Speaking ahead of a meeting of EU ministers in Brussels, the bloc’s foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said: “If you act as a terrorist, you should also be treated as a terrorist.”

Shahin Gobadi, a member of the NCRI’s foreign affairs committee, told Brussels Signal that the decision was long overdue. “We have been pushing for this for a long time. In our view, the decision is at least three decades late,” he said.

Continue reading HERE

Source: https://brusselssignal.eu/2026/01/iranian-resistance-backs-eu-plan-to-label-revolutionary-guards-terrorists/?fbclid=IwY2xjawPtyqdleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBzcnRjBmFwcF9pZBAyMjIwMzkxNzg4MjAwODkyAAEeSXeGamL60_54lVt1RF3TH2xy2-97JhopBU1G1B8TSS6xkGznzGxfAQmt47Q_aem_x2I2NK6FLIK8fEbCvPuCjw

The post Iranian resistance backs EU plan to label Revolutionary Guards ‘terrorists’ first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

USS Georgia transits Strait of Hormuz

DUBAI:  Some Middle East officials worry a “perfect storm” may be brewing in the Middle East as the final hours of Donald Trump’s time in office tick down. The United States and Israel have deployed new military assets in the Persian Gulf region, as Iran sends more ballistic missiles and drones to its proxy groups in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen, increasing concerns of an imminent confrontation.

“It is like conditions are being set for the perfect storm,” said one official in the Persian Gulf region, who asked not to be identified.

The U.S. Navy announced Dec. 21 that the Ohio-class guided-missile submarine USS Georgia, accompanied by two other warships, entered the Arabian Gulf waters, joining the USS Nimitz Carrier Strike Group that was deployed to the region late last month.

“SSGNs are one of the most versatile platforms in the fleet, equipped with superior communications capabilities and the ability to carry up to 154 Tomahawk land-attack cruise missiles. The platform can also be configured to host up to 66 Special Operations Forces,” reads a statement by U.S. 5th Fleet, whose command is based in Bahrain

The U.S. Air Force flew two B-52 bombers to the Middle East on Dec. 30 in the second such mission this month and the third since November. U.S. officials described the B-52 long-range flights to the Middle East as a message of deterrence to Iran.

Several regional analysts and observers have warned the military buildup could be a prelude to a plan by Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to provoke Iran into a military confrontation that would free them to strike its nuclear and ballistic missile facilities and proxy militias in the region.

“These activities are more than just posturing. They are more like repositioning in preparation for something that could either be planned or anticipated,” said Mohammed Baharoon, the director-general of B’huth Center for Public Policy here. “Moving a strike group and a nuclear submarine and flying bombers repeatedly on dry runs are costly exercises and are more than delivering a message to Iran to keep away. Wolves don’t run for nothing.”

Baharoon pointed out that Israel’s decision to show and announce the sailing of a Dolphin submarine through the Suez Canal towards the Red Sea is by itself “a significant message and indication of a possible scenario in place.”

The displays of U.S. military are just days ahead of the first anniversary for the assassination of IRGC senior commander General Qassem Suleimani in a U.S. drone attack last January 3, in Baghdad. Iran has vowed to avenge the killing of its commander who was responsible for all IRGC operations abroad.

Israel is already engaged in a low-intensity conflict with the Iranian Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) and their main allied Shiite militia the Lebanese Hezbollah, as Breaking D readers know. Israeli warplanes have launched about 40 air raids on basis and arms depots for the IRGC and Hezbollah in Syria in 2020. The last attack, in the early morning hours of Dec. 30, targeted what Syrian sources describe as a missile depot southwest of Damascus. Just few days earlier Israeli warplanes blasted installations at the “Syrian Military Research” compound in Hama province that, Syrian sources say, were used to build long-range artillery rockets and ballistic missiles based on technologies and parts supplied by Iran.

Israeli officials have repeatedly said they will not tolerate the deployment of Iranian ballistic missiles and other advanced weapons along the northern borders with Syria and Lebanon.

Hezbollah’s leader Hassan Nasrallah asserted in a Dec. 27 interview that his group was on a full state of alert and was in possession of “highly accurate” ballistic missiles that can hit any target in Israel. “The (Iranian) precision missile project has not stopped and will not stop,” Nasrallah told pro-Hezbollah Al-Mayadeen TV.

The region was already on tenterhooks after last month’s killing of Iranian nuclear scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, regarded by the West as the head of the Iranian nuclear program. Iranian officials have accused Israel of killing the scientist and promised retaliation.

Some U.S. officials noted that the recent military deployments were meant to reassert continued U.S. commitment to its Middle Eastern allies even as President Trump’s administration withdrew thousands of troops from Iraq and Afghanistan.

The deployment of the guided-missile submarine and other vessels signals the U.S. Navy’s “commitment to regional partners and maritime security,” the Navy said, displaying its readiness “to defend against any threat at any time.”

Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) spokesman Brig. Gen. Hidai Zilberman said in an interview with a Saudi news-site on Christmas Day that Israeli intelligence has picked up signals that Iran might use its proxies in Iraq or Yemen to attack Israel with drones or ballistic missiles.

Iran and its allies have grown more alarmed by the heightened military activities. This was also reflected in the recent interview by Nasrallah, when he suggested that the Trump administration’s remaining time in office must be managed carefully, calling the outgoing US president “crazy.”

Suleimani’s successor, Gen. Esmail Ghaani made a surprise visit to Baghdad on December 23 where he met with the commanders of Iran’s proxy militias, a few days after the U.S. Embassy compound in the Iraqi capital was targeted by Katyusha rockets.

The rocket attack on Baghdad’s diplomatic Green Zone on Dec. 20 was regarded as a terrorist act by US and Iraqi government officials.

“The United States strongly condemns the latest attack by Iran-backed militias on the International Zone in Baghdad. While no Embassy personnel were harmed, the attack caused at least one Iraqi civilian casualty and damaged Iraqi civilian property,” Pompeo said in a statement.

Baharoon says he does not think all-out war is planned. “I don’t believe the U.S. or Israel want to start a war with Iran, but they could be trying to provoke a confrontation that would provide the opportunity to target Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missiles installations, creating a mess for President-elect Joe Biden to deal with,” Baharoon said. “But would Iran take the bait, or keep low until Biden is in office?”

Source: click here

The post Persian Gulf Buildup By US, Israel Worries Region: ‘A Perfect Storm?’ first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

Militias sharing power with weak central governments has become a growing phenomenon in the Middle East, causing widespread alarm of state structure collapsing and chaos spreading across borders. This new trend has common features on many levels, but most important of all the strong ties between the militias and some regional powers, in particular Iran. The Iranian Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) is the main source of arming and funding to major non-state actors that have strongly established themselves as decision makers in their respective countries: The Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) in Iraq, the Houthis in Yemen, Hezbollah in Lebanon and several pro-regime militias in Syria. The PMF, the Houthis and Hezbollah not only have well-armed forces, but also have strong political representation within their respective states in the form of members of parliament or the government.

Militias, by definition are armed groups involved in insurgency warfare against the central government or a foreign force or other militias within a country that might be under occupation or has either become a failed state or on the verge of becoming one. Militia members are often ideologues that form an ultra-nationalist group or a sectarian group in a quest to weaken an occupation force or the central government and force it to adhere to their demands and comply with their ideology. Militias in general do not respect the state’s law or international laws. Some countries undergo internal political power struggle that could lead to a civil war. This is not the case being discussed in this article. It is about extensive efforts by a foreign power to create armed non-state actors in sovereign states to control them. Militias are the favorite tools used by regional or super powers in fighting proxy wars against one another. Such militias thrived during the Cold War era, and in other periods of global conflicts. They have now made a strong comeback at an unprecedented scale in the Middle East region.

The current situation in the Middle East could be regarded by military scientists as Fourth Generation warfare, which is simply defined as the loss of the central government’s monopoly on the use of force due to the rise of an armed non-state actor. In modern states, only security agencies and regular armed forces have the right to use arms and resort to violent means to enforce law and order and defend the country’s borders. However, in a Fourth Generation Warfare environment militias or armed non-state actors are often the tools of foreign powers in a quest to establish control over a state and subsequently enhance regional influence through an indirect and less costly approach. Under this scenario, the hostile powers do not need to send their own troops to defeat the other nation or take it over. They simply arm and fund non-state actors in the targeted countries and get them to do their dirty work. Iran fought an eight-year-long war against Iraq in the eighties costing it hundreds of thousands of lives without a victory. But now it has made a great deal of progress in controlling Iraq via the PMF militias and without sacrificing any of its troops. Also, through Hezbollah and Iranian-backed Shiite militias in Syria, Tehran has now virtual control over all the territory from its southwestern borders all the way to the Mediterranean.

Therefore militias are now a major component of the so-called Fourth Generation Warfare. Their presence is often aimed at weakening the central government and spreading chaos to facilitate their hostile takeover of state institutions. The situation becomes more complex when there are multiple militias in one state and each militia is serving a different foreign power, which is what is taking place today in countries like Syria and Libya. Regional and global powers are supporting warring factions in these two countries that have become infested with radical terrorist groups while the process to broker a political settlement to re-establish a strong central government there remains deadlocked.

One phenomenon endangering global stability and international law is that the militias are gaining recognitions by members of the international community and are treated as legitimate entities. The U.S.-led Alliance combating terrorists in Iraq and up until late 2016, coordinated with the PMF and provided them with air support in the war against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS). Russia has been working closely with Hezbollah and pro-Iranian Shiite militias in Syria to drive back rebel forces and save the regime there. The political leadership of Hezbollah is recognized by the European Union and Russia and formal lines of communications exist between the two powers with Hezbollah officials, even though the group’s military branch is integrated with its political leadership. Hezbollah is regarded a terrorist group by the U.S. and some Arab Gulf States.

So the PMF and Hezbollah are treated as acceptable entities co-existing with the state’s security agencies and armed forces. The non-state actors have created parallel institutions to that of the state dealing with welfare, religious affairs, education, communications and media. As a result countries like Lebanon and Iraq are now politically vulnerable at all times and actions of their political leaderships are often questionable by the international community. Normalizing this abnormal situation has only encouraged regional powers to create more militias, and the phenomenon is spreading.

The presence of a militia in a multi-ethnic or multi-sectarian country will increase the possibility of a civil war, because when one non-state actor possesses arms other communities in the country will feel an existential threat and subsequently seek ways to form their own armed militias to protect themselves. This will ultimately lead to a civil war as is the case in Libya and other regional countries. Moreover, ungoverned territories and fragile states have proven very attractive to extremist groups like Al Qaeda and ISIS to establish themselves there and spread terror worldwide. This is evident today in places like Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Libya.

Even if a country’s population is not made up of multi-ethnic or sectarian communities, a militia cannot permanently coexist peacefully with a state because it will always compete with the central government for the monopoly on the use of force and the drafting of foreign policy and managing state institutions. The conflict between the two sides could be postponed but never avoided. It is a matter of time before the country goes through a gradual meltdown of its institutions leading to a civil war and possible breakup.

Hence, global powers should concentrate on reviving and strengthening central governments in the Middle East and deny militias affiliated with foreign powers any legitimacy. Moreover, the international community must set new tough rules regarding armed non-state actors that are backed and funded by a foreign power to take over an internationally-recognized state that is a member of the United Nations. Such an act amounts to a foreign invasion of a sovereign state and must be treated as such.

*Riad Kahwaji, is the founder and director of INEGMA with a 28 years of experience as a journalist and a Middle East security analyst.

Source: http://www.eurasiareview.com/02082018-militias-rule-in-fourth-generation-warfare-in-middle-east-region-dangerous-trend-analysis/

The post Militias’ Rule In Fourth Generation Warfare In Middle East Region: Dangerous Trend – Analysis first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.