Latest world news

US fireworks

Published

9 years ago

April 15, 2017

The GBU-43/B, also known as the Massive Ordnance Air Blast, detonates during a test at Elgin Air Force Base, Florida, US, on November 21, 2003, in this handout photo provided on April 13, 2017, Reuters/UNI

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Awaiting details from Afghanistan, a look at the Syrian outrage

By Saeed Naqvi

President Trump has furnished proof that the leader of the Free World, which dropped the first nuclear bomb on Hiroshima, remains true to form: it has dropped an even bigger Mother Of All Bombs (non-nuclear, we are being persistently reminded) on Nangahar province in east Afghanistan on what are being described as IS tunnels. Since details are not known, let us first sort out the Syrian outrage.

The alleged sarin gas attack on Khan Shaykhun, a small town in Idlib province where the Jabhat al-Nusra’s militant offshoots are now fighting with their backs to the wall, invited a massive US retaliation: 59 cruise missiles were fired on the nearby Shurayat air strip to teach Bashar al-Assad a lesson.

Analysts under pressure to meet deadlines, hurriedly suggested the strikes made Trump look virile in his meeting with Xi Jinping in Florida, that Rex Tillerson looked strong in his meeting with Sergei Lavrov and that the North Koreans will think twice before their next menacing launch. All of this is fanciful because the big players know the truth. Yes, the opposition to the Syrian army, mostly Al-Nusra and IS wearing other labels, and their regional sponsors, now know that the Trump, browbeaten at home, can be dragged into the Syrian fight. The civil war can be prolonged.

To make sense of the air strikes, it would be useful to visit a similar incident in August 2013. Then, too, a sarin gas attack was allegedly mounted on an even bigger scale on Ghouta township, on the outskirts of Damascus. Two US missiles took off from a US base in Spain—in retaliation, of course. On this occasion, the Russian anti-missile paraphernalia at their base in Tartus, brought down the missiles in Mediterranean Sea. Apparently, a sizeable number of missiles fell in the sea this time, too. So the Russian S400 and S300 are indeed operational.

President Obama would have met President Vladimir Putin at the September 2013 G20 summit in St Petersburg from what the US “Deep State” had designed to be a position of strength once the two missiles have been launched. Instead his face was in the lower mould during his bilateral aside with the Russian leader. If the Russian intercepts had caused a loss of face, subsequent face saving for the Obama administration in 2013 was also provided by the Russians. They suggested that Syria sign the Chemical Weapons Convention and surrender its chemical weapons.

A Palestinian demonstrator holds a placard with a poster depicting Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad during a protest against American airstrikes in Syria, in the West Bank city of Nablus, Reuters/UNI

On September 11, 2013, Putin wrote in The New York Times: “No one doubts that poison gas was used in Syria. But there is every reason to believe it was used not by the Syrian army, but by opposition forces, to provoke intervention by their powerful foreign patrons, who would be siding with fundamentalists.”

Putin then points to something even more sinister. “Reports that militants are preparing another attack, this time against Israel, cannot be ignored.”

In other words, the opposition was checked in their tracks by timely Russian intervention. Air attacks in retaliation for the false flag at Ghouta were prevented. The desperate opposition was now about to play its trump card: launch a poison gas attack on Israel.

In his weekly address to the nation, Obama said: “Until recently, the Assad regime would not admit that it possessed chemical weapons. Today Syria has signaled a willingness to join with 189 other nations, representing 98 percent of humanity, in abiding by an international agreement that prohibits the use of chemical weapons.” There was fulsome praise for Russia. “Russia has staked its own credibility in supporting this outcome,” Obama said.

It was clear even then that this Washington-Moscow entente over Syria would set the cat among the pigeons in Tel Aviv and Riyadh. All their huge investments in arms, money, mercenaries and years of planning was liable to be wasted in Obama’s second term when John Kerry because his Secretary of State.

On the issue of Russia and Syria, the Deep State, with the media as amplifier, was not going to give up. No wonder it pitched its tent behind Hillary Clinton’s platform for the 2016 Presidential elections. The spider in the Deep State web, weaving the Syrian yarn is one Robert Stephen Ford, US ambassador to Damascus in 2011 when the “insurgency” was first initiated.

The most accurate narrative of Ford, in cahoots with this French counterpart, Eric Chevallier, and how they stoked the fires in Syria should be available with New Delhi’s ministry of external affairs. Of the entire diplomatic corps in the Syrian capital that this reporter met, the sharpest eye was that of Ambassador V.P. Haran.

The grinding of the US, Israeli, Saudi propaganda machine in Syria never stopped.

Every now and then the White Helmets in Syria would produce a heartwrenching story of “Assad’s brutality”. The photograph of a four-year-old Syrian boy, his face burnt by “Assad’s” attack on civilians in Aleppo, found its way to the final Trump-Clinton debate in Las Vegas on October 19, 2016. Clinton simulated a lump in her throat describing the child with burns as evidence of indiscriminate Russian (not just Syrian) bombing of civilians.

Exactly on cue, Christiane Amanpour of the CNN, in her high profile interview with Russian Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov, produced the very same picture for Lavrov to see. “This is a crime against humanity,” Amanpour thundered. Lavrov looked at the photograph. “Very tragic,” he said. He then made a bold assertion: the US was probably supporting the Jabhat al-Nusra.

Meanwhile, NGOs in the field furnished video recordings of the “burnt boy” being diligently filmed to be presented to the world media—propaganda of the macabre genre.

If the Pulitzer Prize winning investigative journalist Seymour Hersh is to be believed, the West is itself implicated in the sarin gas scandal. His outstanding piece in the London Review of Books after Ghouta, quite incontrovertibly establishes that “the sarin that was used didn’t come from Assad’s stockpiles”. He quotes British Intelligence for this detail. He adds:

“A secret agreement in 2012 was reached between the Obama administration and the leaders of Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, to set up a sarin gas attack and blame it on Assad so that the US could invade and overthrow Assad.”

Sarin gas has been in the news earlier when Bill Clinton’s Defence Secretary William Cohen caused journalists as senior at Peter Arnett and Bernard Shaw to be sacked for having pointed to US stockpiles or nerve gas which was used on a village in Laos to hunt down US army defectors. It became notorious as Operation Tailwind. The official version then was that the gas was not dropped on Americans. That which was dropped, on whoever, was not sarin but “but garden variety CS tear gas.” The reporters stuck to their guns.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Related Topics:Afghanistan Al-Nusra Bomb Sarin Syria US

Up Next

Saving Kulbhushan Jadhav

Don't Miss

Cash crunch at ATMs in some states

Latest world news

Trump calls it a wonderful gesture as Machado presents him Nobel Peace Prize medal

Donald Trump described it as a “wonderful gesture” after Venezuela’s opposition leader Maria Corina Machado presented him with her Nobel Peace Prize medal during a White House meeting.

Published

9 hours ago

January 16, 2026

[email protected]

US President Donald Trump has described it as a “wonderful gesture” after Venezuela’s opposition leader Maria Corina Machado presented him with her Nobel Peace Prize medal during a meeting at the White House.

Trump praised Machado publicly after the interaction, saying she had been through “so much” and that the act reflected “mutual respect.” He said the medal was given to him for the work he has done, according to his post on his social media platform.

The gesture, however, has drawn attention as the Nobel Institute has clarified that a Nobel Peace Prize cannot be transferred to another individual.

Nobel Institute rules out transfer of prize

The Nobel Institute has stated that Machado is not permitted to give her Nobel Peace Prize to Trump. Despite this, a White House official confirmed that Trump intends to keep the medal, even if the act remains symbolic.

Trump has long expressed interest in the Nobel Peace Prize, making the episode particularly notable despite the formal limitations placed on such honours.

Political context behind the meeting

Machado had been widely regarded as Venezuela’s democratic leader-in-waiting before Trump’s recent policy decisions regarding the country. Earlier this month, Trump declined to fully back her challenge to Venezuela’s ruling regime and instead signalled openness to engaging with leaders linked to the existing power structure.

Trump has publicly questioned Machado’s ability to lead, saying she lacks sufficient support and respect within Venezuela. Her political party is believed to have won the 2024 elections, results that were rejected by President Nicolas Maduro.

Trump has also indicated a willingness to work with acting President Delcy Rodriguez, who previously served as Maduro’s deputy.

What Machado said after the meeting

Speaking to reporters after leaving the White House and heading to Capitol Hill, Machado said she presented the medal to the US president as recognition of his “unique commitment” to Venezuela’s freedom.

She added that Trump did not provide detailed assurances during their closed-door discussion, including on the issue of elections in Venezuela. No further specifics of the meeting were disclosed.

Afterwards, Machado greeted supporters gathered near the White House gates, hugging several of them. Addressing the crowd, she said they could count on President Trump, prompting brief chants of appreciation from those present.

Machado’s recent public appearance

Before her visit to Washington, Machado had largely stayed out of public view since travelling to Norway last month, where her daughter accepted the Nobel Peace Prize on her behalf. She had spent nearly a year in hiding in Venezuela before appearing at the ceremony.

Latest world news

US freezes immigrant visa processing for 75 countries, India not in list

The United States suspends immigrant visa processing for 75 countries, excluding temporary visas, as part of stricter immigration measures.

Published

1 day ago

January 15, 2026

[email protected]

The United States has indefinitely suspended immigrant visa processing for 75 countries, targeting individuals seeking permanent residency based on nationality. The move, set to take effect on January 21, excludes tourist and temporary work visas, but is expected to have a significant impact on family-based immigration.

Reasons behind the visa freeze

The US State Department said the suspension aims to prevent the entry of foreign nationals likely to require government welfare and public benefits. “The Trump administration is bringing an end to the abuse of America’s immigration system by those who would extract wealth from the American people,” said State Department spokesman Tommy Pigott.

While the administration cites the risk of immigrants draining government resources, studies by the Cato Institute and other research groups suggest immigrants generally use fewer benefits than US-born citizens.

Who will not be affected

Temporary visas for tourists, business travelers, and sports fans remain unaffected. Exceptions are also allowed for individuals with dual nationality, a valid passport from a country not on the list, or travel serving an “America First” national interest. Approved visas that have not yet been printed must be refused according to the State Department.

Countries affected

The visa freeze covers nations across Africa, Asia, Latin America, the Middle East, and Eastern Europe. Some of the most affected countries include Pakistan, Bangladesh, Somalia, Russia, Iran, Afghanistan, Brazil, Nigeria, and Thailand.

Other countries on the full list include Albania, Algeria, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Bhutan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Myanmar, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Colombia, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Dominica, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, The Gambia, Georgia, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Haiti, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, North Macedonia, Moldova, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Nepal, Nicaragua, Republic of the Congo, Rwanda, St Kitts and Nevis, St Lucia, St Vincent and the Grenadines, Senegal, Sierra Leone, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria, Tanzania, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, and Yemen.

Trump administration immigration record

The Trump administration has already imposed stricter vetting procedures over the past year, revoking over 100,000 visas and deporting more than 605,000 people, with 2.5 million others leaving voluntarily. Critics highlight that the policy disproportionately affects immigrants from non-European countries.

Latest world news

Anything less than US control of Greenland unacceptable, says Trump

Donald Trump has said American control of Greenland is vital for national security and missile defence, reigniting debate over the Arctic island’s strategic importance.

Published

2 days ago

January 14, 2026

[email protected]

US president Donald Trump has said that American control over Greenland is essential for the United States’ national security, describing it as “vital” for a planned air and missile defence system known as the Golden Dome.

In a social media post on Wednesday, Trump claimed the United States “needs Greenland for the purpose of National Security” and asserted that the Arctic island plays a key role in the proposed defence architecture. He further said that NATO would become “far more formidable and effective” if Greenland were under US control, adding that “anything less than that is unacceptable.”

Comments ahead of US-Denmark talks

Trump’s remarks came just hours before senior Danish and Greenlandic officials were scheduled to hold talks at the White House with US Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. The discussions are focused on Greenland and broader security issues in the Arctic region.

Responding to US concerns, Denmark’s defence minister Troels Lund Poulsen said the country was increasing its military presence in Greenland. He also noted that Copenhagen was in discussions with allies regarding a stronger NATO footprint in the Arctic.

NATO role and strategic concerns

Trump said NATO “should be leading the way” in building the proposed multi-layer missile defence system. He warned that if the alliance did not act, rival powers could step in, stating that Russia or China might otherwise take the lead.

The US president has repeatedly spoken about taking control of Greenland, a strategically located and sparsely populated island that is an autonomous territory within the Kingdom of Denmark. His renewed comments underline continued US interest in the Arctic’s strategic importance amid rising global security competition.