A New Intervention By America Or It’s Puppet Regimes Would Be Just As Disastrous As The Previous Ones.

What to do about Haiti?

Its government barely exists, lacking both legitimacy and authority. Gangs have taken over the streets. Food and fuel are in short supply: gas stations only just reopened, two months after criminals seized a critical fuel terminal. The country is suffering from a cholera epidemic. A desperate driver told ABC News: “You don’t have anyone to turn to.”

Once the richest colony in the Western Hemisphere, the brutally oppressed slave population won both freedom and independence in 1804, just a couple decades after the American colonies became a nation. The United States, embarrassed by former slaves ruling themselves, recognized Haiti only in 1862, when slavery was literally under fire in America.

The only other country where slavery was overthrown violently, Haiti found neither peace nor stability. America didn’t help. In 1914 American troops arrived to empty the national bank and returned a year later after the Haitian president was assassinated. American troops finally left in 1934, after having “dissolved Haiti’s parliament at gunpoint, killed thousands of people, controlled its finances for more than 30 years, shipped a big portion of its earnings to bankers in New York and left behind a country so poor that the farmers who helped generate the profits often lived on a diet ‘close to starvation level’.”

In 1994 the Clinton administration went retro, again playing colonial hegemon. America invaded, ousting the ruling junta and reinstating the demagogic president, who had encouraged his followers to “necklace” opponents with flaming tires filled with gasoline. Such was the restoration of “democracy,” with American control giving way to the United Nations, which ended its peacekeeping mission in 2000. Under Amerian and French pressure to step down, President Jean-Bertrand Aristide was ousted in another coup in 2004, which a former French ambassador indicated was effectively orchestrated by Washington and Paris. (The new government conveniently dropped Aristide’s claims for reparations from France.)

A U.N. mission was established, which ran until 2017. Interrupted by a terrible earthquake in 2010, the occupation was supposed to establish law and order, but instead the outside forces added to the Haitians’ hardships. The occupiers caused a cholera epidemic that killed more than 10,000 people. Sexual abuse, including that of children, also was pervasive.

In July 2021 Haitian President Jovenel Moise was assassinated. The country was left almost leaderless, with four claimants to his job, including two competing prime ministers, two different constitutions, a largely empty legislature for which elections were long overdue, and a supreme court whose head had recently died.

The interim (and wholly illegitimate) government is pushing for allied intervention in some form. U.N. Secretary General António Guterres advocated an international force to back the Haitian National Police. In October America’s U.N. Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield announced American support for a U.N. resolution proposing “a limited, carefully scoped, non-UN mission led by a partner country.” The administration, she added, “will work with partners and other Council members to set defined and specific parameters for the mission, and the United States will consider the most effective means to directly support, enable, and resource it.”

Apparently, it would be an unofficial project of the willing, authorized but not managed by the U.N. Who would contribute? America’s role in developing such a resolution suggests the willingness to back it with force. The usual foreign policy suspects in Washington want to send in the American military. In an editorial published the day of Moise’s murder, the Washington Post insisted: “Swift and muscular intervention is needed.”

The editorialists admitted that the previous peacekeeping mission “was a far cry from perfect.” But at least the U.N. brought “a modicum of stability to Haiti…. At this perilous moment, a modicum of stability would be preferable to most other plausible scenarios.”

Only hinted at by the safely P.C. publication was the requirement that such a mission be staffed by…well, you know…people from, uh, countries…whose troops could be trusted. The earlier mission “involved forces from Brazil, Uruguay and other nations,” including the Nepalese, the Post curiously specified, and we know how that turned out. So just make sure the next mission is made up of Americans, French, and Canadians, whom the Post named as obligated to push for such a force. Indeed, the Biden administration reportedly wants Ottawa to take the lead; Canada’s prime minister declared that intervention is necessary “in one way or another.”

Recognizing there is likely to be little public support for the idea, the Post offered an argument of last resort. Sending U.N. troops to Haiti would be worrying, admitted the paper, “But does anyone have a better idea?” A profound and persuasive argument for forcibly occupying another nation, whether its people like it or not.

Other than government officials and commercial elites, most Haitians are skeptical of the proposal. NPR’s Eyder Peralta wrote that “many Haitians express deep distrust of an international troop presence after a history of troubled foreign intervention.” In contrast to the enthusiasm of Post editorial writers, leading Haitians oppose another foreign intervention. Writer and blogger Daniel Larison pointed to an “umbrella coalition of Haitian organizations, The Commission for a Haitian Solution to the Crisis, also known as the Montana Accord, [which] rejected the government’s call for outside military assistance.”

Haitian writer Monique Clesca said, “We do not want U.S. troops, U.S. boots, U.S. uniforms, none of that.” This view is shared by many Haitians who lived through the last foreign deployment and have less than fond memories of the experience. Two Post reporters concluded that the proposal for another foreign intervention “is a divisive and delicate subject here, where the shadow of a long history of destabilizing foreign interventions, including the U.N. mission that introduced cholera, looms large.”

A new peacekeeping mission would not likely be peaceful. Conditions in Port-au-Prince, especially, are shocking. For instance, Max Boot of the Council on Foreign Relations labeled Haiti “a Hobbesian state of nature—Somalia in the Caribbean.” Even as it advocated military intervention, the Post acknowledged: “With gun battles raging in the capital, Port-au-Prince, and cutting off main roads to provincial towns, relief groups have often been stymied in their distribution efforts. Meanwhile, thousands of people, terrified by the gang warfare and an epidemic of kidnappings for ransom, have fled their homes to the countryside.”

Violent but irregular resistance from criminal gangs and other disaffected groups would be likely. Several analysts from Just Security warned: “The gangs are heavily armed and have been fighting street battles in Port-au-Prince neighborhoods regularly for four years. If they decide to engage, they will be doing so on terrain they know, and while they almost certainly will be outgunned in the long run, they can inflict tremendous damage on intervening forces and civilians.”

Indeed, the previous U.N. force engaged gang members, causing substantial civilian casualties. Former human rights lawyer Pooja Bhatia, who investigated the U.N. mission, observed: “We concluded that rather than promoting peace and justice, UN troops helped the police terrorize the poorest quartiers of the capital Port-au-Prince, bastions of support for Aristide. Many civilians alleged that [UN] troops, many of them Brazilian soldiers with experience in ‘cleaning operations’ in Rio de Janeiro’s favelas, perpetrated the atrocities themselves.”

Another occupation looks good only compared to the country’s current chaos. Haitians judge proposals by the results of past interventions, though. Last time the U.N. stayed for 13 years, yet four years later public order had entirely dissolved.

Observed Larison:

The long history of failed and destructive outside interference in Haitian affairs shows that neither the United States nor the UN has the solution to Haiti’s political problems. Each time that outside forces have meddled in the name of helping Haiti, they have reliably made things worse.” In September 2021 the Biden administration’s Special Envoy for Haiti, Daniel Foote, resigned in frustration. His critique of U.S. policy was devastating, contending that “our Haitian friends” need “the opportunity to chart their own course, without international puppeteering and favored candidates.”

Indeed, outside intervention bears much of the blame for current circumstances. Explained Larison: “The current crisis is itself the product of ongoing interference on the part of the U.S. government, which backed former President Jovenel Moïse when he was alive and has been instrumental in keeping Henry in power despite his lack of democratic legitimacy and the broad coalition of Haitians opposed to his continued rule.”

Bhatia related that Henry “has never had any sort of constitutional authority and indeed is implicated in Moïse’s assassination. The people he claims to speak for revile him. His only constituency is outside the country. Over the past 15 months, America has insisted that the opposition, a remarkably broad-based coalition of civil society leaders, activists and popular organizations, negotiate with him.”

The civic group coalition wrote the Biden administration earlier this month:

We encourage your administration to reflect on the long history of international interventions in Haiti, and how those actions have served to undermine state institutions, democratic norms, and the rule of law. Previous interventions have had a costly human toll, including through rape, sexual exploitation, and extrajudicial killings. As Doctors Without Borders has warned, such an intervention would mean “more bullets, more injuries and more patients”.

Journalist Jonathan M. Katz also highlighted the “vacuum that a century of U.S. invasions, occupations, and interference has left in its wake. Sending an armed force to do battle with one Haitian gang and its sponsors…will do nothing to make Haiti a safer or more stable place for its people to live in the medium or long term.”

Foote concluded: “The hubris that makes us believe we should pick the winner—again—is impressive. This cycle of international political interventions in Haiti has consistently produced catastrophic results. More negative impacts to Haiti will have calamitous consequences not only in Haiti, but in the U.S. and our neighbors in the hemisphere.”

Of course, failing to act comes with a cost. The focus of American foreign policy, however, is not just whether Haiti would be better off. It is whether Americans would be better off. The solution for neither is another occupation, even if motivated by the best of intentions. In fact, Haiti’s civil society organizations offered the administration a list of measures to “support peacebuilding and equitable development.” That would be a much better approach than continuing to treat Haiti as another social engineering experiment for the American military.


America Occupies About One-Third Of Eastern Syria And Maintains Sanctions On The Country To Prevent Its Reconstruction While It Steals It’s Crude Oil.

America currently has about 900 troops stationed in eastern Syria and backs Kurdish forces in the region. This presence allows America to control about one-third of Syria’s territory, an area where most of the country’s oil and wheat resources are located.

Officially, America maintains that its presence in the country is about fighting ISIS, but the Syrian government rejects that notion. “Fighting terrorism does not happen through an illegitimate international coalition that violates Syria’s sovereignty and destroys towns and villages,” Syrian Foreign Minister Faisal Mekdad said at UN headquarters.

On top of the occupation, America also maintains crippling economic sanctions on Syria. Secretary of State Antony Blinken has previously said that these sanctions are meant to prevent Syria’s reconstruction until there is a political settlement in Syria, meaning regime change in Damascus.

Mekdad discussed the sanctions on Syria, saying the country has been “economically besieged” by Western powers. “The war against Syria, ultimately, was an attempt by the West to maintain control over the world,” he said.

The situation in eastern Syria highlights the hypocrisy of America, as President Biden’s address to the General Assembly focused on accusing Russia of violating the UN Charter by taking Ukraine’s territory.

Russia has shamelessly violated the core tenets of the United Nations Charter — no more important than the clear prohibition against countries taking the territory of their neighbor by force,” Biden said in his speech last week. But, of course, he won’t directly address America’s criminal occupation and robbing of Syria’s resources.


The Saudi Regime Is Extending Its Heavy Hand To Those Who Oppose Its War, Using Starvation As A Weapon Against Other Countries Whose People Or Media Exercise Freedom Of Expression.

This week, dozens of people were killed and injured near the Yemen-Saudi border when American-made warplanes and French-made howitzer cannons fired unabated on many populated border areas in Sadaa and Hajjah — including the Monabeh, Sahar, alSafra, al-Dhaher and Sheda areas. Samer Manea Ali Hussein, a 15-year-old Yemeni boy, was killed along with others on Monday when a French-made howitzer cannon hit a village in the Monabeh region, one of Yemen’s border areas that are subjected to daily bombardment. Shrapnel from an artillery shell penetrated Samer`s body when he was walking to a school. Unrelenting Saudi airstrikes have also deepened the crisis and tragedy afflicting the poorest country in the Middle East since 2015.

The rural hospital in the Munabbih border area is poorly equipped and barely functioning as a result of the bombing, but compared to other hospitals in border areas it is the best hospital. The hospital has received more than 245 people, including children, during October, injured by the Saudi bombardment that targeted just two villages known as Al-Sheikh and Al-Raqwa, the hospital administration said. However, dozens were not lucky and died on the bumpy, bomb-scarred road through the Qatabir region while they were being evacuated.

Hundreds of children die every day thanks to the Saudi blockade and airstrikes and bombardment, which have a devastating effect on the safety and psyche of thousands upon thousands of children in the border areas and across the region. According to a recent statement to the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), the war has killed or maimed at least 10,000 children since it began in March 2015, which is equivalent to four children every day. However, these are just the cases verified by the agency, while the actual toll could be much higher, according to James Elder, a spokesman for UNICEF.

The scenes of burnt and bloody bodies left in populated border areas by high-tech weapons supplied by the United States and other Western powers are no anomaly: On October 15, many people were killed and injured when Saudi warplanes dropped American-made bombs on pharmaceutical warehouses in Sawan, east of Yemeni capital Sana’a. The airstrikes not only targeted the warehouses, which were the only hope to save the lives of many patients, but also targeted electrical supply stores and the public-works building, leaving mass casualties and destruction and badly damaged water facilities belonging to the Ministry of Water and Sanitation.

The Ministry of Public Health and Population, based in Sana’a, said that the Saudi airstrikes resulted in severe damage to pharmaceutical warehouses, and complete destruction of all medicines and medical supplies inside them. Saudi military spokesman Turki al-Maliki confirmed the airstrikes, claiming that “the kingdom had exercised restraint in recent months in support of UN efforts and initiatives to find a comprehensive and lasting political solution to the Yemen crisis.”

As the war officially passes its 2,400th day, the Eye of Humanity Center for Rights and Development, a Yemeni advocacy group, said in a report issued last week, that 4,270 children have been killed by Saudi attacks since 2015, when the war began. According to the NGO, those attacks have also killed 2,850 women, mostly mothers. The attacks destroyed 1,128 schools, and thousands of children’s kindergartens and daycare facilities, along with other vital facilities such as factories, food-storage facilities, fishing boats, markets and fuel tankers. Thousands of pieces of critical infrastructure have also been damaged, including airports, seaports, electrical stations, tanks and water pumps, and roads and bridges.


The recent attacks against the war-torn country — where millions of forgotten people are struggling against a cold winter, starvation, COVID-19, and the worst blockade in the modern era — came in the wake of a statement of the UN Security Council that called for an end to the Yemeni Army’s advances toward the last stronghold of the Saudis in the oil-rich Ma’rib province and an immediate ceasefire across Yemen. The majority of Yemeni parties saw the Security Council’s move as a green light to Saudi Arabia to commit more crimes in their home.

For their part, Ansar Allah denounced the statement of the UN Security Council. Mohammed Abdul Sam, the spokesman of Ansar Allah, said:

The bombardment of pharmaceutical warehouses and other civilian facilities in Sana’a comes in light of the recent statement by the UN Security Council, which is completely biased in favor of the coalition of aggression… Unfortunately, Saudi Arabia is forging ahead with its aggression and siege instead of stopping them and calculating the upshot of its foolishness.”

Since 2015, when the war began, Saudi Arabia has continued bombardment but it generally escalates after any international pronouncement, which Saudi Arabia inevitably interprets as a green light for more bombing.

In a retaliatory move — according to Brigadier General Yahya Saree, spokesman for the Yemeni Armed Forces — Saudi Duty Forces Camp in the kingdom’s southwestern border region of Jizan was bombed by five homegrown ballistic missiles, along with drones, killing more than 35 Saudi military personnel, including senior officers and pilots,. The military forces site houses command headquarters, arms depots, and hangars for Boeing AH-64 Apache attack helicopters.

In a related development, a high-ranking military source said that an unprecedented military operation deep in Saudi territory dubbed the “Stage of the Greatest Pain,” will be launched in retaliation for an expected Saudi attack on the oil field in Marib. In this operation, the kingdom’s most vital facilities will be subject to attacks. The potential Yemeni retaliation operations will exceed even the famous attacks that took place in 2019 against Saudi crude, according to the Yemeni military. On September 15, 2019, the Yemeni Army hit the largest oil processing plant in Khuris and Abqaiq, the heart of the kingdom’s oil industry, sparking fires and closing half the kingdom’s output of crude, 5 million barrels per day. In light of previous statements of the Yemeni Army and subsequently proved on the ground, these operations are likely to happen.


With the continued support of the United States and amid the absence of real efforts to reach a just settlement and peace and a shameful blackout by international media, Saudi Arabia will continue its bombardment of Yemen unabated. Moreover, the Saudi regime is extending its heavy hand to those who oppose its war, using starvation as a weapon not only against Yemenis but also against other countries whose people or media exercise freedom of expression.

In the wake of a video statement from a Lebanese popular television anchor-turned-politician criticizing the war against Yemen, Saudi Arabia has not only banned Lebanese imports but also expelled the ambassador of Lebanon and cut ties with Beirut. Bahrain, Kuwait, and the UAE have also expelled their Lebanese ambassadors at the request of Riyadh. The video featured George Kordahi inveighing against the Saudi-Emirati war in Yemen a few weeks before becoming Lebanon’s information minister. Kordahi, who had worked for Saudi and Emirati television networks for a long time, said that the war of Saudi Arabia in Yemen is absurd and the Ansar Allah movement is defending itself and its country. The Kordahi video is but one step in the right direction.

On the other hand, it is out of the question that Yemenis will either acquiesce to the scorched-earth policies pursued by Saudi Arabia and supported by the American regime or surrender to the international pressures applied by America, the U.K., and their allies. Not when they have worked this hard to liberate the whole country, despite the terrible bombing, the blockade, starvation, and epidemic. On Tuesday, the media bureau of Yemen’s army, loyal to the Houthis, released a video showing the moment of capture of Jabal Morad and al-Jwbah, which was seized by Sana’a forces supported by local tribes during the recent military operations dubbed Rabi’ al-Nasr’ (Spring of Victory) that began two weeks ago. Now, the Yemeni forces, supported by local tribes from Marib, have captured 12 of the 14 districts in oil-rich Marib.


The American Government Has Essentially Begun Its Preparations For An Invasion Of Russia Via The Baltic Countries.

Since the relationship between the United States and Russia has taken a turn for the worse in recent years, it is quite clear to the author that, nowadays, the American administration has been seeking confrontation with the Russian Federation, be it over politics, trade or even the construction of Nord Stream 2 (which is of no concern to the American regime) for the European Union (EU). And President Joe Biden is seemingly trying to achieve this aim by using fairly aggressive and ideologically divisive rhetoric as a tool.

Based on a number of reports published by American and Western media outlets, aside from anti-Russia propaganda, the American government has essentially begun its preparations for an invasion of Russia via the Baltic countries, the Black Sea, the Arctic Ocean and regions bordering the Russian Federation to the East.

According to a May 17 report in Business Insider, the “US Special Operations Europe (SOCEUR) conducted its largest annual exercise in conjunction with a smaller one” with troops from several NATO member and partner countries. Both drills were staged “at the same time to simulate a full-blown conflict with Russia ranging from the Baltic states and Scandinavia south to Ukraine and the Black Sea region”. The realistic exercises were called Trojan Footprint 21 and Black Swan 21 and “took place in Romania and across Eastern Europe”. The article also stated that Crimea “would be an ideal environment for Naval Special Warfare operations”. In fact, American SEAL teams are already capable of conducting “over-the-beach raids and ambushes, maritime and land special reconnaissance, and underwater special operations, such as placing sensors on the ocean or limpet mines on enemy vessels”. The author of the article also opined that Russian radar installations and A2/AD (anti-access/ area denial) “batteries and command-and-control systems would be a logical target for SEAL platoons”. The two exercises essentially showed “how conventional and special-operations units would work together in a major conflict with Russia”.

According to Business Insider, the Russian military bolstered its presence in Crimea since its annexation, “making it a seemingly impenetrable fortress guarding Moscow’s southern flank both from land and air”, and making invading it quite a challenge.

At this point, it is worth reminding revenge-seekers in the United States that Crimea has been viewed as Russia’s stronghold for quite some time. In fact, a number of burial grounds for foreign fighters on the peninsula serve as a reminder of this land’s bloody history. And in the past, there were no openly gay servicemen unlike nowadays in the American and its allies’ armies.

A May 17 article in The National Interest reported that the United States had a plan to attack Kaliningrad, which was described as “a single symphony of violence to break down advanced defenses”. General Jeffrey L. Harrigian, Commander of the American Air Forces in Europe, said that the city and its garrison “could be prime targets for” multi-domain operations. Sydney J. Freedberg Jr., the Deputy Editor for Breaking Defense, clarified that there would be simultaneous attacks on Kaliningrad from the air, land, sea and cyberspace, i.e. “a single symphony of violence to break down advanced defenses”. Hackers could first “disrupt communications networks while jamming planes confuse radars”. In the meantime, “bombers, ships and submarines could lob long-range cruise missiles” and ground forces “fire rockets”. Stealth fighters and bombers would then be able to “penetrate surviving defenses to drop GPS-guided” weapons.

Still, individuals behind the aforementioned plans appear to have forgotten about the possibility of a massive counter missile strike against the United States and its European allies, as well as the potential damage Russian hypersonic weapons could cause to those who beat the drums of war and anyone else dragged into the conflict… For it was in fact Russia’s Katyusha rocket systems that turned the tide of World War II.

Preparations for an armed invasion of Russia are no longer kept under wraps in the European Union. During the May 6 meeting of EU’s Foreign Affairs Council involving EU Defense Ministers, a decision was made to grant the requests of Canada, Norway and America to participate in the PESCO (Permanent Structured Cooperation, a part of European Union’s security and defense policy) project Military Mobility. The three countries would be the first states to be invited to participate in the initiative. But the very project Military Mobility is not so much centered around defense, as this initiative coming to fruition would give the West an opportunity to relocate roughly 50,000 personnel to the Baltic states. One issue at present is the poor infrastructure in the EU, especially in Eastern Europe. Hence, in the nearest future, the plan is to upgrade it so that roads, bridges, railroads etc. are able to cope with large quantities of heavy military transport.

Germany’s Minister of Defense Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer welcomed the move to invite the three aforementioned nations to take part in project Military Mobility, and described it as “another big step in the transatlantic alliance and in the cooperation between the European Union and NATO”. Her support for the initiative could stem from the memory of successful military campaigns of the past, for instance, during the Franco-Prussian War (1870–1871). However, Kramp-Karrenbauer is apparently unaware of the failed attempts to conquer the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union in the 19th and 20th centuries.

As part of the anti-Russia propaganda drive, some truly impressive photographs were published by Western media recently showing maritime drills, dubbed Exercise Ragnar Viking, that involved vessels of the British Royal Navy, American Navy, the French Navy and the Royal Norwegian Navy. The Drive reported that, according to the American Navy, the drills were intended to “showcase high-end NATO cohesion, solidarity, and credibility in the Norwegian, North, and Baltic Seas”. The article also said that specific elements of the exercise “included a demonstration of long-range strike capabilities from the North Atlantic into Lithuania, amphibious landings in Norway, plus anti-submarine warfare and surface action group operations in the North Atlantic”.

Unfortunately, the aforementioned examples are not the only ones indicative of a vengeful policy toward Russia adopted recently by the United States and its NATO allies, which is in direct contrast to statements made by President Joe Biden and Secretary of State Antony Blinken expressing willingness to have a more stable and predictable relationship with the Russian leadership.


Assassination Is American Modus Operandi. That Is What They Do All The Time – For Decades, Everywhere, In Different Areas In This World. This Is Not Something New,” Assad Said.

In mid-September, Trump acknowledged that he intended to physically eliminate Assad at the beginning of his presidency and that the Pentagon chief at a time, Jim Mattis, persuaded him to not do so.

Assassination is American modus operandi. That is what they do all the time — for decades, everywhere, in different areas in this world. This is not something new,” Assad said.

As argued by the Syrian president, the existence of US-plotted assassination plans is “self-evident” and has “always existed, for different reasons.”

We have to expect this in our situation in Syria. With this conflict, with the Americans — they occupy our land and they are supporting the terrorists — it is expected. Even if you do not have any information, it should be self-evident,” Assad continued.

Speaking about prevention, the Syrian president said that it should not be applied to every scattered threat episode per se, but rather the general behavioral specificity of the US.

Nothing will deter the United States from committing these kinds of vicious actions or acts unless there is an international balance where the United States cannot get away with its crimes. Otherwise, [the US] is going to continue these kinds of acts in different areas and nothing would stop it,” Assad said.

Asked if he knew of any other assassination attempts during his presidency, the Syrian leader said “I did not hear of any attempt, but as I said, it’s self-evident that you have many attempts, or maybe plans, to be more precise.”

Learn More At: