Image is of destruction and damage inside Israel, sourced from this article.
Iran and Israel have struck each other many times over the last few days. There has been a general focus on military facilities and headquarters by both sides, though Israel has also struck oil facilities, civilian structures and hospitals, and in return for this, Iran has struck major scientific centers and the Haifa oil facilities.
Israel appears to have three main aims. First, to collapse the Iranian state, either through shock and breakdown by killing enough senior officials, or via some sort of internal military coup. Second, to try and destroy Iranian nuclear sites and underground missile cities, or at least to paralyze them long enough to achieve the first and third goals. And third, to bring the US into a direct conflict with Iran. This is because the US better equipped to fight them than Israel is (though victory would still not be guaranteed depending on what Iran chooses to do).
Iranian nuclear facilities are hidden deep underground (800 meters), far beyond the depth range of even the most powerful bunker busters (~70 meters or so), and built such that the visible ground entrances are horizontally far away in an unknown direction from the actual underground chambers. Only an extremely competent full-scale American bombing force all simultaneously using multiple of the most powerful conventional (perhaps even nuclear) bunker busters could even hypothetically hope to breach them (and we have seen how, in practice, American bunker busters have largely failed to impair or deter Ansarallah). There are several analysts on both sides who have concluded that it is entirely impossible to physically prevent Iran from building nukes.
I fully expect the US to join the war. I believe the current ambiguity is a deliberate invention of the US while they work to move their military assets into position, and as soon as they are ready, the US will start bombing Iran. After that, Iran's leadership must - if they haven't already - harden their hearts, and strike back with no fear, or risk following the path of Libya, Syria, and Iraq, either into either surrender, occupation, or annihilation. Every day where they do not possess a nuke is a day where lives are being lost and cities are being bombed.
Last week's thread is here.
The Imperialism Reading Group is here.
Please check out the RedAtlas!
The bulletins site is here. Currently not used.
The RSS feed is here. Also currently not used.
Israel-Palestine Conflict
Sources on the fighting in Palestine against Israel. In general, CW for footage of battles, explosions, dead people, and so on:
UNRWA reports on Israel's destruction and siege of Gaza and the West Bank.
English-language Palestinian Marxist-Leninist twitter account. Alt here.
English-language twitter account that collates news.
Arab-language twitter account with videos and images of fighting.
English-language (with some Arab retweets) Twitter account based in Lebanon. - Telegram is @IbnRiad.
English-language Palestinian Twitter account which reports on news from the Resistance Axis. - Telegram is @EyesOnSouth.
English-language Twitter account in the same group as the previous two. - Telegram here.
English-language PalestineResist telegram channel.
More telegram channels here for those interested.
Russia-Ukraine Conflict
Examples of Ukrainian Nazis and fascists
Examples of racism/euro-centrism during the Russia-Ukraine conflict
Sources:
Defense Politics Asia's youtube channel and their map. Their youtube channel has substantially diminished in quality but the map is still useful.
Moon of Alabama, which tends to have interesting analysis. Avoid the comment section.
Understanding War and the Saker: reactionary sources that have occasional insights on the war.
Alexander Mercouris, who does daily videos on the conflict. While he is a reactionary and surrounds himself with likeminded people, his daily update videos are relatively brainworm-free and good if you don't want to follow Russian telegram channels to get news. He also co-hosts The Duran, which is more explicitly conservative, racist, sexist, transphobic, anti-communist, etc when guests are invited on, but is just about tolerable when it's just the two of them if you want a little more analysis.
Simplicius, who publishes on Substack. Like others, his political analysis should be soundly ignored, but his knowledge of weaponry and military strategy is generally quite good.
On the ground: Patrick Lancaster, an independent and very good journalist reporting in the warzone on the separatists' side.
Unedited videos of Russian/Ukrainian press conferences and speeches.
Pro-Russian Telegram Channels:
Again, CW for anti-LGBT and racist, sexist, etc speech, as well as combat footage.
https://t.me/aleksandr_skif ~ DPR's former Defense Minister and Colonel in the DPR's forces. Russian language.
https://t.me/Slavyangrad ~ A few different pro-Russian people gather frequent content for this channel (~100 posts per day), some socialist, but all socially reactionary. If you can only tolerate using one Russian telegram channel, I would recommend this one.
https://t.me/s/levigodman ~ Does daily update posts.
https://t.me/patricklancasternewstoday ~ Patrick Lancaster's telegram channel.
https://t.me/gonzowarr ~ A big Russian commentator.
https://t.me/rybar ~ One of, if not the, biggest Russian telegram channels focussing on the war out there. Actually quite balanced, maybe even pessimistic about Russia. Produces interesting and useful maps.
https://t.me/epoddubny ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/boris_rozhin ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/mod_russia_en ~ Russian Ministry of Defense. Does daily, if rather bland updates on the number of Ukrainians killed, etc. The figures appear to be approximately accurate; if you want, reduce all numbers by 25% as a 'propaganda tax', if you don't believe them. Does not cover everything, for obvious reasons, and virtually never details Russian losses.
https://t.me/UkraineHumanRightsAbuses ~ Pro-Russian, documents abuses that Ukraine commits.
Pro-Ukraine Telegram Channels:
Almost every Western media outlet.
https://discord.gg/projectowl ~ Pro-Ukrainian OSINT Discord.
https://t.me/ice_inii ~ Alleged Ukrainian account with a rather cynical take on the entire thing.
view the rest of the comments
news
Welcome to c/news! Please read the Hexbear Code of Conduct and remember... we're all comrades here.
Rules:
-- PLEASE KEEP POST TITLES INFORMATIVE --
-- Overly editorialized titles, particularly if they link to opinion pieces, may get your post removed. --
-- All posts must include a link to their source. Screenshots are fine IF you include the link in the post body. --
-- If you are citing a twitter post as news please include not just the twitter.com in your links but also nitter.net (or another Nitter instance). There is also a Firefox extension that can redirect Twitter links to a Nitter instance: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/libredirect/ or archive them as you would any other reactionary source using e.g. https://archive.today/ . Twitter screenshots still need to be sourced or they will be removed --
-- Mass tagging comm moderators across multiple posts like a broken markov chain bot will result in a comm ban--
-- Repeated consecutive posting of reactionary sources, fake news, misleading / outdated news, false alarms over ghoul deaths, and/or shitposts will result in a comm ban.--
-- Neglecting to use content warnings or NSFW when dealing with disturbing content will be removed until in compliance. Users who are consecutively reported due to failing to use content warnings or NSFW tags when commenting on or posting disturbing content will result in the user being banned. --
-- Using April 1st as an excuse to post fake headlines, like the resurrection of Kissinger while he is still fortunately dead, will result in the poster being thrown in the gamer gulag and be sentenced to play and beat trashy mobile games like 'Raid: Shadow Legends' in order to be rehabilitated back into general society. --
If I'm running a dysfunctional threatened African or Asian state now, what would the point of being allied to China or Russia? Iran is probably the 3rd most valuable state in the anti-Western camp after China and Russia, and now they're actively suffering in a existential war and the Russians and the Chinese are just allowing Iran to get ran over while having phone conversations with Netanyahu about mutual trade. They let Syria fall while Russia was too busy elsewhere, they didn't lift a finger to help Armenia, and now they're just watching Iran fight alone. They're probably the shittiest military allies you can have, there's literally 0% chance that they pull off something like Desert Storm to help you out. Russia helped out in Syria, but they're basically too busy with their own stuff, but China's anti-interventionist stance is actively harmful right now.
It's getting to the point where I think China might even end up being anti-interventionist to itself. Like, Guangdong gets bombed and the government in Beijing is like "Well, we're keeping a close eye on the situation there, and we hope that peace will eventually come to the region and we're ready to help them out if they want to negotiate."
I get Russia's position. I still don't think they're doing enough, but Armenia's leadership has been pretty awful and Syria just kinda imploded because of Assad's incompetence and his generals becoming traitors, and they're near-singlehandedly fighting off basically the combined might of NATO. It sucks, but I get it. But I'm really being brought around to the side of the Hexbear China sceptics over these past few days. I could see the cold rationale of non-interference when it came to like, Ansarallah or Hezbollah, as much as it sucked. But if China's just not going to do any big moves to help Iran, even just as a show of genuine solidarity, then maybe they really are just gonna let the West isolate them while selfishly trying to become the new center of capitalism and the world's domestic consumption.
The goal of the Chinese revolution is primarily to increase and uphold the living standards of its population. As evidenced by the failure of the soviet union, having a lot of allies isnt a guarantee for the continued survival of your revolution. The actions of the PRC must be analysed through this lens. Even interventionism in other countries affairs is rare in Chinese history no matter the ruling school of thought.
China almost never interfere in the affairs of countries that doesn't share a border with it in its 5000 year history. This was true during every single dynasty outside of like Yuan due to Mongol shenanigans. Pakistan lost an entire chuck of land as the newly independent state Bangladesh, and China didn't do anything except send angry letters and vetoed Bangladesh's acceptance into the UN. This was all under Mao by the way for the people who want to blame everything on Dengism^TM^. I guess that would make Mao a Dengist too.
The construction of what is currently China itself evolved over a long period of wars, conquests, and genocides by various parties. China has not really been just one thing, and if one tries to think of it that eay it has still invaded and conquered neighbors during every period.
Under the CPC, China has not itself done invasions on any large scale, nor large bombing campaigns and so on like the imperialists. However, as part of the Sino-Soviet split it materially and substantially backed up truly awful anticommunists and opportunists, part of why the Vietnamese public harbored negative sentiment towards China for so long. Imagine if China provided support to Iran on par with what it provided Pol Pot or even the Mujahideen.
It's important to understand China as not essentialist in anti-intervention, but taking a conscious course, adopting a strategy, on purpose, that is not about refusing tactics but instead is about geopolitical positioning. Part of their PR is to say they do not meddle - but of course they meddled a lot just 30-40 years ago, cozying up with imperialists to stick it to the soviets. It is good that they no longer do such things, but how much of that is a consequence of the end of the USSR? When Filipino Maoists raise frustrations with China supporting the feds that kill and imprison them, is it simply non-interventionism and supporting existing governments or is it a larger strategy of being friendly to imperialists in order to build its own position (which is still a defensible position in its own way)?
This is important to wrestle with because it helps to frame how one handles their own position in organizing against capital, particularly in the imperial core, and how one engages with diaspora communitied that often have frustrations with China based on personal experience. The bad things did happen, and they still happen, but one must also oppose sinophobia and the anticommunism/capitalist-jacketing that seeps into anti-China rhetoric. One should not understand a country of over a billion as being simply good or evil or even, in this case, just communistic or capitalist. It is a project with strategies negotiated by sophisticated people and with substantial harms and downsides that impact others' struggles as well as upsides and boons that support others' struggles (China-Iranian trade is essential to Iran).
The operative word is "borders." China throughout the centuries has done plenty to interfere in the affairs of its neighbors (Imjin War, the Sui dynasty attempting to invade Korea 4 times which caused it to collapse, various Chinese invasions of Vietnam, fostering division among the Turkic Khaganate). I'm talking more in the lines of the Crusades where a bunch of French and German knights traveled across Europe to conquer the Levant.
My experience with the Chinese diaspora is that it largely suffers the same issues as other diaspora (labor aristocrat/petty bourgeois which expresses itself through the so-called model minority, alienated from their roots which expresses itself among 2nd+ generation as "too Asian for Americans and too American for Asians," colorism and white-worship in general, lack of solidarity with non-Chinese diaspora and POC in general especially if their skin color is darker on account of colorism).
China doesn't share a border with Cambodia and its border with Afghanistan is miniscule.
Historically, China has had varying borders. Something like the genocide of Dzungars was expansionist (but also responding to repeated raids and attacks) by the Qing dynasty, with whom they did not share a border until they expanded into what is now inner Mongolia.
The Levant is closer to Italy than Kashgar is to Beijing.
Of course, in modern times, the extent and distances of "meddling" is qualitatively different between China and the imperialists. Just not comparable. But it's not historically accurate to say that China just doesn't or hasn't meddled or engaged in long-ranging warfare, at least if we are going by the various dynasties up to today.
Re: diaspora, I don't really mean Chinese diaspora, as that is not generally a group with relevant stories of being frustrated by China working against their revolutionary projects. But the Vietnamese, Filipino, and Cambodian diasporas have such members.
'China almost never interfere in the affairs of countries that doesn't share a border with it in its 5000 year history' this can be applied to any country or civilization ever. international affairs didn't really exist back. i don't think they were criticising dengism or anything
Nah, Western Europeans were raising crusader armies to intervene in the Levant for the sake of Christian pilgrims and to stick it to the Saracens. At least, that was the official reason given by the pope. Obviously, the real reason is colonization. And sticking it to the Saracens.
I mean, Maoist China did give training and help Guerillas around the world, but tbh basically every AES state did that. Even Albania had it's own proxies.
The Horse will never lose its dominace on the Battlefield - Look at the 6000 year History.
I feel like this is just the Iran strategy with its regional allies but amplified up and if Iran gave even less support and aid to its allies than China gives to theirs. Like, the rationale inside Iran might have been (I don't know one way or another): "Well, if we supply our allies - Hezbollah, Ansarallah, Iraqi groups, Hamas to a certain extent - then they can weaken Israel for us and fight them off and we don't have to do as much fighting, so we won't even need nukes, and we can develop back here and build weapons and survive and develop and by [some unspecified future year] we'll be ready and strong enough to take regional power."
And then Israel starts bombing the shit out of everybody and then after all that they start bombing the shit out of Iran too, and suddenly it's like "Oh shit, it sure would have been nice if, in this situation, we had allies to fight alongside us and strike Israel at closer range than we can, because now we're alone while Hamas is fully focussed on resisting genocide, Hezbollah is hibernating and trying to endure Lebanon's fucked up domestic situation, and Ansarallah, bless 'em, has been doing all they can but can only do so much."
And in a decade or whatever, if Russia falls (quite unlikely) and Iran falls (more possible, idk what the odds are though), China might end up in a similar situation where, gee, they sure wish they had allies to exert global pressure and give them intelligence and ports and airports and supply goods to them over land, I wonder where those guys went?
yeah ... china should ignore the world .. the world then will surely ignore china .... Just let the World suround you , little china .. then close your Eyes .. becase if you can no see them , they surely can not see you ..and its better if you dont see .. and with these close eyes you can then dream of a future that does contain all the roads not taken..
The non-intervention arguments makes no sense, especially when it part takes in global trade while your enemy is attacking your global supply chain and potential export dumping ground
Ussr refused to shoot itself in the foot. Look how that turned out. We can not allow China to make the same mistake. China must shoot itself in the foot over and over again, trust me this is how revolution survives
not really following here , but with the shooting .. its very very easy actually .. you shoot on what shoots at you . If you dont . .the Person Shooting at you or your Friend has no incentiv to stop shooting. And no matter how bad he aims , he will hit eventually.
The problem with this strategy is that China doesn't exist in a vacuum. It exists in a world where the dominant hegemonic power is constantly looking for ways to isolate and destroy them and their anti-imperialist allies. At some stage you have to respond before it's too late or risk being totally surrounded and have no allies to rely on. CPC politicans love talking about multipolarity, but as long as the US Empire is allowed to do whatever the fuck it wants, a true multipolar world will not take shape.
It'd be up to the chinese populace to force the government to fight if china got attacked. I do think they'd accomplish that like they usually do when they need the government to do something, but the leadership are fucking slow and solidified to a bad degree right now.
You should have an idea of what exactly does "china helping iran" in this context look like, how would china do it and what difference impact would it have. Give them a nuke ? Sci-fi. Send PLA troops en mass to fight in iran ? Through what logistics and come on now. Send modern aircraft and air defense systems ? Sure and did and will touch on that again but at this point its useless without months long training, systems intergration etc. Up their supply of electronics and components, metals etc necessary for military production to Iran? Who says they havent or wont? Sanction Israel? thats one of the most brought up points yeah.
So with the 2 bigger points. Firstly, that they havent already armed Iran with modern aircraft and ad systems that could have significantly stengthened their position, here is my comment from yesterday https://hexbear.net/comment/6243693
So like i actualy wonder, is there any indication that over the last 15-10-5 years or whatever Iran was open and actively sought any formal military alliance with China involving any Chinese large scale military strength being present in Iran or at the very least the purchase of modern aircraft/ air defense systems at scale? China would most likely oppose the former and based on what time the latter, but iranian and regional politics and trust are much different than that and iran is an actual regional power with agency on those matters and we have to look at how they used that agency and based on that judge the possibility or disappointment regarding chinese (in)actions. If iran itself didnt even have the approach descibed above how and why would they or anyone else expect China to have done anything regarding concrete military deterence through hardware or manpower in Iran. Iran seems to in part have chosen its own strategies and investment deterence wise and militray buildup wise and doupt anyone in iran's goverment and army had any delusion regarding china or tried to built that deterence.
As far as sanctions to the entity over this or palestine i agree they should have done it and should do it. But how effective it would have been in detering israel or even not backfiring in the general balance of world backing of Israel idk, i had some thoughts here https://hexbear.net/comment/6199174
You could be anti-interventionist while flexing your economic muscle. China is not even doing that
In some ways, Russia has nobly allowed Assad to reach his highest level ambitions as an ophtalmologist in Moscow.
BRICs being a complaining department bin doing fancy trade show proven right once again
All this talk about “Iran is idealist, China is Marxist and would never make these mistakes” cracks me up for this reason
might pray to God to get World Communism than pray for China to become Marxist
I am not entirely unsympathetic to your argument, but Armenians brought it upon themselves. Strategically Azerbaijan is more important, while Armenia is kind of cumbersome due to its weakness and the historic enmity with its surrounded Turkic states. Then the new government tried to align itself with the EU instead of russia. It was the same issue with assad's syria, they wanted stand on their own two feet but needed to be bailed out by russia - which in turn meant giving up sovereignty to russia. Which both states did not want to do.
The chinese leadership probably sees the interventionist stance of the soviet union as one the causes for its fall. I guess they plan on waiting out the american empire.
Waiting out the American Empire while the empire is actively and ruthlessly making moves to pick off your allies one by one, and destabilize the region so it can end up weakening and encircling you.
Shame that climate change is quickly making the “wait out empire” strategy less viable
sorry, but that first sentence took me out if it. would've been better to say 'armenia brought it upon themselves' rather than what you went with considering the ethnic cleansing that occurred
Apparently, ''brought it upon themselves'' means making the fatal mistake of not having resources aka you deserve to be eliminated in the geopolitical social darwinist game that you are forced to play.
I hope this logic is not applied to a territory in the Levant that made the ''mistake'' of not signing up to unreasonable peace treaties or that it is not integrated into the global trade system
Lol please its pitiful how you try to gotcha me, thinking I support the genocide of people. Palestinians are in the same positions as native americans were - Israel is fundamentally predicated on the eradication of the indigenous populace, no matter what piece of paper is signed, the settlers are already committed to breaking it.
So cooperation is a fundamental wrong. And yes the current world system is very darwinist in nature. Most of BRICS+ arent even marxist in their outlook.
Yes the armenian leadership did. This is an explanation of why the russian leadership did not save the armenians of Artsakh.
Why would the Russians bother saving Artsakh if the Armenians themselves, as represented by their government that has never once recognized Artsakh, didn't save Artsakh? Armenia, through their shitty bootlicking-the-West government, constantly snubs Russia, yet people here expect Russia to bail out Armenia at the first sign of trouble?
Iran should do X, Russia should do Y, China should do Z, blah blah blah. Shit is getting old.
That's exactly what I was talking about, but people took to mean it I support turks killing armenians or something.
Well, it's better to get some support from Russia/China than none at all, I guess.
Don't worry, the people who think that the PRC helping NATO destroy its allies - including the USSR - and the PRC becoming dependent on the continuation of NATO's colonial horrors are good things, as well as the people who think that Assad's fall was a good thing are going to explain this stuff any minute now.
Russia did something similar to what it did with Syria in relation to Venezuela. In 2018-2019, the US was planning a military coup in Venezuela, the head of SEBIN (Venezuela's FBI) was behind the coup and fled when the coup failed. He said that Russia was not only sending arms and ammunition to Venezuela on planes, but that Russia had real troops (mainly PMC Wagner) and at least two military operations centers around Caracas, the capital, which I imagine they operated with Cuban military experts, the Bolivarian Militia of Venezuela and Colectivos (private armed citizens who support the government).
Of course, the situation in Venezuela has improved for Maduro mainly because neighboring countries elected friendly governments (Colombia and Brazil) in 2022 and, unlike in Syria, the Venezuelan right is poorly organized and has no support from the population, they literally have to operate in Ecuador and Argentina, both countries that barely have any stability to support a coup like the one that happened in Bolivia in 2019.
but maybe china is just a Butterly that just dreams to be the world manufacturing base of Drones and Rare earth Minerals , with that base beeing strategiclly reliand on Iranian energy and Russian grain..
Gotta figure that out first ....
You can get a free visit from the nazi military contractors who will fuck off halfway through rooting out insurgents and claim victory anyway
The point of dealing with China is for infrastructure deals and getting around sanctions. Nobody deals with China for its military. There's a reason why the AES focuses more on dealing with Russia instead of China.
huge cope, but could Russia/China's voiced/material support be a function of US involvement?
maybe russia has its hands tied but could it or China be providing surreptitious material support atm? and outward support if US becomes more involved?