The Nuclear Horns of Daniel 8

Published December 19, 2023 8:00am EST

To understand the dangers of a nuclear Iran, see Pakistan

US and its partners would find an emboldened, nuclear-powered Iran extremely difficult to stop

Iran’s goal is to ‘dominate and control’ the region: Gen. Jack Keane

Fox News senior strategic analyst Gen. Jack Keane (Ret.) provides analysis of the growing unrest in the Middle East after a cargo ship in the Red Sea was targeted by Houthi rebels.

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

The horrors of Hamas’ attacks on Israel have refocused the world’s attention on the primitive savagery of Islamist terrorism. But to protect against this threat, we must address a problem at the other end of the technological spectrum: the danger of a nuclear Iran.

Iran played a central role in the Israel attacks, providing crucial material and political support to Hamas. Currently, Iran-backed Hezbollah is engaging Israel from the north, complicating Israeli operations in Gaza. Meanwhile, Iranian proxies launch attacks on U.S. forces in Iraq and Syria.

Today’s Iran, armed only with conventional weapons, is aggressive and dangerous. But tomorrow’s Iran will become even more so if it realizes its long-standing ambition to develop nuclear weapons.

An Iranian military truck carries surface-to-air missiles past a portrait of Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, during a parade in Tehran on April 18, 2018. (Atta Kenare/AFP via Getty Images)

A nuclear Iran’s likely strategy is not a mystery. For a preview, we need only revisit the behavior of nuclear-armed Pakistan.

Following its birth in 1947, Pakistan sought to wrest the territory of Kashmir from India, causing decades of bloody conflict. When Pakistan acquired nuclear weapons in the late 1990s, it redoubled its efforts to take Kashmir with a combination of proxy and regular military forces, confident that its nuclear shield would limit Indian retaliation.

The result was even greater conflict than before, including India and Pakistan’s first war in 28 years. Since then, the dispute has ground on, with periodic eruptions of violence killing thousands of Indians and threatening to trigger a larger war.

A nuclear Iran would take a page from Pakistan’s playbook. Iran would deploy its proxies across the Middle East more aggressively than before, using regular military forces where necessary, insulated from retaliation.

The United States and its partners would find such an emboldened Iran extremely difficult to stop. The result would be further violence against Israel, and more bloodshed and instability in Lebanon, Syria and Iraq, which could spiral into regional war.

As the Pakistan case makes clear, a nuclear-armed Iran would be exceptionally dangerous. What does Pakistan suggest the United States and its partners should do about the menace of a nuclear Iran?

First, Pakistan reminds us not to ignore the seriousness of the Iranian nuclear problem. When India and Pakistan acquired nuclear weapons in the late 1990s, many experts underestimated the danger, believing that nuclear weapons would deter violence and stabilize South Asia.

But in fact, nuclear Pakistan became bolder and more aggressive. Similarly, nuclear weapons will embolden, rather than moderate, the behavior of a nuclear Iran.

Second, Pakistan shows that the U.S. must not inadvertently support the bad Iranian behavior that it wishes to oppose. During the War on Terror, the United States gave Pakistan tens of billions of dollars in aid, even as the Pakistanis continued to support proxy groups, including Lashkar-e-Toiba and the Taliban, in South Asia and Afghanistan.

Similarly, U.S. policy toward Iran has often supported rather than stymied Tehran’s nuclear efforts. For example, the Obama administration’s nuclear agreement with Iran, known as JCPOA, sought to restrict Iran’s nuclear program, but afforded Tehran access to over $100 billion in previously frozen assets, as well as a lax inspection regime.

Under the Biden administration, the United States has allowed Iran to pocket tens of billions of dollars in oil revenues ostensibly forbidden by economic sanctions. The administration also has made billions of dollars in frozen Iranian assets available to the mullahs in exchange for the release of American prisoners.

Such cooperative policies provide Iran with the time and resources it needs to advance its nuclear ambitions. A return to the “maximum pressure” of the Trump administration’s sanctions regime wouldn’t end Iran’s nuclear program. But aggressive sanctions would at least increase the economic headwinds for Iran, undermining its nuclear efforts.

We also should be willing to use tailored force to set back Iran’s nuclear program. Slowing Iran’s progress can buy time while we wait for more moderate leadership, or possibly regime change, in Tehran. Even the most ossified dictatorships don’t last forever.

Third, Pakistan shows that we must devise military strategies to resist Iran if it becomes a nuclear power. India, through calibrated military operations, has retaliated against Pakistan in a number of instances, including a high-intensity campaign in the mountains of Kashmir following the two countries’ nuclear tests.

India continues to develop strategies to punish Pakistan without triggering nuclear war. These measures haven’t ended Pakistani provocations. But they have demonstrated Indian resolve and shown that Pakistan will pay a price for masterminding regional violence.

We should devise similarly calibrated military strategies to impose costs on Iran without triggering all-out conflict. Even if we succeed, such strategies will make a bad situation only a little better. But as India learned with nuclear Pakistan, if Iran manages to get nuclear weapons, a little better may be the best we can do.

Caught in the valley of two nuclear powers: Revelation 8

Decoder Replay: Caught in the valley of two nuclear powers

by Ammar Nainar | 20 Dec 2023 | Asia, History, King’s College London, Politics

India and Pakistan — both nuclear powers — have fought three wars over Kashmir. But neither will yield in one of the world’s intractable conflicts.

Zero Bridge in Srinagar Kashmir. (Credit: P. Kijsanayothin for Getty Images Signature)

Editor’s note: On 11 December 2023, The Supreme Court of India upheld a decision by the Indian government to revoke Article 370 of the Indian Constitution which gave special status to the regions of Kashmir and Jammu, an area that has been contested by Pakistan and India since the partition of India in 1947. Kashmir is located at the northern tip of India and northeast of Pakistan. China controls about 15% of the area as well. At the heart of the conflict is the demographics of the region. Kashmir is majority Muslim while India is majority Hindu. Under Article 370, the people in the region could enact their own laws on most matters. In effect, it gave the area a degree of autonomy.

In this Decoder Replay, we republish a story by Ammar Nainar originally published in 2017 that explains the origins of the conflict and why the two countries have repeatedly failed to reach agreement over it. We launched Decoder Replay to help readers better understand current world events by seeing how our correspondents decoded similar events in the past.

Imagine a family dispute: Two brothers fight over a piece of land, so much that they are prepared to kill each other.

This is an analogy for the seven-decades-old conflict over Kashmir, a divided territory straddling the northernmost part of the frontier between India and Pakistan.

Kashmir is not only one of the oldest unresolved disputes at the United Nations. It is also one of the most dangerous.

It is the major bone of contention between two nuclear-armed countries that have gone to war four times since they achieved independence from Britain in 1947. Three of those wars, plus numerous skirmishes and border incidents, have been over Kashmir.

Why are India and Pakistan willing to risk nuclear annihilation over a mountainous piece of land that is home to fewer than 17 million people, barely one percent of their combined population?

Britain’s rule of the Indian subcontinent ended in 1947 with partition along religious lines. India became a majority Hindu nation and Pakistan a Muslim-dominated state.

But the division was not clear cut. It affected other religious communities and left a number of independent, princely states facing a dilemma: to join India or Pakistan. The states included the Muslim-majority Jammu and Kashmir.

Amid the chaos of partition, Pakistani raiders attacked the state, which appealed for help to India.

India conditioned military support on Jammu and Kashmir joining India. After the ruler of the princely state, Maharaja Hari Singh, signed the Instrument of Accession in October 1947, acceding his state to India, Indian forces entered the state to expel the raiders, sparking the first of three wars with Pakistan over Kashmir.

In April 1948, the United Nations Security Council called on both sides to implement a three-phase peace plan: Pakistan was to withdraw the raiders, India to reduce its forces and a plebiscite was to be held on the territory’s future status.

Neither side respected the initial UN Resolution.

A ceasefire agreement took effect on 1 January 1949, but neither side was willing to pull back its forces before the other, and the plebiscite was never organized.

Ever since, the territory has been divided along the ceasefire line, or Line of Control. On one side is the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir, which has a population of almost 14 million. On the other is Pakistani Kashmir, home to just under three million. Both parts are majority Muslim.

Hostilities broke out again in 1965 as Pakistan sought to put pressure on India to negotiate. The war ended in stalemate.

The two countries also went to war in 1971, when India intervened in the separation of what were then West and East Pakistan. The latter is now Bangladesh.

After almost three decades punctuated by militant uprisings, the third Kashmir war broke out in May 1999 and ended 12 weeks later when U.S. President Bill Clinton, fearing a nuclear confrontation, persuaded Pakistan to withdraw.

The potential for conflict persists.

Today, the scenario in Kashmir is little different from its past, characterized by an insurgency in the India-controlled state. The past year has seen a series of crises in the region, sparked by the killing by Indian security forces in July 2016 of Burhan Wani, the commander of a militant group and an opponent of Indian rule in Kashmir.

The killing triggered violent protests and riots in the Indian-administered Kashmir valley. More than 9,000 people were injured over 50 days.

The two countries hold diametrically opposed views on the dispute over Kashmir — although they agree on the strategic importance of a region next to China and Afghanistan, with major water resources and bisected by important supply routes.

For New Delhi, Kashmir is an integral part of India under the 1947 Instrument of Accession and Pakistan has no role to play in its domestic affairs.

Pakistan argues that the UN Security Council Resolution of 1948 upholds the right of the people of Kashmir to self-determination. It seeks a plebiscite on their future.

The local population appears divided, with a plurality favoring independence. A 2013 poll conducted on both sides of the Line of Control showed that 15 percent of the population wanted Kashmir to be part of Pakistan, 21 percent wanted it to remain in India and 43 percent wanted independence. The poll is included in Stephen Cohen’s book “Shooting for a Century“.

Kashmiri independence would be in Pakistan’s interest. It would come at a huge political cost to India and in Pakistani eyes might contribute to the Balkanization of India and damage its international standing.

Where do we go from here?

The dispute has received worldwide attention, yet the international community seems poorly placed to resolve the issue.

A 1972 accord called the Simla Agreement aimed to normalize Indo-Pakistani relations after the 1971 war and the independence of Bangladesh. It stipulated that the Kashmir dispute should be settled peacefully through bilateral negotiations, without foreign interference.

But South Asia’s emerging security architecture — with an emerging China-Pakistan nexus against a tacit Indo-U.S. alliance — looks certain to maintain tension between India and Pakistan. Some fear a regional Cold War.

Resolution of the Kashmir dispute would require adjustments in India’s federal system, a reappraisal of the military balance between India and Pakistan and changes in Kashmir’s constituent parts. It could take years for any of these decisions to be made, let along put into action.

Internationalize the Line of Control?

One proposed solution would be to convert the Line of Control, which divides Kashmir into the Indian-administered zone south of the line and a Pakistan-administered area to the north, into an internationally recognized border.

But there is little hope that Pakistan would support that approach as it would irrevocably place most of the Muslim-populated Kashmir Valley within India.

In New Delhi and Islamabad, the Kashmir dispute is perceived as a zero sum game where equal gains for both sides are next to impossible. South Asia seems a far cry from the dream of Pakistan’s founder Muhammad Ali Jinnah, who envisaged Indo-Pakistani relations as “an association similar to that between the United States and Canada.”

Pakistan’s new nuclear war cry: Revelation 8

Palestine – Kashmir hyphenation: Pakistan’s new war cry

It is high time for the people of Palestine to understand that a fanatical Islamic leadership is dragging them deeper into ruin.

K N Pandita

December 13, 2023

Non-Democratic dispensation

Chairing a meeting of the core Gupkar Gang, Dr Farooq Abdullah pontificated, stating that the Union Government led by Shri Narendra Modi should play its role in stopping bloodshed in Gaza and bringing peace to the Middle East. He added that the government of the land of Gandhi should carry the message of peace to West Asia. He may have said something more but we confine our views to the printed word only.

These are pious words any rational being will welcome. But coming from the mouth of a veteran political leader of the sub-continent, people will ask questions likely to cast doubts on the sincerity and conviction of Gupkar’s leadership.

Selective reaction

Farooq Abdullah has not seen or heard what is going on in the Baluchistan province of Pakistan for a long time. The Gupkar Gang wants “greater autonomy” for J&K but would not react to the repression of the Baluch Liberation Movement for autonomy or independence. The reason is simple. Gupkars do not want the Muslim-majority-state of J&K to be integrated into a Hindu-dominated Indian Union, nor do they want the Muslim-majority region of POJK to seek independence from a military-dominated regime in Islamabad. In simpler language, Dr Farooq Abdullah opposes democratic dispensation for the Muslim ummah whether in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan or J&K, a federated unit of the Indian Union.

Take another example. Nearly 1.1 million Afghans — all Muslims — had sought asylum in Pakistan when the Soviet incursion into Afghanistan in 1979 forced their displacement from their homeland. They have been living in makeshift refugee camps on Pakistani territory for nearly four decades, particularly close to Quetta, the capital city of Baluchistan province. Their younger generation grew up in Pakistan, speaks Urdu, the language of Pakistan, and has become part of Pakistani society. Pakistan has been receiving massive aid from private and official sources including the United Nations by way of donations for the hapless Afghan refugees. Where have those billions of dollars landed nobody knows. The Afghan refugees continued to live in shanties while the Pakistani Generals bought themselves palatial residences in exclusive areas of big American and European cities.

Only weeks ago, the caretaker government in Islamabad decreed that the Afghan refugees have to return to their native land. The order was implemented forthwith. So far, nearly 1,50,000 Afghan refugees have been pushed back despite protests from the victimized people who have no means of subsistence and no homes and shelters in Afghanistan. We have seen heart-rending visuals of emaciated children, women and old people in tatters trekking back to the Afghanistan border. We have seen the images of aged and famished Afghans begging not to be displaced but to no avail. They say that they are thankful to Pakistan for giving them asylum for nearly four decades but the manner in which they are pushed back and thrown into destitution is unbearable. Compare this to the large-heartedness of the European countries and of the United States which have given asylum to millions of Muslim migrants from the Africa and Asian continents.

Politicising faith

Where is the Islamic brotherhood (ukhuwwat)? Where is the Organisation of the Islamic Conference which broadcasts its concern for the Muslim ummah? Where is Erdogan, and where are the Ayatollahs of Iran whose patriarch announced during the heyday of Iran’s Islamic revolution that “the sword is the gift given by the providence to the ummah.” Where are the Pakistani leaders who swear by the resolutions of the UN on Kashmir but turn a blind eye to what the UN Charter stipulates regarding the international refugees’ right to return to their native countries?

Where are Farooq Abdullah and his Gupkar Gang who embraced thousands of Rohingya Muslim refugees and resettled them illegally in the Jammu Division (not Kashmir) on humanitarian grounds but will not say a word on the plight of the Afghan refugees in Pakistan? Farooq Abdullah and the Gupkars will lament the loss of life in Hamas but remain lip-sealed when Azerbaijan killed Armenians with Turkish Bayraktar drones or when it recently drove away thousands of Armenians from their native habitat in Nagorno Karabakh.

Pak’s argument

Pakistani argument is that these Afghan refugees are in nefarious collusion with an anti-Punjabi Segment of the Pakistan Army called TTP, and hence, must face punishment. TTP is the face of the armed uprising of the Pathans and Pashtuns of Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa against the domination, deprivation and discrimination they endure at the hand of the Punjabis who dominate the politics, economy, and military power in Pakistan. The Afghan refugees have close ethnic, linguistic, social and religious ties with the Pashtuns of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Their empathy for their kinsmen is similar to the feeling of brotherhood that Pakistanis claim to share with Kashmiri Muslim insurgents.

Leaders of many Muslim states like Iran, Algeria, Turkey, Jordan, Syria, and Pakistan have given a call to the Muslims of the world to unite and fight Israel to the finish. In Pakistan, Maulanas have made thundering calls for Muslims of the world to unite for destroying Israel and “liberating Kashmir.” They covertly tell their faithful that the way the attack of Hamas on Israel was planned, funded, and executed successfully on October 7, should be used as the formula for liberating Kashmir. Some Hamas suicide bombers were reportedly trained by Pakistan’s ISI somewhere in Northern Pakistan. Reports are that the Pakistani army has even started glider training for the terrorists to make them airborne for aero-infiltration of Kashmir. In J&K, Pakistani Rangers have intensified their shelling on forward Indian army posts and pickets and increasing attempts at sneaking terrorists across the LoC as well as the international border.

As part of this newly threatening posture, Pakistani leaders and Maulanas have become more vociferous about Pakistan exercising the nuclear option against Israel and India. They are assertive because they think that suicide bombers (fidayeen) will be as successful in a blitzkrieg on Kashmir as Hamas was in Israel on October 7.

In the final analysis, neither Palestine nor Iran, neither Hezbollah nor Hamas are seriously considering a nuclear option. It is Pakistan that has created compulsions for itself to go for the nuclear option.

The reasons are more complex than what many surmise. A wide faultline separates the Pakistani masses from the Punjabi-dominated administration, political and military power. Economically, Pakistan finds no relief even if granted alms by some Arab states or global lending agencies. India refuses to have any dialogue on bilateral issues, including Kashmir, with Pakistan unless Pakistan winds up its terror shop. The TTP are successfully and relentlessly ambushing and humiliating the Punjabi army. The Baluch Liberation Army has made the Punjabi army’s patrolling of the Baluch – Afghan border a death trap in which hundreds of Pakistan’s soldiers have been lost. The hostility of the Taliban regime to the West has dashed Islamabad’s long-standing desire for “Westward Depth”. The enduring popularity of Imran Khan has not left an option for the Pakistani army to call for war.

It is high time for the people of Palestine to understand that a fanatical Islamic leadership is dragging them deeper into ruin.

Iranian Horn Reveals New Nuclear Missiles: Daniel 8

Oficina del Líder Supremo iraní WANA (Agencia de Noticias de Asia Occidental) vía REUTERS - El Líder Supremo de Irán, el ayatolá Ali Jamenei, observa un avión no tripulado iraní durante su visita a la exposición de logros de la Fuerza Aeroespacial del CGRI en Teherán, Irán, 19 de noviembre de 2023 — *photo_camera*Iranian Supreme Leader’s Office WANA (West Asia News Agency) via REUTERS – Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei looks at an Iranian drone during his visit to the CGRI Aerospace Force achievements exhibition in Tehran, Iran, November 19, 2023

Iran unveils new Fattah II hypersonic missile

Enrique Fernández

20/NOV./23 – 19:00

In the midst of an open war with Israel, Iran presents and flaunts before its supreme leader the new weapons with the idea of showing a great part of its military power before the main Israeli ally, the United States.

Iran’s Revolutionary Guard unveiled the second version of its hypersonic missile, the Fatah II, at an aerospace exhibition attended by Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in Tehran on Sunday.

Iran’s Revolutionary Guard unveiled the Fattah II, the second version of its hypersonic missile, at the Tehran Aerospace Exhibition on Sunday. According to the Iranian government’s semi-official Mehr news agency, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has unveiled a hypersonic missile.

Oficina del Líder Supremo iraní WANA (Agencia de Noticias de Asia Occidental) vía REUTERS - El Líder Supremo de Irán, Ayatolá Ali Jamenei, visita la exhibición de logros de la Fuerza Aeroespacial del IRGC en Teherán, Irán, 19 de noviembre de 2023 — **Oficina del Líder Supremo iraní WANA (Agencia de Noticias de Asia Occidental) vía REUTERS –** Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei visits the IRGC Aerospace Force achievements exhibition in Tehran, Iran, 19 November 2023

Hypersonic weapons travel at five times the speed of sound and pose significant challenges to missile defence systems. Their speed and manoeuvrability make them more difficult to intercept than ballistic missiles. The Fattah II is a hypersonic (supersonic) glide-capable missile that is part of the hypersonic weapons range.

Local media reported that the Fattah, a two-stage missile, has a range of 1,400 kilometres and a maximum speed of Mach 13 (about 16,000 kilometres per hour). Notably, as detailed in the Tasnim report, Fattah is armed with a spherical solid-fuel engine with adjustable nozzles that allows for variable manoeuvrability in and around the Earth’s atmosphere.

Oficina del Líder Supremo iraní WANA (Agencia de Noticias de Asia Occidental) vía REUTERS - El Líder Supremo de Irán, el ayatolá Ali Jamenei, habla durante una reunión en la exposición de logros de la Fuerza Aeroespacial del IRGC en Teherán, Irán, 19 de noviembre de 2023 — **Oficina del Líder Supremo iraní WANA (Agencia de Noticias de Asia Occidental) vía REUTERS –**
Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei speaks during a meeting at the IRGC Aerospace Force achievements exhibition in Tehran, Iran, November 19, 2023

Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, also attended the event and unveiled several new drones, including one for the Gaza Strip. In a speech to SDF commanders who accompanied him on the trip, Khamenei praised the achievements of Iran’s young army. Khamenei said: “Our young men have done great things in every scene they entered with energy and faith, and the traces of perseverance and faith were clearly revealed in this exhibition”.

Fattah II strengthens HGV-class hypersonic weapons capabilities and demonstrates Iran’s technological advances in this field. This new missile puts the Islamic Republic in a select group of countries (only four in the world: the United States, Russia, China and India) capable of mastering the development and production of advanced hypersonic weapons.

Iran blocks IAEA nuclear inspectors

Tensions are rising. The standoff between Iran and Western powers is growing as Iran expels many of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors overseeing the country’s nuclear energy programme.

PHOTO/ARCHIVO - Rafael Grossi, director general de la Organismo Internacional de Energía Atómica (OIEA) — **PHOTO/ARCHIVO –** Rafael Grossi, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)

This underlines the urgent need for mass protests against Israel’s war in Gaza to counter the military escalation against the ayatollahs’ regime. There is speculation that the US attack on Iran and the war in the Gaza Strip could spread throughout the Middle East.

“Iran’s position is not only unprecedented, but also contradictory to the necessary cooperation,” IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi.

IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi also pointed to the stockpiles of highly enriched uranium that Iran has accumulated since 2018, when then US President Donald Trump unilaterally abandoned the 2015 UN (United Nations) backed Iran nuclear deal and imposed devastating economic sanctions on Iran.

REUTERS/DADO RUVIC - El intercambio de prisioneros entre Irán y Estados Unidos, algo cada vez más posible para formalizar el acuerdo nuclear — **REUTERS/DADO RUVIC –**

Washington has used its control of the global financial system to threaten its European allies and much of the world to impose these sanctions, which themselves constitute an act of war.

IAEA officials discovered in September that Iran possessed 128.3 kilograms of 60% enriched uranium. Transforming enriched uranium into 90% enriched weapons-grade uranium and using it to make a nuclear bomb is a relatively simple technological task. The IAEA said Iran has 60% enriched uranium, enough to produce three nuclear bombs in a matter of weeks when enriched to 90%.

Saudi Horn is Worried About the Iranian Horn’s Rising Hegemony: Daniel 8

In pic, Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The GCC summit showed a “weak” Saudi Arabia, and the attempt by the Arab world to appease Iran and follow its lead on information warfare. (Image: Reuters file)

Saudi, UAE, Qatar ‘Worried’ Iran is Emerging Leader in Muslim World Amid Israel-Gaza War: Sources

Reported By: Manoj Gupta

Edited By: Shilpy Bisht

Last Updated: NOVEMBER 13, 2023, 02:27 IST

In pic, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The GCC summit showed a “weak” Saudi Arabia, and the attempt by the Arab world to appease Iran and follow its lead on information warfare. (Image: Reuters file)

According to top intelligence sources, Iran has been calling the shots behind the scenes on the theatre of war in Gaza and regionally the entire time. Lebanese military group Hezbollah, which is engaged in exchange of fire with Israel at their border, is making its decisions on Iran’s guidance

The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) is believed to be worried about the escalating tensions with Iran-backed proxies such as Hezbollah, Yemen’s Houthi attacks on Saudi Arabia, which could de-stabilise Iraq where Saudis, Emiratis, and others recently invested billions of dollars.

The GCC, comprising Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, UAE, Qatar, Oman and Bahrain, is concerned that Iran could be the new leader and decision-maker in the region with the recent turn of events vis-à-vis Gaza-Israel conflict.

Although Saudi Arabia has normalised ties with Iran to an extent, but there are tensions inherent as it remains a target of Iran’s theocratic dogma and single-minded dedication to become the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, thus, asserting religious, not just geopolitical, primacy over the region and the whole Muslim world.

According to top intelligence sources, Iran has been calling the shots behind the scenes on the theatre of war in Gaza and regionally the entire time. Lebanese military group Hezbollah, which is engaged in exchange of fire with Israel at their border, is making its decisions on Iran’s guidance.

The GCC summit represented a “weak” Saudi Arabia, and the attempt by the Arab world to appease Iran and follow its lead on information warfare.

Saudi Arabia and other Muslim countries called on Saturday for immediate action to end military operations in Gaza. The extraordinary joint Islamic-Arab summit in Riyadh urged the International Criminal Court to investigate “war crimes and crimes against humanity that Israel is committing” in the Palestinian territories, according to a final communique, according to news agency Reuters.

Dozens of leaders including Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi, Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan, Qatar’s Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani and Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, who was welcomed back into the Arab League this year, attended the joint Islamic-Arab summit in Riyadh.

Finally, the collective gathering to issue the statement calling for an immediate ceasefire and rejecting Israel’s claim of self-defence, shows they are, however reluctantly, agreeing to accept Iran as the leader on the Palestinian cause.

Kashmir Will Spark the First Nuclear War: Revelation 8

Kashmir Dispute Could Spark South Asia’s Nuclear Fuse: APHC

Mohammad Ali (@ChaudhryMAli88) Published November 13, 2023 | 11:20 AM

ISLAMABAD, (UrduPoint / Pakistan Point News – 13th Nov, 2023) The All Parties Hurriyat Conference (APHC) has expressed serious concern over the prevailing situation in Indian illegally occupied Jammu and Kashmir terming it as a nuclear flash point in South Asia.

According to Kashmir Media Service, the APHC leadership in a statement issued in Srinagar feared that the unresolved Kashmir dispute could provide the spark to light South Asia’s nuclear fuse, as the territory is the highest militarized zone in the world with over one million Indian troops deployed in cities, towns and villages to suppress the Kashmiri people brutally.

It urged the United Nations to intervene to resolve the dispute to avoid a nuclear catastrophe in the region.

The leadership said that forces’ personnel have set up roadblocks at various places where they keep pedestrians standing for hours in severe cold for frisking. Besides, crackdowns are carried out in various areas where men and women are paraded indiscriminately.

It deplored that the Indian forces’ personnel and Indian agencies NIA and SIA have intensified cordon and search operations and house raids across the territory during which people are tortured, arrested and harassed.

The APHC demanded the release of all illegally detained Hurriyat leaders including Masarrat Aalam Butt, Muhammad Yasin Malik, Shabbir Ahmad Shah, Nayeem Ahmed Khan and Aasiya Andrabi languishing in different jails of IIOJK and India.

The leadership said Kashmir is a humanitarian and political issue that can be resolved through comprehensive dialogue among the parties, not through the implementation of policies of coercion or military force.

The arrests, harassment, killings and ongoing human rights violations are regrettable and reprehensible in all respects, it added.

Pakistani Nuclear Terror Threat Before the First Nuclear War: Revelation 8

Tehreek-e-Jihad Pakistan: The latest ‘armed jihad’ challenge for India’s terror exporting neighbour

New DelhiEdited By: Mukul SharmaUpdated: Nov 05, 2023, 05:01 PM IST

File photo of a Pakistani soldier standing guard near a check-post at Afghanistan border/for representation Photograph:(AFP)

Tehreek-e-Jihad is inspired by “Sheikh un Hind”, a reference to the third principal of Darul Uloom Deoband, a religious seminary in Deoband, in northern India’s Uttar Pradesh state and birthplace to Deobandi movement.

Pakistan’s structural support to terrorism export inside India’s Jammu and Kashmir and across its contested border with Afghanistan continues to threaten its existence. Recently, an organisation called Tehreek-e-Jihad Pakistan (TJP) has propped up which has been claiming the responsibility for targeted attacks against Pakistani security forces.

The TJP has carried out a number of high-profile attacks, including one that killed 12 Pakistani soldiers in the restive province of Balochistan province in July this year.

What is Tehreek-e-Jihad Pakistan about?

The insignia of TJP shows a book over a rehal or tawla — typically a stand for keeping religious books — and a wrong map of Pakistan that falsely shows the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir inside Pakistan, imposed over two swords.

Founded in February this year, the TJP named Maulana Abdullah Yaghistani as its emir and Mullah Muhammad Qasim as its spokesperson, according to the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), a Washington DC-based think tank.

On May 12, 2023, the TJP carried out an attack on a Pakistani army camp in northern Balochistan.

The military camp was of Pakistan’s paramilitary Frontier Corps (FC). In May, the group released photos of six men among those who attacked the FC camp in Balochistan.

What are Tehreek-e-Jihad Pakistan’s stated goals?

According to its founding statement published in February, Tehreek-e-Jihad is inspired by “Sheikh un Hind”, a reference to the third principal of Darul Uloom Deoband, a religious seminary in Deoband, in northern India’s Uttar Pradesh state.

TJP said that “the objective for which the movement of Sheikh-ul-Hind emerged was destroyed after the independence of Pakistan.”

It must be noted that Deobandi movement was initiated to restore the key tenets of Islam in Muslim life. At the onset in 1866, its goal was also to fight the British with greater strength after Indian subcontinent failed to free itself from British colonial rule during 1857 revolution. Therefore, in political sense, the Deobandi religious leaders remained staunchly anti-colonialist. But within Islam, they asserted themselves as the revivalists who intended to purify the practice of Islam.

Across the Af-Pak region’s vast jihadist landscape, the restoration of key tenets of Islam and fighting the colonial power, remains the dual goals of armed groups who claim to be inspired by the Deobandi movement.

Here, TJP’s statement reflects that they see the state of Pakistan as a purported colonial force on the land.

“We have reached the conclusion that except through armed jihad, the enforcement of an Islamic system is not possible in Pakistan,” the TJP statement added, while announcing the establishment of the organisation.

Escalating Tensions Prompt US To Postpone Iran Obama Nuclear Talks: Daniel 8

Escalating Tensions Prompt US To Postpone Iran Talks

Wednesday, 10/25/2023

Washington has communicated a potential shift in its stance regarding Iranian assets held in Qatari banks and postponed talks on nuclear issues.

The message was allegedly delivered by Secretary of State Antony Blinken during his visit to Doha on October 13, according to Amwaj Media.

The delay is suspected to be driven by the tensions surrounding the war waged by Iran-backed terror group Hamas on October 7 against Israel when thousands of its militia slaughtered at least 1,400 civilians and soldiers and took at least 220 more hostage.

Since then, attacks have taken place on US bases in Iraq and Syria, with Iran’s Yemen proxy, the Houthis, also sending missiles towards Israel since the war broke out, intercepted by the US and Saudi Arabia.

According to Amwaj Media, a source denied the war in Gaza was to blame for the postponement.

In August, Tehran and Washington struck a deal that led to the liberation of five American hostages held in Iran, in exchange for the release of $6 billion in frozen Iranian assets located in South Korea. These Iranian assets were first transferred to Switzerland’s central bank for conversion before being subsequently moved to Iranian bank accounts based in Qatar.

The United States has made itself clear in its desire for Iran to stay out of the Israel-Hamas conflict and warned it to control its Lebanon proxy, Hezbollah. It has also pledged its commitment to support Israel as it vows to rid the Gaza Strip of the terror group designated by the US, EU and UK.

As of the time of this publication, the US State Department has not issued an official statement regarding the developments.

Iranian Horn Attacks Babylon the Great: Daniel 8

Iraqis rally in Baghdad in January 2021 to mark the first anniversary of the killing of Quds Force commander Gen Qassem Suleimani and Iraqi militia commander Abu Mahdi Al Muhandis in a US drone attack. Reuters

Iranian proxy in Iraq vows to expand attacks on US bases in the region

Latest threat comes from armed faction that has claimed responsibility for attacks in past two years

Sinan Mahmoud

Baghdad

Oct 25, 2023

Live updates: Follow the latest news on Israel-Gaza

A shadowy Shiite militia in Iraq has threatened to strike US military bases across the Arabian Peninsula, expanding the number of recent attacks on American troops by Iran-backed military groups.

US forces in Iraq and Syria have faced a surge in rocket and drone attacks due to Washington’s support for Israel’s bombardment of the Gaza Strip after Hamas operatives killed more than 1,400 people, most of them civilians, in cross-border raids on October 7.

The Israeli attacks have killed more than 6,500 people so far, most of them civilians, leading to widespread anger across the Middle East.

“We affirm that our patience has limits,” Alwiyat Al Waad Al Haq – Abnaa Al Jazeera Al Arabiya (AWH), or the True Pledge Brigades – The Sons of the Arabian Peninsula, said on Telegram late on Tuesday.

The statement went on to say the group considered US bases in the region as targets.

AWH is considered to be one of many groups created by Tehran, comprising trusted fighters from its most powerful militias in Iraq.

The small, elite and fiercely loyal bands are highly trained in drone warfare, surveillance and online propaganda, and answer directly to officers in the Quds Force, an arm of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps that controls allied militias abroad.

These militias have been responsible for a series of increasingly sophisticated attacks against the US and its allies in Iraq and abroad.

AWH claimed responsibility for drone attacks on the Arabian peninsula in 2021 and 2022.

There had been a lull in attacks on US forces in Iraq, posted there as part of the international coalition to defeat ISIS, after Prime Minister Mohammed Shia Al Sudani took office last October.

Mr Al Sudani was nominated by the Co-ordination Framework, the largest political group in the Iraqi Parliament comprising powerful Iran-backed Shiite militias and political parties.

The resurgence of attacks is embarrassing his government, which has been under pressure from Washington and its allies to rein in the militias and protect US forces and foreign diplomatic missions.

Mr Al Sudani denounced the attacks on Monday and ordered Iraq’s security forces to clamp down on rogue militias linked to Iran. However, the government is not expected to do much to deter them.

On Tuesday, the Pentagon said American and allied forces in Iraq and Syria had been the targets of drone and rocket attacks at least 13 times in the past week.

“Between October 17 and the 24, US and coalition forces have been attacked at least 10 separate times in Iraq and three separate times in Syria,” Pentagon spokesman Brig Gen Pat Ryder said, referring to the international coalition against ISIS.

The attacks were conducted using a “mix of one-way attack drones and rockets”, he said, describing the tally of the strikes as “initial numbers”.

He did not identify the groups responsible but said they were “supported by the IRGC and the Iranian regime”.

The US Central Command told NBC News two dozen American military personnel were wounded in an attack on Al Tanf base in Syria. The injuries were minor, the news outlet said.

Many of the attacks have been claimed by a group calling itself the “Islamic Resistance in Iraq”, a network of powerful Iraqi Shiite militias aligned with Iran.

“What we are seeing is the prospect for more significant escalation against US forces and personnel across the region in the very near term coming from Iranian proxy forces and, ultimately, from Iran,” Brig Gen Ryder said.

US Secretary of Defence Lloyd Austin said last week he had put more forces on standby, ready to be stationed in the region, “as part of prudent contingency planning, to increase their readiness and ability to quickly respond as required”.

The Pentagon chief also redirected the movement of the USS Dwight D Eisenhower carrier strike group to the US Central Command’s area of responsibility.

Washington had earlier sent the USS Gerald R Ford carrier strike group to the Eastern Mediterranean.

The US has about 900 troops in Syria and 2,500 in Iraq as part of efforts to combat ISIS, which once held significant territory in each country but was pushed back by local forces with coalition support.

The Russian Horn Nukes Up: Daniel 7

The Kremlin Resumes Nuclear Testing in Escalation of Conflict With Ukraine and the West (Part One)

By: Alexander Taranov

October 24, 2023 04:54 PM Age: 21 hours

After taking a break for several months, Russian President Vladimir Putin has returned to employing nuclear threats. During his speech at the Valdai Club on October 5, Putin promised not to change Russia’s nuclear doctrine nor launch preventive strikes. He made clear, however, that Russia is looking to resume nuclear testing and hinted to the State Duma that Russia’s ratification of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) should be withdrawn (Kremlin.ru, October 5; see EDM, October 13).

Putin gave two primary reasons for coming to the decision to cancel ratification of the CTBT. First, Russia has successfully tested the new nuclear-powered, nuclear-armed Burevestnik (SSC-X-9 Skyfall) cruise missile. Second, Russian specialists have allegedly advised testing the Burevestnik and Sarmat intercontinental ballistic missile (SS-X-29 or SS-X-30) with a nuclear payload. The CTBT, signed and ratified by Russia, does not allow for this. Putin sees no issue with revoking Russia’s ratification as the United States has signed the treaty but has not ratified it.

Several Duma deputies immediately took Putin’s “hint” and ran with it. On October 6, Vyacheslav Volodin, speaker of the State Duma, announced that the next Duma Council meeting would consider revoking Russia’s ratification of the CTBT. The decision, according to Volodin, corresponds with Russia’s national interests and will represent a symmetric response to the United States, which has yet to ratify the treaty (Duma.gov.ru, October 6). It took the State Duma less than two weeks to adopt the appropriate bill (Kommersant.ru, October 18).

Putin first discussed the possibility of resuming nuclear testing during his February 2023 address to the Federal Assembly. He announced the suspension of Russia’s participation in the Treaty on Measures for the Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms (New START Treaty). The Russian president then ordered the Russian Ministry of Defense and the state atomic energy corporation, Rosatom, to ensure their readiness to test Russia’s nuclear weapons. He stipulated that Russia would not do so first, but only in response to the United States resuming such testing (Kremlin.ru, February 21).

The most recent evidence that the Kremlin has been taking steps to make this a reality appeared in mid-August. At the time, Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu together with the head of Rosatom, Alexey Likhachev, flew by helicopter over Novaya Zemlya to inspect the nuclear test site there. Over 130 nuclear explosions were conducted at this site during the Soviet era from 1954 to 1990 (Telegram, August 11).

Domestic interest over Russia’s position on nuclear testing has grown in recent months. For example, Mikhail Kovalchuk, director of the Kurchatov Institute, spoke out in support of such measures in late September. Kovalchuk commented on Russian political expert Sergey Karaganov’s proposals to adjust the Russian state’s official nuclear policy (Ria.ru, June 26). Kovalchuk suggested that Russian nuclear deterrence policy should be brought in line with current geopolitical realities characterized by the West’s more aggressive stance toward Russia. He referred to the 1961 test of the most powerful Soviet nuclear bomb, Tsar Bomba, as an effective response to Washington’s bellicose rhetoric. After the test, Kovalchuk asserted, “the Americans began to negotiate, instantly. … It is enough to conduct tests on Novaya Zemlya. One time, at least. And everything will fall into place” (Ria.ru, September 28).

Russian propagandists have used Putin’s Valdai Club speech as the basis for spreading nuclear blackmail. Margarita Simonyan, editor-in-chief of state-controlled RT, declared that a “nuclear ultimatum” to the West will be the key to resolving the military conflict in Ukraine. She further stated that Russia would not “have to hit Washington” to defeat the United States. It would be enough to conduct a thermonuclear explosion over Siberia, and digital equipment, including satellites, would stop working across the globe (Telegram/MargaritaSimonyan, October 2).

Moscow has been quick to provide disclaimers for such combative rhetoric. Russian presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov disavowed Simonyan’s controversial statements. Peskov argued that Russia has yet to withdraw from the CTBT, which means it is a bit premature to discuss such prospects openly (Ria.ru, October 3). Mikhail Ulyanov, permanent representative of the Russian Federation to the International Organizations in Vienna, claims that withdrawal of Russia’s ratification of the treaty does not mean that such tests will necessarily be conducted (Twitter.com/@Amb_Ulyanov, October 6).

Others in Russia share such views. Pavel Podvig, a well-known independent Russian expert, explains that the United States and Russia have a policy of keeping nuclear test sites prepared for the possible resumption of nuclear testing (Svoboda.org, October 6). This was documented by Washington when it declared a moratorium on nuclear testing and by Russia when it ratified the CTBT in 2000. Podvig also stated that the United States, Russia, and likely China are currently conducting experiments related to their nuclear military programs. The CTBT authorizes such “subcritical” tests that do not involve live nuclear explosions. Podvig’s remarks came as evidence of recent construction activities have appeared on the Novaya Zemlya archipelago, home to one of Russia’s nuclear testing sites (Censor.net, September 22).

Podvig doubts that Russia will resume nuclear testing for two reasons. First, after formally withdrawing from the CTBT, Putin would have to walk back his statements that Russia will not resume testing before the United States. Second, Russia will base its decision partly on the reaction of its remaining international allies, none of whom (except North Korea) would support the resumption of such testing (Svoboda.org, October 6).

Belarusian President Alyaksandr Lukashenka has also weighed in on the matter. According to him, by arming Ukraine, especially with long-range missiles capable of hitting Russian territory, the United States is pushing the Kremlin toward the use of nuclear weapons (President.gov.by, October 6). Lukashenka likely seeks to take advantage of the Russian tactical nuclear weapons stationed on Belarusian territory in supporting Putin’s escalating nuclear rhetoric.

This is not the first time Lukashenka has signaled Moscow’s intentions to escalate the conflict with Ukraine. In his annual address to the National Assembly in March 2023, the Belarusian president first presented the Kremlin’s ultimatum: If Ukraine does not give up and agree to negotiate a peace settlement, then Russia will be forced to use nuclear weapons (President.gov.by, March 31).

Lukashenka’s comments are especially important in drawing parallels to the beginning of discussions on the deployment of Russia nuclear weapons in Belarus in 2021. Back then, Lukashenka stated that Minsk would extend an offer to Russia to deploy nuclear weapons on its territory if the North Atlantic Treaty Organization took a similar step in Poland (Ria.ru, December 2, 2021). The two sides, however, signed an agreement to this effect only two years later, without waiting for NATO to deploy nuclear weapons first (Belta.by, May 25).

A similar logic lies behind Russia’s withdrawal of ratification of the CTBT and renewed nuclear saber-rattling. The Kremlin now has the option to resume nuclear testing without waiting for the United States to do so. The West cannot discount the fact that Russia may unilaterally resume nuclear testing in considering the possible use of tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine.