Patients regain much weight after stopping new obesity drug: study

Washington (AFP) – A new generation of obesity drugs often delivers dramatic weight loss, but many patients wonder what happens when they stop treatment.


Issued on: 12/12/2023

A new study published Monday in the Journal of the American Medical Association shows much of the weight loss achieved by Zepbound comes back when people stop using the medicine 

© Handout / Eli Lilly/AFP/File

One study published Monday in the Journal of the American Medical Association provides an answer: much of the weight comes back, signaling patients may be locked into long term dependence on the drugs.

The research was based on weekly injections of tirzepatide, the compound in Eli Lilly's new weight loss drug Zepbound that was approved by the United States last month.

After 36 weeks, 670 adults achieved a notable mean weight loss of 20.9 percent.

The group was then split into two, with half continuing on Zepbound, and the other half given a placebo.

At 88 weeks, those on the placebo regained almost half of the weight they had lost, ending up 9.9 percent lower than their baseline.

Those on Zepbound continued to lose weight, ending 25.3 percent lower than where they had started.

The trial patients were mostly women and had a mean age of 48, with a mean weight at the outset was 107.3 kilograms (236.6 pounds).

All participants were encouraged to consume 500 calories less each day than they burnt and take at least 150 minutes of exercise per week.

Common side effects were gastrointestinal issues including nausea, diarrhea, constipation and vomiting, said the study.

Growing evidence

Study authors, led by Louis Aronne at Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, said the results "emphasize the need to continue pharmacotherapy to prevent weight regain and ensure the maintenance of weight reduction."

They added the latest research adds to four previous trials that showed "medications, including potent antiobesity medications such as semaglutide, have demonstrated that weight is substantially regained" after stopping treatment.

Semaglutide is the active ingredient in Novo Nordisk's Ozempic and Wegovy, which, like Zepbound, are examples of so-called "GLP-1 agonists" that work by mimicking the function of a hormone that secretes insulin, slows down the emptying of the stomach, and suppresses appetite.

Zepbound also contains another molecule that acts like the gut hormone GIP.

In response to the study, Lilly's Jeff Emmick said in a statement that "patients, providers and the public do not always understand obesity is a chronic disease that often requires ongoing treatment, which can mean that treatment is stopped once weight goals are met."

GLP-1 agonists have been found to cut the risk of cardiovascular disease associated with obesity -- but they also heighten the risk of gastrointestinal problems, studies show.

Though the rates of serious issues such as stomach paralysis are low, some experts fear that using the drugs for years or decades could change the benefit-to-risk calculus.

Cost can also be a disincentive. Zepbound costs $1,059.87 per month, and insurance companies often do not cover weight loss medications. Medicare, state subsidized insurance for the elderly, is barred from covering it.

© 2023 AFP

UK PM Sunak faces leadership test over Rwanda plan

London (AFP) – UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak on Tuesday seeks to avoid a humiliating defeat for his latest plans to send migrants to Rwanda that have split his ruling Conservative party.

Issued on: 12/12/2023 - 

Rishi Sunak is facing a key challenge to his authority over his immigration plans 

© James Manning / POOL/AFP

The Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill is Sunak's answer to a unanimous Supreme Court ruling last month that deporting asylum seekers to Rwanda was illegal in international law.

It aims to legislate to address the court's concerns, as part of a government bid to cut record levels of regular and irregular immigration that is likely to be a key issue at next year's election.

But by seeking to declare Rwanda safe -- despite concerns from human rights monitors -- and removing legal challenges to deportation orders, he has triggered deep factional Tory in-fighting not seen since wrangling over what form Brexit should take.

Hardline right-wingers say the proposals are not tough enough, while more liberal Tories are concerned it could see the UK break international law if the proposals are amended down the line.

A parliamentary debate will start from about 1230 GMT, with a vote expected at 1900 GMT, with all eyes on votes against and abstentions, in what is being seen as a key test of Sunak's leadership.

Defeat would not only be the first at such an early stage of the parliamentary process since 1986 but also a blow to his authority, just over a year since he became Tory leader.

Sunak should call a general election if he loses the vote, opposition Labour leader Keir Starmer said in a speech on Tuesday, but added: "It'll go through tonight, I don't doubt."
Breakfast meeting

Sunak, who is well behind opposition Labour in the polls, has made controlling immigration one of his key policies.

In a bid to appease opponents Tuesday he invited potential rebels for breakfast at Downing Street to get them to back the bill -- or risk it falling at the first hurdle.

"Take back control" was a mantra for Brexit supporters like Sunak during the 2016 referendum.

But Tory governments have found the reality of policing UK borders since leaving the European Union more problematic.

The UK-Rwanda deportation plan was first announced by Sunak's successor Boris Johnson last year as a way of dealing with increasing numbers of migrants crossing the Channel from France in small boats.

Starmer called the policy, which has already seen the UK pay Rwanda some £240 million ($300 million), a "perfect example" of the "cultural stain that runs through the modern Conservative Party".

"Not a single person has been sent and even if we did send people, we would pay for their hotels and upkeep.

"And we'd have to resettle refugees from Rwanda in exchange. That's the deal that they are voting on today," he said.

Net migration -- the difference between the number of people arriving and those leaving -- stood at a record 750,000 last year.

Sunak's government has since announced plans including higher minimum salaries for economic migrants, and restrictions on accompanying family to cut numbers, prompting widespread criticism.

But it also wants to cut asylum applications due to a backlog of cases from "small boats" crossings, blaming them for adding pressure and an estimated £8 million-a-day cost on public services.

© 2023 AFP

UK PM Sunak faces leadership test over Rwanda plan

London (AFP) – UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak on Tuesday sought to avoid a humiliating defeat for his latest plans to send migrants to Rwanda that have split his ruling Conservative party.


Issued on: 12/12/2023 

The Rwanda bill is a key test of Prime Minister Rishi Sunak's authority 

© Leon Neal / POOL/AFP

The Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill is Sunak's answer to a unanimous Supreme Court ruling last month that deporting asylum seekers to Rwanda was illegal in international law.

Interior minister James Cleverly admitted the plans were "novel" and "pushing at the edge of the envelope" but addressed the court's concerns.

Extreme action was needed to break the business model of "evil people-smuggling gangs" preying on the vulnerable, he told MPs before a debate and crunch vote on the proposals.

"This is lawful, this is fair, this is necessary... This is how we restore confidence in our immigration and take control of our borders," he said.

The bill is part of wider government action to cut record levels of regular and irregular immigration that is likely to be a key issue at next year's election.

But by seeking to declare Rwanda safe -- despite concerns from human rights monitors -- and removing legal challenges to deportation orders, Sunak has triggered deep factional Tory infighting not seen since wrangling over what form Brexit should take.

Hardline right-wingers say the proposals are not tough enough, while more liberal Tories are concerned they could see the UK break international law if they are amended down the line.

Defeat would not only be the first at such an early stage of the parliamentary process since 1986 but also a blow to Sunak's authority, just over a year since he became Tory leader.

Opposition Labour leader Keir Starmer said he expected the government to win the vote but Sunak should call a general election if he loses.

Sunak invited Conservative right-wingers to Downing Street to try to get them to back the bill 

© Adrian DENNIS / AFP

UK climate minister Graham Stuart was called back to vote from the critical last-stage talks at the COP28 summit in Dubai, sparking fury from green campaigners.
Breakfast meeting

Sunak, who is well behind Labour in the polls, has staked his political reputation on controlling immigration as one of his key policies.

In a bid to appease opponents Tuesday, he invited potential rebels for breakfast at Downing Street to get them to back the bill -- or risk it falling at the first hurdle.

"Take back control" was a mantra for Brexit supporters like Sunak during the 2016 referendum on European Union membership.

But Tory governments have found the reality of policing UK borders since leaving the EU in full in 2021 more problematic.

The UK-Rwanda deportation plan was first announced by Sunak's predecessor Boris Johnson last year as a way of dealing with increasing numbers of migrants crossing the Channel from France in small boats.

Labour's interior affairs spokeswoman Yvette Cooper said £240 million ($300 million) had already been spent without a single migrant being sent to Rwanda, with £150 million more promised by 2026.

The government confirmed that one asylum seeker died on the Bibby Stockholm accommodation barge houses that critics have called a prison ship 

© Andrew Matthews / POOL/AFP

She called it a "gimmick" that would have minimal impact on numbers and urged the government to instead tackle the lengthy asylum backlog, which is costing some £8 million a day to UK taxpayers.

"You cannot make Rwanda safe just by saying it," added her colleague, Chris Bryant, a former member of parliament's foreign affairs committee.

Net migration -- the difference between the number of people arriving and those leaving -- stood at a record 750,000 last year.

Sunak's government has since announced plans including higher minimum salaries for economic migrants, and restrictions on accompanying family to cut numbers, prompting widespread criticism.

But it also wants to cut asylum applications due to a backlog of cases from "small boats" crossings, blaming them for adding pressure on public services.

One provision of the bill is to house migrants deemed to have arrived illegally in purpose-built detention centres, to ease accommodation pressures.

Cleverly also confirmed the sudden death of an asylum seeker on an accommodation barge docked off southwest England that critics have compared to a prison ship.

No further details were immediately available but Care4Calais chief executive Steve Smith accused the government of inflicting further trauma on migrants.

© 2023 AFP

Sunak faces parliamentary test as he rallies support for Rwanda migration bill

Issued on: 12/12/2023 
01:32
Video by:FRANCE 24

British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak faces the biggest parliamentary test of his premiership on Tuesday when lawmakers vote on his flagship migration policy of sending asylum seekers who arrive illegally in Britain to Rwanda. Sunak is seeking to revive his key plan after the UK Supreme Court ruled last month that Rwanda was an unsafe place to send those arriving in small boats on England's southern coast, concluding it would breach British and international law.

 

Public bodies 'overwhelmed' at having to implement human rights laws, study warns

by University of Exeter

Credit: Pixabay/CC0 Public Domain

Staff members at public bodies can be "overwhelmed" by having to implement human rights laws into the working of their organization when those members are in "awe" of legislation, a new study warns.

When laws are viewed as sacrosanct, control over interpretation and implementation can be seen as the responsibility of a privileged few, according to the research, published in Recht der Werkelijkheid.

This leads to staff placing greater weight on implementation through processes. Laws may appear so that specialist staff feel they do not have the perceived required knowledge and expertise and cannot be trusted to implement them.

Those who see equality and human rights law as malleable believe they should not be judged or assessed separately, but integrated into everything that the organization does.

Most public bodies in England and Wales are subject to equality and human rights duties, which require them to implement the values of equality and human rights into all areas of their work.

Dr. David Barrett, from the University of Exeter Law School, investigated the way people understand and perceive laws in eight public bodies. He interviewed those responsible for implementing equality and human rights within the organizations, who remain anonymous in order for them to speak more freely.

Dr. Barrett said, "Implementers that see equality and human rights law as sacrosanct believe in the importance of these values but are in such awe of them that they are overwhelmed at having to incorporate them into their organization. They tend to focus on keeping it as a separate area of work and seeing implementation as a one-time task.

"Those who see the law as malleable are more likely to trust people to implement equality and human rights, to incorporate them into all areas of the work of the organization and to see it as an ongoing task.

"If you view equality and human rights law as sacrosanct, you are more likely to believe that once you have taken action to implement these norms then you have successfully implemented them and therefore do not need to take action to implement these norms again. In contrast, if you view the law as malleable, you recognize that the requirements of equality and human rights can change as the work of the organization and the context around the organization changes, so believe that implementation is not a one-time event but an ongoing process."

The research recommends governments in England and Wales should explore ways of making public bodies work together on embedding human rights laws, either through establishing overlapping regulatory spaces, or through requiring the EHRC to better coordinate their work.

More information: David Barrett, Legal Consciousness and the Implementation of Equality and Human Rights Law in England and Wales, Recht der Werkelijkheid (2023). DOI: 10.5553/RdW/138064242023044002005

Provided by University of Exeter New regulatory model needed to help organizations comply with equalities legislation, study says

UN human rights declaration turns 75

Oliver Pieper

DW
December 10, 2023

The United Nations General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights 75 years ago today. Germany marks the occasion at a time when those rights are under threat.

Eleanor Roosevelt, former 'First Lady' of the US and Chair of the UN Human Rights Commission was a driving force behind the UN Human Rights Charter

 imago images/Everett Collection

When German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock went to China earlier this year, she admonished her Chinese counterpart for his country's treatment of the Uyghur Muslim minority.

Qin Gang did not take the comment kindly, replying that China did not need "a teacher from the West." He rejected the notion that there are "universal standards" to protect human rights. Baerbock pointed to the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR).

The UN General Assembly adopted the document on December 10, 1948.

Now, Baerbock has warned of the threat posed to the principles enshrined in that document, which is why "universal human rights are more important than ever," she told a gathering of her Green Party's lawmakers marking the anniversary. She opposed the position that "human rights were for fair-weather politics that are only important when there are no other problems."

UDHR: Germany's mission

The declaration, which came into force just three years after the devastation of the Second World War, sums up its intentions in its first article: "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights."

What may seem like an obvious statement was considered a significant breakthrough in global cooperation. For Baerbock, the document forms the basis of German foreign policy 75 years later.

Despite the many challenges to it, from the Middle East to Ukraine to Sudan, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, saw reason to celebrate the anniversary.

"The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is a miraculous text," Volker Türk, the commissioner, said in a statement. "At a time when the world emerged from cataclysmic events, the Declaration set out universal rights and recognized the equal worth of every person."

Today's threats

"Even as the 30 articles of the Declaration have sparked a transformation in all areas of our lives," Türk added, "the embers of racism, misogyny, inequality and hatred continue to threaten our world."

The UN estimates that there are now 110 million refugees in the world and 735 million people without enough food to each. Fifty million people are in slavery, according to the International Labor Organization (ILO).

In all, the situation paints a grim picture that "would have dramatically blown up my worst-case scenario ten years ago," Heiner Bielefeldt, a professor of human rights at the University of Erlangen in the southern German state of Bavaria, told DW.

"There have not only been setbacks but outright collapses, both thanks to the advance of autocratic regimes as well as the autocratic tendencies within established democracies," he said.

Looking for progress

Despite the poor grade for human rights enforcement, Bielefeldt noted some progress, such as the arrest warrant issued for Russian President Vladimir Putin by the International Criminal Court. Russia, however, does not recognize the court, and Putin is unlikely to face justice there for his invasion of Ukraine.

Germany's human rights standing has also taken a hit. International monitors have downgraded the country's standing from "open" to "hampered," due to the state's treatment of climate activists.

On the international level, however, Germany sees itself as a champion of human rights. Bielefeldt pointed to using German courts, under the principle of universal jurisdiction, to try perpetrators of torture in Syria. It was the first of its kind

In January last year, the court sentenced the main defendant to life imprisonment for crimes against humanity, 27 counts of murder, rape and deprivation of liberty.

At the Greens' gathering, Baerbock acknowledged the diplomatic challenge of balancing engagement with accountability when it comes to countries with poor records on human rights. Given the number of crises confronting the international community, Bielefeldt said getting that balance right will remain a significant challenge for policymakers.

"It's no longer just about human rights violations here and there, or breaches of international humanitarian law, but about the fact that an entire set of international rules, developed over decades, is in danger of being destroyed," he said.

This article was originally written in German.

'From despair to hope': UN urges leaders to support refugees

Geneva (AFP) – As the number of refugees soars worldwide, the United Nations is appealing for countries to support displaced people at a global summit this week with the aim of showing that "change is possible".

AFP
Issued on: 12/12/2023 

The number of people displaced worldwide passed 114 million by the end of September, an all-time high

 © Abdul MAJEED / AFP

The UN is convening the Global Refugee Forum in Geneva with thousands due to participate, including heads of government and state, in a search for concrete responses to record displacements.

The number of people displaced worldwide passed 114 million by the end of September, an all-time high.

And with conflicts raging in Gaza and elsewhere forcing ever more people to flee their homes, that number has surely soared further.

UN refugee chief Filippo Grandi said the devastating war in Gaza that exploded after Hamas militants carried out their unprecedented attacks on October 7 would surely be raised during the forum.

Just over two months ago, Hamas militants killed around 1,200 people inside Israel and kidnapped around 240 people -- 137 of whom remain in Gaza, Israeli officials say.

In response, Israel's relentless bombing campaign and ground offensive have killed more than 18,000 people in Gaza, according to Hamas authorities.

The fighting has caused 1.9 million of the Palestinian territory's 2.4 million inhabitants to be displaced.

'Catastrophic'

"I hope that there will not be a regional exodus of Palestinians," Grandi told AFP in an interview last week, saying that "it is very, very important to address (the humanitarian crisis) to prevent an exodus that would be really catastrophic".

But while the Israel-Hamas war will be discussed at the forum, he said the second edition of an event destined to be held every four years will mainly focus on surging displacements around the globe.

From Russia's war in Ukraine to the raging civil war in Sudan and a humanitarian crisis in Afghanistan, conflicts and crises had fuelled record displacement even before the Gaza war erupted.

Among the 114 million displaced people, nearly 36.5 million have fled across borders and are living as refugees, according to UNHCR -- a number that has doubled in the past seven years.

Iran and Turkey were the countries hosting the most refugees by the middle of 2023, with 3.4 million each, followed by Germany and Colombia, each hosting 2.5 million.

Global leaders at the forum need to put in place long-term policy and practical arrangements for burden and responsibility-sharing, including providing financial and technical support, UNHCR said.

This year's event is being co-convened by five countries: Colombia, France, Japan, Jordan and Uganda.

'Political manipulation'

More than 4,200 participants are expected, including more than 300 refugees, though UNHCR has revealed little about the high-level participants.

The agency said the event would provide an opportunity to "show that change is possible, that there is a path from despair to hope and from hope to action".

"Human mobility nowadays has reached very high levels," Grandi said, urging leaders and politicians to refrain from populist anti-migrant rhetoric and to instead seek positive solutions.

"To say, for example, 'we build a wall, we push them back'... does not solve the problem," he said. "People will keep coming."

Grandi also denounced a "political manipulation" by politicians in Europe especially who seek to boost their popularity by attacking migrants.

"They manipulate, they create a fear... They create a hostility in order to gain votes," he said.

Grandi said that Europe had always been a role model in the way it provides protection to refugees, and that he hoped it would remain a good example.

Bad examples from Europe, he warned, could be followed "by countries which host many more refugees, and then it would really be catastrophic".

Grandi has repeatedly criticised Britain's efforts to send asylum seekers to Rwanda, cautioning that "abandoning the responsibility to take up the process of determining asylum, it goes against the refugee convention".

The British government announced a new bill last week after Supreme Court judges ruled in November that the deportation plan was illegal, saying that Rwanda was not a safe country.

© 2023 AFP

HUNGER ON THE RISE
Food insecurity, the forgotten crisis of COP28

When it comes to climate change, the world’s food system is a double-edged sword. Food production is both one of the biggest emitters of global greenhouse gases and one of the sectors hardest hit by the effects of climate change. To reconcile these two issues, the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization on Sunday set out an unprecedented roadmap for solutions. But the topic rarely makes it to the negotiating table.


Issued on: 12/12/2023 

An agroecology technician checks seed and potato crops in a greenhouse in Venezuela on August 4, 2023. 

© Miguel Zambrano, AFP

By: Cyrielle CABOT

Besides limiting rising temperatures to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, safeguarding food security and ending hunger were key objectives of the Paris Climate Change Agreement back in 2015. But NGOs and scientists argue that food and agriculture aren’t addressed enough at the negotiating table of the annual UN climate change conference, COP.

So on December 10, during this year’s conference COP28, the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) decided to put its foot down. It published a roadmap of actions governments could take to combat both food insecurity and climate change. The report, according to the FAO, comes at a “time of urgencies”.

The global food system is extremely vulnerable to the effects of climate change, which have a significant impact on agriculture. Malnutrition has been on the rise for years, with 9% of the global population suffering from chronic hunger and a third from severe food insecurity, according to the FAO.

“But food production is also one of the main drivers of climate change. It accounts for about a third of all man-made global greenhouse gas emissions,” says Marie Cosquer, a food systems and climate crisis analyst at Action Against Hunger, a global NGO aimed at combatting hunger. “For a long time, governments and institutions tended to present the issues as separate opposing battles. Some claimed that in order to feed the entire planet, we needed to produce more food. But now there is clear evidence that our global food system is no longer working because hunger is becoming more widespread.”

Climate crisis, extreme weather drove 27 million children into hunger in 2022

“The FAO report is an important step forward because it dismantles the notion that [food production and climate change] are opposing issues,” says Quentin Ghesquière, agriculture and food safety advisor at Oxfam. “Multiple studies have shown that the driver of food insecurity is above all access to and distribution of food,” he insists.

National action plans for 2030

In its roadmap, the FAO has outlined a series of actions countries can take to address these two issues simultaneously. It calls on states to draw up national “Country Action Plans” in ten key domains like clean energy, crops and food waste by 2030. Actions include “changing food taxes and subsidies to provide consumers with incentives to consume healthy diets”, “improving food production, harvesting and distribution practices” and “protect equitable access to resources”.

While “the actions to be taken are still vague and not very concrete,” Cosquer says, the FAO has also put forward quantified targets. The number of people suffering from chronic hunger worldwide should fall to 150 million by 2025 (about 735 million people faced chronic hunger in 2022) and should reach zero by 2030. By 2050, the entire global population should be able to consume a healthy diet.

In parallel, the FAO has also set out the goal of cutting global greenhouse gas emissions by agrifood systems down to 25% by 2030 and reaching carbon neutrality by 2035, so that agrifood systems become carbon sinks by 2050.

These “ambitious objectives … pave the way for interesting and fundamental debates on how they will be achieved”, says Ghesquière. The report is part one of a trilogy – part two and three will be published in 2024 and 2025. “That’s what we’re impatiently waiting for, to know the concrete steps we can take to achieve these goals and to tackle funding and national implementation.”

Funding is sure to be a major sticking point in the implementation of the country action plans. According to a 2022 report published by the Global Alliance for the Future of Food, only 3% of public climate finance is directed to food systems. What’s even more striking is the fact that the majority (62%) of developed countries did not include measures for food systems in their “nationally determined contribution” (NDC), climate action plans to cut emissions and adapt to climate change. As for developing countries, only 4% of their finance needs are earmarked for implementing food system measures.

‘A good thing’ but ‘not enough’

“Even if it falls short for now, the FAO report is a reminder that we need to act quickly,” says Ghesquière, at a time when food and agriculture are struggling to emerge as a major focus in climate negotiations. On Monday, December 11, when COP28 leaders were preparing for the final sprint to adopt this year’s climate agreement, food and agriculture virtually disappeared from the negotiating table.

And this despite COP28 getting off to a good start. On the second day of the conference, 134 countries including China, Brazil the US and 27 members of the EU rallied behind a proposal by host country UAE to include food and agriculture in their national climate plans by 2025.

“It’s a good thing,” says Cosquer, who is particularly pleased that the declaration maintains “the right to food” as the framework for any action on food systems. “But it’s still not enough, because all the commitments made on the sidelines of the official negotiations are non-binding and are often hard to put into practice”.

Cosquer also criticises the “very vague language and lack of concrete actions or quantifiable targets” in the declaration. “It also doesn’t mention the phasing out of fossil fuels,” she adds. According to analysis published by the Global Alliance for the Future of Food in November 2023, food systems account for at least 15% of all fossil fuels burned globally.

‘No concrete progress’

But Cosquer’s main concern is that the issue quickly stopped being addressed altogether. “There won’t be any concrete progress regarding food and agriculture at COP28,” she sighs. The main reason being the deadlock that ensued from discussions around how to establish a framework for reflection on food and agriculture. “Logistical concerns that conceal all the tensions at play in these negotiations and that have deprived us of a discussion on the topic,” she laments.

The analyst would have liked to see food and agriculture mentioned in the final summary of global climate action at COP28, every word of which is being fiercely debated in the final sprint of the conference. “It’s urgent but unfortunately there doesn’t seem to be any political will behind the issue. We know the solutions. We just need to implement the principles of agro-ecology and increase public funding to support food producers,” Cosquer concludes.

This article was translated from the original in French.

 

Moscow and Gaza: Is Russia Ready for a Major Shift in Its Middle East Policy?

by Ramzy Baroud

 Posted onDecember 12, 2023

ANTIWAR.COM

Gaza was among the main topics on the agenda of Russian President Vladimir Putin as he arrived in the Middle East region on Wednesday, December 6.

Some news reports referred to the trip as ‘rare’, especially since the start of the Russia-Ukraine war in February 2022.

We know that the situation in Gaza, namely the Israeli war and the subsequent genocide, is a major objective in Putin’s visit, based on press statements from Russia’s official media.

But we do not know, yet, exactly how Gaza factored in, in Putin’s one-day visit.

Putin’s visit included the UAE and Saudi Arabia, two of the richest and most economically influential Arab countries, which are, like Russia, members of OPEC+ – the larger and most influential group of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC).

Oil prices, energy supplies and the fractious security of the Red Sea waterways are reportedly also part of Putin’s agenda. However, it is unlikely that the Russian president has initiated such an important visit to discuss any of these issues.

Indeed, fluctuating oil prices and achieving OPEC+ consensus regarding production levels have been ongoing issues linking Russia to the Middle East for years, especially since the start of the Ukraine war, which invited unprecedented US-Western sanctions.

But what does Putin have to say about Gaza, in particular?

In the early phase of the Israeli war with the Palestinian Resistance in the besieged Gaza Strip, Russia had taken a guarded position, condemning the targeting of civilians, while calling for a comprehensive political solution.

But, days later, Moscow’s position began evolving into a stronger stance, namely condemning the Israeli war on Gaza, Washington’s blind support for Tel Aviv and the US’ intransigence during UN Security Council meetings.

President Putin, on October 13, compared Israel’s besiegement of the Gaza Strip to the Nazi siege of Leningrad in 1941. “In my view it is unacceptable, more than two million people live there. Far from all of them support Hamas, by the way, far from all. But all of them have to suffer, including women and children,” he said.

Moscow’s UN ambassador, Vasily Nebenzia, has repeatedly attempted, to no avail, to pass a UNSC resolution demanding an immediate and unconditional ceasefire in Gaza. His efforts culminated to nil due to US refusal, backed by equally strong rejection of other Western allies of Israel.

Despite his unsuccessful efforts, Nebenzia has used the UNSC as a platform to declare Russia’s progressively strong stances against the Israeli war, going as far as questioning Israel’s long-touted ‘right to defend itself’.

“All they (the West) can do is to keep (talking) about Israel’s alleged right for self-defense, which, as an occupying state, it does not have, as was confirmed by the (UN) International Court consultative ruling in 2004,” Nebenzia said on November 2.

Following the US shameful use of the veto power to block the passing of a UNSC resolution demanding an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, the Russian representative Dmitry Polyanskiy stated: “Our American colleagues have condemned thousands – if not tens of thousands – more civilians (..) including women and children, to death, along with the UN workers who are trying to help them.”

But for various reasons, the Russian position did not evolve beyond political rhetoric, however strong, into any tangible strategies.

The typical explanation for Russia’s inability to formulate a practical strategy regarding Gaza is its lack of any serious diplomatic or political capital beyond the current war on Ukraine; and that Moscow was fully aware of the Middle East’s delicate geopolitical balances.

But things began to change – not in Moscow, but in Gaza itself.

Over two months into a war that has resulted in the killing of more than 17,000 civilians, so far, Tel Aviv is finally discovering the limits of its military power.

Moreover, the war gradually began to destabilize the Middle East, involving state and powerful non-state actors, many of whom are close allies to Moscow and protectors of Russian interests in the region.

They include Iran, Hezbollah in Lebanon, Ansarallah in Yemen, the Islamic Resistance in Iraq and, of course, Hamas itself.

As a sign of closer relationship between Hamas and Russia, the Palestinian movement has released all Israeli captives with dual Israeli-Russian citizenship.

It has done so without a formal prisoner swap agreement, like the ones that have been mediated through Qatar and Egypt, resulting in the release of scores of Israelis and hundreds of Palestinians, starting on November 24.

Surely, Putin’s visit to the Middle East carries greater meaning than the mere ‘emphasis on the strong relationships’ between Russia and a few Arab countries. This meaning is compounded by the immediate visit to Moscow by Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi on December 7, also with the sole purpose of discussing the situation in Gaza.

Is it possible that Russia has finally found a geostrategic opportunity in the Middle East that would allow it to expand, in terms of its strategic alliances and political role, beyond Syria?

This expansion must appear as an attractive opportunity for Moscow, especially as early signs of Israeli military failure and, by extent, American failure, in Gaza are becoming unmistakably clear.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov is expected to deliver an important speech at the 21st Doha Forum in Qatar on December 10.

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman, Maria Zakharova, was quoted by the TASS news agency on December 6 as confirming that Lavrov will be discussing the war in Gaza and the overall situation in Palestine and in the Middle East.

“The minister will pay special attention to the problem of Palestinian-Israeli settlement, of course, and security issues in the Middle East,” she said.

None of this, including the potential new Russian ‘vision’ in the Middle East, would have been possible if it were not for the Israeli-US inability to defeat small Resistance groups in a tiny, besieged region like Gaza.

Aside from the setback of the Israeli military machine, which has been financed and sustained by Washington, the genocide in Gaza has cost the US whatever little political credibility it still enjoyed in the Middle East.

Time will tell whether Russia will be able to stake a claim and help define a new Middle East in the post-Gaza war.

However, one of the most important factors that Russia will consider before making any major moves is the tangible outcome of the Israeli war on Gaza.

And, unlike most Israeli wars against Palestinians and Arabs in the past, this time around it seems that Palestinian Resistance – despite its very limited capabilities in the face of a powerful Israel-US military machine – is the one most likely to control the outcomes.

Dr. Ramzy Baroud is a journalist, author and the Editor of The Palestine Chronicle. He is the author of six books. His latest book, co-edited with Ilan Pappé, is Our Vision for Liberation: Engaged Palestinian Leaders and Intellectuals Speak Out. His other books include My Father was a Freedom Fighter and The Last Earth. Baroud is a Non-resident Senior Research Fellow at the Center for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA). His website is www.ramzybaroud.net

President Biden’s War Pigs

by Edward Lozansky and Robert Zapesochny 

Posted onDecember 07, 2023    ANTIWAR.COM

Day of judgment, God is calling
On their knees, the war pigs crawling
Begging mercy for their sins
Satan laughing spreads his wings
Oh lord, yeah!
~ Black Sabbath Lyrics

In 1992, comedian George Carlin noted that after the Cold War politicians in Washington were always declaring war on things at home, “We got a war on poverty, the war on crime, war on litter, the war on cancer, the war on drugs.” Carlin believes politicians never declared a war on homelessness because “there is no money to make in this problem.”

However, since George W. Bush’s war against terrorism there has been a three-legged stool to the pro-war coalition: ideologues (neo-conservatives and liberal internationalists), greedy war pigs who benefit financially from these conflicts, and a silent majority of patriotic Americans who are well-intentioned but are only now beginning to accept that these forever wars are not serving their or national interest.

It is likely that many of these patriots are never going to be anti-war, but they are certainly against taxpayer’s money being spent for losing wars while the war pigs have powerful incentives to prolong these wars for as long as possible.

According to the Treasury Department, our national debt is over $33 trillion dollars. This country has so many problems. We don’t need any new wars. Unless the military-industrial (MIC) complex is reined in, there will always be a demand for demagogues who are bought with MIC money to spread fear in the name of national security and righteousness.

In Washington today, Democrats and Republicans in Congress, lobbying firms, and think tanks are making lots of money off war and deterrence. If you just look at the top defense contractors, and their current board of directors, there are many important civilian and military officials, from previous administrations, who are making lots of money from these wars.

Lockheed Martin
The Board of Directors includes former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Marine General Joseph Dunford (2015-2019) and former Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson (2013-2017). 

Boeing
Republican presidential candidate Governor Nikki Haley is worth $8 million dollars from speaking fees, book deals, real estate, after joining the board of Boeing. Another member here is retired Admiral John Richardson, who served as Chief of Naval Operations (2015-2019). This is the highest-ranking position in the U.S Navy.

Northrop Grumman
Admiral Gary Roughead, who served as Chief of Naval Operations from 2011 to 2015, is on the board at Northrop Grumman.

General Dynamics
Former Secretary of Defense James Mattis (2017-2019) is on the board of General Dynamics. Incidentally, Secretary Mattis’ top deputy at the Pentagon was Patrick Shanahan. Before President Trump appointed Shanahan to be the Deputy Secretary of Defense, he worked at Boeing for 30 years.

RTX
In 2020, Raytheon and United Technologies merged. The company changed its name to the RTX Corporation in 2023. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin served on the board of Raytheon before taking over the Pentagon in 2021. Admiral James Winfield Jr. was the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (2011- 2015) and has been serving on Raytheon’s board since 2017, and later the RTX board, while simultaneously serving as the Chair of President Biden’s Intelligence Advisory Board since 2022.

One can continue this list corruption indefinitely. This small list is part of a much greater trend in influence peddling. There should be a law banning high-ranking officers from making money from defense contractors or any lobbying firms. If any of them feel that they can contribute to their expertise to the country, they can volunteer their services.

Another issue is the ownership of stocks in defense firms from members of Congress, as well as their close relatives. Former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates wrote in his memoirs that he was grateful that he entered government when the market was high in 2006. Gates was conscious of the fact that many of the Obama officials sold their stocks when the market reached a low in early 2009.

The legislative branch should be held to the same standards as the executive branch. There should be no profiteering in war stocks. In December 2021, a few months before the war in Ukraine began, 15 members of the House and Senate Armed Services Committees had stock in defense companies.

We also need to cut the number of bureaucrats at the Pentagon. Former Deputy Secretary of Defense Gordon England wrote in 2011, that the Defense Department could safely cut 100,000 civilian employees. Back then, there were 700,000 civilian employees. In 2023, there are over 950,000 of them.

Of course, the problem is not just the lobbyists but the consultants. In 2017, Antony Blinken, and three other Obama administration alumni founded a firm called WestExec Advisors LLC. Many of the principals and senior advisors from this firm are serving in the Biden administration. According to the Intercept, WestExec alumni include Secretary of State Antony Blinken, Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines, Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco, and former White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki.

When President Biden nominated Antony Blinken for the position of Secretary of State, in addition to WestExec, he was serving as a partner at Pine Island Capital Partners, which is a private equity firm that primarily invests in the aerospace and defense industries. Lloyd Austin was also a partner at this investment firm when he was nominated as Secretary of Defense.

Today, Pine Island Capital Partners has an impressive bipartisan list including former Senator Tom Daschle, former Congressman Dick Gephardt, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs retired Admiral Michael Mullan, and Secretary Blinken’s former business partner Michèle Flournoy.

It looks like almost every member of President Biden’s national security team including National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan, who was a partner at Macro Advisor Partners, has benefited from corporate clients working for MIC.

Last year, President Biden said that the world is closer to nuclear war then at any time since the1962 Cuban Missile Crisis. Therefore we need responsible statesmen to pull us back from the brink, but the Biden administration is filled with people who are compromised by corruption, and therefore cannot be trusted to properly handle our national security.

New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman wrote that our environmental challenges are so great that mankind must “manage what is already unavoidable and avoid what will truly be unmanageable.”

The same can be said of nuclear war. If we do not rein in the military-industrial complex and the war pigs that benefit from this corruption, the U.S.-Russia relationship could eventually become unmanageable.

Edward Lozansky is President of American University in Moscow.

Robert Zapesochny is independent researcher and writer.

 

Yes, There Are Innocent Palestinians

by Trenton Hale Posted onDecember 11, 2023

Recently, popular conservative Mark Levin went to X to voice his opinion on the ongoing war in Gaza. Levin’s position was rather tasteless when he claimed that there were no “innocent Palestinians.”

He linked to an article written by D.W. Wilber, whose background is in US intelligence. In the article, he claimed that “So let’s get a few things clear. First of all, there are no ‘innocent Palestinians.’”

This take is fundamentally inhumane when considering that many of whom that have lost their lives in this war have been children.

As of October 31, 133 babies under the age of 1 have been killed thanks to Israeli bombs. This represents just a portion of the 444 babies that have been killed. The report published by the Palestinian Health Ministry claimed that, “444 babies were killed, including 133 under one year old, 153 one-year-olds and 158 two-year-olds.”

On November 29, two Palestinian boys were shot and killed by Israeli forces in Jenin in the West Bank. This came after Israel raided the camp. Adam Samer al-Ghoul, 8, was shot in the head while Abu al-Wafa, 15, was shot in the chest.

While they were sleeping, a Palestinian family was hit by an Israeli bomb. When Khaled Nabhan woke up, he immediately began to call out to his children and grandchildren. His daughter’s survived, but his 3- and 5-year-old grandchildren sadly did not. They were buried under the rubble.

All in all, the number of children who have died in Gaza because of Israel’s airstrikes is damning. According to BBC, more than 7,000 children out of the 17,500 civilians have died since the outbreak of war.

As heartbreaking is this is, Levin and Wilber would argue that they were not “innocent Palestinians.” To them, they represent terrorism and are nothing more than terrorist sympathizers.

And Wilber even acknowledged the number of civilians who have died in the conflict. Sadly, he downplays this by saying the “Palestinians should have thought about that before they elected terrorists to govern them.”

Well, only about 44% of Palestinians voted for them in 2006 to govern them. As I have shared, many children have died, and they certainly did not vote for them in 2006. In fact, about a majority of those living in Palestine did not vote for Hamas in 2006.

Today, only 11% of Palestinians align themselves as Hamas supporters. The only reason they won in 2006 over Fatah was because Fatah was divided and because they had given up on a peace resolution with Israel. 70% said that they would have voted for Fatah is they believed peace would occur if whoever won the election would make peace with Israel.

Furthermore, dehumanizing them in this manner is beyond cruel. When antisemites do the same thing when they make their voices heard, they are rightfully called out for their dehumanizing of all Jews. When we look at what the Nazis said in their attempts to dehumanize Jews to justify slaughtering them in World War II, they are rightfully called out as genocidal maniacs. But why is it not wrong to dehumanize all of Palestinians because of the actions of Hamas?

Finally, this argument is the same argument Osama bin Laden used to justify killing Americans in 9/11. As Jack Hunter wrote, “This is EXACTLY part of Osama Bin Laden’s logic in carrying out 9/11. Al-Qaeda believed Americans elected their government and so anyone who perished on the day of their attacks was worse than just collateral damage – they deserved it.”

Bin Laden using this logic is evil but it is not evil for Wilber to do this according to Levin. How does this make any kind of sense?

The notion that there are no innocent Palestinians is evil and should be eroded. The arguments used by Wilber are the same that bin Laden used to justify murdering American civilians in 9/11. This is the first step to supporting a genocide and it deserves to be called out.

Trenton Hale is a young libertarian writer. He is the author of two books, The Failed Idea: Why Socialism Fails in Theory and Practice, and Freedom for All: How a Libertarian Society Would Function. He regularly posts on his substack and Instagram pages. His works have been featured in institutes such as Antiwar.com, the Mises Institute, Libertarian Institute, and Mises Magazine for the Liberty Youth Coalition.

Palestinian economy severely impacted by Israel-Hamas war: World Bank

Washington (AFP) – The Israel-Hamas war in Gaza is having a severe impact on the Palestinian economy, the World Bank said Tuesday, adding that a sharp economic contraction is likely this year and next.

AFP
Issued on: 12/12/2023 

© MAHMUD HAMS / AFP

The conflict, sparked by Hamas' cross-border attacks on October 7 that killed 1,200 people, according to Israeli figures, and saw around 240 hostages taken back to Gaza, is now dragging on into its third month.

The human toll of Israel's fierce response has been extreme: More than 18,400 people in Gaza have been killed, the majority of them women and children, according to the Hamas-run health ministry.

The UN estimates 1.9 million of Gaza's 2.4 million people have been displaced by the war, half of them children, as Israel's overwhelming aerial bombardment in the days after October 7 was subsequently accompanied by a ground invasion aimed at destroying Hamas.

UN agencies and aid groups fear the Palestinian territory will soon be overwhelmed by starvation and disease, and are pleading with Israel to boost efforts to protect civilians.

Beyond the immediate human cost, the Israel-Hamas conflict has also "severely impacted the Palestinian economy," the World Bank announced in a statement published Tuesday.

Gaza's contribution to the overall Palestinian economy, which includes the West Bank, had already shrunk from around 36 percent in 2005 to just 17 percent last year, according to the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics.

Israel's fierce response to the Hamas attacks on October 7, along with the shuttering of its borders to Palestinian workers from both Gaza and the West Bank, is likely to severely impact the Palestinian economy, according to the Bank.

Despite Gaza's small economic contribution, the World Bank now expects the overall Palestinian economy to contract by 3.7 percent this year, down sharply from its pre-war forecast of a 3.2 percent increase.

Next year, the situation is expected to be even worse.

Whereas the World Bank previously anticipated growth of 3.0 percent in 2024, it now expects an overall contraction of 6.0 percent -- on the assumption that the severity of the conflict decreases next year.

If the war drags on, the economic impact could deteriorate further.

In response to the conflict, the World Bank has announced some financial support aimed at meeting the immediate needs of the population in Gaza.

On Tuesday, the development lender announced an additional $20 million in funds for medical care, humanitarian needs, and financing for food vouchers and parcels in the besieged Palestinian territory, on top of the $15 million already delivered.

The package, some of which required approval by the Bank's board of directors, will provide "emergency relief for the affected people of Gaza," the World Bank said.

© 2023 AFP

Middle East leaders have few answers for 'day after' Gaza war

Doha (AFP) – Middle East leaders gathered in Qatar sought ideas for what happens after the Gaza war, but remained firmly opposed to putting their own troops or international forces into the ravaged territory.

Issued on: 12/12/2023 - 

The Gaza war has claimed more than 18,000 lives, according to the Hamas-run health ministry 

© Menahem KAHANA / AFP

The Palestinian question is extremely delicate for leaders in the Arab world, where the war has sparked massive protests in several countries.

At the annual Doha Forum that ended Monday, Qatar reiterated that no Arab country would send in forces to stabilise the situation after the guns of Israel and Hamas fall silent.

"No one from the region will accept... to put boots on the ground (following after) an Israeli tank. This is unacceptable," said Qatar's Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani.

But he also opposed any international force in Gaza under current conditions. "We shouldn't always talk about the Palestinians as if they need some guardian," he said.

The Palestinians were represented by the Palestinian Authority, which has power in the Israeli-occupied West Bank territory, but not Gaza, which is in the hands of Hamas militants.

Despite their rivalry, Palestinian Authority prime minister Mohammad Shtayyeh said Hamas could not be eradicated.

Thani said no regional power would put troops into Gaza after the war 

© SALIM MATRAMKOT / AFP

They are "an integral part of the Palestinian political mosaic," he told the forum.

Yet, eradication is precisely what Israel is seeking with its war -- in retaliation for Hamas's unprecedented attack of October 7 which killed 1,200 people and saw some 240 hostages taken back to Gaza, according to Israeli figures.

The ensuing Israeli offensive has killed more than 18,400 people in Gaza, according to the Hamas-run health ministry.

On Tuesday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said following a conversation with US President Joe Biden that there was "disagreement" between the allies over "the day after Hamas".

The Israeli premier said he hoped "we will reach agreement here" but he vowed not to "repeat the mistake of Oslo," referring to 1993 peace accords signed in the United States.
'Heart of all conflicts'

Jordan's Prime Minister Bisher Khasawneh warned that failure to deal with "the day after" the war would mean "uglier scenes in a year or two".

He hoped the war would act as a "wake-up call", especially as the conflict threatens a wider regional conflagration.

The war has sparked mass protests around the region 

© FADEL SENNA / AFP

The war has encouraged groups linked to Iran, which backs Hamas, to launch attacks on US and allied forces in Iraq and Syria, while Yemen's Huthis have fired missiles and Israel is engaged in near-daily cross-border clashes with Hezbollah in Lebanon.

The Israel-Palestinian question is "at the centre and the heart of all conflicts in the region," said Sheikh Mohammed.

"What's coming out of Gaza every day is not just affecting those forces in Lebanon or Yemen. It also affects an entire generation that might be radicalised because of these images," the Qatari premier added.

But concrete policies were lacking at the forum, which excluded high-level representatives from key regional players Saudi Arabia, Lebanon and Egypt.

The United States, Israel's key diplomatic and military ally, has previously indicated the Palestinian Authority could govern both Gaza and the West Bank in the aftermath of hostilities.

But the Palestinians say a much more fundamental response is needed, one that takes seriously "an independent, sovereign, viable state of Palestine on all the Palestinian territories" in Shtayyeh's words.

Jordan's premier said the war should be a 'wake-up call' to the region 

© SALIM MATRAMKOT / AFP

Qatar, which hosts the Hamas leadership, said it is still working on a fresh truce like the one last month that saw a one-week break in fighting and scores of Israeli hostages exchanged for Palestinian prisoners and humanitarian aid.

But Sheikh Mohammed warned Israel's relentless bombardment in Gaza was "narrowing this window" for a ceasefire.

"There is a collective responsibility on all of us to stop the killing, to go back to the table to find a lasting solution," he said.

© 2023 AFP