English हिन्दी
Connect with us

Latest world news

Syrian War Being Dragged On Basis Of Lies For Ulterior Reasons

Published

on

Syrian War Being Dragged On Basis Of Lies For Ulterior Reasons

~By Saeed Naqvi

If war begins in Syria, it will be on absolutely trumped up charges about the use of poison gas by Bashar al Assad. Why would he gas his own people if he is, by all western assessments, winning the war? And how do White Helmets take perfect close-up pictures of injured children? How do they not get poisoned? How do they not get poisoned? Mine is a small voice but, having travelled to each one of the countries involved in the Syrian tragedy, I can say with all the conviction at my command: this war is being dragged on the basis of lies and for ulterior reasons.

On March 29, 2018, President Donald Trump announced in Ohio that the US would “very soon” get out of Syria. Other nations should shoulder that burden. As if on cue, Saudi Crown Prince, Mohammad bin Salman, declared that Bashar al Assad would remain President of Syria. He added, in parenthesis, that US troops should remain in Syria for “the short term if not the long term.”

This abrupt change of heart by the two who are principally leading the anti Assad campaign in Syria was explained by an intelligence mishap. In fact a double gaffe was involved. A major plan to surround Damascus, with Ghouta as the spring board was to be boosted by US air cover. Syrian intelligence found out the details about this plan.

How would the US justify a major air campaign over Damascus? White Helmets, a multimillion dollar NGO founded by a British Army officer, James Le Mesurier to boost the propaganda effort of the motley group of militants and state actors, were expected to play a key role at this juncture. They would detonate “poison gas” in Douma, a town in eastern Gouta. This would be blown up sky high as Syrian “brutality”. That would justify an air campaign.

When this plan was leaked the Syrian army barged into Douma. They caught red handed atleast fourteen intelligence officers of whom eight were from Saudi Arabia and one each from the US, Israel, Turkey, Qatar, Jordan and Morocco. Some nationalities pose a question mark? What is a Turk doing in this gang? Is Turkey playing both sides of the street? Qatar and Saudi Arabia are supposed to be at each others’ throat. What is ultra cautious Morocco doing in Douma? This is all happening in the midst of a fierce urban, guerilla campaign. Who knows how many identification documents are in play?

In brief, the capture of intelligence officers caused Trump and MBS to reverse gear. These two obviously had fears that their officers, may begin to sing like canaries. But no such fear afflicted the British and the French. Their officers are not on the list. These countries face a bagful of problems back home. They did not mind when White Helmet, the False Flag experts, detonated their devices, not so much to kill, maim and suffocate but to saturate the networks and the news agencies with heart rending pictorial coverage. This would divert attention from their problems. In the case of Britain these problems were existential.

Syrian War Being Dragged On Basis Of Lies For Ulterior Reasons

The Helmets have clearly been advised by psychologists that children look the most angelic between the ages of four and five. If the children can be plausibly shrouded in bandages, their limbs suspended by slings and ambient sounds given a suitable crescendo, their mission would be successful.

On March 29 and 30 Trump and MBS were cooing like doves. How does one then explain the messy resumption of hostilities in Syria – alleged gas attack in Douma and Israeli missile over Homs?

One theory is that Trump can flourish as many white flags as he likes, the Deep State will proceed on its agenda regardless. This, quite literally, is a singular moment in history when there is no super power to control or direct world affairs.

President Emmanuel Macron is facing a revolt of the Rail Unions and more. With all manner of populisms waiting in the wings, a young President, on a brand new party may seek respite in diversionary moves which direct national focus towards the Russian menace.

It is Britain where the establishment is on sixes and sevens. Labour’s Leftist leader Jeremy Corbyn’s ratings keep rising despite stalwarts of the new Labour like Lord Peter Mandelson declaring in interviews that Corbyn “must be undermined”.

Accidental Conservative Prime Minister, Theresa May has not quite found her feet after the Brexit debacle. Then her performance at the party Tory conference last October became an almighty embarrassment. Fighting for her political life, when she rose for her speech she was afflicted by an unstoppable, hacking cough. Then, like a bad omen, letters on the backdrop behind her began to drop off. It became a comical clip for the social media. Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, nursing an unrealistic ambition, acquired a bounce in his tread.

Both May and Johnson have invested a great deal by word and gesture, on alleged poisoning of double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia. They were also keen that the embers of Syria must not be extinguished.

Meanwhile not just the conservative MP, Lucy Allan, from Telford, but the entire Establishment is in deep shame at the serial sex abuse scandal of over 1,000 British children, spread out over years which media like the BBC has been accused of covering up. It is disgusting to speculate that Ghouta and Skripal have helped divert attention from the most horrendous of sex scandals mankind has ever known.

What is staring the May-Johnson duet in the face is the prospect of a rout in the May 3 local bodies’ elections. Just the wrong time for Trump and MBS to be embracing Vladimir Putin. Western democracy needs Russia painted in lurid colours for greater cohesion. The West needs a raison d’tre, an enemy image, to be able to stand upright.  Something like a, Cold War. Hence the rumbling of war drums.

Latest world news

Suicide bombing at Islamabad shrine kills 10, over 20 injured

A suicide bombing at a Shia shrine in Islamabad’s Shehzad Town area killed at least 10 people and injured over 20, prompting a city-wide emergency.

Published

on

Suicide bombing at Islamabad Shrine

At least 10 people were killed and around 20 others sustained injuries after a suicide bomber detonated explosives at a Shia shrine in Pakistan’s capital, Islamabad, on Friday afternoon.

The explosion took place at Tarlai Imambargah, located in the Shehzad Town area, when the attacker set off the device at the main entrance of the place of worship, where devotees had gathered.

Bomber stopped at entrance, say officials

Security officials said alert guards intercepted the attacker at the gate, preventing him from entering the main hall of the shrine. The timely action is believed to have reduced the scale of casualties inside the premises.

However, the blast caused significant damage to the gate structure. Visuals from the site showed shattered windows of nearby buildings and debris scattered across the road following the explosion.

Emergency declared across Islamabad

In the aftermath of the attack, the Islamabad Inspector General of Police declared a city-wide emergency. Rescue teams and law enforcement personnel rushed to the site amid concerns that the casualty count could rise.

The injured were shifted to Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences (PIMS) and Polyclinic Hospital for treatment.

Recent history of suicide attacks in the capital

The incident comes less than three months after a suicide bombing outside a district and sessions court building in Islamabad on November 11, 2025, which killed 12 people and injured more than 30 others, raising renewed concerns over security in the capital.

Continue Reading

Latest world news

Bangladesh rushes to finalise US trade deal after India secures lower tariffs

Bangladesh is accelerating talks with the US to finalise a trade agreement after India secured lower tariffs, raising concerns over export competitiveness and transparency.

Published

on

Bangladesh is moving quickly to finalise a trade agreement with the United States after India concluded a deal with Washington that lowered tariffs on Indian goods to 18 per cent. The development has triggered concern in Dhaka that Bangladesh could lose market share in the US if it fails to secure comparable or better terms.

The US and Bangladesh are expected to sign the agreement on February 9, just three days before the country’s national election scheduled for February 12. The timing and lack of transparency surrounding the deal have drawn criticism from economists, business leaders and political observers.

Bangladesh’s economy is heavily dependent on ready-made garment exports, which account for nearly 90 per cent of its exports to the US. Any tariff disadvantage compared to India could significantly impact export orders and employment in the sector.

Tariff cuts under negotiation

The proposed agreement follows a series of tariff revisions imposed by Washington. In April 2025, the US imposed a steep 37 per cent tariff on Bangladeshi goods. This was reduced to 35 per cent in July and further lowered to 20 per cent in August.

According to reports, the upcoming deal is expected to bring tariffs down further to around 15 per cent. Officials see this as critical to keeping Bangladeshi exports competitive against Indian products in the US market.

Secrecy around negotiations raises concerns

Concerns have intensified due to the confidential nature of the negotiations. In mid-2025, the interim government led by Muhammad Yunus signed a formal non-disclosure agreement with the US, committing to keep tariff and trade discussions confidential.

No draft of the agreement has been shared with the public, parliament or industry stakeholders. A commerce adviser had earlier stated that the deal would not go against national interests and could be made public with US consent.

Policy experts, however, argue that the lack of disclosure prevents meaningful debate on the agreement’s long-term implications.

Conditions reportedly linked to the deal

Media reports suggest that the agreement may include several conditions. These include reducing imports from China, increasing military procurement from the US, and allowing American goods easier access to the Bangladeshi market.

It is also reported that Bangladesh may be required to accept US standards and certifications without additional scrutiny. Inspections on US vehicle imports and parts could reportedly be eased to facilitate smoother entry into the local market.

A senior policy analyst described the process as opaque, noting that signing the agreement just days before elections could bind the hands of the next elected government.

Garment industry left in the dark

Bangladesh exports garments and textiles worth between $7 billion and $8.4 billion annually to the US, accounting for nearly 96 per cent of its total exports to the American market. In comparison, Bangladesh imports around $2 billion worth of goods from the US.

With India and Bangladesh exporting similar apparel products, lower tariffs for India could shift US buyers towards Indian suppliers. Industry leaders warn that this could put millions of jobs at risk in Bangladesh’s garment sector, which employs 4 to 5 million workers, most of them women.

The sector contributes over 80 per cent of Bangladesh’s export earnings and nearly 20 per cent of its GDP.

A senior garment exporters’ association official said the agreement carries major implications and should ideally have been signed after the election to allow broader political and public discussion.

Political timing draws criticism

Economists and analysts have also questioned why an unelected interim administration is finalising a major trade agreement so close to national elections. They argue that responsibility for implementing the deal will fall on the incoming elected government.

A prominent economist criticised the process as lacking transparency and warned that the country could be pushed into long-term commitments without adequate scrutiny or public consent.

Meanwhile, US diplomats have indicated openness to engaging with various political forces in Bangladesh, including Jamaat-e-Islami, which has been banned multiple times in the country’s history.

Continue Reading

Latest world news

Pakistan faces domestic backlash after India secures lower tariffs in US trade deal

India’s US trade agreement has sparked criticism in Pakistan after Islamabad ended up with higher tariffs despite sustained outreach to Washington.

Published

on

PM Shehbaz Sharif

India’s recently concluded trade agreement with the United States has triggered strong domestic criticism in Pakistan, where opposition leaders, journalists and commentators are questioning Islamabad’s diplomatic strategy after the country ended up with higher tariffs than India.

Under the agreement announced on February 2, US tariffs on Indian exports have been set at 18 per cent, while Pakistani goods will face a 19 per cent rate. The outcome has drawn sharp reactions in Pakistan, especially given what critics describe as sustained efforts by its leadership to engage Washington in recent months.

New Delhi, by contrast, is widely seen as having resisted pressure from US President Donald Trump and negotiated from a position of economic leverage rather than personal diplomacy.

Social media reactions highlight public anger

Following the announcement, Trump shared images related to India, including India Gate and a magazine cover featuring Prime Minister Narendra Modi alongside himself, before confirming the revised tariff rate for Indian goods. The optics did not go unnoticed in Pakistan, where social media users questioned why India secured better terms without overt displays of political deference.

One widely circulated post by Pakistan-based X user Umar Ali used sharp language and imagery to criticise Pakistan’s approach, reflecting growing frustration among sections of the public over what they see as an unequal outcome despite extensive outreach efforts.

Opposition leaders question foreign policy approach

Former Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf minister Hammad Azhar described the outcome as a failure of strategy rather than circumstance. He argued that modern foreign policy depends on economic strength, market access and tariffs, not symbolic gestures or personal relationships, pointing to India’s recent trade agreements with both the US and the European Union as examples.

Other opposition figures echoed similar views, saying India negotiated with “strategic autonomy” while Pakistan relied too heavily on personal engagement with US leadership.

Journalists warn of economic consequences

Journalists in Pakistan also weighed in, warning that the tariff decision could deepen the country’s existing economic challenges. Concerns were raised about declining exports, falling foreign investment and reduced bargaining power on the global stage.

Commentator Imran Riaz Khan criticised what he termed a failed lobbying strategy, arguing that symbolic gestures cannot replace economic leverage in international negotiations. Digital creator Wajahat Khan similarly framed the outcome as a reflection of unequal negotiating positions, stating that India approached the talks as a partner, while Pakistan did not.

India’s trade deals expected to boost exports

India’s back-to-back trade agreements with the European Union and the United States are expected to provide a significant boost to exports. Estimates suggest these deals could add up to $150 billion in exports over the next decade, strengthening India’s economic standing and reinforcing its negotiating position in future global trade talks.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com