Image is of the Te Pati Maori (Maori Party) cofounders, Rawiri Waititi and Debbie Ngarewa-Packer. They have 6 of the 123 seats in the New Zealand parliament.


Officially confirming that the Republican primaries were a gigantic waste of time for everybody involved, Trump has massively beat everybody else in Iowa, and will very obviously be the Republican candidate for 2024. Given the abysmal state of the US economy (for everybody who isn't in the top 1-10%, which is mainly what national statistics reflect when they aren't telling blatant falsehoods), it's more plausible than ever that Trump may indeed once again become President - though I personally refuse to predict one way or another due to how volatile politics and geopolitics currently are. Project 2025 is coming, folks - either as the official Republican governance program, or as what the Democrats will do in 2026 after the midterms, stating that they have no other choice and have to reach across the aisle as they are the Adults In The Room™.

In other news...

Late last year, New Zealand voted in a new and very right-wing government, composed of the center-right National Party, the libertarian ACT Party (ACT stands for the "Association of Consumers and Taxpayers", good lord), and the fascist New Zealand First party. By what I can tell, this was the well-trodden path of "Vaguely center-left party does neoliberal austerity and causes a recession and workers fucking hated it and voted in a different party out of desperation," though the flooding and cyclones did add challenges to Chris Hipkins' short reign after Jacinda Ardern resigned.

It's worth noting that Hipkins was at least fairly China-friendly, meeting up with Xi Jinping on a five-day visit in the summer. They still do the whole "We have concerns about human rights" thing, but of all the countries of the imperial core, New Zealand is - or, perhaps, was - one of the most amicable. In 2021, China was New Zealand's single largest trading partner, with a third of exports going to China (more than Australia, the US, Japan, and South Korea combined), and they receive 22% of their imports from China too, more than any other single country.

Christopher Luxon, the new Prime Minister and sentient thumb, has said that he is exploring a closer relationship with AUKUS:

Luxon said New Zealand was interested in becoming involved in AUKUS Pillar 2: a commitment between the three partners to develop and share advanced military capabilities, including artificial intelligence, electronic warfare and hypersonics.

“We’ll work our way through that over the course of next year as we understand it more and think about what the opportunities may be for us,” Luxon said. “AUKUS is a very important element in ensuring we’ve got stability and peace in the region.”

This is not to say that Hipkins wanted nothing to do with AUKUS or Western organizations aimed generally against China - in fact, pre election, "he was open to conversations about joining Pillar II of AUKUS". But the current government is pushing down on the accelerator pedal.

The left-wing Maori party, Te Pati Maori, has stated that they want New Zealand to remain non-aligned, as joining AUKUS would erode the sovereignty of the country:

As Maori we cannot allow our sovereignty to be determined by others, whether they are in Canberra or Washington. Aotearoa should not act as Pacific spy base in the wars of imperial powers. Joining AUKUS will severely undermine our country’s sovereignty, constitution, and ability to remain nuclear free. There is too much at stake for our government to make a commitment of this magnitude without a democratic process.

In general, the party leaders of Te Pati Maori want New Zealand to be the "Switzerland of the Pacific", which is perhaps not the greatest analogy given all the problems Switzerland had and has, but we understand the intended meaning of desiring neutrality.


The Country of the Week is New Zealand! Feel free to chime in with books, essays, longform articles, even stories and anecdotes or rants. More detail here.

The bulletins site is here!
The RSS feed is here.
Last week's thread is here.

Israel-Palestine Conflict

If you have evidence of Israeli crimes and atrocities that you wish to preserve, there is a thread here in which to do so.

Sources on the fighting in Palestine against Israel. In general, CW for footage of battles, explosions, dead people, and so on:

UNRWA daily-ish reports on Israel's destruction and siege of Gaza and the West Bank.

English-language Palestinian Marxist-Leninist twitter account. Alt here.
English-language twitter account that collates news (and has automated posting when the person running it goes to sleep).
Arab-language twitter account with videos and images of fighting.
English-language (with some Arab retweets) Twitter account based in Lebanon. - Telegram is @IbnRiad.
English-language Palestinian Twitter account which reports on news from the Resistance Axis. - Telegram is @EyesOnSouth.
English-language Twitter account in the same group as the previous two. - Telegram here.

English-language PalestineResist telegram channel.
More telegram channels here for those interested.

Various sources that are covering the Ukraine conflict are also covering the one in Palestine, like Rybar.

Russia-Ukraine Conflict

Examples of Ukrainian Nazis and fascists
Examples of racism/euro-centrism during the Russia-Ukraine conflict

Sources:

Defense Politics Asia's youtube channel and their map. Their youtube channel has substantially diminished in quality but the map is still useful. Moon of Alabama, which tends to have interesting analysis. Avoid the comment section.
Understanding War and the Saker: reactionary sources that have occasional insights on the war.
Alexander Mercouris, who does daily videos on the conflict. While he is a reactionary and surrounds himself with likeminded people, his daily update videos are relatively brainworm-free and good if you don't want to follow Russian telegram channels to get news. He also co-hosts The Duran, which is more explicitly conservative, racist, sexist, transphobic, anti-communist, etc when guests are invited on, but is just about tolerable when it's just the two of them if you want a little more analysis.
On the ground: Patrick Lancaster, an independent and very good journalist reporting in the warzone on the separatists' side.

Unedited videos of Russian/Ukrainian press conferences and speeches.

Pro-Russian Telegram Channels:

Again, CW for anti-LGBT and racist, sexist, etc speech, as well as combat footage.

https://t.me/aleksandr_skif ~ DPR's former Defense Minister and Colonel in the DPR's forces. Russian language.
https://t.me/Slavyangrad ~ A few different pro-Russian people gather frequent content for this channel (~100 posts per day), some socialist, but all socially reactionary. If you can only tolerate using one Russian telegram channel, I would recommend this one.
https://t.me/s/levigodman ~ Does daily update posts.
https://t.me/patricklancasternewstoday ~ Patrick Lancaster's telegram channel.
https://t.me/gonzowarr ~ A big Russian commentator.
https://t.me/rybar ~ One of, if not the, biggest Russian telegram channels focussing on the war out there. Actually quite balanced, maybe even pessimistic about Russia. Produces interesting and useful maps.
https://t.me/epoddubny ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/boris_rozhin ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/mod_russia_en ~ Russian Ministry of Defense. Does daily, if rather bland updates on the number of Ukrainians killed, etc. The figures appear to be approximately accurate; if you want, reduce all numbers by 25% as a 'propaganda tax', if you don't believe them. Does not cover everything, for obvious reasons, and virtually never details Russian losses.
https://t.me/UkraineHumanRightsAbuses ~ Pro-Russian, documents abuses that Ukraine commits.

Pro-Ukraine Telegram Channels:

Almost every Western media outlet.
https://discord.gg/projectowl ~ Pro-Ukrainian OSINT Discord.
https://t.me/ice_inii ~ Alleged Ukrainian account with a rather cynical take on the entire thing.


  • SeventyTwoTrillion [he/him]
    hexagon
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago
    The Guardian: The Houthis are not a group that can be bombed into extinction – here’s why

    By Amal Saad, lecturer in politics and international relations at Cardiff University. The article is posted below in whole.


    The war launched by the “axis of resistance” against Israel and the US marks the first time in history that a coalition of non-state actors has collectively come to the defence of another non-state actor, namely Hamas. Spearheaded by Iran, the axis includes Syrian militias, the Palestinian groups Hamas and Islamic Jihad, Lebanon’s Hezbollah, Iraq’s Popular Mobilisation Units (PMU) and Yemen’s Houthis or, to give them their official name, Ansar Allah. For the past three months, the latter three have taken the initiative, launching attacks on Israeli and US targets in support of their Palestinian allies.

    But rather than acknowledge these groups as having motives and interests of their own, the US, UK and Israel continue to reduce them to a transnational network of Iranian proxies whom they believe can be threatened and bombed into submission, a point made clear by yet another wave of overnight airstrikes. This is a fundamental misunderstanding of the underlying dynamics within the axis and of the unshakeable unity of its members, all of which could make western powers’ intervention in the region even more costly.

    Unlike traditional western coalitions, which are created ad hoc by like-minded states to fight a common threat without any long-term commitments, the axis of resistance began as an enduring alliance that developed into a wartime coalition. Since its inception, what bound the core members together was the mutual provision of military and political support to confront Israel. While Iran furnished Hezbollah, Hamas and other Palestinian groups with longstanding military and financial assistance, Syria offered its territory as a secure supply route for Hezbollah and as a safe refuge for Hamas’s leaders. For its part, Hezbollah provided technical and military training to Hamas, including bomb and tunnel-making expertise, and along with Iran, smuggled weapon-manufacturing technology to the West Bank and Gaza.

    In 2013 the axis formed its first wartime coalition, in support of the Syrian state. Hezbollah officially intervened in that war and persuaded Iran to deploy its Revolutionary Guards to Syria, while the newly formed PMU followed suit, further expanding the axis. Alongside the coalition’s role in Syria, Iran and Hezbollah directly intervened in Iraq in 2014 to assist the PMU in fighting Islamic State. The final addition to the axis were the Houthis, who received military and political assistance from Iran and, according to some reports, military training from Hezbollah, in their war with a Saudi-led coalition that started in 2015.

    What makes the axis such a cohesive and durable alliance is its deep-seated ideological pillars and shared strategic objectives. All its actors subscribe to an anti-imperialist and anti-Zionist agenda, with the Palestinian cause as the focal point. Today, it shares two common aims: to force Israel into an unconditional ceasefire in Gaza, and to expel US troops from Iraq and Syria. In pursuing these aims, the non-state actors in this alliance are acting in accordance with their own political beliefs and strategic interests rather than following Iranian diktat. While Iran has offered material support to the non-state actors within the axis, such assistance has not translated into the kind of exercise of power that characterises sponsor-proxy relationships. This view is shared by the US intelligence official Brian Katz, who has argued that Iran’s non-state allies “are no longer simply Iranian proxies. Rather, they have become a collection of ideologically aligned, militarily interdependent, mature political-military actors committed to mutual defence”. In essence, the nature of this alliance is organic and symbiotic, as opposed to transactional and hierarchical.

    This was most recently demonstrated by Hamas’s surprise 7 October attack on Israel of which, according to Israeli and US accounts, Iran had no foreknowledge. Having said that, there does appear to have been a pre-planned “forward defence” strategy whereby Hezbollah, the Houthis and PMU groups would take the offensive and initiate strikes against Israel and the US should Hamas require such assistance. This strategy is being executed today by means of tactical military coordination, which is reportedly occurring within several joint operations’ rooms in various capitals across the region. Within this strategy, Hezbollah assumes the role of battle management whereby it directs, plans and coordinates military operations across the different conflict theatres. Three battle arenas outside Gaza are being fought in sync: Hezbollah’s moderate-intensity war with Israel, the PMU’s attacks on US and Israeli targets in Syria, Iraq and Israel itself, and the Houthis’ attacks on cargo ships in the Red Sea and occasional strikes on Israel. All fronts are synchronised to pause when the fighting in Gaza is suspended, as demonstrated by the temporary truce in Gaza in late November.

    An alliance characterised by such a high level of coordination, reflecting a unity of purpose and vision requires the US and its allies to radically alter their approach to this conflict. The assumption that “sustained” military action against these actors will break their will to continue fighting is as misguided as it is dangerous. On the contrary, military solutions that expand the scope of the conflict will only invite more coordinated responses from across the axis. Western leaders would do well to reflect on the reality that they are not merely trying to protect shipping routes, but are waging an unwinnable war on an ideologically united and tenacious alliance of powerful non-state actors.

    The US and UK strikes on Yemen have only increased the prospects of a full-blown regional war, given that the Houthis have now threatened to widen the scope of their campaign to include “all US and UK interests” in the region. Yet the Lebanese-Israeli front remains the most flammable, considering that Israel is champing at the bit for a war with Hezbollah. As the latter is the most powerful non-state actor in the axis of resistance, if not the world, such a war would be the most far-reaching and mutually destructive. Nothing short of a ceasefire in Gaza can prevent the region from turning into a powder keg.


        • Fishroot [none/use name]
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Yup it’s pretty good, i think there was also a teach in that goes into her arguments on how there is a lack of means for western nations to deal/communicate with non state actors which seem to be more and more common in modern warfare

          • voight [he/him, any]
            ·
            10 months ago

            Is that really about means of communication or about refusing to "negotiate with terrorists"?

            • Fishroot [none/use name]
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              I think both aren’t really mutually exclusive. There is a certain legal greyzone that makes negotiation with no state actor “abnormal” (something something carl schmitt). There is also something humit for a “””functional””” state to see a “””non functional””” organization as equal.

              I can’t prove my statement here, just guts feeling tbh

        • SeventyTwoTrillion [he/him]
          hexagon
          ·
          10 months ago

          Very interesting interview.

          TLDR:

          • Hezbollah isn't meaningfully constrained by either Lebanese public opinion (this is more firmly behind them than ever) nor the potential for economic damage (the economy is already in such dire straits that it's just going from Horrible Situation A to Horrible Situation B). The "official" Lebanese leadership and military also appears pretty okay with Hezbollah, at least compared to during the 2000s when there were important Lebanese people directly saying that Israel should keep bombing southern Lebanon.
          • Hezbollah and the rest of the Resistance Axis does not seek to impose itself as the spearhead of anti-Israeli military actions; it always asks what the Palestinian militants want and need for them to do. The Palestinian cause has been unifying for the Middle East and other Muslim countries for many decades now and has special significance that Westerners may not understand when they merely say "Why ain't Hezbollah starting the war up, then?" That being said, Hezbollah has been maintaining a moderate intensity war with Israel since October 7th that it is not deterred from escalating into high-intensity war if need be - but they do not actively seek it.
          • Hezbollah is unwilling to tolerate military actions or assassinations deep inside Lebanese territory, regardless of whether the officials assassinated are Hamas or Hezbollah or anybody else. It was forced to respond in order to reestablish deterrence, and effectively did so with the attack on the Meron base, as well as a sudden uptick in the number of Israelis wounded on the northern front.
          • Hezbollah's stated casualty numbers are probably about right, because it's very hard to hide deaths in Islamic culture, as large funerals are held for the deceased. This is obviously different to Western cultures, where small, quiet funerals can be held without seeming at all odd, and thus deaths kept secret.
          • Israel knows that a war with Lebanon will be a disaster - there is a reason why it has committed unbelievable atrocities in Gaza for months now, with zero regard for human rights or decency, but has not done the same in Beirut or even really southern Lebanon. It's not because the Israelis think that Lebanese people are more their equal, but because they deeply fear the repercussions. Israel may see its only potential winning move as getting the US involved alongside them, but this will introduce further problems as a two-front war becomes a multi-front war throughout the entire region, with US military bases in Syria and Iraq as sitting ducks.
          • Hezbollah probably finds all the Europeans and others talking to them and trying to warn them against getting involved deeply funny. They're called the Resistance Axis for a reason - if they aren't resisting Israel and the US, then they might as well give up and become farmers or something. It's kind of the whole point of existing as an organization at all.
          • The coalition and alliance of state actors (Iran, kinda Syria) and non-state actors (Hezbollah, Hamas, kinda Ansarallah) is deeply fascinating and is incongruent with Western models of alliances. As the article I quoted up there states, it's based on ideology and shared history and grievances, not mere transanctions or private interest or anything like that. While Iran is obviously the most powerful entity in that alliance, claiming that the rest of the Resistance are mere proxies is simply bad analysis.
          • We're in uncharted territory, and whether regional war will begin is unknown (this video was published 13 days ago; I would argue that we are now in a regional war by definition with the bombing of Yemen by a non-Israeli actor). Israel is in a uniquely bad position, seemingly unable to create any actual military victories in Gaza or southern Lebanon (creation of false narratives of victory don't count, and neither does mass murder of civilians - these are standard Israeli past-times). Assassinations of officials is also a very inferior facsimile of victory - these people aren't unique, irreplaceable leaders, and they also aren't especially well-protected. This means that Israel is becoming increasingly desperate. Desperate governments and ideologies do very, very stupid things.