Image is of Ansarallah military spokesman Yahya Saree delivering a statement/speech.
The ceasefire appears to be at least temporarily over, with an exchange of fire between (what appears to be) predominantly Iran and the entity, though as always I expect we’ll find increasing evidence of direct US involvement.
The chain of events was as follows, in spoilers below for those who haven’t been keeping up:
chain of events summary
-
A while ago, Iran warned the occupation entity that if they strike Beirut (with particular emphasis on its southern suburbs, which is an area where Hezbollah officials/structures are concentrated as I understand it) then they will directly strike the north of Occupied Palestine, turning the area into a military zone, and encouraged settlers to leave to avoid civilian casualties.
-
This warning was grudging accepted by the entity, who ordinarily has a policy called the Daniyeh Doctrine, in which they murder civilians en masse by bombing apartment buildings and houses in enemy cities in order to pressure the military forces they are battling to give into conditions they ordinarily would not be obliged to accept, because the Zionist ground campaigns are usually fairly ineffective at achieving goals on medium to long timescales. While removing their ability to bomb Beirut didn’t halt the Daniyeh Doctrine entirely (they could and did hit other places), their distinct inability to strike the capital when they ordinarily could do that freely was a big source of discontentment in both the civilian population and the military.
-
As Hezbollah increasingly attrited the Zionist offensive forces, the attractiveness of bombing Beirut in retaliation increased regardless of the consequences, and of course the Zionists do still want to do anything they can to attack and weaken Iran directly and are much worse at hiding this than even the US. This resentment culminated on June 7th, where the Zionists conducted an airstrike on Beirut on a Hezbollah HQ.
-
Iran immediately said that this constituted a break in the ceasefire, and Khamenei put Iran back on a full war footing. Within 6 hours of the strike on Beirut, Iranian missiles were flying towards the northern occupied territories, in what they regarded as merely a warning shot. Western media was obviously fairly dismissive of this; 182% interception rates and all that jazz, but we have several videos of missiles hitting targets.
-
Trump publicly warned the Zionists to not respond, which many sensible people immediately diagnosed as kayfabe, and Iran obviously remained on guard against a counterattack. This came a few hours later from Zionist drones and stand-off strikes from aircraft likely in Iraqi airspace, just like in the initial phase of the war months ago. These hit sites in western and central Iran, including a petrochemical facility, but also with some interceptions.
-
Iran then responded to this counterattack with a yet bigger warning shot into the occupied territories. Ansarallah also joined in with strikes on the Zionists, and they additionally announced that the Red Sea is now closed to all vessels linked directly to the entity. Certain accounts have said that the Bab el Mandab is now actually under full blockade, but this is not clearly substantiated as of me writing this at about 2pm BST, June 8th. There’s been a lot of “considering closing” and “threatening to close” and “moving to close” the Red Sea over the ceasefire period that hasn’t materialized, so I don’t want to get out over my skis.
Worth noting that according to Yves over at Naked Capitalism (a fairly reliable and left-leaning, but not communist, website), we’re now about a month or so away from reaching “tank bottom”. This is largely because commercial demand destruction has not sufficiently occurred due to oil price market manipulations keeping it low, and also because there have been basically no government policies in the US like widespread work-from-home orders. So, soon the shortages will be of the literal oil molecules not being available and not just the price signal. So there’s an increasing anxiety in the US to get this conflict over before the economy really starts to crash in the latter half of the year, one way or another. As a deal seems only increasingly unlikely given US stubborness and inability to accept battlefield realities, a return to military strikes as we’ve seen appears the only way forward, despite almost catastrophic munitions shortages.
Last week’s thread is here.
The Imperialism Reading Group is here.
Please check out the RedAtlas!
The bulletins site is here. Currently not used.
The RSS feed is here. Also currently not used.
The Zionist Entity's Genocide of Palestine
Sources on the fighting in Palestine against the temporary Zionist entity. In general, CW for footage of battles, explosions, dead people, and so on:
UNRWA reports on the Zionists’ 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.
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.
Mirrors of Telegram channels that have been erased by Zionist censorship.
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.
Simplicius, who publishes on Substack. Like others, his political analysis should be soundly ignored, but his knowledge of weaponry and military strategy is generally quite good.
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.
Also just a lot of contradictory incomprehensible stuff. Like saying ‘Of course there will be no toll on the strait of hormuz, that is against international law. However it is understood there will be a fee paid for using the strait of Hormuz’
???
What are you even talking about dude? There is no difference between a fee or a toll, they are the same thing.
All the Pez Libs are just like the Succ Dems of the Western Left, how they’ll act all radical and say the right stuff part of the time when it’s clear that’s what the public sentiment is - but then backtrack on all of it and go back to their baseline Liberal reformism at the first opportunity (in the case of the Western Left, posting Lenin memes until an election happens and then they become Mamdanists. In the case of Pez Libs, saying there will be complete Iranian victory and ready to fight a war for a decade after school girls get blown up and the public is outraged and protesting for action but then returning to baseline “lift sanctions and trade with us, we will let in nuclear inspectors (Mossad spies)” bullshit immediately after).
This is just how these people are, at their core, they cannot be changed. Even if Israel and US invaded, nuked them, whatever, their changes will only be temporary. The only solution is to remove these people from the government and install a revolutionary government filled with different people.
there is no contradiction here, just legalese. legally, there is a difference. under UN convention the strait must be open to commercial traffic free of charge, however the neighboring countries can charge fees for repairs and services. since there’s a lot of ships moving through the strait, the plan is to charge an “environmental management fee” instead of a scary freedom of navigation violating toll. this proposal will also give oman a cut. the iranian parliament hasn’t voted on it yet because it’s still remote only, but that’ll be the first item on the agenda once it reopens.
Invoking freedom of navigation doesnt count that close to the coast, and besides the usa isn’t a signatory to the UN Law of the Sea that defines what freedom of navigation is
i agree with you however
edit to include a wikipedia map of territorial boundaries and shipping lanes from 2004
turns out all those ships are sneaking past closer to Oman articles were just showing a boat on the highway lol
I think literally 0 people buy this and the “legalese” of this is entirely moot because this is all in the context of the breakdown of international law and an unprovoked war of aggression carried out completely illegally. Anybody still playing the international law dance is a decade behind the times, I’m sorry. You can’t out-maneuver the nation that controls international law and acts with impunity in the arena of international law.
It is not very reassuring that Iranian civilian leadership seems to be focused on international law loopholes instead of projecting its power and interests to end the genocide and occupations of its allies. Their priorities seem deeply wrong. If they are really winning the war, they can get whatever demands they wish regardless of “international law”. That’s how surrender during wars has always worked. It was “illegal” under international law for the USA to invade Iraq and continue to occupy it for decades, but they did it anyway because they had the military might. They didn’t make excuses about loopholes. It was illegal under international law for them to abduct Maduro and steal Venezuela’s entire oil rights, but they did it anyway. Stop following the made up rules that only bind and do not protect us, while they only protect and do not bind the imperialists.
Appealing to international law signals rationality and willingness to negotiate, which helps Iran maintain the international goodwill to close the Strait. The US has more leeway to ignore international sentiment than Iran does. I think it’s a good thought experiment to consider what would have happened if Iran had decided to close the Strait unprovoked, with no US-Zionist attack to legitimize it.
it signals weakness, and encourages the imperialists to push harder. They only understand violence and pain inflicted on them, nothing else
Because they use more force and everyone is afraid of them. The only way to get people on your side is to prove you can stand up to the bully. Only by forcing them to back off and standing your ground can you gain any allies. Weak capitulation to “international norms” will only earn you scorn and mockery, it will look like you have no other options except weak appeals to “international law” that everyone knows is toothless.
I don’t think USrael cares about words at all, not Iran’s or anyone else’s or even their own. I don’t think anything Iran says, whether aggressive or conciliatory, will change the posture of the US or the Zionists. The empire will always seek the maximum they think they can get away with.
I agree with the principle, but I would argue that Iran succeeds by that metric. Iran has met aggression with aggression. I don’t know “how Iran looks” to other nations, but among civilian experts the prevailing view seems to be that Iran has won. I think invoking international norms is a rhetorical strategy to keep the blame on the US even though Iran controls the Strait. It’s a way of saying, “The US forced us to do this. If you want to be mad at someone, be mad at them, we’re the reasonable party here.”
I don’t know if I feel optimistic, it’s been a grim 21st century, but Iran’s control of the Strait, and regional escalation parity with USreal, seem encouraging to me.
im not going to pretend to be privy to the negotiation details, but the goal is probably to create a plausible scenario in which iran is in control of its main source of advantage while at the same time maintaining diplomatic relationships with its neighbors. international law is not important because of whatever liberal values it represents, it’s important because most countries have agreed to it. why would the government shoot itself and isolate itself further? USA can violate international law as much as it wants not because it controls international law or every bilateral relationship, but because it controls the world’s financial system and sanctioning USA is akin to suicide.
im sorry but do you genuinely think US is willing to sign a document of unconditional surrender? US is fully capable of doing a genocide (even without nukes), and is willing to sacrificing the gulf countries if it comes to it. there’s simply a limit on what iran can demand and while yes the negotiating team can probably do better, it’s really not by that much.
If this argument was true, surely Iranian leadership that originally came up with the toll plans/proposals were aware that it’s illegal by international law. Why didn’t they just say Fee initially instead of saying something illegal then backtracking? This suggests movement, a retreat, within Iranian leadership and the positions they are taking. Where they initially felt confident enough to assert their interests unapologetically, and now are changing it and retreating from that instead of defending it. At best, it was an unforced error that alienated their neighbors right? At worst, it demonstrates a capitulation in leadership to the demands of “international law” ie American demands.
Did Venezuela? No. They just agreed to have their oil funds locked up in an American controlled fund. You don’t have to explicitly, outright state it was a surrender for it to be one. America retreating from the region and allowing the tolls/fees and forcing the entity to withdraw its occupation forces temporarily and cease hostilities would be functionally identical to them signing a surrender document. I hope for the former, I do not expect the latter. But if Iran does win in this respect, it won’t be through international law or loopholes therein, it will be from display of their might and willingness to inflict violence against the settlers and their proxies, their willingness to mine the strait and win a war of attrition. They win on the battlefield, and they force concessions. International law has nothing to do with it.
My understanding of how countries normally do tolls is that they just call it a fee and that it’s already a thing for other countries in the region. This is Iran just playing coy about wanting a cut for oil going through.
It’s not very coy when you just outright say it out-loud within a single sentence. That’s just giving up the game. Araghchi really says some foot-in-mouth stuff sometimes.
Iran sources have previously clarified the fee would be for navigational services, health and saftey kinda shit, you know, moving through part of a nations territory would actually involve a lot of administration and other labour
as far as I am concerned, the talk of the toll was largely drummed uo by western media to get seppos all riled up, it’s like the sea mines in the strait that arent even there, it’s just so imperialist dogs can spit out their champaigne and shout how could they!? while they press the button that kills children
this is not true at all, the Iranian government repeatedly called for and imposed a toll, and talked it up publicly