts in Syria, Iraq and Yemen. Iranian protesters stormed the Saudi embassy in Tehran in January 2016 after a prominent Saudi Shi’ite cleric was executed, prompting Riyadh to close the embassy.

Saudi Arabia severed its diplomatic relations with Iran in January 2016, following demonstrations held in front of the Saudi embassy in Tehran and its consulate in the city of Mashhad by angry protesters who set the diplomatic missions ablaze for the execution of top Shiite cleric Nimr al-Nimr by Saudi Arabia Iranian pilgrims returned to Hajj this year for the first time since a deadly crush in 2015, in what could be an important confidence-building measure for dialogue on other thorny issues between Iran and Saudi Arabia.

Saudi Arabia and several other Arab governments severed ties with Qatar in June, citing its support for Iran as one of the main reasons. Iran accused Saudi Arabia of being behind deadly attacks in Tehran claimed by Islamic State, something Riyadh denied.

Until now, no Saudi report on the 2015 crush has been published, and the bodies of dozens of Iranian victims remain unidentified. Family members of 11 Iranians whose bodies are still missing are traveling to Mecca later this year for DNA tests

Nearly 800 people were killed, according to Riyadh, when two large groups of pilgrims arrived at a crossroads east of Mecca. Counts by countries of repatriated bodies showed over 2,000 people may have died, including more than 400 Iranians. Iran’s Supreme Leader has said his people would never forget that “catastrophe”, but President Hassan Rouhani suggested a trouble-free Hajj this year could help build confidence in other areas of dispute between the arch-rivals. So far, Iranian pilgrims say they are satisfied.

This year, Iran issued its nearly 90,000 pilgrims blue electronic bracelets to help organizers trace and identify them. Dozens of Iranians clad in traditional white clothes and a distinctive red mark arrived in orange buses on Thursday at their encampment in Mount Arafat.

Iranian pilgrims participated without incident in the symbolic stoning of the devil on Friday, the riskiest part of the Hajj because of the large crowds involved. More than 2.3 million pilgrims participated in the five-day ritual, a religious duty once in a lifetime for every able-bodied Muslim who can afford the journey. Tehran had sent pilgrims to Hajj based on Saudi promises of safety.

Pilgrims with previous experience at the Hajj say their facilities and treatment by the Saudi authorities are better than in past years and include air conditioned tents. “The way that security handled the Iranian pilgrims until now has been good,” said Samir Shuahni, an Iranian journalist with the delegation. “This is what I’ve noticed for the nearly month that I’ve been in Mecca and Medina: there is good cooperation and the pilgrims are moving freely.”

Iranians said the Saudi authorities had asked them not to hold a traditional Shi’ite prayer in an open space in Medina, citing it as a potential target for Islamic State militants. Such restrictions have not troubled Iranians still in shock from the IS attack in Tehran which killed at least 18 people.



Both Islamic leaders do not show real inclination for a peace and friendship deal in order to protect themselves as well as a unified Islam.

However, it is indeed puzzling to know who between the two is eager to sustain the tensions and why.

Clearly, the off repeated Saudi-Iran tensions unnecessarily delay the resolution of Palestine issue as Israel and USA continue to prolong the Zionist occupation of and genocides in Palestine territories. Both should share the guilt and blame for the genocides and hardship of people of Palestine.  Israelis and Americans relish Islamic blood but do Saudi and Iran also do the same?

Needless to ascertain that mutual suspicion forces them to knock at the doors of enemies of Islam as Saudi Arabia is strenuously doing by trying for joint action against Iran systematically.  Will that help Saudi Arabia at least in the long run improve its global standing or Islamic status?

Therefore, Iran still lacked confidence in Riyadh but hoped it would build goodwill.

Question is how far faithful and devoted Muslims they are! Whether they believe in God or in their own relative wealth!

Hopefully, logic and good thinking on the part of both Saudi and Iran would help the Palestinians regain their lost sovereignty to Zionist fascists and western imperialist and also promote unity among Muslims.

These Muslim leaders are accountable for their foolish and hypocritical actions and answerable elsewhere….


Venezuela’s Maduro mocks US criticism of democracy!

Venezuela’s Maduro mocks US criticism of democracy!

-Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal





US democracy drama


Democracy and human rights are the two issues on which USA claims advantages and therefore criticizes the weak or anti-capitalist –imperialist nations and, whenever possible, it attacks to further weaken and destabilize them.

Destabilization of entire world except USA thus is basis of US democracy that USA seeks especially in the Islamic world.

It is indeed a perfect anomaly that the super nation which has killed maximum people across the globe during its existence after “discovery” as the closest ally of its English master UK and has also terrorized the humanity, is still talking about democracy, human rights and rule of law.

USA can still talk because it is the super nation effectively controlling entire world, including the nations that oppose US domination.

Though these days Washington does not speak much about democracy deficits in other nations as many human rights are denied to American citizens on some flimsy grounds, recently it did criticized democracy of Venezuela in Latin America where, like in West Asia, it does not have many friends or allies.

Seeking to make the world of global US colonies to help advance military supremacy forever, USA, even after the fall of the mighty Soviet Russia and weakening of non committed China,  still hates socialism and communism, though both themselves have not been able to provide safety, security and prosperity to the common global people.

The atomic bomb is too dangerous to be loose in a lawless world. That is why Great Britain, Canada, and the USA that have the secrets about its production, do not let others make nukes and do not intend to reveal that secret until means have been found to control the bomb so as to protect ourselves and the rest of the world from the danger of total destruction.

The USA, which intervenes in the domestic affairs of any weak or totally independent nation which does not promote US interests in the region, refuses to let them advance their legitimate interests if that does not toe the US line, has a long sordid history of interventionist meddling and regime change in Latin America and around the world, and that is what’s going on in Venezuela.


Maduro wins Venezuela


Venezuela is one the few remaining countries that claim to be socialist but continue to ignore the popular concerns while the super power USA considers them as shame nations without essential human rights. The main concern of Venezuela is to save the nation from the western propaganda manipulative tactics to showcase Socialism as anti-human.

Last week Venezuela’s socialist government won a popular mandate with all seats having been won to dramatically recast the country’s political system against the will and fancies of capitalist USA. Electoral authorities said more than 8 million people voted July 30 to create a constitutional assembly endowing President Nicolas Maduro’s ruling party with virtually unlimited powers, while opposition members and independent analysts put the total number from between 2 to 4 million.

The official result would mean the ruling party won more support than it had in any national election since 2013, despite a crisis ridden economy, spiraling inflation, shortages of medicine and malnutrition. President Nicolás Maduro has suggested the constitution needs to “restore peace” to the country so that measures could be implemented to  improve the living conditions of the people. .

A newly-elected body, consisting mostly of Maduro allies and even his wife, will be given the ability to dissolve state institutions and possibly rewrite the constitution. The people have delivered the constitutional assembly,” Maduro said on national television. “More than 8 million in the middle of threats.  It’s when imperialism challenges us that we prove ourselves worthy of the blood of the liberators that runs through the veins of men, women, children and young people.”

Maduro said he had received congratulations from the governments of Cuba, Bolivia and Nicaragua, among many others. Maduro and his supporters have dismissed criticism of the assembly as merely the latest in Washington’s attempts to interfere in Venezuela and other Latin American countries.

Maduro promised that the new assembly would quickly “restructure” the office of the chief prosecutor.




Maduro called the vote for a constitutional assembly in May after a month of protests against his government, which has overseen Venezuela’s descent into a devastating crisis during its four years in power. Due to plunging oil prices and widespread corruption and mismanagement, Venezuela’s inflation and homicide rates are among the world’s highest, and widespread shortages of food and medicine have citizens dying of preventable illnesses and rooting through trash to feed themselves.

Venezuela is in turmoil following the contentious vote over the weekend which critics say is an attempt by Maduro to consolidate power. More than 120 people have died this year in clashes protesting the Venezuelan president’s rule, including a candidate for the assembly killed in the night of the election.

The opposition, which the USA considers as its own ally against the regime, estimated only 2.5 million ballots were cast. Opposition leaders estimated the real turnout at less than half the government’s claim in a vote watched by government-allied observers but no internationally recognized poll monitors.  Opposition leader Henrique Capriles, the governor of the central state of Miranda, urged Venezuelans to protest against an assembly that critics fear will effectively create a single-party state.

Opposition leaders had earlier called for a boycott of the vote, declaring it rigged for the ruling party. Ahead of the vote, the opposition organized a series of work stoppages as well as a July 16 protest referendum that it said drew more than 7.5 million symbolic votes against the constitutional assembly.  The president of the opposition-led National Assembly, Julio Borges, told Venezuelan news channel Globovision that Maduro’s foes would continue protesting until they won free elections and a change of government. He said Sunday’s vote had given Maduro “less legitimacy, less credibility, less popular support and less ability to govern.”

Opposition decried the vote as a fraud and called on supporters to protest again as of midday.  “The constitutional assembly will not resolve any of the country’s problems, it just means more crisis,” opposition leader Henrique Capriles said. “As of tomorrow, a new stage of the struggle begins.”

Several countries refused to recognize the results, while Spain and Canada joined in the condemnation. Latin American nations from Argentina to Mexico, which are historically wary of siding with Washington in hemispheric disputes, sharply condemned the vote.  The EU said the constituent assembly could not be part of the negotiated solution to the country’s crisis, noting it was elected under doubtful and often violent circumstances.

Throughout these past four months of often violent protests in Venezuela, the country’s army has, several times, reaffirmed its “unconditional loyalty” to President Maduro. Despite the incident as well as demonstrations, the situation appears to be calm in the country. Meanwhile a search is under way in Venezuela for 10 men who escaped with weapons after an attack on a military base, according to President Nicolás Maduro.



Venezuela has been rocked by months of protests against the government of Maduro, who was elected in 2013 following the death of Hugo Chavez, and there have been at least 125 deaths. Opposition leaders call the election a naked power grab meant to keep the Socialist Party in office despite anger over an economic crisis that has spurred malnutrition and left citizens struggling to obtain basic consumer products.

Countries across the Americas, as well as the European Union, denounced the creation of the assembly, which will have the power to rewrite the constitution. The USA – the top market for the OPEC oil – called the vote a sham, and officials in Washington said they were preparing oil-sector sanctions. “A spokesperson for Emperor Donald Trump said that they would not recognize the results of Venezuela’s constituent assembly election,” Maduro told a crowd of cheering supporters following the completion of the vote. “Why the hell should we care what Trump says?” he added. “We care about what the sovereign people of Venezuela say.”

Opposition leaders call the election a naked power grab meant to keep the Socialist Party in office despite anger over an economic crisis that has spurred malnutrition and left citizens struggling to obtain basic consumer products. Opposition leaders decried the vote as a fraud and called on supporters to protest again as of midday.  “The constitutional assembly will not resolve any of the country’s problems, it just means more crisis,” opposition leader Henrique Capriles said. “As of tomorrow, a new stage of the struggle begins.”

Meanwhile, the Vatican has urged Venezuela’s president not to proceed with a controversial new assembly that his critics say would give him unprecedented power. In a statement issued on the day  Maduro was set to install the new assembly – a vote for which last week was boycotted by the opposition parties and denounced as “rigged – the Vatican called on “all political actors, and in particular the government, to ensure full respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms and the existing constitution”. “The Holy See appeals firmly to all of society to avoid all forms of violence and invites, in particular, the security forces to refrain from excessive and disproportionate use of force,” it said. The statement also it urged the government of Maduro “to prevent or suspend ongoing initiatives such as the new Constituent Assembly which, instead of fostering reconciliation and peace, foment a climate of tension”.

At least 10 people were killed in protests against the unpopular Maduro, who insists the new body known as the constituent assembly will bring peace after four months of protests that have killed more than 120 people. Countries across the Americas, as well as the European Union, denounced the creation of the assembly, which will have the power to rewrite the constitution.

Maduro has also said he would use the assembly’s powers to bar opposition candidates from running in gubernatorial elections in December unless they sit with his party to negotiate an end to hostilities that have generated four months of protests that have killed at least 125 and wounded nearly 2,000. Maduro says a new constitution is the only way to end such conflicts.


US agenda


USA has a major agenda globally – to ferment troubles in every region by suing the opposition parties. It obstructs peaceful environment everywhere and invades energy rich Arab nations, among others, maintain military superiority. It uses  major powers even in Mideast to its own advantage and help sustain the tensions in every region.

As the super power, the USA has a vast nuclear arsenal capable of blowing up the planet several times. The World commemorates the 72nd anniversary of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (August 6, 9, 1945)- the worst  human tragedy ever inflicted upon the people of Japan by the corporatist American regime. .

Fishing in the troubled regional waters has been the key foreign policy parameter of USA and every president- white or black- dutifully pursued imperialist policies by promoting global capitalism. . .

USA badly wants a regime change in Venezuela in order to make entire Latin America pro-American. Opinion polls highly influenced by outside forces showed 85 percent of Venezuelans disapproved of the constitutional assembly and similar numbers disapprove of Maduro’s overall performance.

Maduro said the opposition had been backed by anti-government leaders based in the USA and Colombia. Maduro has threatened that one of the constitutional assembly’s first acts would be jailing opposition leader Freddy Guevara inciting violence.

The USA quickly pledged potentially devastating oil sanctions and condemnations of the process poured in from governments around the capitalist world and the opposition at home. Many capitalist countries, among them the USA, the UK, and Mexico, have denounced the move by Maduro, claiming it is a move to seize additional power for his party at a time when his approval rating stands at just 20 per cent. The USA has issued sanctions against Maduro and 13 of his close advisors and threatened more.

The European Union and nations including Argentina, Canada, Colombia, Mexico, Panama, Paraguay, Spain, Britain and the USA criticized Sunday’s vote. The Trump government promised “strong and swift actions” against Venezuelan officials, including the 545 participants in the constitutional assembly, many of them low-ranking party members.

Crippling sanctions are indeed economic terrorism being imposed by USA and its powerful western allies on weak nations that do not subscribe to US agenda. After Iran and North Korea now USA and its cohorts seek to impose sanctions on Venezuela with which it has problems.

Politicians throughout the Americas, as well as leaders from the UN, expressed concern with the decision and demanded its reversal, though the Venezuelan government justified its decision as a reaction to “coup-like actions” allegedly performed by the opposition. On 1 April 2017, the TSJ reversed its decision, thereby reinstating the powers of the National Assembly.

Under pressure from USA, Latin American nations from Argentina to Mexico, which are historically wary of siding with Washington in hemispheric disputes, sharply condemned the vote. Several refused to recognize the results, while Spain and Canada joined in the condemnation. The EU said the constituent assembly could not be part of the negotiated solution to the country’s crisis, noting it was elected under doubtful and often violent circumstances. ‘Nobody can escape the food shortages and spiraling inflation faced by millions every day’.


Perspective and Problems

Like Turkey, Venezuela is also facing troubles from outside especially USA that uses the opposition to advance its capitalist and anti-national objectives.

The people of Venezuela are struggling with food shortages, economic hardship and an inflation rate of around 600 per cent. If the US goes ahead with its threat to sanction the oil industry – Washington currently purchases 700,000 barrels a day from Venezuela – the situation would likely worsen considerably. Many supporters of Chavez appear to have lost faith in Maduro, yet reports suggest most of them are still supporting him in fear of what might follow him. The conservative opposition parties in Venezuela have long had ties to Washington, and some of their leaders were involved in a 2002 coup that briefly unseated Chavez.

America believes economic terrorism in the form of sanctions would weaken the Venezuela and make people fight against the regime.

The US sanctions are planned to cripple the economy of Venezuela, make the life of common peole miserable so that they oppose the elected government.  In a strike at Venezuela’s already flailing economy, the Trump government is preparing to levy new sanctions on Venezuela, following through on threats to impose penalties if the country went through with the weekend election. The new sanctions could be imposed and will likely target Venezuela’s oil sector, including possibly its state owned petroleum company. One official said an announcement was imminent. The officials were not authorized to discuss the matter publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity.

Many experts believe the US has been seeking a change of government in Caracas since Chavez was elected in 2002. During  past years, Venezuela has been facing serious crisis alongside protest era.

Following the death of President Hugo Chávez, Venezuela faced a severe socioeconomic crisis during the presidency of his successor, Nicolás Maduro, as a result of their policies. Due to the country’s high levels of urban violence, inflation, and chronic shortages of basic goods attributed to economic policies such as strict price controls, civil insurrection in Venezuela culminated in the 2014–17 protests. Protests occurred over the years, with demonstrations occurring in various intensities.

The discontent with the Bolivarian government saw the opposition being elected to hold the majority in the National Assembly for the first time since 1999 following the 2015 parliamentary election. As a result of that election, the lame duck National Assembly consisting of Bolivarian officials filled the TSJ with allies. Into early 2016, the the Supreme Tribunal of Justice (TSJ) of Venezuela alleged that voting irregularities occurred in the 2015 parliamentary elections and stripped four lawmakers of their seats, preventing an opposition super-majority in the National Assembly which would be able to challenge President Maduro. The TSJ court then began to approve of multiple actions performed by Maduro and granted him more powers.

After facing years of crisis, the Venezuelan opposition pursued a recall referendum against President Maduro, presenting a petition to the National Electoral Council (CNE) on 2 May 2016. The opposition organized an unofficial referendum over Maduro’s plan earlier in July, when more than 7 million voters overwhelmingly rejected his constituent assembly and voted in favor of early elections. On 21 October 2016, the CNE suspended the referendum only days before preliminary signature-gatherings were to be held. The CNE blamed alleged voter fraud as the reason for the cancellation of the referendum. Western observers criticized the move, stating that CNE’s decision made Maduro look as if he were seeking to rule as a dictator.

Days after the recall movement was cancelled, 1.2 million Venezuelans protested throughout the country against the move, demanding President Maduro to leave office, with Caracas protests remaining calm while protests in other states resulted in clashes between demonstrators and authorities, leaving one policeman dead, 120 injured and 147 arrested. That day the opposition gave President Maduro a deadline of 3 November 2016 to hold elections, with opposition leader Henrique Capriles.

Days later, then National Assembly President and opposition leader Henry Ramos Allup announced the cancellation of 3 November march to the Miraflores presidential palace, with Vatican-led dialogue between the opposition and the government beginning. By 7 December 2016, dialogue halted between the two and two months later on 13 January 2017 after talks stalled, the Vatican officially pulled out of the dialogue. Further protests were much smaller due to the fear of repression, with the opposition organizing surprise protests instead of organized mass marches.

Actions by President Maduro and his Bolivarian officials included a 7 February 2017 meeting which announced the creation of the Great Socialist Justice Mission which had the goal of establishing “a great alliance between the three powers, the judiciary, the citizen and the executive”, with Maduro stating that “we have been fortunate to see how the judicial power has been growing and perfecting, carrying a doctrine so complete with the constitution of 1999” while stating that the opposition-led National Assembly “took power not for the majority not for the people but for themselves”.

On 29 March 2017, the TSJ took over legislative powers of the National Assembly. The Tribunal, mainly supporters of President Nicolás Maduro, also restricted the immunity granted to the Assembly’s members, who mostly belonged to the opposition. The dissolution of assembly was termed as a “coup” by the opposition while the Organization of American States (OAS) termed the action a “self-coup”. The decision was condemned by some media outlets, characterizing the move as a turn towards authoritarianism and one-man rule.




USA is eager to unseat President Nicolás Maduro. American worry is compounded by a communist model poll in Venezuela as allies of the Socialist Party won all 545 seats in the new assembly, which will also have the power to dissolve state institutions such as the opposition-run Congress and sack dissident state officials.

The electoral council’s vote counts in the past have been seen as reliable and generally accurate, but the widely mocked announcement appeared certain to escalate the polarization and political conflict paralyzing the country.

Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro celebrated the election of a new legislative superbody that is expected to give the ruling Socialist Party sweeping powers and mocked US criticism that the vote was an affront to democracy. Venezuela’s socialist government says a national election has given it a popular mandate to dramatically recast the country’s political system even as condemnations of the process have poured in from nations abroad and the opponents at home.

The 545-seat constituent assembly will have the task of rewriting the country’s constitution and will have powers above and beyond other state institutions, including the opposition-controlled congress.

On Friday, the new 545-member assembly was formally opened. Maduro promised that the new assembly would quickly “restructure” the office of the chief prosecutor.   The assembly unanimously elected well-known Socialist Party leaders to its leadership, with former Foreign Minister Delcy Rodriguez to serve as the president and former Vice President Aristobulo Isturiz as First Vice President. The constituent assembly would hold sessions in the same legislative palace as the existing congress, which the opposition took over in a landslide 2015 victory.

Calling itself “The Binary Guardians”, a hacking group has attacked Venezuelan government websites in an operation targeting the “dictatorship” of President Nicolás Maduro. The group posted messages appearing to support the actions of a group of armed men who attacked a military base in the central city of Valencia on Sunday.

Meanwhile, supporters of President Maduro marched in the capital Caracas. They called for an end to months of opposition protests and unrest.

Interestingly, Americans, while criticizing polls in countries like Russia, China, Venezuela, are unable to control their own presidential poll.  Americans blame Russia for interference in US presidential poll that demolished the hopes of Democratic Party’s Madam Clinton just like the besieged Palestinians and their children have real hopes of a future under the continued attacks and genocides by Israel which keeps the occupational crimes and control mechanism to squeeze the youth of Palestine.

Maduro made it clear in a televised address that he intends to use the assembly not just to rewrite the country’s charter but to govern without limitation. Describing the vote as “the election of a power that’s above and beyond every other,” Maduro said he wants the assembly to strip opposition lawmakers and governors of constitutional immunity from prosecution — one of the few remaining checks on ruling party power. Declaring the opposition “already has its prison cell waiting,” Maduro added: “All the criminals will go to prison for the crimes they’ve committed.”

Any country, and particularly any socialist governed country, that nationalizes their oil industries (or any other US corporate interests, i.e., United Fruit Company in Guatemala and Honduras) become targets for regime change by the USA by using the opposition parties. Iran, Iraq, Libya, Venezuela, Indonesia, Afghanistan, Pakistan et al are living examples. The methods begin with economic warfare, destabilizing their economies via sanctions and withholding of investments and loans, denial of access to markets and imposition of punitive tariffs. When the people feel the economic pain they blame the government and this is exacerbated by covert CIA teams and CIA fronts like National Endowment for Democracy (see Ukraine) who infiltrate and organize, fund and foment “democratic” opposition.  USA achieves total destabilization thanks to Neocon plans.

It is unfortunate that any independent nation must also obey the “democratic” US dictates in order to survive in the comity of nations. Any refusal to dance according to the CIA-Pentagon muse should be ready for a terror attacks.

Who can tie the ball around US neck?

Only in fairy tales a super hero emerges to save the weak ones from monsters!

Experienced RSS operative Ram Nath Kovind becomes 14th president of India!

Experienced RSS operative Ram Nath Kovind becomes 14th president of India! Will he work against unity of India?

-Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal




Indian news is that a strong RSS man Ram Nath Kovind, former governor of the northern Indian state of Bihar, has been elected as the country’s new president who functions just as the biggest rubber-stamp in India.

A disappointed incumbent President Pranab Mukherjee’s term has ended on July 24 and Kovind took oath on 26th July to become India’s 14th President.  In the last Presidential polls held in 2012, Pranab Mukherjee had defeated PA Sangma by over 69 per cent votes.

BJP led NDA candidate RN Kovind has been elected the country’s 14th president. Former governor of Bihar, Kovind (71), is the second Dalit leader after RK Narayanan to occupy India’s highest but purely ceremonial or rubber-stamp post. In the final vote count, the Modi nominee Kovind received 65.6 per cent votes translating into 702,044 Electoral College votes, while Congress led UPA candidate Meira Kumar managed to get 34.35 per cent (367,314 votes). According to reports, there was cross voting in UP, Gujarat and Goa during the elections, which resulted into Kovind’s massive 2/3rd votes. 522 MPs voted for Kovind, while 225 parliamentarians voted for Meira Kumar.

It is an accepted fact that under Indian setup, the president’s job is restricted to rubberstamping the decisions of the central government, faithfully. He cannot ask too many questions to the government or parliament unless he is ready to relinquish his top position. He can, however, place his recommendations if any, to the government for consideration and just stop at that as it is the PM’s prerogative to accept or implement or simply reject the president’s ideas.


Perfect RSS man


Though most of the Presidents have supported RSS, this is the first time a RSS man has been promoted to be the president of India in a dramatic way.

Born on October 1, 1945, in Uttar Pradesh’s Kanpur Dehat, Ram Nath Kovind was the youngest among three brothers. After graduating in law from a Kanpur college, Kovind had gone to Delhi to prepare for the Indian Administrative Services. He failed to pass it twice and started practicing the law. He is a former President of the BJP Dalit Morcha (1998-2002) and President of the All-India Koli Samaj as well as the SC/ST representative at IIM-Calcutta.

Kovind, an advocate by profession, used to practice in Supreme Court and Delhi High Court. He entered politics in 1994 when he became a Member of Parliament in Rajya Sabha from Uttar Pradesh and served as an MP for two consecutive terms till 2006. He had represented India in the UN in New York and addressed UN General Assembly in October 2002.  In 1977, Kovind had worked as the private secretary of the then Prime Minister Morarji Desai of Janata Party. Later Kovind had also served as national spokesperson of BJP. On August 8, 2015, Kovind was appointed governor of Bihar and now he is the first citizen of India. His sustained cool tactics helped him to grow in the career ladder. He never raised his voice for the low caste Hindus or  under privileged, never uttered a word in voice or writing for them…

Kovind, son of a cloth-seller, but never campaigned for a Dalit cause and he has kept a low profile. He stayed away from the media as he didn’t want to be controversial and he never attended Dalit programs. In fact, he never projected himself as a Dalit leader as he prefers to stay away from controversies. His unassuming, submissive nature is the main quality for which he has been assigned to Presidential palace as its custodian for a term. He, like his mentor Gujarati Modi, is fluent in both Hindi and English.

Kovind silently built up his political career from lower cadre RSS man to reach the Presidential Palace and thanks to his caste he became the Indian president.

Modi and Kovind have known each other for a long time. There is nothing wrong if the PM goes for a man with whom he shares chemistry. A “committed member” of the right-wing RSS, the ideological fountainhead of the BJP, Kovind rose to become a lawyer and served two terms in the upper house of parliament. He has also been the party’s spokesperson, led a BJP Dalit organisation and has held several important party posts. His closeness to the RSS helped him go places. A highly lucky man, indeed!

Kovind can enjoy all high level privileges without fear or inhibitions as at present BJP has a comfortable majority in the parliament and he is not going to have any problem at all, unless, of course, BJP loses power in the next parliament poll in two years .  However, many prominent Dalits say they are unaware what contributions, if any, the new first citizen has made on behalf of the community.


Hoping to get another term from PM Modi at Presidential palace to enjoy life, Congress leader and incumbent president Mukherjee tried to appease and cooperate with the Modi government on most issues and promptly signed bills, he did question the issuing of multiple ordinances on land acquisition bill and summoned Union ministers to explain why this was being done. He also spoke critically about growing intolerance in the country. It would be interesting to see if Kovind would be critical of NDA government on any issue.

India targets Hindu low castes and Muslims


Will Kovind do anything to end crimes against Muslims and low caste Hindus, poor Indians?

Kovind seeks a Hindu rashtra exclusively for Hindus just like Israel which seeks  an exclusively Jewish state.

Even though  little known, Kovind is not entirely without controversy, however, A 2010 Hindustan Times report quoted him as saying that “Islam and Christianity are alien to the nation” at a press conference calling for the scrapping of a report that recommended government job reservations for socially and economically disadvantaged sections among religious and linguistic minorities. This was a political statement and is still the stand of the RSS- BJP Hindutva duo.

The system which divides Hindus into rigid hierarchical groups based on their karma (work) and dharma (the Hindi word for religion, but here it means duty) is generally accepted to be more than 3,000 years old. The caste system divides Hindus into four main categories – Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and the Shudras. Many believe that the groups originated from Brahma, the Hindu God of creation.

The Dalits sit at the bottom of the Hindu caste system in India and complaints of discrimination are still widespread. Many in fact, accuse the BJP of perpetuating the Brahmin-led caste order where Dalits figure at the bottom, and say Kovind’s nomination comes at a time when the party is being accused of being insensitive towards the community.


Four years ago, a group of upper-caste men arrived at Mehul Vinodbhai Kabira’s modest two-room home in Gujarat and threatened to burn it down. Bhayla is a nondescript village of around 450 low slung brick-and-cement homes straddling a highway dotted by pharmaceutical, engineering and bio-tech factories. Most of the homes in this dense village are owned by land-owning upper castes, but around 70 belong to Dalits (formerly known as untouchables) like Kabira, who form the lowest rung of India’s harsh caste hierarchy.

Kabira’s crime? He dared to park his newly-bought auto-rickshaw for passengers near the village at the bus stop, which also doubled up as its three-wheeler stand. His parents worked all their lives as scavengers, collecting manure, but their son had decided to shun the indignity of a lowly caste-based occupation. Instead, he took out a loan and started playing a three-wheeler. “Most of the auto-rickshaws here are owned by upper-caste men. They couldn’t tolerate a Dalit plying his trade at the bus stand. So they beat me up and threatened me,” he says. Kabira did not take any chances. He left the village with his family to live with a relative some 15km (nine miles) away and drove his three-wheeler. When he returned to Bhayla in 2014, he sold off his auto-rickshaw, paid back his loan and signed up as a 217 rupees-a-day ($3; £2.40) contract worker in the “housekeeping” – a euphemism for a cleaning job – at a pharmaceutical factory. A few houses away, Dayabhai Kanabhai Kabira, 42, faced the ire of upper-caste neighbours in a different way. A canny farmer, he had inherited two acres of farm land from his father, and sold it to buy a four-acre plot some 40km away to augment his income.


Rising RSS-state violence


India targets weak sections of the nation, namely Muslims and low caste Hindus, Christians, among other such communities.  Most of the violence incidents against them are not reported in the press and media, managed by those lords who hate Muslims and low caste and all minorities. Even when reported, the regime and state government refuse to act. Governments instruct the police officials not to “entertain” the complaints of Muslims and others but just pretend being “gravely” concerned about the problems they face from their foes.  That is it.

Dalit lives have improved in Gujarat – and all over India – and many upper-caste people are finding it difficult to digest this. “Conflict increases where social conditions for Dalits may be getting slightly better,” says the Director of the Centre for Policy Research, a leading think-tank.

Atrocities against low Hindu caste Dalits are nothing new in Gujarat, the birthplace of former India leader Mahatma Gandhi, who waged a campaign against untouchability all his life. In the past, conflicts between Dalits and upper castes were restricted to fights over land, wages, water, housing and the practice of untouchability. But conflicts take place without any valid reasons.


Gujarat has only 2.3% of India’s 200 million Dalits – 14th most populous state for the community – yet it ranks high in terms of atrocities against them, with more than 1,000 cases of “crimes” against Dalits recorded in 2015. Between 1990 and 2015, 536 Dalits were murdered in Gujarat and 750 Dalit women raped. The conviction rate is abysmal: suspects in 95 of 100 cases are freed, according to one study. Eleven districts remain officially declared as “atrocity prone” for Dalits since 1981. “Dalits are protesting. They are asking questions, filing right to information applications, petitioning authorities and quizzing village council heads,” says Dalit rights activist Martin Macwan. “Upper castes are getting jittery and the violence continues.” His organisation Navsarjan Trust carried out a four-year-long study – published in 2010 – recording 98 untouchability practices in nearly 1,600 villages in Gujarat.

Most of the findings were startling, for example: More than 90% of the villages banned temple entry to Dalits; 54% of government schools had a separate queue for Dalit children for the midday school lunch; 64% of village councils had Dalit members sitting separately and being given separate tea cups or glasses; In 96% of villages, Dalits did not have access to burial grounds; But the recent violence against the Dalits, according to Shah, is rooted in a shrill campaign by radical Hindu groups “telling people what to eat, drink, dress and monitor their behavior”; Critics say the self-styled “cow protection” vigilantes are running extortion rackets and running amok even as Prime Minister Modi maintains a curious silence;  The agitation in Gujarat may not hurt the BJP in polls much – a third of Dalit voters have voted for the Congress party in the recent past. But, as psychologist Sanjay Kumar says, it might hurt the party’s electoral prospects in Uttar Pradesh and Punjab, two states with large Dalit populations and which go to the polls early next year.

Things took a new, devious turn in Gujarat, one of India’s most prosperous states, ruled by Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s BJP for more than a decade. A video surfaced showing four Dalit men being assaulted by zealous “cow protection” vigilantes. Their crime was that they were doing their caste job of skinning a dead animal. (Many Hindus consider cows sacred and the slaughter of the animal is banned in many Indian states. There have been attacks across India where Muslims have been accused of eating or smuggling beef.)


A night patrol with India’s cow protection vigilantes Angry Dalits came out in protest and the parliament in Delhi was in uproar. Some 30 Dalits, including women, have tried to take their own lives – and one has died- since the incident.

, tens of thousands of community members pledged to boycott some of their traditional tasks, including the disposal of dead animals and manual cleaning of sewers.

But, as social scientist Ghanshyam Shah says, even Gandhi was helpless when schools in Gujarat set up by organisations owing allegiance to his ideals refused to admit Dalit students. The state saw some of the earliest upper-caste agitations against affirmative action for the Dalits in the 1980s.

There is deep social conflict bubbling from below.  This cannot be good news for Modi who is only interested in and focuses on his next foreign tours.


Observation: Rubber stamp and India’s problems!  


Ram Nath Kovind will be the first RSS-BJP leader to occupy Rashtrapati Bhavan, but his real test will be to not be swayed by his party on matters where he may have to take a call as per his conscience and assert his authority on issues having no precedent or requiring his discretion, as the Constitution may not be clear on what stand should be taken.

At the very outset, Kovind has been chosen in order mainly to widen the vote bank of low caste Hindus for the Hindutva parties and that is the reason why the Congress also fielded a low caste Hindu woman just for the sake of opposing the sure candidate Kovind as BJP had mustered enough to support him to presidency.

The five-year job of Indian president is largely ceremonial but could be crucial when elections throw up fragmented mandates. The president apparently has no role in governance and other importance matters concerning policies – they rest with the Prime minister and his cabinet. The Premier calls all shots while the President just agrees with Pm and obeys him. Generally, the president is an insider who would not create any obstacles to the government and sign anything that is sent from the government like an obedient student.

While it is an open secret that governors are only following the diktats of the ruling party at the Centre, the opposition will approach the President — as governors hold office at the pleasure of the President — for redressal. But President alone cannot take any decision as he has to obey the PM’s view and eventually it is the PM who decides all such important matters. President can dissolve the state assemblies and even the Parliament only on the advice of the central government led by PM.

It is said India president is equal to British Queen. The government of UK must take the advice of the Queen on all important matters, but in India president’s existence itself is forgotten.  The London Queen indeed has all levers of control but Indian President does not enjoy that important privilege. Media reports only when the Indian president goes abroad or visits any state in India.  Of course, all top foreign dignitaries do meet the president and have sumptuous lunch or dinner as the care may be.  TV often shows how he receives foreign presidents. President uses a long imported black car which exclusive for the president and nobody else can import that type of shining car- not even the richest corporate lords of India who control Indian parliament and state assemblies. .

Kovind is not the first low caste President; Earlier, a distinguished carrier diplomat and educationalist KR Narayanan with a lot of experience in human resources management as an Ambassador to USA, China, among other nations,  the VC of JNU and Union minister for technology etc, was made Indian President and he knew how to manage the political  leaders as well.


As a RSS man can Kovind make a deviation to strengthen his presidency? Though many would argue that the President of India is a mere “rubber stamp”, he would also controlled by the government. The reality and experience show that on many occasions the head of the state has had to take tough decisions which though not altered the course of history, could make the government to think and decide.

President Kovind might like to visit PM Modi for certain clarification or just like that to pay his usual respect to his mentor but the protocol does not allow that. Only PM should visit the President and not vice verse. But will he deviate form the protocol and go directly to PMO seeking a meeting with  the Indian strongmen PM Modi?

In recent years,  renowned scientist APJ Abdul Kalam faced problems from the government as the  latter‘s recommendations  were not approved by the President who  returned the  recommendations of  the government for reconsideration but the government repeatedly resent the same proposal and it became a prestige issue for the government and a Presidency vs. government tussle ensued. When the government repeatedly resent the same proposals for presidential accent, Kalam had then to “obey” the government affix his rubber stand to end the crisis, with a pinch of salt. Government wanted to show it is above the president.  Maybe, Dr. Kalam thought as the director of a military production organization (missiles), he could get everything he wanted from the government but as nation’s President he had to forget that privilege and prestige.

That is the fate of every Indian rubber stamp president. Every President wishes to say he or she is not a mere rubber stamp but the Constitution has prescribed the role of the president in a way as being subordinate to the government. In contrast the president of USA or Russia is a powerful post and he is the “supreme leader” of the government. .

As President RSS operative Kovind won’t be like scientist Dr. Abdul Kalam, the widely known as the Missile man and respected globally as the Indian intelligent common man as president and who was committed entirely the to services to the nation, but as a low caste man he knows what India is all about and is likely to avoid any controversy surrounding the Presidency. Abdul Kalam was nominated by the then PM Vajpayee.  He can now plan his foreign tours to enjoy his stay at Rashtrapati Bhavan but should align his external plans with those of overtly ambitious PM Modi who is now the touring premier of India. .


President APJ Abdul Kalam, who became head of state during Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s regime was not a BJP member, had a good run but his decision to sign on the papers imposing President’s Rule in Bihar in 2005 earned him a lot of censure. That he had signed the orders while on an official visit to Moscow and without asking questions to the Manmohan Singh government and Bihar governor Buta Singh made matters worse.
Modi and RSS-BJP’s choice of a low caste RSS Hindu from Uttar Pradesh (UP) in the North means to further target mosque-structure politics for consolidation of Hindutva hold over low cast Hindus. After making a Sanyasi (saint politician) as UP chief minister the Modi government has brought in a low caste Hindu as Indian President. That means, Muslims fear, the RSS-BJP government and RSS-BJP president would jointly coerce the Hon. Supreme Court judges to deliver a pro-Hindutva judgment over reconstruction of grand Babri Mosque pulled by Hindutva criminal gangs belonging most of the Hindu parties of India in 1992 and might even save the false prestige of new Hindutva criminal crops.

This could mean two things. One, the Modi government would speed up judgment and give justice to Muslims and the historic Babri Mosque, illegally destroyed by Hindu criminal elements on fictitious stories spread by RSS with Congress government support.   Two, the Modi government, UP government and President would coerce the Hon. Supreme Court to disallow the reconstruction of the Mosque as the Federal Government of Narasimha Rao promised to the world on January 06, 1992 the day of destruction of the Mosque and let the government to promote RS criminal elements to further advance their Hindutva goals.

Interestingly, the BJP regime is pushing ahead with the Congress policy of imposition of north Indian language Hindi in all states that would in due course replace the regional language, first by gradually reducing the importance of regional languages. Tamil Nadu opposes the ugly mindset of Indian government now being controlled by RSS.  Congress, the culprit in trying to force Hindi on non-Hindi speaking people of India must be too glad that the BJP which promoted to keep Muslim under check and reduce their presence in governments, assemblies, parliament, government services, government retirement beneficiaries among them. Insignificant Kovind could be expected to be with BJP-Congress duo in forcing Hindi on non-Hindi speaking people saying it could be a link language for national integration but it is indeed the linguistic imperialism.

Unity of India lies in the hearts and minds of people- not in languages and thus forcing a language on people is indeed strange. Only a government that has no constructive ideas would try to create linguistic, social, cultural, religious, caste, economic problems for people in order to stay in power. Those who want to work in the North of India would automatically learn Hindi. Like those Hindi speaking peole  living in Southern states learn the local language in many cases at times perfectly well. But in order to just visit North or other parts of India, no one needs to know Hindi or any other Indian language and necessary communication does take place as people are getting educated.

English alone has the capacity to bridge people of entire country. Hindi as a hegemonic language fails to fulfill that faction. Yet people do watch TV programs in Hindi when the local language channels telecast useless and boring programs.

One fails to understand the  big man attitude of North Indians towards South Indians who work or study there and cause problems to them.  Strangely those who visit South Indian states make fun of South India and its languages. There I clearly cultural hegemony in the minds of most North Indians that get reflected in their attitude towards Sothern people.

Hindi is like any other language in India- nothing more or less any attempt to impose it on every Indian would continue to fail, despite huge resources being allocated for propagation of Hindi as “special link” everywhere. Now the BJP government is also promoting another north Indian language Sanskrit in a big way along with Ayurveda pills while many other Indian languages lack central support; for instance, Tulu language does not have scrip and Union government is not serious about such important Indian issues. . But Indians love their own languages and should have the right to promote their own languages whether BJP or Congress or Indian regime likes it or not.

It would be naive if anyone expects the BJP man Kovind to speak for the Kashmiris who seek justice and sovereignty. India’s occupation forces have, brutally and through trap techniques, slaughtered over 100,000 innocent Kashmiris, most of them are Muslims. Will he raise his silent voice against or Sri Lankan criminal assaults and regular atrocities against Indian Tamils at Katchatheevu, elsewhere? He is of course duty bound to support Indian case in Arunachal Pradesh which China is eager to acquire from India by supporting India cause in badminton, etc. China also joins India and Pakistan in occupational cries against Kashmiris.

APJ Kalam could be a model president of India for every future president to enumerate for state performance. Kovind may have to take a call on matters unforeseen and without past examples and how he goes about it will determine his proper management of political human resources and a place in history of constitutional politics. Otherwise, one need not dwell into the choice of an unknown person for Presidential palace. That is the job of Indian political class to determine. PM Modi thinks India does not have any better person for presidency as Congress government and President Mukherjee thought a cricketer who was promoted by gambling masters and pampered by corporate -media lords should honored with the nation’s heist national honor Bharatratna.

Indian politicians have no shame in undermining and even insulting the national honors, though!

World expects a positive end to the Babri mosque demolition and construction of Hindu structure over the Mosque. Indian media lords think by denying Muslims their legitimate right to have mosques built in India, they would defeat Islam and insult Muslims.  They also insult the Constitution of India by seeking to degrade Muslim minority in place of due protection for them as minority. They have generated fear among Muslims, including those who are anti-Islamic by faith and practice.  They don’t mind more partitions if only that would make India 100% Hindus.

No one knows anything about the new President of India and none now thinks Kovind could be a better or good president.  Kovind’s first concern likely to be to come across as balanced and neutral whenever the opposition knocks on his door. Congress and other opposition parties have been raising objections to the way many governors in the NDA government are conducting themselves.



Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal

Hiroshima marks 72 years since America’s nuclear attack!


Hiroshima marks 72 years since America’s nuclear attack!

-Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal



America conducted world’s first nuclear attack (Atomic test on humans) in Hiroshima of Japan seventy two years ago, while America constantly giving contradictory statements of never using nuclear arsenal again.

Tormented by terrific memories of destructions of WMD from USA, Japan’s traditional contradictions over atomic weapons have again come into focus. Japan is officially one of the hyper economic powers that have refused to have nukes for whatever reasons.

Humanity is in fact scared of American nukes. Japan had last month sided with nuclear powers Britain, France and the US to sack a UN treaty prohibiting atomic weapons, which was vetoed by critics for ignoring the reality of security threats



US Nuclear experiment with humans


Japan is also the only country to have suffered atomic attacks, in 1945. Japan, the prime target of US imperialism during the World War Two, on 06 August 2017 marked 72 years since the world’s first nuclear attack on Hiroshima. Today, Japan is a close terror ally of USA and NATO. That is story of success of US foreign policy that makes the real enemies its allies to jointly fight against ideological foes Russia and China.

The bombings claimed the lives of 140,000 people in Hiroshima and 74,000 people in Nagasaki. Some died immediately while others succumbed to injuries or radiation-related illnesses weeks, months and years later. It resulted in Japan announcing its surrender in World War II on August 15, 1945.

Japan suffered two nuclear attacks at the end of the World War II by the United States in Hiroshima on August 6, 1945 and in Nagasaki three days later. The bombings claimed the lives of 140,000 people in Hiroshima and 74,000 people in Nagasaki. Some died immediately while others succumbed to injuries or radiation-related illnesses weeks, months and years later. Japan announced its surrender in World War II on August 15, 1945.

The anniversary came after Japan sided last month with nuclear powers Britain, France and the US to dismiss a United Nations (UN) treaty banning atomic weapons, which was rejected by critics for ignoring the reality of security threats such as North Korea.

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, speaking at the annual ceremony at Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park near the ground zero, said Japan hoped to push for a world without nuclear weapons in a way that all countries can agree. “For us to truly pursue a world without nuclear weapons, we need participation from both nuclear-weapons and non-nuclear weapons states,” Abe said in his speech at the annual ceremony. “Our country is committed to leading the international community by encouraging both sides” to make progress toward abolishing nuclear arms, Abe added without directly referring to the UN treaty.

Japanese officials routinely argue that they abhor nuclear weapons, but the nation’s defence is firmly set under the US nuclear umbrella and have criticised the UN Nuclear Weapon Ban Treaty as deepening a divide between countries with and without nuclear arms. None of the nine countries that possess nuclear weapons took part in the negotiations or vote on the treaty.

Many in Japan feel the attacks amount to war crimes and atrocities because they targeted civilians and due to the unprecedented destructive nature of the weapons. But many Americans believe they hastened the end of a bloody conflict, and ultimately saved lives, thus justifying the bombings.

No US president visited Hiroshima and Barack Obama became the first sitting US president to visit Hiroshima in May last year, paying moving tribute to victims of the devastating bomb.

Americans do not even mention about nuclear attack on Japan.


World War II and WMD attack


Hiroshima was the primary target of the first nuclear bombing mission on August 6, with Kokura and Nagasaki as alternative targets. Having been fully briefed under the terms of Operations Order No. 35, the 393d Bombardment Squadron B-29 Enola Gay, piloted by Tibbets, took off from North Field, Tinian, about six hours’ flight time from Japan.


During the final stage of World War II, the United States dropped nuclear weapons on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki on August 6 and 9, 1945, respectively. The United States had dropped the bombs with the consent of the United Kingdom as outlined in the Quebec Agreement. The two bombings, which killed at least 129,000 people, remain the only use of nuclear weapons for warfare in history.  In the final year of the war, the Allies prepared for what was anticipated to be a very costly invasion of the Japanese mainland. This was preceded by a US conventional and firebombing campaign that destroyed 67 Japanese cities. The war in Europe had concluded when Nazi Germany signed its instrument of surrender on May 8, 1945. The Japanese, facing the same fate, refused to accept the Allies’ demands for unconditional surrender and the Pacific War continued. The Allies called for the unconditional surrender of the Japanese armed forces in the Potsdam Declaration on July 26, 1945—the alternative being “prompt and utter destruction”. The Japanese response to this ultimatum was to ignore it.

Orders for atomic bombs to be used on four Japanese cities were issued on July 25. On August 6, the U.S. dropped a uranium gun-type (Little Boy) bomb on Hiroshima, and American President Harry S. Truman called for Japan’s surrender, warning it to “expect a rain of ruin from the air, the like of which has never been seen on this earth.” Three days later, on August 9, a plutonium implosion-type (Fat Man) bomb was dropped on Nagasaki. Within the first two to four months following the bombings, the acute effects of the atomic bombings had killed 90,000–146,000 people in Hiroshima and 39,000–80,000 in Nagasaki; roughly half of the deaths in each city occurred on the first day. During the following months, large numbers died from the effect of burns, radiation sickness, and other injuries, compounded by illness and malnutrition. In both cities, most of the dead were civilians, although Hiroshima had a sizable military garrison.

In 1945, the Pacific War between the Empire of Japan and the Allies entered its fourth year. The Japanese fought fiercely, ensuring that U.S. victory would come at an enormous cost. Of the 1.25 million battle casualties incurred by the United States in World War II, including both military personnel killed in action and wounded in action, nearly one million occurred in the twelve-month period from June 1944 to June 1945. December 1944 saw American battle casualties hit an all-time monthly high of 88,000 as a result of the German Ardennes Offensive. Japan announced its surrender to the Allies on August 15, six days after the bombing of Nagasaki and the Soviet Union’s declaration of war. On September 2, the Japanese government signed the instrument of surrender, effectively ending World War II. The justification for the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki is still debated to this day.

The role of the bombings in Japan’s surrender and the US’s ethical justification for them has been the subject of scholarly and popular debate for decades. J. Samuel Walker wrote in an April 2005 overview of recent historiography on the issue, “the controversy over the use of the bomb seems certain to continue.” He wrote that “The fundamental issue that has divided scholars over a period of nearly four decades is whether the use of the bomb was necessary to achieve victory in the war in the Pacific on terms satisfactory to the United States.”

Supporters of the bombings generally assert that they caused the Japanese surrender, preventing casualties on both sides during Operation Downfall. One figure of speech, “One hundred million [subjects of the Japanese Empire] will die for the Emperor and Nation”, served as a unifying slogan, although that phrase was intended as a figure of speech along the lines of the “ten thousand years” phrase. In Truman’s 1955 Memoirs, “he states that the atomic bomb probably saved half a million US lives—anticipated casualties in an Allied invasion of Japan planned for November. Stimson subsequently talked of saving one million US casualties, and Churchill of saving one million American and half that number of British lives.” Scholars have pointed out various alternatives that could have ended the war without an invasion, but these alternatives could have resulted in the deaths of many more Japanese. Supporters also point to an order given by the Japanese War Ministry on August 1, 1944, ordering the execution of Allied prisoners of war when the POW camp was in the combat zone.

Those who oppose the bombings cite a number of reasons for their view, among them: a belief that atomic bombing is fundamentally immoral, that the bombings counted as war crimes, that they were militarily unnecessary, that they constituted state terrorism, and that they involved racism against and the dehumanization of the Japanese people. The bombings were part of an already fierce conventional bombing campaign. This, together with the naval blockade, could also have eventually led to a Japanese surrender.


At the time the United States dropped its atomic bomb on Nagasaki on August 9, 1945, the Soviet Union launched a surprise attack with 1.6 million troops against the Kwantung Army in Manchuria. “The Soviet entry into the war”, argued Japanese historian Tsuyoshi Hasegawa, “played a much greater role than the atomic bombs in inducing Japan to surrender because it dashed any hope that Japan could terminate the war through Moscow’s mediation”.

Another popular view among critics of the bombings, originating with Gar Alperovitz in 1965 and becoming the default position in Japanese school history textbooks, is the idea of atomic diplomacy: that the United States used nuclear weapons in order to intimidate the Soviet Union in the early stages of the Cold War


The nuclear attack on Japan was only the first even WMD experiment by USA and a few hardcore Americans and US Jews as well as Israel are ever ready to nuclear attack again.

WMD of USA and Israel pose  the deadliest danger to the world as only these two fascist nations would not hesitate and would very much like to  blast nuclear arms to their desired targets  with a purely sadistic pleasure motive.


Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal

Joint Cricketism: Indo-England imposes will on Sri Lanka and South Africa! Or do bowlers resort to false bowling to promote batboys?

Joint Cricketism: Indo-England imposes will on Sri Lanka and South Africa! Or do bowlers resort to false bowling to promote batboys?

-Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal





Sri Lankan government is indeed thrilled to see that finally India offered a full 100 to one of the Lankan batboys. In fact, Lankans did not expect such a turnaround luck smiling on them as only they are supposed offer 100s and more to Indian guests. Did Lankan president used his diplomatic channel to talk to New Delhi for a speedy 100 runs for the highly disappointed Lankans?


South Africans have already got a 100 but English masters sill refuses to make Amla happy with his usual quota of 100. UK fails him while South Africans continue to  offer bog runs  English bowler Moin Ali. The Africans might offer him 100 to make England score cross 400 in the second inning, thereby laving a big score to  the visitors to chase down. South Africans have decided to lose and make their English bosses celebrate.


Of course the bowlers can offer any number of runs to any batboy as per the understanding or mafia dictates or even their own whim and similarly  the regime can offer top national award to any cricket showman  of their  choice- none can question these frauds.


Can they be? Can the corporate media that exist thanks to the dirty money power?


Indo-UK m bossism: Joint cricketism: South Africa serves UK masters


Clearly, as a former colony South Africa plays cricket for Langland. Neither the bowlers nor the batboys are interested in defeating the masters who taught them the tricks like 4s and 6s and 100s. South Africa now offers big score to Uk and make the Queen pretty happy l.

Interestingly, after winning the test one comfortably with false Lankan bowling, India also got the test-2 as well with the priory arranged first innings advantage. But one interesting thing has happened which is not entirely Indian mind. After comfortable lead in the first innings, India let Lankans to follow on and offered one full 100 and a couple of 50 before winning the match again conformably.

The question is how Kolhi skipped his “fabulous” 100 that Lankans would have given in the second innings if India chose to bat again. Did Sirisena ordered Indian team in Lanka to make Lankan gust happy, too?

Interestingly, Lankan batboys and peole around are very happy. SL boys hit 4s and ones and two with a smile as they knew the change of Indian mind to feel the weak boys form Sirisena’s country.


After letting India win comfortably in the first test Sri Lanka seems to have decided to make India shine by offering  another big score in the first innings in the range of  600-700 runs  to stronger India. India cannot be challenged by Sri Lanka in any manner so Indian teams has be promoted in cricket.

In the first test in the first innings, SL bowlers offered exactly 600 runs, enough for Indian batboys for India to win the match comfortably In the second test also SL bowlers now are f offering big score to India to ensure their another “historic” win.

SL bowlers The make sure the run-rate of SL batboys dont fall sharply and keep adding more 4s so that India is steady.

IN the first test, Koli could not get his “fabulous” 100 in the first innings so SL bowlers offered him a special 100 in quick runs in the second innings.

In the ongoing second test also, Koli fell without this “historic” 100 and he is damn sure Sl bowlers would offer him 100 in the second innings as in the first test.

Kolhi got Padmashri award last year and this year BCCI and corporate sponsors want Pujara to be offered a national award as he is managing 100s. So, Kolhi is not at all worried about his quick fall, leaving Pujara at the crease. He wanted to show Pujara deserves the national award this year from Modi.

That is cricket which controls Indian governments, both federal and regional.

Test cricket is meant to offer big 100s to batboys in both innings and if one of them could get one 100, then the second innings will take care of it as the opponent team is sure to help the other team as well for return favors for their own batboys. .

UN must declare test cricket bogus and all records fake too.

If Modi and Sirisena decide to share 100s, who will be offered more 100s and will they also get national awards? Obviously- that would be Modi!

In the first test, Sri Lankan bowlers toil in the hot sun to offer big score to India with  a couple of 100s, 50s and  batboys Dhawan had almost reached the “historic’ 200 but with a short of a couple of runs he fell. India thinks Lankans have tried to be over smart with India and for which Lanka would have to pay. But Lankans would argue that they have done no harm to Indian batboys and they just threw the ball to Dhawan for   him to choose the shot- 4 or 6 but he fell.  In the second innings also, Lankans toiled on the field to give a quick 100 to Indian captain Kolhi mostly in 4s and expected India to  return the  hard favors they received from Lankans. . But India plays mischief and remove FDM Karunaratne at 98 runs, thereby making him cry loud and even President Sirisena would have felt the  hard pinch of Indians. India did not show any mercy.  So now Lankans are being  punished to offer big score for the visitors.

As it stands, if they want a full 100 from India, Lankans must offer 300 runs to a couple of batboys plus the usual 50s. SL batboys have not got a 100 in this series, though they are kind to Indian batboys. .

Lankans are taking a big risk in offering good marks to Lankan batboys, but India just want to win and shine. They have got some good bowlers but the batboys are just as useless as in other teams and they can hit only when their bowlers are weak or offer too many runs.

The cricket regimes or their judiciaries won’t do anything to other batboys and cricket board. But the UU has a duty before the world in exposing match fixing in cricket and ban the  test cricket  once for all


Indian mercy


While Sri Lanka continues for promoting Indian prestige in joint cricket exercise in Colombo where India are the honored guests to enjoy everything that is offered to them as Lankans are supposed to offer big scores for the team in the first innings and 100s and more as individual score to the “known” batboys and if they fail to make merry at the crease fall unexpectedly quickly, then the bowlers also get a chance to amass big scores. With additional runs meant for batboys.

Interestingly, South African cricketers are worse than Lankans in both bating and bowling as they do not let the opponent England to lose the match and if the batboys do nt get enough runs, they offer big runs to bowlers to make the English score somewhat ‘respectable’ and good though they would lose the match as batboys would collapse against the boys of London Queen.

Like India and Lanka, England and South Africa also plays for 100s. England and India play joint strategy to somehow fool the world.


Who decides the teams for match series?


Apparently  the ICC, controlled by UK and India, decides as who should lay against whom and who should win the series, etc as well as who all should be given 100s for their onward  move in ranking  for national awards  as well as the ICC awards

It is the ICC makes rules to favor the batboys and make bowling work difficult.


Big teams must play against weak ones to get easy 100s and more. England does not play against Australia as often as it plays against weak teams with prior agreements.

Of late, one nasty development is taking place very fast.  More and more bowlers take to bating for fame as bowling has no place in awards and money schemes. Initially some bowlers get big score as batboy fall quickly and unexpectedly and now it is becoming an order of the day. Not only in test but even in one-dayers and 20/20 the situation is explosive. As a result, the boulders don’t bowl properly but only offer big runs hoping for return favor to person.


Thus the IC and cricket board in every country is killing bowling strategies.


ICC also decides which team can have effective bowlers and which team should not have. So, England and India should have good bowlers.


This leads to another crucial issue. Cricket is not a new entertainment.  It is being played for centuries and every fool in cricket knows the effective and serious bowlers are important to win any match. Apparently, South Africa now thinks it can win without good batboys and bowlers. One is not sure if South Africans in London palsy for the Queen’s prestige and British image.


All these years the cricket world has deliberately kept the bowlers less used or underused and they are asked not to deny runs to big batboys and never try to take their valuable wickets. The job of bowlers, therefore, is to offer the baters big scores in quick 4s and 6s, etc s that when they get 50s and 100s etc they would run from one end of the field to another with the lifted up bats and they even show the bat to the spectators as if they have achieved something unique and great what the mountaineers achieve by scaling the mountains in one go.

For the corrupt corporatist regime, all national frauds in the name of fake records are their friend and allies and they deserve national honors.

But the batboys are helped by fellow batboys, opponent bowlers and fielders as well as cricket mafia of corporate lords that sponsor the matches to complete the “historic” 100s.

Cricketers believe it is easier to get awards and money by listening to mafia and coronate lords who make “wonders” for the crickets to get 100s than doing any sincere hard work or seeking to change pro-batboy rotten rules with genuine neutral rules.


Indo-UK control rains  


It can be a strange phenomenon but it is true. Only the intelligence community and scientific community know all about it. Mafias  get information about the  possible use of rains to help India or UK as the case may be


Since UK and its terror ally India control cricket entirely, they also control ICC, rules and crate rains to defeat a team that they don’t want to win and only they could win

Now India has already won the both tests and there was no need for rains to disturb the opponents-Lankans. . But between UK and South there seems to be a fight though the latter also plays for the UK.  It seems England  is not winning the fourth and final test match/ UK has already bated its second innings and the totals nearing 400 runs. But UK is not very sure of winning this so rains have come to its rescue.  If match ends in a draw and get canceled England would win the series as it has 2 wins against one for South Africa. If South Africa wins,  UK cannot win the series as both will end 2-2.  But UK is playing with SA not to lose or draw but to win so that it can shine as the top cricket team alongside India. .


India shares the intelligence of not only terrorism but also crickctism. India offers tips on the basis of intelligence to England and UK also does the same to help India when it is required.


China’s role in US-North Korea stand-off limited!

China’s role in US-North Korea stand-off limited!

–Dr. Abdul Ruff Colachal




Super power USA continues to decide for the entire world and imposes its will on those that remain unwilling to follow the footsteps capitalist imperialists. American strategists believe continued pressure tactics and threatening tone of USA have made tremendous impact even on its strongest opponent Soviet Russia to fall in line by breaking up the mighty Soviet state and its Warsaw Pact military alliance and also forced its ally China to take a conciliatory approach in order to raise trade with capitalist nations.

Today, Iran and North Korea are the two nations that are stubborn and refuse to abide US rules. And so Washington pushes for punitive measures to weaken them by taking up the nuclear issue even while it is unserious about total denuclearization and disarmament globally. Both are indeed scared of USA and its terror ally Israel and therefore update their missile capabilities with regular missile tests. But USA calls  these a serious threat to  American security.  .

USA opposes rapid missile tests being conducted by Iran and North Korea though it also is engaged in such terror operations as a routine matter. .


ICBM celebrated

North Korea’s recent long-range missile tests have deepened concern about the threat Pyongyang poses to the US mainland, and strengthened determination here to prevent any strike. North Korea said it had conducted another successful test of an intercontinental ballistic missile that proved its ability to strike the US mainland, drawing a sharp warning from Trump and a rebuke from China. The latest test of an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) celebrated by North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, was the latest to be conducted in defiance of a UN ban. “We do not seek a regime change, we do not seek the collapse of the regime, we do not seek an accelerated reunification of the peninsula, we do not seek an excuse to send our military north of the 38th parallel,” said Mr Tillerson, referring to the border between the Koreas.

North’s leader, Kim Jong Un, supervised the midnight launch of the missile and called it a “stern warning” to the USA that it would not be safe from destruction if it tried to attack China or its allies. However, two US intelligence officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said on Monday Kim wants to develop a nuclear-capable ICBM to deter any attack on his country and gain international legitimacy, not to launch an attack on the USA or its allies that he knows would be suicidal.

The ejection test was carried out on land at Sinpo Naval Shipyard, the US defense official told CNN. It gave no other details about the increased submarine activity. Ejection tests from submarines usually gauge the ability to “cold launch” missiles, when high pressure steam is used to propel missiles out of launch canisters. The shipyard is in Sinpo, a port city on the east coast where the North had previously conducted tests of submarine-launched ballistic missiles.



The Pentagon acknowledged that the latest test represented the longest test flight of any North Korean missile. The missile could fly at least 3,420 miles, the minimum range for what the Pentagon classifies as an ICBM. Two separate US officials who discussed the latest test, which lasted about 45 minutes, said it showed greater range than the July 4 ICBM launch, which North Korea said lasted 39 minutes. One of the officials said it had greater height, range and power than the previous test because it used force stabilizing engines, which counter the effects of winds and other forces that can knock an ascending rocket off course. A US defense official, reported later that North Korea had been showing “highly unusual and unprecedented levels” of submarine activity, in addition to its third “ejection test” this month.

According to a US assessment, North Korea’s latest test of an intercontinental ballistic missile has shown that Pyongyang now may be able to reach most of the continental USA. The assessment, which the officials discussed on condition of anonymity, underscored the growing threat posed by Pyongyang’s nuclear and missile programs, and could add pressure on President Donald Trump’s administration to respond. Video of the latest missile test appears to show it breaking up before landing, indicating Pyongyang may not yet have mastered re-entry technology needed for an operational nuclear-tipped missile.



Pyongyang claimed its latest missile could hit the US west coast.

Independent weapons experts also said they believed the launch demonstrated many parts of the USA were within range if the missile had been launched at a flattened trajectory. The top Democrat in the US Senate called on President Donald Trump to block some Chinese investments in the USA to pressure China “to help rein in North Korea’s threatening and destabilizing behavior.”

The Pentagon acknowledged military-to-military talks with US allies Japan and South Korea after the test. While the test missile had a lofted trajectory rather than the more direct one required to reach the USA, the military takes the threat seriously. The Hwasong-14, named after the Korean word for Mars, reached an altitude of 2,314.6 miles and flew 620 miles before landing in the waters off the Korean peninsula’s east coast, according to KCNA. The flight demonstrated successful stage separation, and reliability of the vehicle’s control and guidance to allow the warhead to make an atmospheric re-entry under conditions harsher than under a normal long-range trajectory, KCNA said.


A White House statement after the phone call said the two leaders “agreed that North Korea poses a grave and growing direct threat to the USA, Japan, the Republic of Korea, and other countries near and far”.  It said Trump “reaffirmed our ironclad commitment” to defend Japan and South Korea from any attack, using the full range of US capabilities.  A Republican senator said President Donald Trump had told him there would be a war with North Korea if its missile program continued. One Is not very sure if he was joking.


China scapegoat?

President Trump who seems to have soft corner for Russia for unknown reasons, has repeatedly urged China to rein in its ally North Korea and has repeatedly criticised China, which shares a land border with North Korea and is its closest economically, for not doing enough to stop Pyongyang’s weapons program. Trump tweeted after the missile test that he was “very disappointed” in China and that Beijing profits from US trade but had done “nothing” for the USA with regards to North Korea, something he would not allow to continue. Asked by a reporter how he plans to deal with Pyongyang, Trump said at the start of a Cabinet meeting: “We’ll handle North Korea… It will be handled.”

China hit back after US President Donald Trump tweeted he was “very disappointed” in China following North Korea’s latest missile test, saying the problem did not arise in China and that all sides need to work for a solution.  China has become increasingly frustrated with American and Japanese criticism that it should do more to rein in Pyongyang.

China is North Korea’s closest ally, but Beijing, too, is angry with its continued nuclear and missile tests. China’s Foreign Ministry, responding to Trump’s earlier tweets, said the North Korean nuclear issue did not arise because of China and that everyone needed to work together to seek a resolution.

At the UN in New York, China’s UN ambassador Liu Jieyi said it is primarily up to the USA and North Korea, not Beijing, to reduce tensions and work toward resuming talks to end Pyongyang’s nuclear weapon and missile programs. The USA and North Korea “hold the primary responsibility to keep things moving, to start moving in the right direction, not China,” China’s U Liu Jieyi told a news conference to mark the end of Beijing’s presidency of the UN Security Council in July. “No matter how capable China is, China’s efforts will not yield practical results because it depends on the two principal parties,” Liu said. China said there was no link between the North Korea issue and China-US trade. “We think the North Korea nuclear issue and China-U.S. trade are issues that are in two completely different domains. They aren’t related. They should not be discussed together”.

China, with which North Korea does most of its trade, has repeatedly said it strictly follows UN resolutions on North Korea and has denounced unilateral US sanctions as unhelpful. Nikki Haley, US Ambassador to the UN, said in a statement China must decide if it is willing to back imposing stronger UN sanctions on North Korea over Friday night’s long-range missile test, the North’s second this month. Any new UN Security Council resolution “that does not significantly increase the international pressure on North Korea is of no value”, Haley said, adding that Japan and South Korea also needed to do more.

China’s close ally Russia said the USA and other countries were trying “to shift responsibility for the situation to Russia and China” following the most recent missile test. “We view as groundless attempts undertaken by the USA and a number of other countries to shift responsibility to Russia and China, almost blaming Moscow and Beijing for indulging the missile and nuclear ambitions of the DPRK (North Korea),” the Russian Foreign Ministry said in a statement.


The Pentagon said it has updated military options, but at the same time says a confrontation would be catastrophic. In light of that, US foreign minister Tillerson repeated at length that the US wasn’t seeking regime change and said the goal was dialogue, but one not based on the assumption that North Korea could keep its nuclear weapons. Pyongyang has categorically refused such terms.

Rex Tillerson, the secretary of states, says that the US government, unlike in West Asia, is not seeking a regime change in North Korea, amid tensions over Pyongyang’s weapons program. “We’re not your enemy,” Rex Tillerson said, adding that the US wanted a dialogue at some point. As always, there are no good options when it comes to North Korea, but less time to pursue them. The strategy, said Tillerson, is a sustained campaign of peaceful but intensifying economic pressure to change its mind. But given the advances in ballistic technology demonstrated by the recent ICBM tests, there’s growing doubt that denuclearization is a realistic possibility. However, Tillerson took a more diplomatic approach, saying that “only the North Koreans are to blame for this situation”. “But,” he added, “we do believe China has a special and unique relationship, because of this significant economic activity, to influence the North Korean regime in ways that no one else can.”

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe spoke with Trump and agreed on the need for more action on North Korea just hours after the US Ambassador to the UN said Washington is “done talking about North Korea”. Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe spoke with Trump and agreed on the need for more action on North Korea, hours after the US Ambassador to the UN said Washington was “done talking about North Korea”.

Japanese PM Abe and Trump did not discuss military action against North Korea, nor what would constitute the crossing of a “red line” by Pyongyang, Abe told reporters after his conversation with Trump that repeated efforts by the international community to find a peaceful solution to the North Korean issue had yet to bear fruit in the face of Pyongyang’s unilateral “escalation”. “International society, including Russia and China, need to take this seriously and increase pressure,” Abe said. He added Japan and the United States would take steps towards concrete action but did not give details. Pyongyang is determined to develop its nuclear and missile program and does not care about military threats from the USA and South Korea.  “How could Chinese sanctions change the situation?”

The US officials say while China worries about North Korea’s nuclear and missile programs, and the US reaction to them, its overriding concern is to avoid a North Korean collapse, which could strengthen US interference in the region send millions of refugees fleeing toward China and lead to a reunified Korea allied with Washington.



China’s direct investment in the USA quadrupled from 2015 to 2016, to $48 billion annually. The task force this year faces what could well be a record number of deals, many of them controversial as Chinese firms scout USA targets as varied as hotels and film studios to hedge against a weaker yuan.

The purpose of CFIUS, a national security vehicle to try to make sure that high-tech investments by foreign countries don’t steal the US cutting-edge technology, is to contain China. USA has urged changes at CFIUS because of China because it was not North Korea but that China would close the technology gap between the U.S. and Chinese militaries. In an interview with Reuters, the top US counter-intelligence official suggested the Trump administration was already working on a plan to toughen CFIUS. US plan to prohibit CFIUS from approving Chinese deals would be technically legal but would stretch CFIUS’ mandate, What sounds like effectively a bar on Chinese investment that is being suggested is probably legal but quite different than the case-by-case process that CFIUS has used in the past,” said Stephen Heifetz of the law firm Steptoe & Johnson LLP who represents clients before CFIUS. The USA government should consider the potential for a Chinese response.”

Meanwhile, the USA flew two supersonic B-1B bombers over the Korean peninsula in a show of force in response to the missile test and the July 3 launch of the “Hwasong-14” rocket, the Pentagon said. The bombers took off from a US air base in Guam and were joined by Japanese and South Korean fighter jets during the exercise. “North Korea remains the most urgent threat to regional stability,” Pacific Air Forces commander General Terrence J. O’Shaughnessy said in a statement. “If called upon, we are ready to respond with rapid, lethal, and overwhelming force at a time and place of our choosing.”


Observation: force Israel to dismantle its illegal nukes!

One fails to understand how the routine military operations of Iran and North Korea should cause problems for or in USA. If, for instance, Iran and North Korea are made nuclear free can tensions be put to end when Israel continues to boss over West Asia and use its illegally obtained nukes as a serious threat to world peace, particularly in Mideast.

How can the USA expect China which faces perpetual threat from Washington, to take its orders to boss over a soverign but its ally North Korea by asking it to serve the superpower and give up its legitimate nuclear ambitions, when it is unable to reign in the fascist operations of its close ally Israel in Palestine and Middle East?

Americans are not going to offer any direct answer and nor do we expect any such explanations. But why does Washington expect China to work for Neocons to end abruptly nuclear ambitions of North Korea and why not asks Russia also do that? The Kremlin does not take orders from Washington.

US strategists argue that China will not deter North Korea unless the USA exacts greater economic pressure on China. The USA must send a clear message to China’s government. And hence Trump pushes for the Chinese action. But China’s UN ambassador Liu Jieyi has said that it was up to Washington and Pyongyang to work toward talks on North Korea’s weapons programs.

So, it is all a part of a nuclear drama being staged by UN veto members to terrorize the people of the world. The terrorism operations are also controlled by these big powers.  .

Ultimately, it all comes to business and China wants both balanced trade with the USA and lasting peace on the Korean peninsula. However, to realize these goals, Beijing needs a more cooperative partner in the White House, not one who piles blame on China for American failures.

Despite the ongoing tests, most experts believe Pyongyang does not yet have the capability to miniaturize a nuclear warhead, fit it on to a long-range missile, and ensure it is protected until delivery to the target. They say many of North Korea’s missiles cannot accurately hit targets. Others, however, believe that at the rate it is going, Pyongyang may overcome these challenges and develop a nuclear weapon within five to 10 years that could strike the USA

UN needs to pass a resolution to put an end to nuclear race and first punish all those powers that have WMD threatening world peace in several regions.

Israel has amassed WMD illegally with help from USA-UK terror twins but the UN and IAEA have not questioned Israel because USA with veto decides that matter.

Before asking North Korea and Iran to give up their legitimate nuclear ambitions, let Israel be denuclearized first!. .


Russia begins withdrawal of forces from Syria!

Russia begins withdrawal of forces from Syria!

-Dr. Abdul Ruff



Russian President Vladimir Putin announced out of the blue on March 14 that the main part of Russian armed forces in Syria will start to withdraw, telling his diplomats to step up the push for peace as UN-mediated talks resumed on ending the five-year-old war. Putin said at the Kremlin meeting he was ordering the withdrawal from March 14 of the main part of “our military contingent” from Arab Syria. Putin made his surprise announcement at a meeting with his defence and foreign ministers.


As a result, Russian forces are already leaving Syria, surprising USA, President Assad, the opposition and the entire world because no one knew for sure how many years the Russian forces would stay in Syria. Russia said its first jets have left Syria and are on their way back to Russia. Speculation was that Russia would keep is forces in Syria as USA is doing the same in Afghanistan, Syria, Pakistan and Iraq.


Vladimir Putin said he instructed his armed forces to start pulling out of Syria, over five months after he ordered the launch of a military operation that shored up his ally, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Putin said at a Kremlin meeting with his defence and foreign ministers that Russian forces had largely fulfilled their objectives in Syria. But he gave no deadline for the completion of the withdrawal and said forces would remain at a seaport and airbase in Syria’s Latakia province.


Russia, on instruction from President Putin, had launched air strikes in September followed by a massive troop deployment, turning the tide of a long and brutal war in Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s favor, rescuing his regime from the brink of collapse. Putin’s announcement appeared timed to coincide with peace talks in Geneva that have been dominated by a disagreement over Assad’s fate.


Putin said the decision was discussed and coordinated with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, adding that “the fundamental tasks set for the Russian armed forced in Syria were resolved.  “It was agreed to withdraw main body of the Russian air forces. At the same time Russia would preserve an air flight control center in Syrian territory to monitor the ceasefire regime,” according to an online Kremlin press release.


Earlier, Putin had ordered an intensification of Russia’s diplomatic efforts to achieve a peace deal to end the civil war in Syria that has dragged on for five years, killed thousands of people and displaced millions, many of them seeking refuge in Europe.  As ceasefire effort did not work out well, the western diplomats speculated President Putin may be trying to press Assad into accepting a political settlement to the war, which has killed over 250,000 people, although US officials saw no sign yet of Russian forces preparing to pull out.


Syrian war has displaced half the population, sent refugees streaming into Europe and turned Syria into a battlefield for foreign forces and jihadis. The limited truce, which excludes the powerful Islamic State and Nusra Front groups, is fragile. The warring sides have accused each other of multiple violations and they arrived in Geneva with what look like irreconcilable agendas. The Syrian opposition says the talks must focus on setting up a transitional governing body with full executive power, and that Assad must leave power at the start of the transition. Damascus says Assad’s opponents are deluded if they think they will take power at the negotiating table. The talks must focus on political transition, which is the “mother of all issues”, the UN envoy said.


The Russian withdrawal move was announced on the day UN-brokered talks involving the warring sides in Syria resumed in Geneva. The Geneva talks are the first in more than two years and come amid a marked reduction in fighting after last month’s “cessation of hostilities”, sponsored by Washington and Moscow and accepted by Assad’s government and many of his foes. In Geneva, United Nations mediator Staffan de Mistura told the warring parties there was no “Plan B” other than a resumption of conflict if the first of three rounds of talks which aim to agree a “clear roadmap” for Syria failed to make progress.


US President Barack Obama and Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin have discussed Moscow’s planned military drawdown in Syria and next steps required to fully implement the cessation of hostilities. The White House announced this on March 14, hours after a shock announcement that signals a new phase in the five-year-old conflict.

Russia has remained steadfast in its public support of Assad, while opposition groups — the United States and key European countries — have called on Assad to go as part of a negotiated transition. “A political transition is required to end the violence in Syria,” Obama said.

Russia’s military intervention in Syria in September helped to turn the tide of war in Assad’s favour after months of gains in western Syria by rebel fighters, who were aided by foreign military supplies including US-made anti tank missiles. The anti-Assad opposition which lost hopes of removing Assad from power, simply expressed bafflement, with a spokesman saying “nobody knows what is in Putin’s mind”. Syria regards all rebel groups fighting Assad as terrorists. Rebels and opposition officials alike reacted skeptically.

Opposition spokesman Salim al-Muslat demanded a total Russian withdrawal. “Nobody knows what is in Putin’s mind, but the point is he has no right to be in be our country in the first place. Just go,” he said. A European diplomat was also sceptical. “It has the potential to put a lot of pressure on Assad and the timing fits that,” the diplomat said.

Syrian government rejected any suggestion of a rift with Moscow, saying President Bashar al-Assad had agreed on the “reduction” of Russian forces in a telephone call with Putin Moscow had promised to continue support for Syria in “confronting terrorism”.


Moscow gave Washington no advance warning of Putin’s announcement. Even Americans had seen no indications so far of preparations by Russia’s military for the withdrawal. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Putin had telephoned the Syrian president to inform him of the decision, but the two leaders had not discussed Assad’s future – the biggest obstacle to reaching a peace agreement.


Russia has said it was in Syria to fight Islamist terror groups, but a large part of its air strikes were on anti-Assad groups which Washington and its allies designate as moderate opposition groups. Opposition fighters have alleged that Russia had combat troops on the ground fighting anti-Assad forces, but the Kremlin has never acknowledged this and so it was unclear if such forces would be covered by the withdrawal.


Continuing offensive actions by Syrian regime forces risk undermining both the cessation of hostilities and the UN-led political process. A recent “cessation of hostilities” has been frequently breached but, Obama said, led to a “much-needed reduction in violence”. The White House sought to turn the screws on Assad, just as his backing from Russia was called into question.


By signaling the start of a withdrawal, Russia is likely to soothe tense relations with the USA, which has accused the Kremlin of inflaming the Syrian conflict and pursuing its own narrow interests. “I think we did it to show the Americans that we do not have military ambitions and don’t need unnecessary wars,” said Ivan Konovalov, director of the Center for Strategic Trend Studies in Moscow. “They have been accusing us of all kinds of things and this is a good way of showing them they are wrong.”

Through its intervention in Syria, Putin has restored Russia status as a major international player capable of exerting its influence far from its borders, and forced the United States to reckon with Moscow’s interests. But there was also recognition in Moscow that pressing ahead any further with the military operation would produce diminishing returns. Russian officials have said it is unrealistic to try to restore Assad’s control over all of Syria and the time had come to negotiate a peace. Putin said at the Kremlin meeting, “With the participation of the Russian military … the Syrian armed forces and patriotic Syrian forces have been able to achieve a fundamental turnaround in the fight against international terrorism and have taken the initiative in almost all respects,” Putin said.


Russia’s UN ambassador Vitaly Churkin confirmed some forces would stay in Syria. “Our diplomacy has received marching orders to intensify our efforts to achieve a political settlement in Syria.”  But the Russian leader signaled Moscow would keep a military presence: he did not give a deadline for the completion of the withdrawal and said Russian forces would stay on at the port of Tartous and at the Hmeymim air base in Syria’s Latakia province, from which Russia has launched most of its air strikes.

Questions remained about the practical implications of Putin’s announcement. It was not clear if Russian air strikes would stop. Russia will retain the capability to launch them, from the base in Latakia province.

Russia has shown the road map to all colonial powers to follow suit and emulate. NATO and its leader USA, Israel and India must respect the path shown by the Kremlin to quit occupations and let the nations under their occupation to gain sovereignty.

Millions of people have been slaughtered, severely wounded, driven out of their nations by these colonialist powers.  Fake threat perceptions of anti-Islamic nations, following the Sept 11 hoax, have harmed the humanity.

Peace and democracy are not mere slogans, for, sustained efforts are necessary to achieve these objectives.