WWIII  ICBM

Russia’s missile ‘warning’ to Ukraine and West: what we know



By AFP
November 21, 2024

The nature of the the missile remains unclear - Copyright COME BACK ALIVE/AFP -
Didier LAURAS

Russia on Thursday fired an experimental missile at Ukraine in a clear warning of its capabilities, officials from Western governments said, even as they pushed back against Ukrainian claims of a more provocative action by Moscow.

Ukraine initially accused Russia of firing an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) in combat for the first time in history.

But a US official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said Russia had not fired an ICBM but rather an “experimental” medium-range ballistic missile.

In an address late Thursday, President Vladimir Putin confirmed Russia had used a new, experimental “hypersonic” medium-range ballistic missile named “Oreshnik” (“Hazel”) in an attack on Dnipro.

In what analysts said was intended as a warning to the countries arming Ukraine, the Russian leader hinted the missile was capable of unleashing a nuclear payload.



– What was fired?



Analysts and the United States pushed back against Kyiv’s initial claims that Moscow had launched a nuclear-capable ICBM as part of a barrage towards the central city of Dnipro.

As their name suggests, intercontinental ballistic missiles are capable of striking one continent from another, with a range of at least 5,500 kilometres (3,400 miles).

Intermediate-range missiles by contrast typically have a reach of between 3,000 and 5,500 kilometres — still long enough to make good on Putin’s threat of striking the West.

In his speech, the Kremlin leader said Russia had tested one of its “newest intermediate-range missile systems in combat conditions. In this case, a ballistic missile with a non-nuclear hypersonic configuration.”

Kremlin spokesman Dmitri Peskov said Moscow had informed Washington of the missile’s launch half an hour before it was fired through an automatic nuclear de-escalation hotline, in remarks cited in state media.

While not naming the missile used or giving technical specifications, the US official said Russia “likely possesses only a handful of these experimental missiles”.

“Ukraine has withstood countless attacks from Russia, including from missiles with significantly larger warheads than this weapon,” the official said.

In London, a spokesman for British Prime Minister Keir Starmer told reporters that Russia’s strike on Ukraine was a “ballistic missile” with “a range of several thousand kilometres”, the first time Moscow had used such a weapon in the war.



– What is the context?



Tension has been building between Moscow and Kyiv’s allies in the West since Ukrainian forces struck Russian territory with Western-supplied long-range weapons on Tuesday after getting the green light from Washington.

US President Joe Biden gave Ukraine the go-ahead to fire the missiles into Russian territory for the first time while Washington will soon provide Ukraine with antipersonnel land mines to shore up its defences against Russian forces.

On Tuesday, Putin signed a decree lowering the threshold for using nuclear weapons, a move Western powers condemned as “irresponsible”.

Biden is moving to boost Ukraine’s war effort in the final two months of his administration, before Donald Trump, who has repeatedly promised to end the war quickly, takes power in January.

“The United States will continue to surge security assistance to Ukraine to strengthen capabilities, including air defence, and put Ukraine in the best possible position on the battlefield,” the official said.

In London, the British government spokesman said of the Russian strike: “It is another example of reckless behaviour from Russia, which only serves to strengthen our resolve in terms of standing by Ukraine for as long as it takes.”

NATO spokesperson Farah Dakhlallah said Russia’s use of the missile would “neither change the course of the conflict nor deter” the US-led defence alliance from backing Kyiv.



– What message is Moscow seeking to send?



Despite the initial confusion about the nature of the missile fired, it is clear the strike on Dnipro was unusual and aimed at grabbing the attention of Kyiv and its allies.

“We are really on something unprecedented, and it is much more a political act than a military act. The cost-effectiveness ratio of the attack is zero,” said Heloise Fayet, a researcher at the French Institute of International Relations.

“This change of scale is significant,” she said, adding this was “the first use by the Russians on the battlefield of a missile with a range greater than 2,000 kilometres”.

But she said the use of this missile would “not change the situation significantly on the operational level. They obviously have very few and they are expensive.”

Local authorities said an infrastructure facility was hit in Dnipro and two civilians were wounded.

For Nick Brown of British defence analysis organisation Janes, using the missile was “really about sending an escalatory message or warning, an expensive and potentially dangerous way for Russia to rattle its sabre.”

According to the US official: “Russia may be seeking to use this capability to try to intimidate Ukraine and its supporters… but it will not be a game changer in this conflict.”

Putin hints at strikes on West in ‘global’ Ukraine war

By AFP
November 21, 2024


The attack on Kyiv is the latest in an uptick in escalating strikes on Ukrainian cities, mainly in the south of the war-battered country - Copyright POOL/AFP NICOLAS TUCAT
Florent VERGNES

Russian President Vladimir Putin said Thursday that the conflict in Ukraine had characteristics of a “global” war and did not rule out strikes on Western countries.

The Kremlin strongman spoke out after a day of frayed nerves, with Russia test-firing a new generation intermediate-range missile at Ukraine — which Putin hinted was capable of unleashing a nuclear payload.

Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky branded the strike a major ramping up of the “scale and brutality” of the war by a “crazy neighbour”, while Kyiv’s main backer the United States said that Russia was to blame for escalating the conflict “at every turn”.

Intermediate-range missiles typically have a reach of up to 5,500 kilometres (3,400 miles) — enough to make good on Putin’s threat of striking the West.

In a defiant address to the nation, Russia’s president railed at Ukraine’s allies granting permission for Kyiv to use Western-supplied weapons to strike targets on Russian territory, warning of retaliation.

In recent days Ukraine has fired US and UK-supplied missiles at Russian territory for the first time, escalating already sky-high tensions in the brutal nearly three-year-long conflict.

“We consider ourselves entitled to use our weapons against the military facilities of those countries that allow their weapons to be used against our facilities,” Putin said.

He said the US-sent Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) and British Storm Shadow payloads were shot down by Moscow’s air defences, adding: “The goals that the enemy obviously set were not achieved”.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitri Peskov did however say Moscow informed Washington of the missile’s launch half an hour before it was fired through an automatic nuclear de-escalation hotline, in remarks cited in state media.

He earlier said Russia was doing everything to avoid an atomic conflict, having updated its nuclear doctrine this week.

White House spokeswoman Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters that Washington saw no need to modify the United States’ own nuclear posture in response.



– ‘Reckless behaviour’ –



Ukraine had earlier accused Russia of firing an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) for the first time in history — a claim later downplayed by Washington.

The Ukrainian air force said Moscow had launched the missile as part of a barrage towards Dnipro, where local authorities said an infrastructure facility was hit and two civilians were wounded.

Putin said that Russia had carried out “testing in combat conditions of one of the newest Russian… missile systems” named “Oreshnik”.

Criticising the global response to the strike — “final proof that Russia definitely does not want peace” — Zelensky warned that other countries could become targets for Putin too.

“It is necessary to urge Russia to a true peace, which is possible only through force,” the Ukrainian leader said in his evening address.

“Otherwise, there will be relentless Russian strikes, threats and destabilisation, and not only against Ukraine.”

The attack on Dnipro comes just days after several foreign embassies shuttered temporarily in the Ukrainian capital, citing the threat of a large-scale strike.

“It is another example of reckless behaviour from Russia,” a spokesman for British Prime Minister Keir Starmer told reporters.

The spokesman for UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, Stephane Dujarric, said the new missile’s deployment was “another concerning and worrying development,” warning the war was “going in the wrong direction”.

Yet a US official played down the threat, saying on condition of anonymity that Russia “likely possesses only a handful of these” experimental missiles.



– UK ‘directly involved’ –



The head of the Dnipropetrovsk region where the city of Dnipro is located said the Russian aerial bombardment damaged a rehabilitation centre and several homes, as well as an industrial enterprise.

“Two people were wounded — a 57-year-old man was treated on the scene and a 42-year-old woman was hospitalised,” said the official, Sergiy Lysak.

Russia and Ukraine have escalated their use of long-range missiles in recent days since Washington gave Kyiv permission to use its ATACMS against military targets inside Russia — a long-standing Ukrainian request.

British media meanwhile reported on Wednesday that Kyiv had launched UK-supplied Storm Shadow missiles at targets in Russia after being given the green light from London.

With ranges of 300 and 250 kilometres respectively, both missile systems’ reach is far dwarfed by the experimental intermediate-range system fired by Russia.

Russia’s envoy to London on Thursday said that meant Britain was “now directly involved” in the Ukraine war, with Andrei Kelin telling Sky News “this firing cannot happen” without UK and NATO support.

But the White House’s Jean-Pierre countered that it was Russia who was behind the rising tensions, pointing to the reported deployment of thousands of North Korean troops to help Moscow fight off a Ukrainian offensive in Russia’s border Kursk region.

“The escalation at every turn is coming from Russia,” Jean-Pierre said, adding that the United States had warned Moscow against involving “another country in another part of the world” — referring to Pyongyang.



– Kyiv in retreat –



The defence ministry in Moscow said Thursday its air-defence systems had downed two Storm Shadows, without saying whether they had come down on Russian territory or in occupied Ukraine.

The missile escalation is coming at a critical moment on the ground for Ukraine, as its defences buckle under Russian pressure across the sprawling front line.

Russia claimed deeper advances in the war-battered Donetsk region, announcing on Thursday that its forces had captured another village close to Kurakhove, closing in on the town after months of steady advances.

Moscow’s defence ministry said Russian forces had taken the small village of Dalne, five kilometres (three miles) south of Kurakhove.

Lysak, the governor of the Dnipropetrovsk region, said that 26 people had been wounded in another strike on the town of Kryvyi Rig, where Zelensky was born.

Op-Ed: Escalation or desperation? Russia fires ballistic missile at Ukraine


By  Paul Wallis
DIGITAL JOURNAL
November 22, 2024

Ukraine has long demanded authorization to use the US-made ATACMS missile against targets inside Russia - Copyright DoD/AFP John Hamilton

According to Ukraine, Russia fired the first ICBM ever used in warfare at the Ukrainian city of Dnipro. Two people were injured by the conventional warhead.

The missile was part of a barrage of various types of missiles including hypersonic missiles. Other sources say it was an intermediate-range ballistic missile, which is a sort of scaled-down ICBM with a shorter range.

The attack comes after the US approved the use of long-range ATACMS missiles by Ukraine for strikes inside Russia.

The attack also came with a lot of rhetoric attached. Russia has now “updated” its nuclear doctrine to state that any non-nuclear power acting in partnership with a nuclear power is to be considered a “joint attack”.

This is more or less standard Russian dogma, emphasizing its nuclear capabilities. There is no comparison between an ATACMS missile and any sort of nuclear weapon.

Russia’s military situation in Ukraine is now such a total failure that rhetoric makes far more headlines than actual military achievements. Most of their “advances” in Donetsk are minuscule, taking back what they claim to be their own territory.

In an additional escalation, this time a real one, North Korean troops and weapons are said to be operating in Russia. Various sources state these troops are operating in the Kursk region and taking significant casualties. They don’t seem to be particularly combat-effective.

Despite claims by the incoming Trump administration, this situation is likely to be difficult to defuse. Russia is trying to save face. Its military has taken a severe beating for nearly three years.

Ukraine won’t back down. Ukraine has nothing to gain from a pseudo-peace which may simply turn into another attack after the Russian military has regrown itself. A lasting peace is beyond US capabilities to deliver.

The big loser in a failed peace deal would be the US. America would simply look weak and naïve, and in many ways simply stupid. It would also look as though the US was trying to save Russia, which is the exact opposite of saving face for Putin.

The highly skeptical rest of the world wouldn’t be impressed. It’s the wrong message to send to this planet’s other 8 billion people. Trump has a unique ability to damage America’s reputation and credibility in a few sentences. He spent most of his first term annoying America’s allies making baseless statements about them.

He’s not seen as a “strong leader” outside the US. He’s seen as a highly personally compromised figurehead at best and chronically incompetent on average. He certainly can’t even pretend to lead the rest of the world social media propaganda notwithstanding.

That’s a big shift in the wrong direction. America was in fact a leader of the free world. Under Trump, it’s likely to be purely antagonistic and entirely insular, with no trust.

Add to this self-inflicted mess the various other messages about tariffs, deportations, and democracy in general, and the US could lose just about all of the goodwill of the last century in a month or so.

The winner would be China. In comparison to a tariff-addled, backward-looking, fact-ignoring America and a crippled Russia, China can only look good.

Nothing can save Russia from the consequences of this idiotic self-inflicted war. Europe is rearming. China can pull the plug whenever it wants. It’s game over in so many ways.

America can only be “great” by enforcing a just and permanent peace.

Let’s see who the vertebrates are in this scenario.

___________________________________________________

Disclaimer

The opinions expressed in this Op-Ed are those of the author. They do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of the Digital Journal or its members.

Inside the South Korean weapons factory that could supply Kyiv

By AFP
November 21, 2024

South Korean engineers work on a 120mm self-propelled mortar at the Hanwha Aerospace factory in Changwon - Copyright AFP JUNG YEON-JE
Kang Jin-kyu

At the outskirts of a South Korean industrial city, workers at a sprawling weapons factory were conducting final-stage testing for a newly built surface-to-air defence system that could, eventually, head to Ukraine.

Longstanding domestic policy bars Seoul from sending weapons into active conflict zones, but ever since its spy agency accused the nuclear-armed North last month of sending thousands of soldiers to help Moscow fight Kyiv, South Korea has warned it might change course.

If so, likely top of the list for Ukraine would be the “Cheongung” — or Sky Arrow — air defence system, a domestically-produced Iron Dome-style interception shield that AFP saw Thursday during an exclusive tour of the Hanwha Aerospace factory in the southern city of Changwon.

As the melody of Beethoven’s Fur Elise played on repeat over the in-house speaker, veteran welders worked on huge cylinders that will become part of the inceptor system, which is defensive in nature — although Hanwha also produces an attack-focused variant.

“The Cheongung system can be thought of as similar to the US Patriot missile system,” said senior manager Jung Sung-young at Hanwha Aerospace, South Korea’s largest defence contractor.

Ukraine is reliant on Western air defence systems, particularly Patriots, to protect itself from Russian missile barrages — and has been calling for more deliveries.

Washington said in June it would prioritise deliveries to Kyiv, ahead of other countries that have placed orders.

But were South Korea, which remains technically at war with the nuclear-armed North and has maintained production of weaponry long ignored by Western arms industries, to get involved, it could potentially make a huge difference, experts say.

“As a divided nation, we have systematically established and implemented standards at the national level, from the development of these weapon systems to quality control,” said Jung.

“The quality, capability and manufacturing supply chain of our products is sufficiently competitive compared to those of other countries,” he added.

Whether — or how — South Korea decides to help Ukraine directly depends on “the level of North Korean involvement”, President Yoon Suk Yeol said earlier this month, adding Seoul was “not ruling out the possibility of providing weapons.”

If South Korea were to supply arms, the initial batch would be defensive in nature, Yoon said.



– Combat ready –



To fend off the steady barrage of missiles that have targeted Ukraine’s energy infrastructure and civilian areas, Kyiv urgently needs more air defences, Han Kwon-hee of the Korea Association of Defence Industry told AFP.

“Counteroffensives require stability in the rear zones, which is why Kyiv has also conducted drone attacks within Russia, including Moscow,” Han explained.

“They will help Ukraine hold off Russia’s offensives by intercepting drones and missiles flying deep into their territory,” he said — a huge boost for Kyiv, alongside the recent US move to let it use long-range American missiles against targets inside Russia.

The South has remained combat-ready since its 1950-53 war with the North ended in a truce, and while Hanwha Aerospace, South Korea’s largest defence contractor, was once seen by analysts as retrograde for its focus on land weapons, it is now in high demand.

AFP saw a wide range of weaponry moving along assembly lines at the company’s sprawling Changwon factory, from infantry armoured vehicles to surface-to-air missile systems designed to intercept incoming missiles.

The heightened geopolitical tensions in Europe have heavily benefited the South Korean company, which saw its on-year operating profit soar over 450 percent in the latest quarter to $343.3 million.

It has signed major arms deals with countries such as Poland and Romania, including the export of K9 Howitzers and Chunmoo missile systems.



– Weapons exports –



Seoul has long harboured ambitions to join the ranks of the world’s top arms exporters — aiming to be the fourth-largest, behind the US, Russia and France — something that is now possible, industry research indicates.

It has already sold 155mm artillery shells to Washington — but with a “final user” agreement in place meaning the United States would be the military that uses the munitions.

Experts have said this allows the United States to then provide their own shells to Kyiv.

Hanwha’s other weapons offer that could shift the balance of war in Ukraine is its Chunmoo guided missile system, experts said.

“With a maximum range of 290 km (180 miles), Chunmoo can strike targets in Pyongyang if launched from the border area in the South,” said Choi Gi-il, professor of military studies at Sangji University.

“What Ukraine urgently needs to turn the war in its favour are offensive weapons like Chunmoo missiles and K9 howitzers, capable of inflicting significant damage on the enemy,” Choi added.

“If North Korea’s direct involvement in the war escalates, (Seoul) may consider sending lethal weapons, in addition to defensive ones.”

Nationalist raves galvanise traumatised Ukrainian youth


By AFP

November 21, 2024

The mix of party and military reflects the split reality of young Ukrainians - Copyright AFP Andrej ISAKOVIC
Barbara WOJAZER

At a rave in a former silk factory in Kyiv, Bogdana Lukyanchuk was out partying for the first time since her father was killed fighting Russian forces in eastern Ukraine.

The party raised funds for the Third Assault Brigade, a controversial unit which has gained countrywide name recognition thanks to its military feats and marketing.

“I knew it was a charity event with people that I respected, so I could come and let my emotions run wild for just a day,” Lukyanchuk said, showing a photo of her dad with a broken heart emoji on her phone screensaver.

“There is still life in Ukraine. Life pulsates. Blood pulsates,” the 23-year-old said, shouting over the loud bass.

The Saturday night rave featured a combat drone simulator and merchandise from the Third Assault Brigade.

It was also attended by members of a linked nationalist youth group, Centuria.

The mix of party and military reflected the split reality of young Ukrainians, whose attempts to enjoy life are constantly marked by grief, air raid alerts and strikes.

It showed the efforts being made to galvanise young people exhausted by the war as the Russian invasion nears the three-year mark.



– ‘Gently involve young people’ –



Around 80 percent of Ukrainians have a close relative or friend who has been wounded by Russian forces, according to a survey from the Kyiv Institute of Sociology.

To process the violence against their country, some young Ukrainians find a sense of purpose and camaraderie in nationalist military organisations.

Lukyanchuk came to the rave with friends she met at workshops teaching civilians to handle rifles and use tourniquets, life-saving devices to staunch massive bleeding.

“There are conscious people here,” she said.

She worried that others were forgetting the war.

The patriotic fervour of the beginning of the war has subsided, leaving brigades short of funding and recruits.

In that struggle, the Third Assault Brigade, created by far-right politician Andriy Biletsky, has distinguished itself with its Instagrammable branding.

A neon orange logo in support of the brigade lit up the drone simulation room, which looked like a gamer’s den filled with teenagers slouched on a couch.

Some watched the drone flight simulator on a large computer screen, over which hung the white neon logo of Centuria.

Centuria says it “despises the modern cult of weakness” and aims to raise “strong and proud Ukrainians”.

The group boasts over 16,500 followers on Instagram, where it posts about a variety of events ranging from lectures to knife fights.

The blend of genres serves a purpose, said rave organiser Viktor Mazur.

“We gently involve young people. We don’t do it harshly with heavy propaganda but rather through entertainment, and that way we develop their loyalty,” the 29-year-old said.

Sofia Tabatska was surprised how quickly she worked out how to fly the drone under the guidance of an instructor.

“It’s like playing a computer game, like Grand Theft Auto,” said the 24-year-old.

“It would be nice if I could use it in some way in the future,” Tabatska said.

But she ruled out joining the army any time soon, describing herself as a pacifist.



– ‘Children of the war’ –



Marianna Tkalych, a psychologist, said some militarisation of Ukrainian society was inevitable following the Russian invasion.

But she believes the effect may not be lasting and the real test will come when the war ends and Ukraine’s political process, frozen by martial law, resumes.

The popularity of patriotic and militaristic organisations after the war, she said, will hinge on Ukraine’s capacity to deal with a traumatised generation.

“There will be some young people who have not found their purpose in any other sphere and who haven’t experienced normal life,” said Tkalych, who also heads the research platform Rating Lab.

“The generation growing up right now are children of the war.”

Fourteen-year-old Yury was just a toddler when Russian-backed forces launched a first armed aggression in eastern Ukraine in 2014.

He can hardly remember a life outside the conflict that escalated in 2022.

The teenager says he plans to enlist if the war is still ongoing when he turns 18.

He is already preparing with Centuria.

“I found myself there,” he said, mentioning classes on using assault rifles and fighting.

He said he thought his family would support his plans.

“My mum knows. I hope it will be okay.”

PERVERSE PATRIARCHY

Wildlife monitoring tech used to harass, spy on women in India

By AFP
November 21, 2024

Technology intended to protect tigers in an Indian forest have sometimes been turned on women, researchers warn 

- Copyright AFP/File Aditya Singh

Daniel Lawler

Camera traps, drones and other technology for monitoring wildlife like tigers and elephants are being used to intimidate, harass and even spy on women in India, researchers said on Friday.

In one particularly egregious example, a photo of an autistic women relieving herself in the forest was shared by local men on social media, prompting villagers to destroy nearby camera traps.

Trishant Simlai, a researcher at the UK’s Cambridge University, spent 14 months interviewing some 270 people who live near the Corbett Tiger Reserve in northern India.

For women living in villages around the reserve, the forest has long been a space for “freedom and expression” away from the men in a “heavily conservative and patriarchal society,” Simlai told AFP.

The women sing, talk about taboo subjects such as sex, and sometimes drink and smoke while collecting firewood and grass from the forest.

But the introduction of camera traps, drones and sound recorders as part of efforts to track and protect tigers and other wildlife has extended “the male gaze of the society into the forest,” Simlai said.

On multiple occasions, drones were deliberately flown over the heads of women, forcing them to drop their firewood and flee for cover, according to a study led by Simlai in the journal Environment and Planning.


– ‘We are afraid’ –


“We cannot walk in front of the cameras or sit in the area with our Kurtis (tunics) above our knees, we are afraid that we might get photographed or recorded in a wrong way,” a local woman was quoted in the study saying.

A forest ranger told the researchers that when a camera trap took a photo of a couple engaging in “romance” in the forest, “we immediately reported it to the police”.

In perhaps the most appalling example, a photo of an autistic woman from a marginalised caste relieving herself in the forest was inadvertently taken by a camera trap in 2017.

Young men appointed as temporary forest workers shared the photo on local Whatsapp and Facebook groups to “shame the woman,” Simlai said.

“We broke and set fire to every camera trap we could find after the daughter of our village was humiliated in such a brazen way,” one local told the researchers.

Aiming to avoid the cameras, some women have started roaming farther into the forest, which has the highest density of tigers in the world.

The women also sing less than they used to, which was used to deter animal attacks.

One local woman — who spoke about fear of cameras forcing her into “unfamiliar spaces” in 2019 — was killed by a tiger earlier this year, Simlai said.

– ‘New ways to harass women’ –

Another woman took advantage of the constant surveillance.

“Whenever her husband would beat her, she would run in front of the camera so that her husband did not follow her,” Simlai said.

Overall, “these technologies are actually very good” and are revolutionising conservation efforts, Simlai emphasised.

But he called for more consultation with local communities about the technology, as well as more transparency and oversight from forest authorities, and sensitive training for local workers.

“A lot of that can be done by conservation organisations that — in the first instance — introduced these technologies to the government,” Sim added.

Rosaleen Duffy, a conservation expert at Sheffield University in the UK, told AFP that “sadly” she was not surprised by this research.

“What surprises me is conservationists who imagine that technologies can be introduced and used in a social, political and economic vacuum,” she said.

“The cases in this research are not accidental,” Duffy pointed out. “They were actively using the drones to provide new ways of continuing to harass women.”

While this technology can be a powerful tool to conserve wildlife, “there must be clear rules for what they can and cannot be used for, and clear consequences for anyone misusing them,” she added.

Opinion

Israeli prepares to annex the occupied West Bank and impose a fait accompli on the Palestinians



A view of the West Bank separation barrier, which separates Bethlehem from Jerusalem, has become the site of many artists’ drawings to depict the Israeli attacks on Palestinians, on November 12, 2024 in Bethlehem, West Bank [Wisam Hashlamoun/Anadolu Agency]

MEMO
November 21, 2024 

by Aziz Mustafa


As soon as it was known that Donald Trump will be back in the White House in January, far-right Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich announced that 2025 would be the year to impose the occupation state’s sovereignty over “Judea and Samaria”, known to the rest of the world as the West Bank. Naftali Bennett made a similar announcement in 2016, when Trump was a US presidential candidate for the first time. The Palestinian territory, said Bennett, should be part of the occupation state.

Annexation is illegal under international law.

Any Israeli attempt to annex the West Bank projects a worrying picture of the consequences. The Israelis themselves are monitoring this, but it is not acknowledged by the right-wing government, because even partial annexation could lead to some negative responses that would jeopardise the occupation state’s position. While the Jewish settlers and their leaders who support annexation claim that it can be implemented gradually and thus be revealed as a fait accompli, with reduced negative consequences, research suggests that this is a delusion.

The gradual annexation of so-called Area C of the West Bank (delineated by the Oslo Accords and controlled fully by Israel), or even part of it, is expected to lead to the collapse of the Palestinian Authority, and thus the end of its security coordination with the occupation state, and the occupation army will have to control the occupied Palestinian territory. In such a situation, Israel will be forced to fund a military-run regime and be responsible for the lives of 2.8 million Palestinians. The cost of such a move is estimated at $14.5 billion annually, including expenses for health services, education and national insurance for Palestinians.

OPINION: Smotrich has confirmed that the quest for ‘Greater Israel’ is real

Moreover, the annexation of the West Bank could damage the Israeli economy due to a predicted decline in foreign investment and the imposition of international sanctions. Security will also be affected, as the occupation army will be required to double its presence on the ground, hindering its readiness for war on other fronts. Vital security cooperation under the peace treaties with Jordan and Egypt will be hit, with the potential for Jordan to become dangerously unstable within the international arena, and Israel could find itself in a serious diplomatic crisis.

Even if the incoming Trump administration supports the annexation move, even tacitly, the reaction of Europe and the Arab world is expected to be harsh. It is likely to include economic and diplomatic sanctions, and Israel’s international legitimacy, such as it is, will be damaged severely.


It might even be declared to be a pariah state, similar to South Africa during the apartheid era.

The main fear, though, is that annexation will lead to a point of no return, where the occupation state will be forced to choose between two impossible options: a binational state in which it will lose its Jewish majority, or an apartheid regime in which millions of Palestinians live under Israeli military rule, without full civil rights. Israel has already been found to have passed the threshold as an apartheid state by B’Tselem, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International.

Coinciding with Israeli preparations to annex the West Bank, the government’s attitude towards Palestinian construction, especially in Area C, means implementing a demographic and population revolution in favour of the Jewish immigrant settlers at the expense of the indigenous Palestinians.

There were 2,868 new Palestinian buildings built in Area C from June 2023 to May 2024, less than half of the number built in the corresponding periods in previous years since 2018. The monthly average in 2023 was 260 new Palestinian buildings, compared with an average of 608 buildings per month in previous years from 2018 onwards. This is a 57 per cent decrease. Meanwhile, there has been very intense activity by the occupation army, prompting many Palestinians to stay in their homes and postpone their housing plans.

READ: Israel forces assault staff member after storming Palestinian school

The operations of the army-run Civil Administration in the West Bank; the appointment of far-right extremist Smotrich as Finance Minister and as an additional minister in the Defence Ministry; and the establishment of the Settlement Directorate have all contributed to imposing more control over Palestinian land in the West Bank. This began with building a strategy for work and determining the location for Palestinian construction, and has been extended to a legal advisory system to deal with petitions, the confiscation of engineering equipment and the demolition of “unlicensed” structures that deter Palestinian residents from trying to extend their homes or build new properties.

A major factor in the decline in Palestinian construction has been the decisive move by the Ministry of Settlements and National Missions, headed by Orit Strook, to fund land coordinators in all settlement councils. Their job is to patrol in a vehicle and use drones to detect and report any Palestinian construction. The result has been the confiscation of more than 440 tractors, small trucks and engineering tools used by Palestinian contractors, leaving them without tools for lengthy periods, which is costly and forces them to think twice before their next construction project.

The occupation authorities do not hesitate to demolish any new Palestinian building.

Unlike the past, the procedure is short and sharp. The heads of Palestinian villages know that anything being built has a low chance of survival and faces rapid demolition. The occupation authorities have destroyed 901 Palestinian buildings in Area C this year alone, and declared 5,978 acres to be state land. This is equivalent to half of the entire area that was declared as state land since the 1993 Oslo Accords.

With 19 per cent of Palestinian new-build sites destroyed in 2021, 27 per cent in the following year, 2022, and 22 per cent in 2023, a shocking increase has been recorded this year, with 68 per cent of new Palestinian buildings destroyed. All of this is in preparation for the annexation of the West Bank as soon as Donald Trump takes office in January. With many supporters of Israel’s illegal settlements nominated for major positions in his administration, the incoming US president may be unable to stop the annexation plan, even if, as Republican Party sources claim, he opposes it.

The shadow of Israeli settlement expansion hangs over Gaza

Analysis: With an emboldened Israeli far-right calling to resettle Gaza, Israel's systematic destruction is seen as a prelude to mass Palestinian displacement.

Mohamed Solaimane
21 November, 2024

THE NEW ARAB

Since its launch on 5 October this year, Israel’s campaign of forced evacuations in northern Gaza has claimed over 2,000 Palestinian lives and left more than 6,000 injured. While the immediate toll is devastating, Gazans fear an even darker threat looms over the enclave’s future.

Eyewitness accounts detail the widespread levelling of neighbourhoods in northern Gaza, with bulldozed infrastructure and new road networks tailored for military use. Coupled with growing calls within Israel’s political establishment to reinstate settlements in the area, these developments are deepening fears of permanent Palestinian displacement.

The destruction has sparked speculation that Israel intends to establish a buffer zone along its border with Gaza, a security measure that could also prevent the return of displaced Palestinians, but more troubling is the spectre of reintroducing settlements to northern Gaza, a region Israel evacuated in 2005 when it dismantled 21 settlements as part of a unilateral withdrawal.

The Israeli resettlement of Gaza is no longer a fringe idea
In-depth
Jessica Buxbaum

While Israel’s government has not explicitly announced plans to annex northern Gaza or resettle it with Israeli civilians, observers point out that the widespread displacement and destruction align with longstanding proposals from Israeli military figures to establish a no-man’s land in northern Gaza, intended as a buffer zone against potential attacks.

Far-right parties and settlement organisations in late October organised a provocative rally held just hundreds of meters from Gaza’s border. The event featured members of Israel’s parliament and cabinet, all advocating for renewed settlement in Gaza. This gathering followed a January conference, during which far-right activists and lawmakers signed a petition urging the Israeli government to rebuild settlements in Gaza and northern parts of the West Bank.

Ahmed Fayad, a researcher in Israeli affairs, argues that these calls are “deeply rooted” in the ideology of the Zionist movement now dominating the government.

“This government believes that wherever settlements exist, the army will defend them, thereby ensuring security for surrounding areas,” Fayad told The New Arab, adding that he sees the push for settlements in northern Gaza as driven by “ideological conviction” as well as “political and military aims”.

Israel’s current actions in northern Gaza, which include razing buildings, displacing populations, and enforcing strict security protocols, appear designed to create “a buffer zone, ostensibly to protect nearby Israeli communities,” he adds.

The widespread displacement and destruction in north Gaza align with longstanding proposals from Israeli military figures to establish a no man's land intended as a buffer zone. [Getty]


“It’s too early to conclude that far-right proposals for new settlements will gain traction,” he noted. “Settlements require a level of security and stability that simply doesn’t exist in Gaza right now. The territory is still a closed military zone, inaccessible even to Israelis.”

The future of Gaza, Fayad contended, depends on how Israel envisions its administration of the territory in the post-war era.

“There’s a clear desire among elements of the Israeli government, as well as far-right activists, to reestablish settlements in Gaza,” Fayad said. “Legislative and administrative measures already in place could make this relatively easy to execute. However, such a move hinges on military and political decision-making, which is complicated by the memory of the severe security risks settlements faced before Israel’s 2005 withdrawal.”
Related

Israeli ethnic cleansing nears completion in northern Gaza
Analysis
Paul R. Pillar

The shift from political discourse to open calls for action is evident in statements by Israeli politicians and officials. Current and former members of Israel’s Knesset, ministers, and other high-ranking figures have increasingly advocated for establishing settlements across Gaza.

Mowaffaq al-Kafarna, a political science professor at Gaza University, does not rule out the eventual establishment of settlements but considers it unlikely during the current military campaign.

“The war is ongoing, and the complexities of ensuring security for settlements make such a move implausible at this stage,” he said.

However, he warns that Israel’s actions on the ground suggest a long-term strategy to completely evacuate northern Gaza.


“In this scenario, northern Gaza’s depopulation is just the beginning, with the process potentially extending to Gaza City itself,” al-Kafarna explained. “Israel seems intent on creating a northern Gaza entirely devoid of Palestinian presence, starting with this evacuation as a precursor to wider changes.”

He pointed to the systematic destruction of neighbourhoods and the construction of new road networks bisecting northern Gaza as evidence.

“The division of northern Gaza into isolated sections, combined with widespread destruction, lays the groundwork for gradual and comprehensive depopulation,” he said. “What we’re seeing is the first phase of a larger plan to establish security zones. Settlements may follow, depending on Israel’s long-term calculations.”

He also believes the overarching goal is to neutralise Gaza as a threat to Israel, dismantle resistance groups entirely, and replace Hamas with a pliable civilian administration loyal to Israeli interests.

“This is about ensuring Gaza can never challenge Israel again,” al-Kafarna said. “It’s not just about military domination but also political control, ensuring free movement for the Israeli military while maintaining a civilian administration subservient to Israeli security interests.”

There's a clear desire among elements of the Israeli government, as well as far-right activists, to reestablish settlements in Gaza. [Getty]


One possibility, he suggests, is the incorporation of Gaza under Israel’s broader political and security apparatus. However, this would likely exclude any responsibility for the Palestinian population, which Israel might delegate to international organisations.

“This would contrast sharply with the West Bank, where the Palestinian Authority manages civilian life. In Gaza, there would be no place for any Palestinian-led authority,” he noted.

From the Palestinian perspective, the signs on the ground suggest that settlements are not a distant possibility but an imminent reality. Nasser Attaallah, a Palestinian writer and political analyst, believes that Israel’s policies and actions in northern Gaza are preparing the ground for settlement expansion.

“Netanyahu and his extremist government have dredged up distorted historical and ideological justifications to legitimise these brutal crimes,” Attaallah said. “Settlement in Gaza is no longer just a plan; it’s becoming a reality.”

He warned that such moves will further entrench Palestinian dispossession, with “devastating consequences for the already shattered social and economic fabric of Gaza”.


For Palestinians like Attaallah, the renewed settlement discourse signals a return to a dark chapter they hoped was closed.

“We are witnessing the resurrection of an old nightmare,” he said, “and the world seems powerless to stop it”.

As Israel continues its military campaign in Gaza, Palestinian voices express a deepening sense of despair and inevitability over the region’s future. For many, the 7 October Hamas attack on Israel, which set off the latest escalation, has become a pretext for what they describe as the total obliteration of Gaza.
Related


With Trump's win, Israel moves closer to annexing the West Bank
Analysis
Jonathan Fenton-Harvey

“Gaza is facing a full-scale settlement project,” Attaallah asserts. He argues that years of far-right planning, previously limited to policy papers, are now becoming a reality under the current government. The situation is further compounded, he believed, by the global landscape, particularly the influence of now-President-elect Donald Trump.

“During his first term, Trump legitimised settlements and supported every move by the Israeli right wing. With an administration sympathetic to the settler cause, the situation for Palestinians can only worsen,” he explained.

For Palestinians, this rhetoric, combined with the devastation on the ground, signals the erasure of any prospects for autonomy or stability. The stakes, Attaallah emphasises, could not be higher.

“This is about more than land - it’s about the survival of a people and the obliteration of their existence.”

This article is published in collaboration with Egab.

Opinion

Realism and the invasion of Gaza: 

Critiquing Israel’s Zionist agenda


Palestinians fleeing to Gaza City with their belongings they could take with them, on October 23, 2024 in Gaza City, Gaza. [Mahmoud Isleem – Anadolu Agency]

MEMO
by Syeda Fatima Shuja

November 21, 2024

Realism is a prominent school of thought in international relations and often justifies state actions based on national interests, power dynamics and security. It prioritises the preservation of the state’s autonomy and survival, even at the expense of ethical considerations. However, realism fails to address the moral implications of state actions adequately, particularly when they result in human suffering and violations of international law.

“States,” said Kenneth Waltz in 1979, “are the principal actors in international politics, and their primary concern is survival. The structure of the international system compels states to act in ways that maximise their security.”

In the context of the Israel-Palestine conflict, realism’s reliance on power and security has often masked the underlying injustices and deprivations faced by the Palestinians. It has perpetuated a binary understanding of the conflict, overlooking the complexities of historical grievances, political motivations and the legitimate Palestinian struggle for self-determination.


This narrow perspective overlooks the crucial need for justice, accountability and the recognition of Palestinian rights.

Israel’s latest invasion and occupation of the Gaza Strip, a densely populated territory now under complete Israeli control, is a stark example of how realist thinking can fail to address fundamental moral concerns. The ongoing blockade, military operations and restrictions on movement have caused immense human suffering, yet these actions are often justified by the need to ensure Israel’s security. This approach ignores the long-term consequences of the occupation, including the erosion of trust, the perpetuation of violence and the hindering of peace negotiations. Not for nothing has it been called a “plausible genocide” by the International Court of Justice.

READ: IDF soldiers will pay for Netanyahu seeking to impose military rule in Gaza, warns Gallant

The justification used by Israel for its capture of the Gaza Strip is rooted in a combination of historical narratives, security concerns and political calculations. The claim that Gaza is a strategic buffer zone for Israel is often used to justify the occupation, arguing that the territory’s control is vital for Israel’s security. This narrative, however, is highly contested, with critics arguing that it overlooks the disproportionate use of force against Palestinian civilians and the role of the “unlawful” (as per the ICJ) occupation itself in fuelling conflict.

For Israel, the war in Gaza is framed as a war of self-defence against the Palestinian Islamic Resistance Movement, Hamas, but, in reality, it amounts to a genocide against the Palestinians. The occupation of the Gaza Strip can be seen as a strategic move, aiming to gain an advantageous position in future negotiations. Moreover, Israel is interested in the natural gas fields off the coast of Gaza. The Zionist state also wants to eliminate the possibility of serious resistance from Gaza when extremist Jews seek to destroy Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem and build a temple in its place.

Although the ongoing air strikes, blockade of humanitarian aid and essential goods and services, and the destruction of civilian infrastructure including hospitals, schools and homes have led to a staggering number of civilian casualties, there has been little or no adequate action by the international community to stop the carnage. At least 44,000 Palestinians have been killed, mainly women and children, while 104,000 have been wounded. The sheer scale of the violence, along with the targeting of civilians, has drawn accusations of disproportionate force and collective punishment.


The loss of innocent lives, particularly children, has been devastating.

Thousands of children have been killed or severely wounded in their homes and schools, leaving families in shock. Women’s rights and safety have also been undermined as they bear the burden of displacement, loss of loved ones and injury. Rapes by soldiers have been reported. Whole communities and generations have been affected, losing their homes, futures and hopes.

READ: British MPs urge government to endorse ICC arrest warrant for Netanyahu, Gallant

The ongoing genocide in Gaza raises serious questions about Israel’s treatment of civilians. This is not self-defence as outlined by the realist perspective, as the state is not focusing on addressing the threat posed by Hamas, which it regards as a terrorist organisation. That’s just an excuse. Ethnic cleansing of the enclave is the objective, either through killing or displacement. What’s more, an occupation state — Israel in this case — has no legal right to claim “self-defence” against the legitimate resistance of the people living under its military occupation.

The occupation state has ignored the repeated calls by the international community to respect international law and protect civilians. This highlights the need for reform of the United Nations, where Israel has been protected by the US veto and no means of enforcing resolutions are available. This emboldens Israel and allows it to act with total impunity. The effects are starting to be felt badly across the whole region.

While there has been much talk about the political aspects of “the day after” the war, little thought has apparently been given to the undoubted serious physical and mental health issues affecting the Palestinians in Gaza. Children are traumatised, as are their parents. Who is going to help them?

In the middle of all of this, even as Western governments struggle with poverty and declining public services in their own countries, they continue to give billions of dollars in aid to Israel as well as preferential trading, research and arms agreements.


Nobody is able to explain why with any degree of conviction.

Realism fails to address the humanitarian crisis in Gaza because it focuses solely on power dynamics and security concerns, ignoring the human suffering and rights violations. This narrow perspective perpetuates the cycle of violence without tackling the underlying cause: the decades-old occupation. A just approach based on international law and human rights is needed to end the conflict.

“The Israeli occupation of Palestine is an affront to human rights, an act of aggression, and a violation of international law,” said Noam Chomsky. How right he was.

Opinion

Smotrich has confirmed that the quest for ‘Greater Israel’ is real


Israel’s Finance Minister and leader of the Religious Zionist Party Bezalel Smotrich on March 20, 2023 [GIL COHEN-MAGEN/AFP via Getty Images]

MEMO
by Hussein Laqra’a
November 20, 2024


The leaders of 56 Arab and Islamic countries advocated at the Riyadh Summit last week for the “two-state solution” and the need to establish a Palestinian state on the nominal borders of 4 June 1967, and tried to convince the world that it is the only solution to the Palestinian issue. In response, the extreme far-right Finance Minister of the occupation state, Bezalel Smotrich, insisted that 2025 will be the year that “Judea and Samaria” — the occupied West Bank — will be annexed to Israel and that he expects US President-elect Donald Trump to support this step. He basically confirmed that the quest for “Greater Israel” is real.

The nominal borders as at 4 June 1967 were the 1949 Armistice (“Green”) Line between the Zionist state of Israel and the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem. These occupied Palestinian territories combined make up no more than 22 per cent of occupied Palestine. This means that the 56 Arab and Islamic countries have agreed that 78 per cent of Palestinian land should be served to the Zionist occupation state on a silver platter. In fact, the 2002 Arab Summit in Beirut approved of this.

Some Arabs paid for advertisements in Israeli newspapers to promote this “Arab Peace Initiative”, but the Zionist Prime Minister at the time, war criminal Ariel Sharon, said that it “is not worth the ink it was written with” and rejected it completely. This rejection of the initiative continues to this day, despite Arab pleas and appeals, as well as the many humiliating concessions made by the Palestinian Authority since the 1993 Oslo Accords were signed. The occupation regime and parliament passed a bill recently refusing to recognise a Palestinian state, even if the entire world does so. The Israeli right and left, government and opposition, all agreed on this.

OPINION: A nation in denial: Why Israel’s defeat is imminent

Now Smotrich is working to bury the two-state solution once and for all, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu supports him. We have to ask, therefore, why the Arab and Islamic countries are trying to revive the moribund “two-state solution” despite it being biased and complicit with the occupation?


More than 30 years of “negotiations” have simply bought time for the occupation regime to steal more Palestinian land.

We now know — if anyone was ever in any doubt — that the settler-colonial state rejects sharing Palestine with the Palestinians, even if it is only 22 per cent of the historic territory. While arguing that chants of “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” are “anti-Semitic”, the Zionists have no qualms about stating openly that they want a Jewish state “from the river [Jordan] to the [Mediterranean] sea”. Intensive settlement activity — all illegal under international law — is swallowing up what remains of the West Bank and East Jerusalem, and probably northern Gaza as well if the occupation regime is allowed to get away with its ethnic cleansing and genocide. It would have made far more sense, therefore, for the Arab and Islamic leaders to turn this humiliating page, forget about a “two-state solution” and declare the death of the so-called “peace process”. At the same time, they could have announced their collective political and practical support for legitimate resistance to the brutal Israeli occupation.

I have been saying for years that the Palestinian Authority is wrong to participate in futile negotiations with the occupation state to establish an independent Palestinian state that the Zionists will never accept. And that this path will lead to the loss of what remains of Palestine and thus the liquidation of its cause.

I have also said that the Arabs are wrong to waste their time chasing the mirage of peace with a criminal, fascist, racist, expansionist regime which wants all of Palestine for itself; and, indeed, wants to establish “Greater Israel” from the Nile to the Euphrates, despite the peace treaties and normalisation agreements with its neighbours whose land it will steal. When the occupation finishes swallowing the West Bank and East Jerusalem with settlements and announces their annexation, it will devote itself to expanding at the expense of its Arab neighbours, into Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Egypt, even if it takes another eight decades. When the right time is right, the occupation will do this and will not care about any of the normalisers who are now supporting it against any and all legitimate resistance, thinking that they are thereby weakening Iran’s influence in the region and creating the appropriate conditions for a comprehensive peace deal.

Smotrich stood next to a map of the State of Israel in March 2023 in France, and “Israel” included Jordan, even though the Zionist entity signed a peace treaty with the Hashemite Kingdom in 1994. Didn’t the terrorist Menachem Begin sign a peace treaty with Egypt in 1979?

That won’t stop the Zionists. They want it all, and give nothing in return.

The issue is quite clear, but unfortunately the Arabs continue to bury their heads in the sand. If they were rational, they would have stopped the reckless promotion of the two-state solution illusion that the occupation regime does not want, and the normalisation countries would have severed, not strengthened their relations with it. Moreover, the Palestinian Authority would announce the end of security coordination with the enemy forces in the West Bank, the cancellation of the Oslo Accords, and its return to resistance against the occupation. If the Arabs were rational, they would have backed the legitimate resistance as their own first line of defence instead of abandoning the Palestinians in Gaza. Are they all insane?

Translated from Echoroukonline, 

16 November 2024

 

Stare Into Gaza: The Horror Was Not What I Expected

by Matthew Hoh Posted onNovember 21, 2024

That is Gaza behind me.

The fence line is 600m away. The northern part of Gaza, where Israel is carrying out a genocide within a genocide, systematically starving 300,000 Palestinians to death, is about 2km further.

The absurdity and the obscenity of being able to be this close to 20,000 murdered children, their bodies “prophetic voices from under the rubble” as a colleague called them, is difficult to accept.

The grotesque horror of a school field trip arriving at this location from two hours away to watch the mass slaughter from an observation deck was a shock I am overwhelmed by. The first wave of boys pumped celebratory firsts and thrust middle fingers upon their sight of Gaza.

There were no warplanes or drones visible. The school kids and other audience members of a genocide who gawked and put money into a telescope left disappointed as they saw no bombs or missiles, no artillery or tank fire. There were no blast waves from controlled demolitions to wash over them, and the numbers of smoke pillars from smoldering and cratered homes and schools were in the single digits, their fires not vigorous enough to be smelled. It must have been underwhelming and a let down; not much to boast about or revel in on the school bus ride home.

It was quiet. The sounds of those buried under rubble don’t reach the observation deck. No torn and wrecked bodies could be seen, no sunlight reflected in pools of blood, and no strips of clothes snagged on exposed bones fluttered in the strong wind. We were as close as we could be but so separate and so safe from it. It was sanitary and septic, picturesque.

I felt I was a voyeur, a tourist, a spectator. I felt disgust and disbelief. And I felt an absence within me that I cannot articulate.

To be that close to the cleansing and destruction of 2.2 million people and to be centering now my words on my feelings doesn’t escape me. Perhaps a well-achieved purpose of that observation deck of genocide.

The Nietzsche-ism, stare into the abyss and the abyss stares back at you, struck me as I stood there.

Stare into Gaza and Gaza stares back is what I am left with now, comfortable in my Jerusalem hotel, just hours after looking into their genocide as if I were on a platform at a national park or on the boardwalk at the shore.

The horror of the genocide I expected but did not see. I thought I might curse and cry. I did neither. The cruel and so very human spectacle of a caged people being destroyed as a display for school children was what I encountered. I did not expect that and I don’t know how to respond.

Note: Americans partially funded this observation deck.

The observation deck in Sderot looking into Gaza.

A school field trip assembled at the observation platform overlooking Gaza.

These are my first thoughts on standing that close to Gaza. I may need to revisit them.

I am in Palestine this week as part of a delegation to be in solidarity with and learn from those engaged in Palestinian liberation. Today, in addition to this visit to the border of Gaza, we met with Rabbis for Human Rights and an October 7th survivor in the Sderot settlement, as well as a Palestinian Lutheran minister in Bethlehem.

Yesterday, we were in Jerusalem’s Old City. Here are my reflections from that visit:

A post shared by @matthewphoh

Please comment and share. I will try and post more from this visit.

Viva Palestina.

Reprinted with permission from Matt’s Thoughts on War and Peace.

Matthew Hoh is the Associate Director of the Eisenhower Media Network. Matt is a former Marine Corps captain, Afghanistan State Department officer, a disabled Iraq War veteran and is a Senior Fellow Emeritus with the Center for International Policy. He writes at Substack.

 

On the Maryhouse Stage, Power Politics and War

Living theater poses crucial questions about consequences of war and potential to abolish it

by Kathy Kelly / November 20th, 2024

Art work by Robert Shetterly, taken from the playbill for “Reap What You Sow”

In mid-November, New York’s Catholic Worker community, located in lower Manhattan, opened their sizable auditorium to host “Reap What You Sow: Don’t Lose Heart!” a two act play with two actors which debuted, for two nights, on the Maryhouse stage.

Prior to the performance, preparations included selecting the sturdiest wooden chairs for audience seating, carefully cleaning furniture and floors, and rearranging the space so the next issue of the Catholic Worker newspaper, stacked and ready to mail, wouldn’t interfere with access to the theater. Producers created a set which included curtains made of sheets, an assemblage of donated lights, and a small coffeemaker complete with loud gurgles.

Above were the exposed beams of a building which once functioned as a music school in turn-of-the-century New York City before Dorothy Day and Peter Maurin, founders of the Catholic Worker, appropriated it for works of mercy, feeding hungry people and, as much as possible, housing people in the building’s former musical practice rooms.

It was a fitting spot for the play’s debut. Jack Gilroy, the main author, had created earlier versions. Now the play, authored by Gilroy, zool Zulkowitz, and Olivia Gilroy incorporates the dynamics of “living theater” as actors and activists have fed Gilroy their edits.

The audience were mainly elders who knew one another. Catholic Workers welcomed  Maryknoll Mission sisters, Veterans For Peace, Raging Grannies, and people from Peace Action, World BEYOND War, Code Pink and FOR.

A sprinkling of students from Columbia U. and Fordham, along with a prof from Manhattan College, accompanied by his small son, were also in attendance.

Before the play began, producer zool Zulkowitz played the Beatles’ iconic song, Imagine. Following this came Olivia Rodrigo’s song, Brutal.

Ellie (played by Grazia Saporito) then broke into athletic, riveting dance moves to open the play.

She and her mother, Major Mom, (played by Pat Russell), were winning characters. Tears glistened on Major Mom’s cheeks when she spoke of her experiences as a mother, a widow, and a woman warrior who deeply regretted having killed civilians during missions in which she piloted weaponized drones. The audience learns she was married to Lieutenant Colonel Sean Golden, a marine who died during combat in Iraq. The Major eagerly awaits a promotion to full “Bird Colonel.”

Showing remarkable patience, Major Mom listens to Ellie divulge childhood disappointments, teenage angst, and her current rage over the roles her parents played in “service” to the U.S. military. At one point, Major Mom says “Whoa,” and accuses Ellie of going too far in her accusations.

But Ellie, a debate team champ, doesn’t back down. She has evidence to show that her mom’s “arsenal of democracy” rhetoric and revitalization of World War II themes don’t stand up to actual events in the recent past.

In a way, the play’s two characters are each proxies for fully developed viewpoints. Major Mom represents the Merchants of Death who develop, store, sell and use vast arsenals of weaponry. Ellie champions viewpoints laid out in Howard Zinn’s comprehensive historical outlay, “A People’s History of the United States.”

With Ellie rebelling against revival of World War II rhetoric, the play becomes quite timely. She insists that the good Germans who supported Nazis have counterparts in the U.S. militarists who “take out” women and children in multiple war zones. The claim, “I was only following orders,” eerily enters the script.

Many of the people in the audience have, in the past, supported activists who were recently imprisoned in U.S. federal lockups for having trespassed at a U.S. base harboring nuclear weapons. One of the activists, Carmen Trotta, came to both performances. Plowshares activists literally beat swords into plowshares, damaging nuclear weapons and pouring their own blood over the decommissioned weapons. They believe in making sacrifices, themselves, on behalf of nonviolence, a theme which recurs in Gilroy’s play.

During a dynamic talk back session, actors, producers, and audience members grappled with questions about conscience and pragmatic steps forward. Ellie, still acting in character, urged people to use their imagination and practice empathy. Art, she said, will be the force that carries us through to a new, safe time. Major Mom, (Pat Russell) pointed to the damage caused by structural and systemic violence. Audience members repeatedly voiced outrage over U.S. support for Israel’s genocidal attacks against Palestinians, noting that democrats dared to warn of fascist encroachment while at the same time enabling and provisioning Israel’s mass killing spree, across the Middle East. Israel’s usage of weaponized drones prolongs and exacerbates a war waged by a racist, far-right, nuclear armed, apartheid regime, one to which the U.S. continues to pledge unwavering support.

It seemed all could agree that, as Adam Tooze, writing for the London Review of Books observes:

We should be under no illusion: there has been nothing like this level of threat since the dangerous final phase of the Cold War in the early 1980s. With China committed to a rapid buildup of its nuclear arsenal, we are well on the way to an unprecedented 3-way nuclear standoff.

The characters in Reap What You Sow recognized pivots in their relationships and their interactions, and they assiduously preserved caring relationships. Powerful elites in our world have comprehensively failed to find means for collaboration, opting instead to demonize enemies for their own political gain, pouring energy and resources into the coffers of people whose “top crop” is weaponry. President Biden refuses to negotiate with Putin, and Ukraine has already fired long range missiles, supplied by the U.S., into Russia, sowing ominous seeks which Putin has stated could yield a nuclear exchange.

I hope the play will awaken numerous people, in audiences across this country and beyond, to the crucial question: how can we learn to live together without killing one another? And the follow-up: how can we abolish war?

Reap What You Sow, Don’t Lose Heart is the first production of the Rising Together Talkback Theater Company. The production is available, for FREE, to churches, schools, peace and justice organizations, and other community groups. The company is booking dates for a Summer 2025 “Reap!” Tour. For more information, contact Zool (moc.liamtoh@scitiloPdnAtrAehT) or text 718-964-7643.FacebookTwitterRedditEmail

Kathy Kelly (kathy.vcnv@gmail.com) is the board president of World BEYOND War (worldbeyondwar.org) and a co-coordinator of the Merchants of Death War Crimes Tribunal. (merchantsofdeath.org). Read other articles by Kathy.