Foreign
US, Israel’s True Intentions In Iran Debate
In his 2002 testimony to the United States Congress, then former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told US lawmakers that an invasion of Iraq was necessary for winning the “war on terror” and preventing Iraq and terrorist groups from acquiring weapons of mass destruction. He further claimed that the war would be quick and would usher in a new age of Western-friendly democracy, not just in Iraq, but across the region, including Iran. Neither proclamation was true.
As many experts and officials already knew before the 2003 invasion began, Saddam Hussein’s regime did not have weapons of mass destruction and held no ties to al-Qaeda. The war was bound to cause widespread devastation, instability, insecurity, unspeakable suffering, chaos and the breakdown of governance. And that is what happened. Iraq today is at best a fragile state with enormous economic and political challenges.
After Israel and then the US attacked Iran earlier this month, many analysts rushed to comment on how the two allies have supposedly failed to learn the lessons of the Iraq war and are now repeating the same mistakes in Iran. These analyses would have been accurate had the actual goals of the 2003 invasion been to stop the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and to establish democracy. But they were not.
For the US and Israel, the desired outcome of the war was an Iraq that would not pose any resistance to the Israeli settler-colonial project in Palestine and its role as an agent of US imperial power in the region. This is also the desired outcome in Iran today.
Just like the claims about the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq proved completely false, the claims that Iran was on the “verge of” developing a nuclear weapon have no grounds. No real evidence that Tehran was in fact close to gaining nuclear capabilities has been put forward. Instead, we have been presented with a truly unmatched level of hypocrisy and lies.
Here we have a situation where two nuclear powers – one which stands out as the only state in history to use, not once but twice, a nuclear weapon and another that refuses to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and has a mass-murder-suicide type of nuclear doctrine – are undertaking illegal “pre-emptive” aggression under the guise of stopping nuclear proliferation.
Clearly, the US and Israel are not after Iran’s nuclear programme. They are after Iran as a regional power, and that is why regime change has already been floated in public.
In addition to multiple statements from Netanyahu, Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz, and other Israeli officials, US Senators Lindsey Graham and Ted Cruz have also called for toppling the Iranian government. On Sunday, US President Donald Trump joined the calls for regime change in Iran with a post on social media.
The Iranian people are now being encouraged to “stand up” and fight for their “freedom”. But freedom and democracy in Iran are certainly not what Israel and the US aim for. Why? Because a free and democratic Iran would not serve their interests and accept the brutalities of a settler-colonial project in its vicinity.
They would rather see Iran return to the violent, tyrannical monarchy under the Pahlavi dynasty, which was overthrown in a popular revolution in 1979, or any other political force willing to do their bidding.
If that doesn’t happen, Israel and the US would rather have a fragmented, weak, chaotic, destabilised Iran, marred by a civil war. That would suit their interests, just as a war-torn Iraq did.
Weakening regional powers in the Middle East and spreading instability through subversion and aggression is a well-established policy goal that the political elites in Israel and the US have jointly embraced since the 1990s.
A policy document called Clean Break, authored by former US Assistant Secretary of Defense Richard Perle and other neoconservatives in 1996, outlined this strategy of attacking Middle Eastern states under the pretext of preventing the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction to secure Israel’s strategic interests.
Perle et al did not come up with something radically new; they simply built on the well-known imperial strategy of sowing division and chaos in order to facilitate imperial domination.
But this strategy is not without risks. Just like the collapse of the Iraqi state paved the way for violent non-state actors to emerge and for Iran to solidify its position as a regional power challenging US-Israeli interests, a weakened or fragmented Iranian state can result in the same dynamics.
On a more global scale, the actions of the US and Israel are encouraging more countries to pursue nuclear weapons. The lesson that states are drawing from the US-Israeli aggression on Iran is that nuclear weapons are necessary to acquire precisely to prevent such attacks. Thus, we are likely heading towards more proliferation as a result of this war, not less.
The Israeli state does not seem to be concerned about proliferation as long as the chaos and destruction it spreads in the region allows it to achieve its strategic goal of eradicating the Palestinian struggle once and for all, and ending all resistance to its settler colonisation project. Israel, in a nutshell, wants the entire region on its knees and will stop at nothing to achieve that objective. This is because it does not really have to foot the bill of regional instability.
By contrast, US interests are directly impacted when the Middle East descends into chaos. A dysfunctional Iraq or a weakened Iran may serve the US in the short term, but in the longer term, the instability can disrupt its grander plans for control of global energy markets and containing China.
The rest of the world will also feel the ripple effect of this unjustified aggression, just as it did after the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
Given the brutal, decades-long fallout of that war, the global response to the US-Israeli aggression against Iran has been self-defeatingly subdued; some European countries have appeared to endorse the attack, despite the many negative economic impacts they could face as a result of this war.
If governments truly desire to make the world a safer place, this complacency with imperial violence needs to end. It is past time that they come to the sober conclusion that the US and Israel are agents of destruction and chaos by virtue of their racist colonial design.
The Israeli settler colonial project is an unjustifiable project of displacement, expulsion and genocide; US imperialism is an unjustifiable project of robbing people of their resources, dignity and sovereignty.
To establish peace and stability in the Middle East, the world needs to put pressure on Israel to give up its settler colonial project and become part of the region through a decolonial existence with the Palestinians in a decolonised Palestine; and to compel the US to release its iron grip on the region, allowing its people to live in freedom and sovereignty.
This is the only way to avoid perpetual chaos, instability, suffering and pain.
Aljazeera.com
Foreign
Cabinet Reshuffle: President Sacks Finance Minister
South Sudan President Salva Kiir fired Finance Minister Bak Barnaba Chol in a reshuffle that was unveiled on state television on Monday evening.
Chol was appointed to the post in November, following the president’s firing of Athian Diing Athian just two months after his appointment.
Kiir appointed Salvatore Garang, an economist trained at the University of Khartoum in Sudan, as the new Minister of Finance.
Garang previously served as finance minister from 2018 to 2020, a period marked by economic reforms and fiscal strains.
During his first stint in the role, local media reported that Garang faced corruption allegations, including that he allocated 100,000 dollars to cover the cost of his son’s funeral.
He has not commented on the allegations.
The decree also removed several other senior officials, including the commissioner general of the National Revenue Authority, as part of the broader administrative changes.
Analysts say Kiir regularly makes changes to ranks in the military and government to maintain control as he contends with armed conflict and speculation about his eventual succession.
No reason was given for the ninth change in the finance minister since 2020.
-Source: (Reuters/News Agency of Nigeria NAN)
Business
NCFRMI Reiterates Commitment to Effective Implementation of Global Compact for Migration
National Commission for Refugees, Migrants and Internally Displaced Persons (NCFRMI), has reiterates its commitment to effective implementation of the Global Compact for Migration.
The Honourable Federal Commissioner, NCFRMI, Hon. Dr. Tijani Aliyu Ahmed disclosed this in his opening remark at the just concluded Voluntary National Review (VNR) on the implementation of the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration (GCM) ahead of the 2026 International Migration Review Forum (IMRF).
The event which was held between February 17 and 21 at the Lagos Continental Hotel, Victoria Island Lagos, had the International Organisation for Migration, other international partners, members of the civil society, federal and state government agencies among others in attendance.
Speaking, Dr Tijani extended appreciation to the Federal Government, the United Nations Network on Migration for the sustained technical guidance, institutional support and capacity building provided to Nigeria in the implementation of the Compact.
“I equally acknowledge the invaluable support of the Resident Coordinator’s Office for strengthening system-wide coherence and coordination across the United Nations Country Team and partners in Nigeria.”
He recalled that Nigeria adopted the Global Compact for Migration following its endorsement by the United Nations General Assembly in December 2018, and “since then we have demonstrated sustained political will and institutional commitment to its implementation. As a Champion Country, Nigeria has taken deliberate steps to domesticate the principles and objectives of the GCM within our national migration governance framework.
“The recently validated revised National Migration Policy and its integrated Implementation Plan, which doubles as Nigeria’s National GCM Implementation Plan, stand as clear evidence of this alignment between global commitments and national action.”
He added that in preparation for the first IMRF in 2022, Nigeria conducted its inaugural Voluntary National Review in Lagos through a whole-of-government and whole-of-society approach. “The process strengthened coordination among stakeholders and informed Nigeria’s national report, pledge and interventions at IMRF 2022. Building on that foundation, Nigeria convened a second Voluntary National Review in August 2024 in Abuja, structured around Technical Working Groups covering Labour Migration, Migration Data, Border Management, Return, Readmission and Reintegration, and Diaspora Engagement. The outcomes informed Nigeria’s engagement at the regional review and reinforced sustained national monitoring.”
This 2026 Review according to him is required to track progress since the 2024 regional review, assess implementation across the twenty-three objectives of the Compact, and consolidate national priorities, challenges and areas for improvement ahead of IMRF 2026. “Over the next three days, discussions will follow the GCM review template and align with the thematic areas of the IMRF roundtables. Breakout sessions chaired by members of the United Nations Network on Migration and supported by national thematic leads will evaluate progress, identify lessons learned and generate structured talking points to guide Nigeria’s participation at IMRF 2026.
“This consultation also provides an opportunity to stock take Nigeria’s pledges made at IMRF 2022, highlighting achievements, gaps and opportunities for renewed commitment. Furthermore, building on the evidence of impact from Nigeria’s side event at IMRF 2022, preparations are underway for a side event at IMRF 2026 to showcase practical achievements, lessons learned and pathways for strengthening regular migration channels.
“At this juncture, I would like to reiterate the unwavering commitment of the National Commission for Refugees, Migrants and Internally Displaced Persons, to the effective implementation of the Global Compact for Migration and to sustaining the whole-of-government and whole-of-society approach that underpins this national process.
“We remain deeply appreciative of the consistent support of the International Organization for Migration and other members of the United Nations Network on Migration in strengthening Nigeria’s migration governance efforts. As we prepare for IMRF 2026, we look forward to sustained technical collaboration and partnership to facilitate Nigeria’s effective engagement at the Review Forum and the successful delivery of our proposed side event. Continued cooperation will be critical in transforming commitments into tangible, evidence-based results.”
Foreign
Bloodshed At Friday Prayers As Mosque Bombing Claims Many Lives
A bombing at Khadija Al-Kubra mosque on Islamabad’s outskirts killed 31 people and injured at least 169 during Friday prayers. Witnesses described scenes of chaos, with bodies and wounded lying inside the mosque as rescuers transported victims to hospitals. Pakistani authorities and leaders condemned the attack, launched investigations, and called for urgent medical assistance and blood donations.
A devastating bombing struck the Shiite mosque of Khadija Al-Kubra on the outskirts of Islamabad, Pakistan, during Friday prayers, leaving at least 31 people dead and 169 others injured, officials said. Police are investigating who wa was behind the explosion, AP reported.
Witnesses described scenes of chaos as worshippers were caught in the blast. Television footage and social media posts showed rescuers and residents rushing the wounded to nearby hospitals. Hussain Shah, who was praying in the mosque courtyard, recounted the moment of the attack. “I immediately thought that some big attack has happened,” he said. Entering the mosque, he saw bodies on the carpeted floor and people screaming for help. Shah estimated around 30 bodies inside, while many more were wounded.
Authorities have not received a claim of responsibility for the bombing, though suspicion is expected to fall on militant groups such as the Pakistani Taliban or regional affiliates of the Islamic State, which have previously targeted Shiite communities.
Militants in Pakistan often strike security forces and civilians, with recent months seeing a rise in attacks across the country. Islamabad Deputy Commissioner Irfan Memon updated the casualty numbers shortly after the initial reports. President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif condemned the attack and extended condolences to the victims’ families. “Targeting innocent civilians is a crime against humanity,” Zardari said. Sharif ordered a full investigation, saying, “Those who are responsible must be identified and punished.”
Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi urged hospitals to provide the best possible care for the wounded. Shiite leader Raja Nasir called the attack a serious failure in protecting human life and appealed for blood donations, noting that hospitals were in urgent need. The bombing occurred near an event attended by Uzbekistan’s President Shavkat Mirziyoyev in Islamabad, several miles from the mosque. Islamabad has previously suffered major attacks, including a 2008 bombing at the Marriott Hotel that killed 63 people. The incident comes days after multiple attacks in Balochistan by the outlawed Baloch Liberation Army, which killed roughly 50 people and prompted security forces to eliminate more than 200 militants.
-
Politics2 days agoAssembly Confirms Popular Redeemed Pastor As Deputy Governor
-
Foreign2 days agoCabinet Reshuffle: President Sacks Finance Minister
-
Business1 day agoJUST IN: 13 Banks May Shut Down In March As CBN Confirms 20 Safe For Recapitalisation Deadline
-
Politics2 hours agoBREAKING: “Serial Disrespect” Sparks Drama As Senate Order Arrest Of Tinubu’s Appointee
-
Politics2 hours agoOpposition Leaders Urge N’Assembly To Begin Fresh Electoral Act Amendment
-
Opinion2 hours agoEdo State To Spend N1billion On Armoured Car For Speaker, N4.6billion On Vehicles For Lawmakers
