David Shavin

Oct. 3, 2024 (EIRNS)—Today the Chief of Staff of Iran’s armed forces, Major General Mohammad Hossein Bagheri, explained for anyone who cared to hear, what their Tuesday, Oct. 1 attack on Israel was about: “After Martyr Haniyeh’s assassination, Iran went through a tough period of self-restraint amid repeated requests by the Americans and Europeans, who would ask us to exercise self-restraint so they would establish a ceasefire in the Gaza Strip.” However, Israel’s constant provocations undermined the process, and the assassination of Hezbollah head Hassan Nasrallah was the last straw. So, Bagheri explained that Tehran took a measured action: Iran targeted the “center for terrorism,” the Mossad spy agency; the Nevatim air base, which houses Israel’s F-35s; and the Hatzerim base, which had enabled the assassination of Nasrallah. Further, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, in the hours after Iran’s Oct. 1 launching of missiles, clearly explained to European foreign ministers that Iran had sent its message, a lawful response, and that they were finished—unless Israel “plans retaliation.”

Oct. 2, 2024 (EIRNS)—The world now stands on the brink of a U.S.-Russia nuclear war being triggered not only in the Ukraine theater, but in Southwest Asia as well.

Sept. 29, 2024 (EIRNS)—Whatever team is making decisions at the White House, this “collective Joe” grouping has, on two recent occasions, apparently turned down the opportunity to go full “flight-forward,” when confronted with the matter of firing Western long-range missiles deep into Russia. On Sept. 13, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer came to muscle Biden on the matter, and on Sept. 26, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy attempted his unique form of charm on the White House. On both occasions, Russia’s President Vladimir Putin had sent a loud and clear message the day before, that Moscow was in no mood to play games, where Ukrainian proxies have their “’label” on the launching of U.S., British and French long-range missiles deep into Russia.

Sept. 26, 2024 (EIRNS)—Russia’s proposed new nuclear doctrine, presented yesterday by President Vladimir Putin, is targeted directly at the predominant “Anglosphere” fantasy, that they can use nuclear blackmail against Russia, putting missiles closer and closer to reach of Moscow, but incurring no risk to London or Washington. Moscow, in this fantasy, is supposed to play along with the narrative that non-nuclear countries are really the ones launching long-range missiles deep into Russia.

Sept. 19, 2024 (EIRNS)—It’s a simple argument, or fantasy. If you never flinch, and just keep bluffing your opponent, doubling- and tripling-down on threats, sooner or later they will have to bend to your will.

Sept. 11, 2024 (EIRNS)—Why is it that London and Washington think they have to push a thermonuclear showdown with Moscow this week?

Sept. 6, 2024 (EIRNS)—A portion of the concluding statement of the remarkable discussion of the International Peace Coalition (IPC), made by Schiller Institute founder Helga Zepp-LaRouche, hit the nail on the head. The session, entitled the “New U.S. Nuclear Doctrine: Reason for the World to Worry,” first laid out the severely advanced nature of the thermonuclear confrontation.

Aug. 30, 2024 (EIRNS)—There are financial and military factions in the West committed to submitting the world to the austerity necessary to extend the impossible financial bubble and to submitting to thermonuclear blackmail with a first-strike nuclear war doctrine. It has everything to do with why London and Washington “dance with the devil,” using their proxy warmongers, Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu and Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelenskyy. The fact that this is not pleasant news does not chase away the problem.

Aug. 25, 2024 (EIRNS)—This emergency statement is issued by the International Peace Coalition.

Aug. 20, 2024 (EIRNS)—Washington attempted to placate Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu last week, assuring him that his avowed concern over the smuggling of weapons through tunnels from Egypt into Gaza did not mean that Israeli troops had to be exempted from an agreed-upon withdrawal and ceasefire, and had to stay on duty on the Gaza border. Rather, the U.S. would offer to patrol the border, along with Egypt. Never mind that Netanyahu was, yet again, putting up one more barrier to any agreement to return the hostages and begin a ceasefire—a barrier to be replaced by another, if circumstances dictated.