Archives: Articles

By Norman Solomon

For decades, countless U.S. officials have proclaimed that the bonds between the United States and Israel are unbreakable. Now, the ties that bind are laced with genocide. The two countries function as accomplices while methodical killing continues in Gaza, with both societies directly—and differently—making it all possible.

The policies of Israel’s government are aligned with the attitudes of most Jewish Israelis. In a recent survey, three-quarters of them (and 64% of all Israelis) said they largely agreed with the statement that “there are no innocent people in Gaza”—nearly half of whom are children.

“There is no more ‘permitted’ and ‘forbidden’ with regard to Israel’s evilness toward the Palestinians,” dissident columnist Gideon Levy wrote three months ago in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz. “It is permitted to kill dozens of captive detainees and to starve to death an entire people.” The biggest Israeli media outlets echo and amplify sociopathic voices. “Genocide talk has spread into all TV studios as legitimate talk. Former colonels, past members of the defense establishment, sit on panels and call for genocide without batting an eye.”

Last week, Levy provided an update: “The weapon of deliberate starvation is working. The Gaza ‘Humanitarian’ Foundation, in turn, has become a tragic success. Not only have hundreds of Gazans been shot to death while waiting in line for packages distributed by the GHF, but there are others who don’t manage to reach the distribution points, dying of hunger. Most of these are children and babies… They lie on hospital floors, on bare beds, or carried on donkey carts. These are pictures from hell. In Israel, many people reject these photos, doubting their veracity. Others express their joy and pride on seeing starving babies.”

Unimpeded, a daily process continues to exterminate more and more of the 2.1 million Palestinian people who remain in Gaza—bombing and shooting civilians while blocking all but a pittance of the food and medicine needed to sustain life. After destroying Gaza’s hospitals, Israel is still targeting healthcare workers (killing at least 70 in May and June), as well as first responders and journalists.

The barbarism is in sync with the belief that “no innocent people” are in Gaza. A relevant observation came from Aldous Huxley in 1936, the same year that the swastika went onto Germany’s flag: “The propagandist’s purpose is to make one set of people forget that certain other sets of people are human.” Kristallnacht happened two years later.

Renowned genocide scholar Omer Bartov explained during an interview on Democracy Now! in mid-July that genocide is “the attempt to destroy not simply people in large numbers, but to destroy them as members of a group. The intent is to destroy the group itself. And it doesn’t mean that you have to kill everyone. It means that the group will be destroyed and that it will not be able to reconstitute itself as a group. And to my mind, this is precisely what Israel is trying to do.”

Bartov, who is Jewish and spent the first half of his life in Israel, said:

What I see in the Israeli public is an extraordinary indifference by large parts of the public to what Israel is doing and what it’s done in the name of Israeli citizens in Gaza. In part, it has to do with the fact that the Israeli media has decided not to report on the horrors that the IDF [Israel Defense Forces] is perpetrating in Gaza. You simply will not see it on Israeli television. If some pictures happen to come in, they are presented only as material that might be used by foreign propaganda against Israel. Now, Israeli citizens can, of course, use other media resources. We can all do that. But most of them prefer not to. And I would say that while about 30% of the population in Israel is completely in favor of what is happening, and, in fact, is egging the government and the army on, I think the vast majority of the population simply does not want to know about it.

In Israel, “compassion for Palestinians is taboo except among a fringe of radical activists,” Adam Shatz wrote last month in the London Review of Books. At the same time, “the catastrophe of the last two years far exceeds that of the Nakba.” The consequences “are already being felt well beyond Gaza: in the West Bank, where Israeli soldiers and settlers have presided over an accelerated campaign of displacement and killing (more than a thousand West Bank Palestinians have been killed since 7 October); inside Israel, where Palestinian citizens are subject to increasing levels of ostracism and intimidation; in the wider region, where Israel has established itself as a new Sparta; and in the rest of the world, where the inability of Western powers to condemn Israel’s conduct—much less bring it to an end—has made a mockery of the rules-based order that they claim to uphold.”

The loudest preaching for a “rules-based order” has come from the U.S. government, which makes and breaks international rules at will. During this century, in the Middle East, the U.S.-Israel duo has vastly outdone all other entities combined in the categories of killing, maiming, and terrorizing. In addition to the joint project of genocide in Gaza, and the USA’s long war on Iraq, the United States and Israel have often exercised an assumed prerogative to attack Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, and Iran, along with encore U.S. missile strikes on Iraq as recently as last year.

Israel’s grisly performance as “a new Sparta” in the region is coproduced by the Pentagon, with the military and intelligence operations of the two nations intricately entangled. The Israeli military has been able to turn Gaza into a genocide zone with at least 70% of its arsenal coming from the United States.

While writing an afterword about the war on Gaza for the paperback edition of War Made Invisible, I mulled over the relevance of my book’s subtitle: “How America Hides the Human Toll of Its Military Machine.” As the carnage in Gaza worsened, the reality became clearer that the Orwellian-named Israel Defense Forces and U.S. Defense Department are essentially part of the same military machine. Their command structures are different, but they are part of the same geopolitical Goliath.

“The new era in which Israel, backed by the U.S., dominates the Middle East is likely to see even more violence and instability than in the past,” longtime war correspondent Patrick Cockburn wrote this month. The lethal violence from Israeli-American teamwork is of such magnitude that it epitomizes international state terrorism. The genocide in Gaza shows the lengths to which the alliance is willing and able to go.

While public opinion is very different in Israel and the United States, the genocidal results of the governments’ policies are indistinguishable.

American public opinion about arming Israel is measurable. As early as June 2024, a CBS News poll found that 61% of the public said that the U.S. should not “send weapons and supplies to Israel.” Since then, support for Israel has continued to erode.

In sharp contrast, on Capitol Hill, the support for arming Israel is measurably high. When Sen. Bernie Sanders’s (I-Vt.) bills to cut off some military aid to Israel came to a vote last November, just 19 out of 100 senators voted yes. Very few of his colleagues voice anywhere near the extent of Sanders’s moral outrage as he keeps speaking out on the Senate floor.

In the House, only 26 out of 435 members have chosen to become cosponsors of H.R.3565, a bill introduced more than two months ago by Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.) that would prevent the U.S. government from sending certain bombs to Israel.

“Israel is the largest cumulative recipient of U.S. foreign assistance since World War II,” the Congressional Research Service reports. During just the first 12 months after the war on Gaza began in October 2023, Brown University’s Costs of War project found, the “U.S. spending on Israel’s military operations and related U.S operations in the region” added up to $23 billion.

The resulting profit bonanza for U.S. military contractors is notable. So is the fact that the U.S.-Israel partnership exerts great American leverage in the Middle East—where two-thirds of the world’s oil reserves are located.

The politics of genocide in the United States involves papering over the big gap between the opinions of the electorate and the actions of the U.S. government. While the partnership between the governments of Israel and the United States has never been stronger, the partnership between the people of Israel and the United States has never been weaker. But in the USA, consent of the governed has not been necessary to continue the axis of genocide.

Norman Solomon is the national director of RootsAction.org and executive director of the Institute for Public Accuracy. 

30 July 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Kim Petersen

Genocide is the deliberate and systematic destruction of a particular group. When it is your country, your troops, your government and its officials committing genocide, many people will stubbornly refuse to acknowledge such a fact. Such is the propagandic effect of patriotism that it erodes critical thought processes and even causes people to overlook extreme evil.

On 28 July 2025, NPR wrote, “Two prominent Israeli rights groups on Monday said their country is committing genocide in Gaza, the first time that local Jewish-led organizations have made such accusations against Israel during nearly 22 months of war.”

The genocide is undeniable as Afkār noted, “Since October 7, 2023, Israeli cabinet ministers, political figures, military officers and media pundits have openly and endlessly incited for the destruction of Gaza and its Palestinian inhabitants.”

Moreover, Israel is trying to spin this genocide as a necessary transfer of the Gazan population: “In recent months, Israel has shifted its messaging on Gaza, acknowledging that it has rendered the territory unlivable and is pushing for the removal of its surviving population. ”

What explains the thinking that leads to the carrying out of such a hideous crime?

Psychopathy is a personality disorder rooted in a lack of empathy and remorse, manipulation, and antisocial behavior. That clearly describes people committing genocide and people aiding and abetting genocide.

Thus, people perpetuating or enabling the commission of a genocide fit the definition of psychopaths.

It is undeniable that Israeli Jews are committing genocide in Palestine. Their prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu is therefore a genocidaire and a psychopath, as well as the many supportive establishment types in Israel. (For more on this read Hamid Dabashi’s After Savagery) The genocide of Gazans has much support among Jewish Israelis. This begs the question of whether psychopathology is widespread among Israeli Jews?

And, when a state or agency knowingly aids and abets Israeli Jews in committing genocide against the Palestinians, then such complicit governments and responsible authorities ought also to be considered genocidaires and psychopaths. Legally, as well:

… one can be held liable for aiding and abetting genocide, even if one does not share the specific genocidal intent of the principal perpetrator.

The Rome Statute contains a provision about criminal responsibility that is not found in either of the U.N. ad hoc tribunal statutes or the Genocide Convention but which further illuminates the mens rea of genocide. Under Article 30 of the Rome Statute, “knowledge” and “intent” are the two components of mens rea. A person has “intent” when the person “means to engage in the conduct” and “means to cause that consequence or is aware that it will occur in the ordinary course of events.” (Grant Dawson and Rachel Boynton, “Reconciling Complicity in Genocide and Aiding and Abetting Genocide in the Jurisprudence of the United Nations Ad Hoc Tribunals,” Harvard Human Rights Journal, 21, 2008: 250.)

Consequently, Israel is not alone in executing its genocide of Palestinians. Countries are called upon to “Stop Arming Israel and Abetting Its Crimes.” Among those governments supplying armaments to Israel are the US and Europeans (“How top arms exporters have responded to the war in Gaza,” and that “European countries use 3rd-party countries to keep arming Israel: British journalist,” “Australia,” “Report suggests arms still flow from Canada to Israel despite denials,” “Infrastructure of genocide: the case confronting Dutch support for Israel’s war machine,” etc) giving political cover, the companies seeking profit from the genocide. Hence, their actions reveal them to be genocidaires.

Many of the common people in many of these countries are opposing the genocide-supporting stance of their governments; for example, Sweden, Netherlands, Canada, even in the US, and worldwide. The leaders are out of touch with masses of their citizens.

Therefore, Canada’s Mark Carney, France’s Emmanuel Macron, Britain’s Keir Starmer, Germany’s Friedrich Merz, Denmark’s Mette Frederiksen, and others are joining avowed Zionists Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump. Are Netanyahu and Trump really the people other country’s “leaders” should follow in making common cause to wipe Palestinians off the map?

Why is this psychopathy exhibited as a common trait among many Western government heads?

Worse, it seems to point to there being something inherently malevolent in the so-called democratic systems of these countries, such that it promotes psychopaths into leadership positions.

Kim Petersen is an independent writer.

30 July 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Dr Syed Mohammad Raghib

Two very distinct realities are depicted in the Arab world: one of excessive riches and luxury, and the other of ongoing pain and deprivation. On the one hand, Gulf elites’ lavish lifestyles—complete with opulent houses, private planes, exotic pets, and supercars—have come to represent wealth and power. However, the faces of undernourished Palestinian youngsters in the West Bank and Gaza tell a different Arab tale of hunger, relocation, and broken promises; its going to be 660 days of their suffering. The Palestinian Health Ministry reported on Sunday that Israel’s genocidal war on the Gaza Strip since October 2023 has resulted in over 59,840 Palestinian deaths and 144,850 injuries. This stark disparity calls into question regional interests, intra-Arab solidarity, and the larger global conscience on a moral, political, and humanitarian level.

The Lavish Arab Life: Oil Wealth and Opulence

The Arab Gulf nations are known for their oil wealth and opulent lifestyles, especially Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Qatar, and Kuwait. Since the 1970s oil boom, these countries have undergone significant change. World-class resorts, skyscrapers, artificial islands, and shopping centres with indoor ski slopes and aquariums can now be found in glittering cities like Dubai, Riyadh, Doha, and Abu Dhabi. By GDP per capita, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates continue to rank among the richest countries in the world as of 2024, according to the World Bank. With a GDP per capita of over $50,000, the UAE is not far behind Qatar, which has about $83,000. The wealth is concentrated in small populations; for example, only about 10% of the population of Qatar is Qatari, and the country has fewer than 3 million inhabitants. This demographic makeup allows for extravagant public spending and raises per capita income levels. The Gulf’s governing families are frequently among the richest people in the world. The House of Saud, for instance, is thought to be worth more than $1.4 trillion. Gold-plated automobiles, yachts worth hundreds of millions of dollars, private jets used for falconry, and extremely expensive watches and handbags are all examples of public displays of luxury. However, the reality of many of their Arab neighbours, particularly Palestine, is incongruent with this wealth.

Palestinian Children: Expressions of Desperation and Hunger

Palestinian territories, particularly Gaza, are among the most economically and socially disadvantaged regions in the world, which stands in stark contrast to the Gulf’s affluence. Eighty percent of Gaza’s population, according to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), depends on foreign assistance. Under an air, sea, and land blockade imposed by Israel and occasionally Egypt, Gaza is home to more than 2 million Palestinians, causing economic standstill. According to UNICEF, almost one in three Palestinian children in Gaza are malnourished as of 2024. Food insecurity, contaminated water, and inadequate healthcare facilities are the main causes of children’s stunted growth, anaemia, and vitamin deficiencies. With only a few hours of electricity per day on average, schools, hospitals, and water purification systems are all impacted. The situation is only slightly better on the West Bank. Economic constriction, military roadblocks, and mobility restrictions have led to significant unemployment rates—nearly 25% overall, with youth unemployment surpassing 40%. This frequently results in lower income for families, which then has an impact on children’s access to nutrition and education. The situation was made worse by Israeli military operations in Gaza in 2023 and 2024. Defence for Children International-Palestine reports that between 2008 and 2024, more than 14,000 Palestinian children were murdered or injured in conflict-related situations. Chronic displacement is common; many people reside in makeshift shelters or crammed structures with subpar facilities for healthcare and sanitation. Palestinian children are raised in a war-torn environment, where they witness frequent bombings, drone surveillance, and the ongoing loss of loved ones. There is widespread psychological discomfort, with many people displaying signs of PTSD. According to the Gaza Mental Health Programme, emotional illnesses affect more than 60% of Gaza’s youngsters.

The Disconnection: Why the Rich Don’t Always Help the Poor

The topic of why the prosperity of the Arab world doesn’t trickle down to its suffering kin is brought up by the disparity between the affluent Arab elite and the impoverished Palestinian children. Arab governments and leaders have frequently verbally affirmed their support for the Palestinian cause. However, political pressure and financial assistance have not always been consistent. The humanitarian help that nations like Kuwait and Qatar have sent to Gaza is insignificant compared to the extent of the need and the resources that these oil-rich countries have at their disposal. For instance, Qatar promised $360 million in aid to Gaza in 2023, which is a substantial sum but insignificant in comparison to its $450 billion sovereign wealth fund. The causes of this disparity are multifaceted. Through the Abraham Accords, certain Gulf countries have normalised their relations with Israel, placing a higher value on defence technology, economic cooperation, and diplomatic influence than on pan-Arab solidarity. The once-unified Arab position against occupation and settlement expansion has been weakened by agreements signed with Israel by the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan. Others contend that coordinated aid is challenging due to Palestine’s political division between Hamas in Gaza and the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank. Gulf leaders are also worried about upending their own governments by aiding organisations viewed as militant or Islamist. The moral optics is still problematic, though. Millions of Palestinian children eat only one meal a day, if at all, while Arab billionaires purchase European football teams or use robotic jockeys to race camels.

Western Hypocrisy and Global Apathy

Palestine’s problems are not limited to intra-Arab relations; the international community is also to blame. Even though Western countries frequently denounce civilian deaths and declare their support for a two-state solution, their foreign policy frequently maintains the status quo. Every year, the United States gives Israel more than $3.8 billion in military assistance. In the meantime, aid to Palestinians is frequently reduced, politicised, or subject to security reform requirements. This disparity has obvious optics. The situation of Palestinians is rarely a major topic in joint statements or press releases when Western politicians travel to the Gulf to negotiate oil or sign billion-dollar arms agreements. The humanitarian situation in Palestine is regularly misreported or underreported, even by Western media. The disparity between the global north’s desire for Arab money and its disregard for Arab misery is further highlighted by this carelessness.

Conclusion: A Moral Reckoning

The Arab world is currently experiencing a severe crisis of identity. Can the oil-rich countries keep creating gold-filled cities while their Palestinian counterparts suffer and go hungry? Does solidarity need to be demonstrated by financial, diplomatic, and moral means, or is verbal support sufficient? There is no one right response, but one thing is certain: it is unsustainable and unfair for two such radically contrasting images to coexist: the daily hunger of Palestinian children and the lavish lifestyle of certain Arabs. It calls into question the morality of the international community as a whole in addition to the conscience of Arab leaders. A portrait divided in two, with one side flourishing in glistening wealth and the other fading into the shadows of poverty, occupation, and neglect, this disparity will continue to haunt the Arab world unless it is addressed with significant political will and humanitarian commitment.

Dr Syed Mohammad Raghib is a research officer at the Indian Institute of Public Administration, New Delhi-110002,  his view expressed in this article is personal.

29 July 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Hugh Curran

PM Benjamin Netanyahu has alienated many in Israel and the U.S.,  some of whom revile his leadership: “The Times of Israel” reported on a Pew Survey finding that in April, 2025, 53% Of Americans had an unfavorable view of Israel compared to 42% in 2022, and “over half don’t trust PM Benjamin Netanyahu to do the right thing”. 

Haaretz News reported that “200 students at Cheltenham High School in suburban Philadelphia have petitioned for the school’s alumni hall of fame to eject Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who graduated from the school in 1967.”

A writer for the Institute for National Security Studies in Tel Aviv noted: “The dangers of diminished US support, particularly as it reflects long-term and deeply rooted trends, cannot be overstated…Israel needs the support of the [American] superpower for the foreseeable future.

Dr Guy Shalev, Director of Israel’s “Physicians for Human Rights” commented: “We must be committed to the truth. That truth lies [not only] in the details [but also] the bigger picture…we published a report on Israel’s actions in Gaza and [after] analyzing those actions, [came to the conclusion that they] led to the destruction of the living conditions necessary for the survival of Palestinians in Gaza. The ”destruction of the healthcare system, the…starvation [and], blockade, the weaponization of humanitarian aid, [the] displacement, destruction of homes and sanitation infrastructure, the spread of communicable diseases …are all contributing factors. When examining all these together, we identify a clear pattern that indicates [an] intent [to destroy the living conditions necessary for the survival of Palestinians in Gaza”]

Five Israeli university presidents called on PM Netanyahu to tell the IDF to ramp up efforts to “solve the horrible hunger issue in Gaza,” adding that … we have a special duty to act using all available measures to avoid and avert cruel and indiscriminate harm to innocent men, women and children.”

The most powerful repudiation of Netanyahu’s leadership has come from Ehud Barak, former PM of Israel who recently declared that “Israel is becoming a pariah state. We need massive “Nonviolent Civil Disobedience” until Netanyahu is ousted. “This is an emergency call asking people to courageously confront reality and take action to stop the landslide [of worldwide condemnation]. Barak continued: “The Israel of the Declaration of Independence and the Zionist vision is collapsing. The present emergency [which needs to be faced] requires us to answer key questions [beginning with]: What is happening to us? Who is responsible for this?… Barak accuses the current regime of “attempting to transform Israel into a non-democratic entity and…that the protests, including general strikes, [appear to have] reached a level  …preceding government collapse”. 

The use of overwhelming power in the destruction of the infrastructure of Gaza by Israel’s military makes full use of American weaponry during their onslaughts. Despite this lethal and indiscriminate use of power there are alternative movements involving peace activists marching, organizing demonstrations and strikes by means of “Nonviolent Civil Disobedience”. This coalition of 160 peace groups, (ALLMEPS) are demanding a ceasing of violence and the creation of a more just system for all people in Palestine and Israel.  .

The Israeli-American professor of Holocaust and Genocide Studies at Brown University,Omer Bartov, has asserted publicly that the destruction of Gaza’s infrastructure and the continuing attempt to make Gaza uninhabitable, constitute Genocide. Fifty-five other Genocide Studies scholars have signed a letter expressing similar sentiments. Bartov, who served in the Israeli military for four years, noted in an interview on NPR, that the systematic destruction of schools and universities and hospitals, convinced him that the Israeli government, with its authoritarian proclivities may eventually turn its violence upon its own internal critics.

In “Jewish News” the Israeli historian Yuval Harari, in a discussion in front of a London audience, warns that a “spiritual catastrophe for Judaism” is taking place in its “ethnic cleansing campaign in Gaza and the West Bank”. He states that “the intention is to create a new Israel based on an ideology of Jewish supremacy”. Such intentions, Harari states, are the result of “anti-Jewish values” and are taking place in the framework of an even “wider collapse of the global world order”. This “global world order” was originally conceived by the U.S. but, ironically, is now being destroyed by the U.S., a paradoxical happening that few in American leadership positions seem able to grasp. The reality is that the moral underpinning that provided U.S. leadership in the creation of “the global world order” has become badly fractured and this is happening while most Americans are oblivious. One of Yuval’s observations about Israel, and other nations, is  “that history is carried out by only five or ten percent of the population, the rest sit at home” [perhaps uncomprehending the full significance of events taking place in their name].

Hugh Curran teaches in the Peace Studies Program at University of Maine

30 July 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Dr. Salim Nazzal 

Losing Ziad Rahbani, for us the dreamers of the left in 1970s Beirut was not just the departure of a brilliant artist. It felt like a light going out, a light that had walked with us through the darkness. It was as if we had lost a friend whose soul we had known long before we shook his hand, a companion who walked the same streets, carried the same dream, and believed, as we did, that art could shake the pillars of this crumbling world.

Maybe I’m exaggerating or maybe not. Ziad didn’t belong to one generation or one movement, but we felt he was “one of us,” one of those who believed that a song could be a political manifesto, and that theater could be an arena of struggle, not just a luxury.

I remember him at the beginning of his journey, the day I saw him by chance at a café in Hamra alone, lost in his thoughts, as if traveling deep inside himself. My friend said, “That’s Ziad, Fairuz’s son.” We approached him, greeted him, and he responded with a faint smile.

Not long after, I attended his play Nazl Al-Sourour. I walked out of the hall feeling as though I had returned from a revolutionary voyage. I turned to the friend who was with me and said, with excitement: “This young man is a genius.” I don’t know where she is now life that brings people together also tears them apart. But if she reads these words, perhaps she will remember my awe that night, and how I spoke to her about it as if it were a prophecy.

That was just before the outbreak of the civil war, when Beirut was still Beirut the city of culture and beautiful noise. Around that time, I read The Mills of Beirut by Tawfiq Yusuf Awwad, a copy I had bought from the Lebanese University bookstore in UNESCO. And just like with Nazl Al-Sourour, I felt something cracking beneath the surface as if both the novel and the play were early warnings of the storm to come.

I lived then in Sin El Fil, in a small room with a garden, and we would spend our evenings listening to Joseph Sakr’s songs. I remember well when that same friend and I first listened to Al-Haleh Taabaneh Ya Layla, before Ziad himself would sing it later with his tender, angry voice. The voice, the lyrics, the melody all were a soft cry against everything.

During that period, the stage of Shoushou was thriving, and I would laugh with a heavy heart watching his plays. But my heart remained tied to Nazl Al-Sourour. Perhaps because it was about a group of friends dreaming of revolution and I was one of them. Not on stage, but in life. I was a dreamy communist, convinced that change was inevitable, and that Beirut could be reborn to the rhythm of songs, manifestos, and words.

But time is merciless. It slowly trimmed down our certainties. I later visited the Soviet Union, and that was the beginning of the fracture in my conviction. There, I started to piece myself back together. I never fully abandoned the dream, but I no longer saw it with the same innocence.

Still, Ziad remained a constant presence in my soul. I followed his works from A Long American Film to Bel Nesbeh La Bokra Shou. He remained, for me, that rare state of being on the edge: a rebel who didn’t raise slogans, an artist who didn’t compromise.

Ziad was defiance made music, rejection spoken in bittersweet satire. He lived through the era of great Arab defeats, yet tried to redefine the pulse of life. He wasn’t a preacher, but a lover of honest phrases, of melodies that said what newspapers could not.

And despite his communist background, he was never a prisoner of ideology. I saw him as naturally liberal free in spirit and thought, flitting between ideas like a bird that never settles in a cage, never repeating itself. That’s what made his art so expansive, so full of fresh rhythm.

As for his compositions for Fairuz they are collective memory. They’re not just music, but windows we open onto ourselves, onto days that weren’t perfect, but were real. They hold as much pain as they do longing, and just enough dream to help us endure what’s still to come.

Dr. Salim Nazzal is President of the European-Palestinian Cultural Forum

30 July 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Sally Dugman

Back in 2009, I wrote an article in which I mentioned:

“The taxpayers of Mississippi, whether they condoned the action or not, bought their current or a former governor an eight seat plane for 3.7 million dollars. The state’s authorizing fiscal managers, obviously, must have deemed it an essential for his office and ratified its purchase order. In addition, it costs approximately $1,200 to operate for each hour in use for trips by the present governor’s family, associates and himself.”

I, also, wrote in the same piece:

“Then again, Nancy Pelosi, from a state in which towns and counties are, one after another, publicly declaring bankruptcy, seems possibly much worse than her Mississippi counterparts in her choices pertaining to flagrantly self-indulgent behaviors. Indeed, it is outrageous that many of our government representatives have the arrogant gall to blithely continue in their assumption that they are entitled to extraordinary perks and privileges at taxpayers’ expense despite the economic downturn, along with related homelessness, joblessness and other serious hardships being faced by many citizens who voted them into office.

“Meanwhile, her excess is particularly evident in that she has spent an exorbitant amount for frequently jetting back and forth between California and Washington, D.C., along with requesting special stipulations relative to her numerous flights. Indeed, according to Jake Tapper, an ABC News correspondent, “On Feb. 1 [2007], unnamed administration and congressional sources leaked to the Washington Times that Pelosi was ‘seeking regular military flights not only for herself and her staff but also for relatives and for other members of the California delegation [1].’” 

“At the same time, one can assume that, while many politicians are encouraging fossil fuel curtailment for the public at large, she is aware that her carbon footprint is blatantly high due to an unrestrained desire to flit back and forth across the American terrain whenever the inclination strikes.”

Now in the present day, I’ll add that I’m very sorry that a mentally ill criminal broke into her home and repeatedly thudded her elderly husband in the head with a hammer as a retribution since he hates her so much. How bizarre and truly awful!

Meanwhile, I wonder about from where her $261.90 million derived. No, I don’t really any more than the money that the rest of most wealthy politicians obtain in their vast stores of lucre, including Presidents such as Obama who hired a private cook for his household.

The answer, actually,  is simple in the end. Moneyed private citizens and corporate heads try to bribe and influence government decisions in their favor. So because of the Citizen United ruling (Citizens United v. FEC), they load millions upon millions in gifts like a jet and vacations, other lavish and expensive favors and financial donations  onto rulers whose special treatment that they want to curry.

This happening even impacts the Supreme Court. For example, some of its members, most notably Clarence Thomas, have taken millions of dollars in bribes, vacations, jet and ship trips, expensive private school tuition for a young relative and more. It’s all well documented. 1 2

Meanwhile, others like Donald Trump sue corporations like Paramount and get away with the gained loot since the company, Paramount or whichever other one it is, wants favors in return for capitulating. Further, he gets to sell all sorts of products while in office such as cryptocurrency, guitars, watches, hats, talking clocks, pictures and much, much more. So, it’s a real cash cow in the final reckoning.. along with other business ventures in operation that he pursues.

So aside from Supreme Court and POTUS gains, what more financially slimy, actually,  involves Congress, itself ? It’s this in my view: Over half of Congress are at least millionaires and their lucre more often than not is largely ill gotten gain. 4 5

The way that one of the major scams is used by some Senators and House Representatives is really easy to note. It goes like this:

Let’s say that I’m on a defense committee and the group members have decided to give more bombs and cash to Israel to kill Palestinian citizens and to the Ukraine leaders to slaughter  Russian  and South Korean troops. I, then, know that once my committee Director announces this being so, the stock of the weapon and war machine manufacturers involved in this butchery will wildly rise in value. So I will buy stocks in these companies in advance of the public announcement to make illicit profits for myself.

In fact and according to Craig Holman and Savannah Wooten, who wrote the Federal Times article,  Lawmakers still benefitting from share trading in defense stocks: “In starker terms, nearly one in five members of Congress traded stocks in businesses to which they are privy to inside information and for which they can affect the value of those stocks through official actions.

“This does not reflect well on Congress.

“The problem is particularly bad in the defense industry. Congressional stock trading can arguably be seen as “war profiteering” – members of cashing in on defense industry stocks at the same time Congress receives updates on the wars in Ukraine and Israel and sets the Pentagon’s annual budget, half of which goes to military contractors every year.

“The potential for unethical stock trading may be worse for military corporations than any other. With the onslaught of new wars, Congress added $70 billion over the last two years to an already bloated Pentagon budget, much of which is funneled directly into the coffers of defense contractors like Palatir, Lockheed Martin, and Northrop Grumman. The stock values in these companies have since experienced double-digitgrowth – a lucrative business opportunity not overlooked by lawmakers calling the shots.

“At least 25 members of Congress sitting on national security committees have simultaneously purchased stock in these very same companies. The majority of these members sit on the Senate and House Armed Services committees, the entities responsible for overseeing the Defense Department budget and contracts. Stocks are held by both Republicans and Democrats. Reaping the benefits of the military-industrial-complex is thoroughly bipartisan.”

Moreover, we citizens should not for a moment naively think that other industries are also not involved in this seamy graft by many corrupt and sleazy political operatives who are put into office by innocent and well meaning voters excluding me as I, as a matter of conscience, absolutely refuse to elect into office a lesser of two evils like a Bombs Away Biden over the alternative murderous monster who also gives hard earned taxpayer money to blow up, starve and delimb or bury alive in building rubble elders, mothers, fathers, older children and babies alike, as well as others such as some soldiers.

Meanwhile, please don’t imagine for a moment that many (not all) of our politicians don’t have their greedy piggy noses in insider trading involving other industries besides murderous warring and genocidal related ones. Of course, they do — such as with pharmaceuticals like the lucrative Covid-19 actions,  gain of function actions and much, much more!

1. U.S. Supreme Court justices take lavish gifts — then raise the bar for bribery prosecutions

2  Legal scholar: Clarence Thomas “corruption” almost “certainly unlawful and ethically reprehensible”

3 Paramount, President Trump reach $16 million settlement over “60 Minutes” lawsuit

4 Majority In Congress Are Millionaires : It’s All Politics

5 List of current members of the United States Congress by wealth

6. Members of Congress Investing In Defense Revealed

7. Politician Trading: If You Can’t Stop Them, Join Them | Alerts and Articles | Insights

Sally Dugman lives in and writes from Massachusetts, USA where she is represented by two good Senators and a House Congressman, who all try to stymie corruption and uplift society … unlike some other creepy pigs in Washington, D.C.

29 July 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Dr. Binoy Kampmark

It’s been almost an article of faith among Israeli officials: the state they represent is incapable of genocide, their actions always spurred by the noblest, necessary motivations of self-defence against satanic enemies who wish genocide upon Jews.  Over time, as Holocaust scholar Omer Bartov writes, “Ethical concerns and moral qualms were brushed aside as either marginal or distracting in the face of the ultimate cataclysm that is the genocide of the Jews.” 

This form of reasoning, known otherwise as “Holocaust-ism” or “Shoah-tiyut”, is a moral conceit left bare in the war of annihilation being waged in Gaza against the Palestinian populace.  Israeli human rights groups have taken note of this, despite the drained reserves of empathy evident in the Israel proper. (A Pew Research Center poll conducted last month found that a mere 16% of Jewish Israelis thought peaceful coexistence with Palestinians was possible.)

In its latest report pointedly titled Our Genocide, the Israeli human rights organisation B’Tselem offers a blunt assessment: “Israel’s policy in the Gaza Strip and its horrific outcomes, together with statements by senior Israeli politicians and military commanders about the goals of the attack, leads us to the unequivocal conclusion that Israel is taking coordinated action to intentionally destroy Palestinian society in the Gaza Strip.  In other words: Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.” 

The infliction of genocide, the organisation acknowledges, is a matter of “multiple and parallel practices” applied over a period of time, with killing being merely one component.  Living conditions can be destroyed, concentration camps and zones created, populations expelled and policies to systematically prevent reproduction enacted. “Accordingly, genocidal acts are various actions intended to bring about the destruction of a distinct group, as part of a deliberate, coordinated effort by a ruling authority.”

Our Genocide suggests that certain conditions often precede the sparking of a genocide.  Israel’s relations with Palestinians had been characterised by “broader patterns of settler-colonialism”, with the intention of ensuring “Jewish supremacy over Palestinians – economically, politically, socially, and culturally.”

B’Tselem draws upon three crucial elements centred on ensuring “Jewish supremacy over Palestinians”: “life under an apartheid regime that imposes separation, demographic engineering, and ethnic cleansing; systemic and institutionalized use of violence against Palestinians, while the perpetrators enjoy impunity; and institutionalized mechanisms of dehumanization and framing Palestinians as an existential threat.”  The attacks on Israel by Hamas and other militant groups on October 7, 2023 was a violent event that created a “sense of existential threat among the perpetrating group” enabling the “ruling system to carry out genocide.”  As B’Tselem Executive Director Yuli Novak notes, this sense of threat was promoted by an “extremist, far-right messianic government” to pursue “an agenda of destruction and expulsion.”

Israeli policy in the Strip since October 2023 could not be rationalised as a focused, targeted attempt to destroy the rule of Hamas or its military efficacy.  “Statements by senior Israeli decision-makers about the nature and assault in Gaza have expressed genocidal intent throughout.”  Ditto Israeli military officers of all ranks.  Gaza’s residents had been dehumanised, with many Jewish-Israelis believing “that their lives are of negligible value compared to Israel’s national goals, if not worthless altogether.”

The report also notes the use of certain terminology that haunts the literature of genocidal euphemism: the creation of “humanitarian zones” that would still be bombed despite supposedly providing protection for displaced civilians; the use of “kill zones” by the Israeli military and the absence of any standardised rules of engagement through the Strip, often “determined at the discretion of commanders on the ground or based on arbitrary criteria.”

Wishing to be comprehensive, the authors of the report do not ignore Israel’s actions in the West Bank and occupied East Jerusalem.  Airstrikes regularly take place against refugee camps in the northern part of the territory since October 2023.  Even more lethal open-fire policies have been used in the West Bank, with the use of kill zones suggesting “the broader ‘Gazafication’ of Israel’s methods of warfare.”

Another group, Physicians for Human Rights-Israel (PHRI), has also published a legal-medical appraisal on the intentional destruction of Gaza’s healthcare system, finding that the Israeli campaign in Gaza “constitutes genocide under the 1948 Genocide Convention.”  The evidence examined by the group “shows a deliberate and systematic dismantling of Gaza’s healthcare system and other vital systems necessary for the population’s survival.”  The evolving nature of the campaign suggested a “deliberate progression” from the initial bombing and forced evacuation of hospitals in the northern part of the Strip to calculated collapse of the healthcare system across the entire enclave.  The dismantling of the health system involved rendering hospitals “non-functional”, the blocking of medical evaluations and the elimination of such vital services as trauma care, surgery, dialysis and maternal health. 

Added to this has been the direct targeting of health care workers, involving the death and detention of over 1,800 members “including many senior specialists” and the deliberate restriction of humanitarian relief through militarised distribution points that pose lethal risks to aid recipients.  “This coordinated assault has produced a cascading failure of health and humanitarian infrastructure, compounded by policies leading to starvation, disease and the breakdown of sanitation, housing, and education systems.”

PHRI contends that, at the very least, three core elements of Article II of the Genocide Convention are met: the killing of members of a group (identified by nationality, ethnicity, race or religion); causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of that group and deliberately inflicting on the group those conditions of life to bring about its destruction in whole or in part.

In accepting that genocide is being perpetrated against the Palestinians, Our Genocide makes that most pertinent of points: the dry legal analysis of genocide tends to be distanced from a historical perspective.  “The legal definition is narrow, having been shaped in large part by the political interests of the states whose representatives drafted it.”  The high threshold of identifying genocide, and the international jurisprudence on the subject, had produced a disturbing paradox: genocide tends to be recognised “only after a significant portion of the targeted group has already been destroyed and the group as such has suffered irreparable harm.”  The thrust of these clarion calls from B’Tselem and PHRI is urgently clear: end this state of affairs before the Palestinians become yet another historical victim of such harm.

Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. 

29 July 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Kevin Reed

The series of lying statements by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that there is “no starvation” in Gaza has produced a powerful backlash by masses of people around the world who are horrified by the evidence that more than 100 Palestinians—the majority children—have died from lack of food and nutrition.

On Sunday, Netanyahu denied the starvation in Gaza while speaking at a Christian conference in Jerusalem. Speaking at an event hosted by Trump supporter and prominent evangelical pastor Paula White, Netanyahu declared:

There is no starvation in Gaza—and there is no policy of starvation in Gaza. We facilitate the entry of humanitarian aid throughout the duration of the conflict. If not, there would be no Gazans left. The sole entity obstructing the flow of humanitarian aid is Hamas. They are reversing the truth.

After 20 months of mass death caused by continuous Israeli bombings, drone missile strikes and ground assaults, Netanyahu also falsely stated that Israel “has provided humanitarian corridors and promoted airdrops of aid,” and called reports of starvation “a blatant falsehood.” He even went so far as to assert that images being circulated around the world of Palestinian children starved to death are fake.

Netanyahu said, “a campaign … distributing false pictures, creating an image of starvation which doesn’t exist.” His comments came on the heels of reports and viral images documenting skeletal children, desperate families and hospitals overwhelmed by malnutrition, which Israeli officials have tried to dismiss as “fake, distributed by Hamas.”

These denials by the fascist Israeli prime minister are directly contradicted by Gaza health authorities and international agencies who track hunger deaths daily. As of Monday, Gaza’s Ministry of Health reports at least 147 Palestinians—including 88 children—have died from malnutrition and starvation since the beginning of the genocide in October 2023.

Al Jazeera reported Monday that in the last 24 hours, 14 more people, including two children, perished from hunger and malnutrition. Health officials warn the true toll is likely far higher due to communication breakdowns and the isolating chaos imposed by ongoing strikes.

Global organizations, including the World Health Organization, have described the growing mortality toll as “mass starvation,” with over 2 million still at risk as food supplies remain throttled by the Israeli blockade and bureaucratic hurdles. Testimonies from Gaza highlight desperate families unable to find food, with malnourished mothers unable to produce breastmilk and fatal shortages of baby formula.

Netanyahu’s assertions have unleashed a wave of international condemnation. The United Nations, numerous governments and more than 100 humanitarian aid organizations have decried the Israeli policy as “orchestrated famine” and “genocide,” emphasizing that the starvation in Gaza is not accidental but a product of deliberate deprivation and the systematic obstruction of overland aid.

Protests have erupted in major cities across the US, Europe and the Middle East, where demonstrators have filled streets demanding an immediate end to the blockade and the free flow of aid into Gaza.

In New York City, hundreds marched through Manhattan during a mass “Day of Action,” chanting for justice for Palestine and decrying US complicity in what they described as genocide and collective punishment. Outside the White House in Washington, protesters banged pots and carried signs reading “Let the food trucks in” and “Israel stop starving Gaza,” calling on the American administration to halt its support for Israel and enforce urgent humanitarian access.

European capitals have seen similar scenes. In Berlin, hundreds gathered, banging kitchenware and carrying banners such as “Stop the genocide” and “Yes to bread, no to bombs,” urging the international community, and especially Germany, to intervene and end the famine. In addition, protests and public outrages were reported across the United Kingdom, France, Italy, Spain and Greece, with actions ranging from large marches to direct blockades of businesses linked to Israeli trade and arms shipments.

Aid agencies have called continuously for the opening of all land crossings, a halt to the siege and immediate ceasefire, warning that “starvation as a method of warfare is a war crime.” Even within Israel, opposition has grown as hundreds of Israelis have joined demonstrations criticizing their government including prominent academics and writers denouncing the policies as beyond the pale of morality.

The UN’s humanitarian chief, Tom Fletcher, called the trickle of aid allowed by Israel “a drop in the ocean,” warning that 14,000 babies could die in the next 48 hours without immediate intervention.

The severity of the public outrage over the starvation of Palestinian babies has also forced hypocritical statements from leading representatives of the imperialist countries who have backed the genocide in Gaza since it began.

While visiting Scotland, President Donald Trump unconvincingly said, “Those children look very hungry. That’s real starvation, and you can’t fake that. The kids need to be fed.” Vice President JD Vance also feigned sympathy saying, “the United States aims to ensure that starving children receive nourishment.”

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron jointly referred to the “egregious” actions in Gaza but took no action to stop them. Starmer’s government has even claimed in court that there is “no serious risk of genocide in Gaza.”

In its own public relations maneuver, Israel announced on Sunday a “tactical pause” in its military campaign. The army said it would suspend combat operations for 10 hours each day in three areas—Gaza City, Deir al-Balah, and Muwasi—to “facilitate” aid delivery.

However, even as a trickle of aid was let into Gaza, Israeli strikes killed dozens, including those waiting for food in “safe zones,” illustrating once again that the real aim of the Zionist regime is to terrorize the Palestinian people in advance of their permanent removal from the Strip.

On Monday, Israeli military actions in Gaza resulted in the deaths of at least 78 Palestinians, according to health officials in the territory. Strikes were reported across multiple locations, with some of the deadliest air and artillery attacks occurring outside the designated 10-hour daily “pause.”

Among those killed were a pregnant woman and her newborn baby, who both died after an Israeli airstrike hit a house and nearby tents in the Muwasi area of Khan Younis. The newborn had been delivered via emergency surgery but did not survive long after birth.

Other strikes targeted homes in Khan Younis and additional sites across the enclave. Reports confirm at least 11 people, including more than half women and children, were killed in a separate attack on a residential building, while additional casualties occurred elsewhere in Gaza as attacks continued amid the humanitarian crisis.

Aid organizations quickly condemned the deceptive “pauses” as inadequate and cynical diversions from any real solution. Numerous truckloads of food remain stuck at Gaza’s periphery, while children continue to die of starvation inside, as Israel blames others for the lack of food distribution.

All the stated humanitarian concerns by the imperialist powers and Israel are exposed by ongoing military operations and the real plans for mass displacement of Palestinians. Israel’s preparations for a “humanitarian city” in Rafah—a concentration camp near the Egyptian border—are still in the works.

Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz and the US-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) are working toward the corralling of as many as 2 million Palestinians into a tightly guarded camp in Rafah, intending to “deradicalize and reintegrate” residents and later “prepare them for relocation,” that is, permanent expulsion from Gaza.

Under this plan, camp residents would be cut off from the outside world, forbidden to leave and exposed to further deprivation and violence. It is to this end of ethnic cleansing that the starvation of the Palestinian population is aimed.

As images and reports of starvation in Gaza continue to circulate, the world’s population is becoming aware of these events which recall the crimes perpetrated by the Nazis in the 20th century during World War II. The crimes against humanity now being committed by Israel in Gaza, with the complicity of leaders like Trump, Starmer and Macron, will be remembered as harbingers of revolutionary struggles by the working class that will overthrow the world capitalist system.

29 July 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By William D. Hartung

When, in his 1961 farewell address, President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned of the dangers of the unwarranted influence wielded by a partnership between the military and a growing cohort of U.S. weapons contractors and came up with the ominous term “military-industrial complex,” he could never have imagined quite how large and powerful that complex would become.  In fact, in recent years, one firm — Lockheed Martin — has normally gotten more Pentagon funding than the entire U.S. State Department. And mind you, that was before the Trump administration moved to sharply slash spending on diplomacy and jack up the Pentagon budget to an astonishing $1 trillion per year.

In a new study issued by the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft and the Costs of War Project at Brown University, Stephen Semler and I lay out just how powerful those arms makers and their allies have become, as Pentagon budgets simply never stop rising. And consider this: in the five years from 2020 to 2024, 54% of the Pentagon’s $4.4 trillion in discretionary spending went to private firms and $791 billion went to just five companies: Lockheed Martin ($313 billion), RTX (formerly Raytheon, $145 billion), Boeing ($115 billion), General Dynamics ($116 billion), and Northrop Grumman ($81 billion). And mind you, that was before Donald Trump’s Big Beautiful Budget bill landed on planet Earth, drastically slashing spending on diplomacy and domestic programs to make room for major tax cuts and near-record Pentagon outlays.

In short, the “garrison state” Eisenhower warned of has arrived, with negative consequences for nearly everyone but the executives and shareholders of those giant weapons conglomerates and their competitors in the emerging military tech sector who are now hot on their trail. High-tech militarists like Peter Thiel of Palantir, Elon Musk of SpaceX, and Palmer Luckey of Anduril have promised a new, more affordable, more nimble, and supposedly more effective version of the military-industrial complex, as set out in Anduril’s “Rebooting the Arsenal of Democracy,” an ode to the supposed value of those emerging tech firms. 

Curiously enough, that Anduril essay is actually a remarkably apt critique of the Big Five contractors and their allies in Congress and the Pentagon, pointing out their unswerving penchant for cost overruns, delays in scheduling, and pork-barrel politics to preserve weapons systems that all too often no longer serve any useful military purpose. That document goes on to say that, while the Lockheed Martins of the world served a useful function in the ancient days of the Cold War with the Soviet Union, today they are incapable of building the next-generation of weaponry.  The reason: their archaic business model and their inability to master the software at the heart of a coming new generation of semi-autonomous, pilotless weapons driven by artificial intelligence (AI) and advanced computing.  For their part, the new titans of tech boldly claim that they can provide exactly such a futuristic generation of weaponry far more effectively and at far less cost, and that their weapons systems will preserve or even extend American global military dominance into the distant future by outpacing China in the development of next generation technologies.

War and a Possible Coming Techno-Autocracy

Could there indeed be a new, improved military-industrial complex just waiting in the wings, one aligned with this country’s actual defense needs that doesn’t gouge taxpayers in the process? 

Don’t count on it, not at least if it’s premised on the development of “miracle weapons” that will cost so much less and do so much more than current systems. Such a notion, it seems, arises in every generation, only to routinely fall flat. From the “electronic battlefield” that was supposed to pinpoint and destroy Viet Cong forces in the jungles of Southeast Asia in the Vietnam War years to Ronald Reagan’s failed vision of an impenetrable “Star Wars” missile shield, to the failure of precision-guided munitions and networked warfare to bring victory in Iraq and Afghanistan during this country’s Global War on Terror, the notion that superior military technology is the key to winning America’s wars and expanding U.S. power and influence has been routinely marked by failure. And that’s been true even if the weapons work as advertised (which all too often they don’t).

And while you’re at it, don’t forget, for example, that, nearly 30 years later, the highly touted, high-tech F-35 combat aircraft — once hailed as a technological marvel-in-the-making that would usher in a revolution in both warfare and military procurement — still isn’t ready for prime time. Designed for multiple war-fighting tasks, including winning aerial dogfights, supporting troops on the ground, and bombing enemy targets, the F-35 has turned out to be able to do none of those things particularly well. And to add insult to injury, the plane is so complex that it spends almost as much time being maintained or repaired as being ready to do battle.

That history of technological hubris and strategic failure should be kept in mind when listening to the — so far unproven — claims of the leaders of this country’s military-tech sector about the value of their latest gadgets. For one thing, everything they propose to build — from swarms of drones to unpiloted aircraft, land vehicles, and ships — will rely on extremely complex software that is bound to fail somewhere along the way. And even if, by some miracle, their systems, including artificial intelligence, work as advertised, they may not only not prove decisive in the wars of the future but make wars of aggression that much more likely. After all, countries that master new technologies are tempted to go on the attack, putting fewer of their own people at immediate risk while doing devastating harm to targeted populations. The use of Palantir’s technology by the Israeli Defense Forces to increase the number of targets devastated in a given time frame in their campaign of mass slaughter in Gaza could foreshadow the new age of warfare if emerging military technologies aren’t brought under some system of control and accountability.

A further risk posed by AI-driven warfare is the possibility that the new weapons could choose their targets without human intervention.  Current Pentagon policy promises to keep a human “in the loop” in the use of such systems, but military logic runs counter to such claims. As Anduril President and Chief Strategy Officer Christian Brose has written in his seminal book Kill Chain, the high-tech wars of the future will hinge on which side can identify and destroy its targets most quickly — an imperative that would ensure slow-moving humans were left out of the process.

In short, two possibilities arise if the U.S. military transitions to the “new improved” military-industrial complex espoused by the denizens of Silicon Valley: complex systems that don’t perform as advertised, or new capabilities that may make war both more likely and more deadly. And such dystopian outcomes will only be reinforced by the ideology of the new Silicon Valley militarists. They see themselves as both the “founders” of a new form of warfare and “the new patriots” poised to restore American greatness without the need for a democratic government in the war-making mix. Their ideal, in fact, would be to ensure that the government got out of the way and let them solve the myriad problems we face alone. Ayn Rand would be proud.

Such a techno-autocracy would be far more likely to serve the interests of a relatively small elite than aid the average American in any way. From Peter Thiel’s quest for a way to live forever to Elon Musk’s desire to enable the mass colonization of space, it’s not at all clear that, if such goals could even be achieved, they would be generally available. It’s more likely that such opportunities would be restricted to the species of superior beings that the techno-militarists see themselves as being.

The Ultimate Brawl Between the Big Five and the Emerging Tech Firms?

Still, the techno-militarists face serious obstacles in their quest to reach the top rungs of power and influence, not least among them, the continued clout of old-school weapons makers. After all, they still receive the vast bulk of Pentagon weapons spending, based in part on their millions of dollars in lobbying and campaign expenditures and their ability to spread jobs to almost every state and district in the country. These tools of influence give the Big Five far deeper roots in and influence over Congress than the new tech firms. These large, legacy companies also influence government policy through their funding of hawkish think tanks that help shape government policies designed to regulate their conduct, and so much more. 

Of course, one way to prevent the ultimate brawl between the Big Five and the emerging tech firms would be to feed them both with ample funding — but that would require a Pentagon budget that would soar well beyond the present trillion-dollar mark. There are, of course, some projects that could benefit both factions, ranging from Donald Trump’s pet Golden Dome missile defense scheme, which could incorporate hardware from the Big Five with software from the emerging tech firms, to Boeing’s new F-47 combat aircraft program, which calls for unpiloted “wing men” likely to be produced by Anduril or another military tech firm. So, the question of confrontation versus cooperation between the new and old guard in the military sector has yet to be settled.  If the rival firms end up turning their lobbying resources against each other and going for each other’s proverbial throats, it could weaken their grip on the rest of us and perhaps reveal useful information that might undermine the authority and credibility of both sides. 

But count on one thing: neither sector has the best interests of the public in mind, so we need to prepare to fight back ourselves regardless of how their battle plays out.

Okay, then, what could we possibly do to head off the nightmare scenario of a world run by Peter Thiel, Elon Musk, and crew? First, we’ll need the kind of “alert and knowledgeable” citizenry that Dwight D. Eisenhower pointed to so long ago as the only antidote to an ever more militarized society. That would mean concerted efforts by both the public and the government (which would, of course, have to be run by someone unlike Donald J. Trump — already a project in itself!). 

At the moment, the tech sector is indeed increasingly embedded in the Trump administration and he owes a number of them a distinct debt of gratitude for helping him over the top in the 2024 election. Despite his very public and bitter falling out with fellow narcissist Elon Musk, the influence of the tech sector within his administration remains all too strong, starting with Vice President J.D. Vance, who owes his career to the employment, mentoring, and financial support of Silicon Valley militarist Peter Thiel. And don’t forget that a substantial cohort of former employees of Palantir and Anduril have already been given key posts in this administration. 

Creating a counterweight to those new-age militarists will require a full-scale societal effort, including educators, scientists, and technologists, the labor movement, non-tech business leaders, and activists of all stripes. Silicon Valley workers did, in fact, organize a number of protests against the militarization of their handiwork before being beaten back. Now, a new wave of such activism is all too desperately needed. 

Just as many of the scientists who helped build the atomic bomb spent their post-Hiroshima and Nagasaki lives trying to rein in or abolish nuclear weapons, a cohort of scientists and engineers in the tech sector needs to play a leading role in beginning to craft guardrails to limit the military uses of the technologies they helped develop. Meanwhile, the student movement against the use of U.S. weapons in Gaza has begun to expand its horizons to target the militarization of universities writ large. In addition, environmentalists need to double down on criticisms of the immense energy requirements needed to power AI and crypto, while labor leaders need to reckon with the consequences of AI destroying jobs in the military and civilian sectors alike. And all of this has to happen in the context of a far greater technological literacy, including among congressional representatives and workers in government agencies charged with regulating the suppliers of new military technologies.

None of that is, of course, likely to happen except in the context of a resurgence of democracy and a committed effort to fulfill the unmet rhetorical promises that undergird the myth of the American dream. And speaking of contexts, here’s one that anybody preparing to protest the further militarization of this society should take into account: contrary to the belief of many key figures from the Pentagon to Wall Street to Main Street, the peak of American military and economic power has indeed passed, never to return. The only rational course is to craft policies that maintain American influence in the context of a world where power has been defused and cooperation is all too essential. 

Such a view, of course, is the polar opposite of the bombastic, bullying approach of the Trump administration, which, if it persists, will only accelerate American decline. And in that context, the key question is whether the widespread harm inherent in the new budget bill — which will only continue to wildly enrich the Pentagon and big arms firms of both kinds, while hitting the rest of us across the political spectrum — could prompt a new surge of public engagement and a genuine debate about what kind of world we want to live in and how this country could play a constructive (rather than destructive) role in bringing it about.

Featured image: Pentagon by Thomas Hawk is licensed under CC B-NC 2.0 / Flickr

William D. Hartung, a TomDispatch regular, is a senior research fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, and the author, with Ben Freeman, of The Trillion Dollar War Machine: How Runaway Military Spending Drives America into Foreign Wars and Bankrupts Us at Home (forthcoming from Bold Type Books). 

28 July 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Shariq Us Sabah

“He is not a believer whose stomach is filled while his neighbour goes hungry.”
— Prophet Muhammad

In October 2023, images emerged from Gaza of a mother boiling grass to feed her children. Weeks later, in India’s Jharkhand state, news quietly surfaced of a nine-year-old tribal boy who collapsed in his classroom from chronic undernourishment. Separated by 4,000 kilometers and vastly different political contexts, both children were victims of the same structural violence. Hunger is not a misfortune. It is policy.

In both Gaza and India, hunger is not about the unavailability of food. It is about access. Who gets food, who is denied it, and why. This is not a failure of logistics or nature. It is a failure of politics. And in both cases, the children suffering are mostly poor, racialized, and forgotten.

India: Hunger as Bureaucratic Neglect

India is no stranger to malnutrition. In fact, it ranks 111th out of 125 countries in the 2023 Global Hunger Index, below neighboring countries like Nepal and Bangladesh. According to the National Family Health Survey 5 (2019 to 2021):

• 35.5% of children under five are stunted (low height for age)
• 32.1% are underweight
• 19.3% are wasted (low weight for height)

These figures are not the result of famine or war. They are the outcome of chronic governmental apathy. The country’s two major child nutrition programs, the Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) and the Midday Meal Scheme, have seen massive underfunding. ICDS funding was cut by nearly 27% between 2019 and 2022, and in many rural districts, anganwadi workers go unpaid or deliver services with no food stock.

The burden falls disproportionately on Dalit, Adivasi, and Muslim children, who are systematically marginalized in the healthcare and food distribution systems. In Bihar’s Kaimur district, nearly 45% of Adivasi children under five are stunted. In Delhi’s informal settlements, unregistered Muslim children often lack access to ration cards, effectively rendering them stateless in the eyes of welfare policy.

What makes India’s hunger crisis insidious is its normalization. Children are dying of malnutrition not in camps or conflict zones, but in classrooms and homes. Their deaths do not spark outrage. Only paperwork.

Gaza: Hunger as a Weapon of War

In Gaza, hunger is not a consequence of failed policy. It is a military strategy. Since October 2023, when Israel launched its most extensive military campaign in the enclave, food, water, and medical aid have been systematically blocked from entering. UN agencies have warned of famine-like conditions, particularly in northern Gaza.

• 100% of the population is food insecure (World Food Programme, April 2024)
• More than 90% of children under five are acutely malnourished
• Multiple hospitals have reported child deaths due to starvation and dehydration

The destruction is not collateral. It is calculated. Israeli forces have bombed bakeries, destroyed irrigation systems, and targeted fishing boats and agricultural warehouses. According to Save the Children (March 2024), this amounts to the deliberate destruction of food infrastructure, which is a direct violation of international humanitarian law under Article 54 of Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions.

The use of starvation as a weapon is a war crime. In Gaza, it is enforced with diplomatic immunity.

Between Neglect and Siege: A Shared Devaluation of Life

To compare Gaza’s siege to India’s systemic neglect would be to flatten crucial political distinctions. One is an occupied territory subjected to military blockade. The other is a postcolonial democracy with institutional failings. And yet, both crises converge at a moral junction: the deliberate abandonment of poor children.

In both cases, hunger is not accidental. It is the end result of decisions. Funding cuts, policy paralysis, militarized border control, caste exclusions, and settler colonialism. The structures differ, but the outcome is the same. Children dying because their lives have been politically devalued.

What unites these crises is global complicity. Gaza’s siege is debated in UN chambers while aid trucks are denied entry. India’s malnutrition crisis is buried in appendices of government reports, rarely surfacing in headlines unless it coincides with an election.

This is not merely a failure of governance. It is a collapse of empathy. A world that spends trillions on surveillance, war, and artificial intelligence cannot ensure that children do not go to bed hungry.

Solidarity Must Be Consistent

For Indian Muslims, Gaza rightfully evokes outrage, grief, and solidarity. Its suffering resonates across centuries of shared faith and colonization. But solidarity, if it is to mean anything, must be consistent. The same ethical energy that fuels protests for Rafah must extend to the malnourished child in Godda or Gadchiroli.

The Prophet Muhammad ﷺ did not call believers to care only for their co-religionists. He called them to care for their neighbors. That neighbor may be a Palestinian orphan or a starving Dalit girl. Justice does not ask us to rank their pain. It asks us to refuse all of it.

To speak out against starvation in Gaza while ignoring chronic hunger in Assam’s detention camps is not justice. It is compartmentalized compassion.

Hunger Is a Political Choice

There is enough food in the world. There is enough grain in India. What is missing is the will to prioritize the lives of the most vulnerable.

In India, that means restoring ICDS funding, universalizing food ration access, and ending caste and religion-based exclusions.
In Gaza, that means lifting the siege, ensuring humanitarian corridors, and holding Israel accountable for starvation warfare.
Globally, that means ending the system where some lives are rationed while others are armored.

The child boiling leaves in Gaza and the one fainting in a classroom in Bihar do not know each other. But their hunger speaks the same language. And their survival should not be a matter of politics. It should be a matter of principle.

Shariq Us Sabah is a writer and researcher. He is a graduate of the National Law School of India University and his work focuses on humanitarian law, statelessness, and the politics of relief.

27 July 2025

Source: countercurrents.org