middle east

The Lion Stirs – The Murky War Upsetting World Commerce

Michael Cessna January 5, 2024

In the week before Christmas of 2023, there are several large-scale wars going on, with several more potential wars in the making: Russia-Ukraine; Israel-Hamas/Hezbollah; the ongoing offensive of pro-democracy rebels closing in on the fascist junta in Myanmar/Burma; the never-ending battles across the African Sahel region, and the potential Venezuelan invasion of Guyana.

But, lurking in the background is another potential conflict, one that may be impacting and aiding the neo-con agenda: Ethiopia vs. Eritrea.

Ethiopia is unique in history, as the only African state that was never colonized by any European power. Although conquered and occupied by Italy in the years immediately preceding World War 2, that occupation was short-lived, as the country was fully liberated from Italian rule by 1943.

A truly ancient state, Ethiopia maintained its status as an imperial monarchy until 1974, with the Communist revolution that placed a brutal Marxist-Leninist government in charge of the country. This government would, in turn, be deposed in another revolution in 1989, as part of the wave of Communist states around the world that collapsed as the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact imploded, leaving Communist “economies” to wither on the vine.

In the aftermath of the Derg’s collapse, Ethiopia was left unable to stop a popular referendum in one of its most critical provinces – Eritrea – that resulted in that state becoming independent in 1993. While this may seem like a random “factoid”, it is actually of enormous significance.

Eritrea – long part of Ethiopia – occupies the coast of the Red Sea, and as such, was Ethiopia’s only access to world commerce…and after a series of wars in the 1990’s and early-2000’s, Eritrea has effectively blocked Ethiopia from using its Red Sea ports. With a population of over one hundred and seven million, Ethiopia ranks 13^th in the top fifteen nations in the world by population – and is the only one of those states that is completely landlocked.

This translates to Ethiopia being forced to pay exorbitant, even “extortionate”, fees to export its goods to market through its only access to the Red Sea, via the Port of Djibouti, which handles an estimated 95% of Ethiopia’s foreign commerce.

Ethiopia’s Prime Minister, Abiy Ahmed, takes this issue seriously…seriously enough, that he made statements on the 13^th of October of 2023, that explicitly underlined Ethiopia’s ‘right to access’ to the Red Sea. Understandably, this rattled every other nation in the “Horn of Africa”, all of whom are vastly outnumbered in both population and military capacity by Ethiopia.

These remarks came less than two weeks after the Hamas terror attacks on Israel that commenced on October 7^th. As a result, the wider world – obviously – paid little the comments little attention. But then, the Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen chose to insert themselves into that conflict on the side of Hamas, on October 19^th…clearly a coincidence, surely.

And then, on January 1^st, Ahmed dropped another bombshell, announcing that Ethiopia had inked a deal with the breakaway Somali province of Somaliland to use their port of Berbera to access the Gulf of Aden – well outside the current shooting gallery – reputedly in exchange of recognition of the breakaway state. This has obviously infuriated Somalia, which has never relinquished its claim to the province, despite the region being de facto independent since 1991 and the region’s independence being ratified in a referendum in 2001.

Now, in the first week of 2024, the Houthi missile attacks and piracy have attracted the attention of major powers around the world, many of whom have joined “Operation Prosperity Guardian”, in an attempt to guarantee safe passage through the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait…albeit too late for world shipping giant Maersk, who announced on January 5^th that they were ordering all of their vessels not already in the Red Sea to divert around southern Africa’s Cape of Good Hope, to avoid the fighting. While this, alone, will cause serious disruptions to global trade, many more cargo carrier lines are virtually certain to not take the risk and divert their vessels, for the same reason as Maersk. This could easily lead to a reprise of the shipping disruptions that happened at the height of the COVID pandemic.

As a result, there are increasingly serious calls within Washington circles to attack Iran directly, as they are the Houthi’s major source of money and weapons. This would be a Godsend to neo-con chickenhawks desperate to finally get the United States into their long-desired war with Iran…

…Which brings us back to Ethiopia’s moves on its future access to the Red Sea.

Ethiopia has three options: they can a) maintain the status quo, with limited access to world shipping solely through Djibouti’s port; b) conclude their deal to access breakaway Somaliland’s ports; or – c) invade at least part of Eritrea, to capture at least that nation’s port of Assab.

Obviously, the status quo is not working for Ethiopia; if it were, there would have been no need for the deal with Somaliland. Djibouti’s port is increasingly limited in capacity, and has little physical room to expand operations, which will soon severely stunt Ethiopia’s economic output…Conversely, the deal with Somaliland risks war with Somalia, as recognition of Somaliland’s independence would almost certainly gut Somalia’s hopes at stabilizing their nation, which was only reunified in 2012. Somalia would have to launch a military campaign to invade the territory to bring it to heel, presenting Ethiopia with the option of going to war with Somalia in support of a breakaway province, something Ethiopia would be loath to encourage, considering recent history.

As well, invading Eritrea to capture Assab carries significant risks on its own, because – all other things being equal in the absence of the current conflict in the Bab-el-Mandeb – Ethiopia could well face a UN-led coalition of military powers “riding to the rescue” of what has been described as the “North Korea of Africa”.

None of these seem like viable solutions, on their own…Unless the world is focused on a different series of conflicts that would combine to divert attention away from Ethiopia “readjusting” the local map, and allowing Addis Ababa to present the world with a fait accompli in the aftermath of the Houthi’s inevitable neutralization, as well as the likelihood of a massive US-Iran war…

…While the foregoing may sound like the implication of a dastardly plot on Ethiopia’s part, it is not…well, mostly “not.” But, the timeline of Ethiopia’s rhetoric regarding its right-to-access to the Red Sea is certainly suspicious, and indicates some level of foreknowledge of events beginning ion October of 2023, and having active plans and options ready to go.

There are plenty of players in this global chess tournament, and too many “leaders” in the West – and elsewhere – are arrogantly blind to the knives in the dark, thinking that “bit players” cannot harm them.

…Rather like Britain, France and the United States from the 1950’s to the 1980’s.

Word to the wise.

*The Freedomist — Keeping Watch, So You Don’t Have To*

The New Pulse of the Neo-Con Forever War

Michael Cessna October 20, 2023

What follows is an “estimate of the situation”, concerning what may well become known as the “Guns of October”. This is a strategic assessment of the current situation in the Levant, and what the deeper plan[s] may be. Nothing in this article is based on “classified information” or “anonymous sources”, but sober estimates based on training, experience, intuition and “informed speculation”.

Around the world, October 7th stunned many people. Even after over twenty years of continuous warfare, the scenes of slaughter coming out of Israel were stunning, both in their daring, but even moreso for their brutality and savagery. Inevitably, perhaps, some people have began to promote an idea that the Israeli High Command was operating in full knowledge of what Hamas was going to do, because there was “no way” that the vaunted Israeli intelligence agencies could have missed Hamas’ preparations.

The fact is, people are always people, and people make mistakes – often, those mistakes boggle the imagination with their stupidity. There is no real evidence of anything like an intentional conspiracy on the part of the Israeli High Command’s part happening.

In this case, however, there are parties throughout the world, who have been desperate for a crisis like Yom Kippur 2.0 to restore their flagging efforts. This group has been pushing an endless series of wars since the 1990’s, and while their influence is, indeed great, they are masters of the notion espoused by one-time White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel’s quip, “… you never want a serious crisis to go to waste…”

The people in power, or hanging on to the tailings of power, who espouse such ideas, are known as “neo-cons”…But – what is a “neo-con”?

Foreign Policy Magazine accurately describes neo-cons as “liberal imperialists on steroids”. They are firm believers in the notion of a highly totalitarian vision of the so-called “Pax Americana”, a series of policies that have produced a national debt in excess of an eye-watering $33 trillion, as of 10/18/2023. These beliefs – and the people behind them – also led to the roiling disasters in Israel, Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and most of the rest of the Middle East.

Another key descriptor of the neo-cons is that they have no political party, beyond that which is most expedient for them at the moment. Zbigniew Brzezinski (1928 – 2017), one-time National Security Advisor to Democrat party President Jimmy Carter, laid out the neo-con strategy and thought in his 1997 book, “The Grand Chessboard”. His criticisms of Republican President George W. Bush’s handling of the post-9/11 wars were not one of actual opposition, but complaining about their mis-handling.

Neo-Con thinking is also at the core of the Russo-Ukrainian War that began in February of 2022. No matter what side of that conflict the Reader may fall on, the fact is that – like Japan attacking Pearl Harbor in 1941 – the West, led by the United States, goaded Russia into its attempt to dismember the Ukrainian state. Why? Because the neo-cons desperately wanted to initiate Cold War 2.0, because Islamic jihadi’s were simply not working as an existential threat to Western society that justified obscenely massive military spending; terrorists are annoying, but they will never seriously threaten the Western social order.

Russia and China, on the other hand…

In early-to-mid 2022, there was a point where the world held its breath, as it seemed that the major powers of the world might actually enter into direct, large-scale combat with each other, something that has not been seen since 1945. While that danger still looms, the important takeaway, is that these situations have sparked increasingly strident calls to revamp western military establishments, to something resembling “the old days”.

But – how does this relate to the “Guns of October”?

In the aftermath of the seeming failure of neo-con ambitions as the “Global War On Terror” sputtered out in the mid-20-teens, despite the flare-up provided by the so-called “Arab Spring”, the neo-con movement became increasingly desperate for something to revive their plans to continue their series of planned wars, the exhaustion and disgust of the people’s of the West – and Russia – over the never-ending series of wars at the dawn of what should have been a “golden century” for humanity.

The clearest example of the desperation of the neo-cons, including their abject hatred of US President Donald Trump, came when Trump rejected their plans to strike three targets in Iran in response to the 2019 downing of an unmanned US drone. Trump canceled the retaliatory attacks when he was informed that the attacks were expected to kill at least 150 Iranians; Trump did not feel that level of retaliation to be a “proportionate” response to shooting down an unmanned drone.

But now, with a reimposition of sanctions against Russia in April of 2021, leading to a near-war with that state, the neo-cons within Washington DC and allies in several European governments have been awaiting a crisis of an appropriate scale to move the world back into the realm of “forever wars”.

Enter October 7th, of 2023.

With increasing calls in the West to end the open and naked barbarity of Hamas – barbarity that organization happily live-streamed, until it realized how bad the optics were – coupled to the deranged bleatings of the Communist mullahs in control of Iran – handed the neo-cons the golden crisis they have desperately needed to galvanize Western governments into continuing the wars: the United States – even under an “anti-Israel” establishment – cannot oppose Israel in assaulting Gaza, nor in hammering the Iranian-back Hezbollah organization in southern Lebanon, especially in the face of Hamas’ barbarity, without suffering catastrophic political consequences. Similarly, the Western European “street” is fed up with their government’s policies of accommodation and appeasement of “refugees” who spare no expense to tell the world how much they hate their “hosts”, who spared little expense to give them shelter and sanctuary.

Caught in the middle, are the Muslim governments of the region, none of whom want anything to do with this war, but who have enough internal problems that they cannot be seen by their populations to be completely abandoning the Palestinians. But, with more and more US Navy warships being deployed to the region at speed, the possibility of an “incident” occurring that “required” a military response against Iran – one that would make the Iraq war look like a training exercise – is an increasingly likely possibility.

Why is this important? Put simply, the United States does not have the manpower to fight the wars the neo-cons want the West to fight. As has been pointed out previously at the Freedomist, two decades of no-victory wars – as well as policies to insult and demean the US military’s primary recruiting pool – have turned a generation of potential recruits firmly against military service…so much so, that there has been a quietly increasing spate of military officers “speaking truth to power”, pointing out that the current world strategic will eventually force the United States to return to conscription, the dreaded “D-word”, that has been anathema to both the political and military spheres alike, for fifty years, since peacetime conscription was ended in the US by President Richard M. Nixon in 1973.

The neo-cons have painted themselves into a corner: They have relentlessly pursued aggressive policies that have burned off most of any good will built up by the United States over the past four decades, in pursuit of a strategy of continual conflict that requires a level of military recruitment that is a pale memory. At the same time, their actions have severely damaged the US economy, because markets not under a regimen of centralized planning respond poorly to toxic cycles of borrowing money, then borrowing more money to simply pay the interest, all while expanding the pool of currency by running the printing presses at high speed.

Likewise, the manufacture of basic war materials has been so neglected the West is finding it difficult to supply a single large war, much less multiple wars.

With much of the potential military recruit-base firmly rejecting staggering enlistment bonuses of over $50,000, there will come a point where the United States will be forced to attempt to revive the Draft for 18-to-30 year-olds…and there has been legislation language already draft, that was repeatedly submitted for some thirteen years.

By Democrat Party apparatchiks.

Needless to say, a Democrat administration reviving the Draft for 18-to-30 year-olds will be “interesting”, to say the least.

The bottom line?