Latest news with #DmitryPolyansky
Shafaq News
09-08-2025
- Politics
- Shafaq News
Arab League, UN to meet on Gaza occupation plan
Shafaq News – Cairo/New York The Arab League and the UN Security Council will both convene on Sunday to address Israel's plan to fully occupy the Gaza Strip. Palestinian Envoy to the Arab League Muhannad al-Aklouk said the League's session will be held at its Cairo headquarters at Palestine's request and with support from member states. The meeting will discuss measures to counter Israel's decision to seize all of Gaza, which he warned could lead to mass displacement and worsen the humanitarian crisis. In New York, Russian Deputy UN Ambassador Dmitry Polyansky noted that the Security Council's emergency meeting on Gaza, initially sought for Friday, was delayed until Sunday morning by Panama, which currently holds the council presidency. He criticized the postponement as unjustified given the urgency of the situation. 🚨‼️🔥Urgent Russian Statement Rejecting the UN Security Council Presidency's Postponement of a Meeting on the Occupation of GazaRussia's Deputy Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Dmitry Polyansky, announced that the Panama mission, which holds the Security Council… — MOSCOW NEWS 🇷🇺 (@MOSCOW_EN) August 9, 2025 The meetings follow the Israeli security cabinet's approval of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's 'gradual' plan to occupy the entire territory. The first stage targets Gaza City, involving the displacement of nearly one million residents to the south, encirclement of the city, and incursions into residential areas. The second stage calls for the takeover of central Gaza's refugee camps, many already heavily damaged. According to UN data, 87% of Gaza's territory is either under Israeli control or subject to evacuation orders. The UN has warned that any further military expansion would have 'catastrophic consequences.'
Al Jazeera
06-08-2025
- Politics
- Al Jazeera
Russia protests Israeli settler attack on diplomatic vehicle in West Bank
Moscow has lodged a formal complaint with Israel over an attack by Israeli settlers on a Russian diplomatic vehicle near an illegal settlement in the occupied West Bank. Russia's Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said in a statement on Tuesday that Moscow considered the attack a 'gross violation of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961', and expressed 'bewilderment and disapproval' that the attack 'occurred with the connivance of Israeli military personnel'. According to Zakharova, the vehicle belonging to Russia's representation to the Palestinian Authority (PA) and bearing diplomatic registration plates was attacked on July 30 near the 'illegal Israeli settlement of Giv'at Asaf', located east of Ramallah and some 20km (12 miles) north of Jerusalem, by a group of settlers. 'The vehicle sustained mechanical damage. The attack was accompanied by verbal threats directed at the Russian diplomats,' the spokeswoman said, adding that Israeli soldiers present 'did not even bother to stop the aggressive actions of the attackers'. According to reports in Russian media, the vehicle came under attack while carrying members of Russia's diplomatic mission to the PA, who are also accredited with Israel's Foreign Ministry. The Russian Embassy in Tel Aviv has sent a demarche letter to Israeli authorities, Zakharova added. Russia's first deputy permanent representative to the United Nations, Dmitry Polyansky, raised the attack on the diplomatic vehicle at a UN Security Council session on Tuesday focused on Israeli captives in Gaza. Polyansky said the attack on Russia's vehicle in the occupied West Bank comes at a time when 'Israeli authorities have embraced the policy of cleansing and colonising' the Palestinian territory. 'It is ordinary Palestinians and even foreigners who every day become victims of relentless raids by security forces and settler violence,' Russia's UN representative said. The 'attack on an official vehicle of the Russian Mission to the Palestinian Authority' was carried out 'under the lenient eye of the Israeli military', he said. 'It is clear that a systematic policy of exiling Palestinians – whether from the Gaza Strip or the West Bank – is fraught with new risks and dangers for stability and security in the Middle East and could once again bring the region to the brink of a major war,' he added. Violent attacks by Israeli settlers and soldiers in the occupied West Bank have surged since October 2023, with the UN reporting that almost 650 Palestinians – including 121 children – have been killed in the territory by Israeli forces and settlers between January 1, 2024 and the start of July 2025. A further 5,269 Palestinians were injured during that period, including 1,029 children. Settler attacks alone accounted for more than 2,200 casualties and cases of damage to property, the UN said.
Russia Today
16-06-2025
- Politics
- Russia Today
Deterrence or death: Israel is making the case for a nuclear-armed Iran
Just hours after Israel launched its strikes on Iran in the early hours of Friday, June 13, US President Donald J. Trump declared that it was 'not too late' for Tehran to return to the negotiating table over its nuclear program. The level of delusion displayed by the joint aggressors here is simply staggering. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu justified the bombs being rained on Iranian cities as a means to bring 'freedom.' The US-Israeli axis sees no contradiction in reducing a sovereign nation to rubble while draping its aggression in humanitarian rhetoric. The strike came even as Washington and Tehran were engaged in protracted negotiations over the thorny nuclear issue. This is not diplomacy; this is coercion cloaked in diplomatic theater. Worse, it will go down as a day of infamy in international relations: a moment when negotiation was used not to resolve conflict, but to disguise premeditated violence. What did Israel and the United States hope to achieve through this betrayal? Regime change? The total submission of a sovereign nation to a militarized settler state forged in 1948? Are we now expected to believe that post-regime change, Tehran will suddenly embrace Tel Aviv – as some delusional pro-Israel ideologues like to fantasize? Incredibly, Israel now casts itself as the victim. Russia's deputy UN envoy Dmitry Polyansky brusquely described Israel's claims that it was only acting in 'self-defense' as 'very perverted logic.' But such perversion runs deep in the policies and pathologies of the Israeli state. As key Iranian infrastructure is bombed to ruins, and as Netanyahu urges Iranians to overthrow what he calls 'an evil and oppressive regime,' many Iranians are calling, ironically and defiantly, for their government to acquire nuclear weapons as the only credible deterrent against the endless cycle of sanctions, sabotage, targeted killings, and military strikes unleashed by the US-Israeli axis. Under such circumstances, can Tehran be blamed for cultivating and arming proxies like Hezbollah and Hamas in an effort to contain Israel? Just look at what Israel did to its neighbours before these groups existed. What makes Netanyahu believe that any post-Ayatollah government would be more pliant? If anything, it might be more resolute in seeking the ultimate deterrence. After all, Iran has been the target of unrelenting foreign aggression since the 1953 CIA-MI6 coup against nationalist Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh. And let us not forget that during the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq War, the Islamic Republic was bombarded with chemical weapons, supplied or sanctioned by Western powers. Washington had no qualms back then, when Saddam was 'our man.' That was, until Israel orchestrated a back-channel arms pipeline that would become the infamous Iran-Contra affair. Can any self-respecting nation endure the constant humiliation meted out by its adversaries? That model of submission may succeed in parts of the Arab world, or in post-colonial client states across the Global South, but the Persians are apparently made of sterner stuff. Only time will tell. A civilization that traces its lineage to Cyrus and Avicenna has a moral and historical obligation to protect itself from existential threats. And if doing so requires the ultimate form of deterrence, then so be it – even if that means defying a so-called 'international community' that has allowed Israel to quietly amass nuclear weapons and lay waste to its neighbors with impunity for nearly 80 years. Israel, for its part, has warned the world time and again of the consequences of ignoring its self-declared prerogatives. As Netanyahu declared last year: 'If Israel falls, the whole world falls.' What exactly did he mean by that? Perhaps he was alluding to the Samson Option – a Sword of Damocles that Israel has long wielded over the world's head. It has been described as a nuclear-armed ultimatum: protect Israel at all costs, or face global ruin. The Samson Option refers to Israel's alleged military doctrine of massive nuclear retaliation in the face of an existential threat. Named after the biblical figure who brought down a Philistine temple, killing himself along with his enemies, the doctrine reflects a last-resort strategy. If Israel faces annihilation, it will reportedly unleash its full nuclear arsenal, possibly as many as 400 warheads, against its adversaries, regardless of collateral damage or global fallout. But is the Samson Option truly limited to nuclear counterstrikes? Former Israeli Defense Minister Naftali Bennett once warned that if Israel were ever pushed to the brink, critical global systems, including life-sustaining medical devices like pacemakers, could cease to function. That may sound far-fetched, until you consider that Israel's cybersecurity and cyber-strategic sectors have become a strategic pillar of its economy. Navigation apps like Waze, maritime tracking systems, and aerospace logistics pipelines are embedded with 'secure' Israeli codes. Now imagine a hidden fail-safe buried in legacy software across the globe, programmed to unleash cascading failures across nuclear plants, air traffic control systems, financial markets, and emergency infrastructure when the Samson Option is unleashed? Think of the recent Stuxnet and Lebanese pager affairs as harbingers. One keystroke, one kill-switch, and the lights go out everywhere! As a researcher in systemic global risks, I find it increasingly naive to assume that the Samson Option is limited to a conventional nuclear doctrine. The real Samson Option may be about collapsing the global system itself – a scorched-earth deterrent against isolation or defeat. Kenneth Waltz, one of the most influential realist thinkers in international relations, argued in a controversial 2012 Foreign Affairs article titled 'Why Iran Should Get the Bomb' that a nuclear-armed Iran might actually stabilize the Middle East, rather than destabilize it. Waltz's theory is rooted in neorealism (or structural realism), which sees the international system as anarchic, and posits that states act primarily to ensure their own survival. From this perspective, nuclear weapons are the ultimate deterrent, and their spread, under specific conditions, can actually lead to greater stability. Consider North Korea: since developing nuclear weapons and delivery systems, its behavior has arguably become more calculated and status-quo-oriented. It also encouraged Trump to extend an olive branch to Kim Jong-un. Israel remains the sole nuclear power in the Middle East, a monopoly fostering strategic imbalance and absolute impunity. The emergence of a rival nuclear-armed state, even with minimal second-strike capability, would force belligerent sides to act with greater caution. Conflicts would likely be reduced to face-saving precision strikes, as seen with nuclear-armed India and Pakistan. Despite hosting radical militant groups, Pakistan has behaved as a rational actor within the nuclear matrix. Similarly, a nuclear Iran could reduce its reliance on asymmetric proxy strategies – such as its support for Hamas or Hezbollah – because its security would primarily rest on deterrence. Some critics however warn that if Iran acquires nuclear weapons, Saudi Arabia may rapidly follow suit. A moot point, except that Riyadh bankrolled Islamabad's nuclear weapons program under America's watch during the 1980s Soviet-Afghan War which featured beloved 'anti-Soviet warriors' like Osama bin Laden! There are also persistent reports which suggest that some Pakistani nuclear assets may already be stationed in Saudi Arabia, under the command of senior Pakistani officers. In the event of a regional nuclear escalation, Riyadh can simply request transfer at will. Historical precedents also do not support alarmist non-proliferation fears. When North Korea acquired nuclear weapons, neither South Korea nor Japan followed suit. Deterrence, once established, tends to cool ambitions, especially when the cost of escalation becomes too high. So, what happens if Israel prevails in the current high-stakes military standoff, and a 'friendly' government is installed in Tehran? This could come about in any number of ways, as Israel alone will not be able to bomb Iran into submission. From a game theory perspective, a series of false flag events can be pinned on 'Iranian sleeper cells.' Furthermore, Netanyahu keeps insisting that Iran is plotting to assassinate Trump – a charge unsubstantiated by any US intelligence findings. If a 'presidential transition' occurs overnight, Vice President J.D. Vance may commit US forces directly to Israel's ongoing bombardment of Iran. But let's game out another scenario: If the current conflict escalates and the Temple Mount in Jerusalem is destroyed – whether by design or by accident – Iran will almost certainly be blamed for the loss of Islam's third holiest site. Such an event would enrage the Sunni Muslim world, redirecting its fury toward Shia Iran, and potentially paving the way for Israel to construct its long-anticipated Third Temple. Notably, in the early 1980s, Israeli extremists plotted to blow up the Dome of the Rock and the adjacent Al-Aqsa Mosque to effect this very outcome. Should such scenarios unfold, it could mark the disintegration of the Middle East as we know it. Netanyahu has previously hinted that after Iran, nuclear-armed 'militant Islamic regimes' like Pakistan could be next in Israel's crosshairs. This warning is not without its irony. For decades, Pakistan's deep state has maintained covert ties with Israel – dating back to Mossad-ISI collaboration in arming the Mujahideen during the 1980s Soviet-Afghan war. Israel has long been aware of Pakistan's 'pan-Islamic' nuclear ambitions but likely opted for strategic silence until all the Middle Eastern chips were in place. What the wider Muslim world fails to grasp is this: alliances with unprincipled powers are always transactional. When the geopolitical bill comes due, it may cost far more than anyone is willing to pay. Since its founding in 1948, several Israeli leaders have consistently expressed a vision of 'Greater Israel' stretching from the Nile to the Euphrates – encompassing parts of Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, and the Gulf. Iran however remained the perennial spoiler to this geopolitical dream. In fact, it was none other than Supreme Allied Commander Europe (NATO), General Wesley Clark, who famously revealed that Iran was the last in a list of seven Middle Eastern countries slated for regime change after 9/11. The current conflict is not about Iranian nukes per se; it is about Israel's territorial ambitions and the fulfilment of ancient apocalyptic messianic fantasies. Zionist ideologues like Avi Lipkin had even floated the idea of 'purifying Mecca, Medina, and Mt. Sinai' – rhetoric that signals theological as much as territorial ambitions. Once Israel secures strategic depth in the Middle East, it may soon challenge major powers beyond the region. But first, Iran must be subdued!
Saba Yemen
14-06-2025
- Politics
- Saba Yemen
Polyansky: Israel's provocation of Iran could have very serious consequences
New York - Saba: Russia's First Deputy Permanent Representative to the United Nations Dmitry Polyansky said that Israel's provocation of Iran could have very serious consequences at the international level. Polyansky indicated, according to RT, that Russia fully supports Tehran's position that such an attack is inadmissible. The Russian diplomat emphasized "This is absolutely unacceptable, and no one should be allowed to behave the way "Israel" is. This is a complete disregard for international law and a very dangerous provocation of these norms and everything that truly preserves the integrity of our world." Whatsapp Telegram Email Print more of (International)
Russia Today
14-06-2025
- Politics
- Russia Today
‘Perverted logic' to call Israeli attack on Iran self-defense
Framing Israel's attack on Iran as self-defense is a form of 'perverted logic,' Russia's deputy envoy to the UN, Dmitry Polyansky, has told RT, accusing West Jerusalem of flagrantly breaching the global body's charter. On Friday, Israel struck Iranian uranium enrichment sites, while also killing several senior military commanders and scientists in targeted assassination operations, describing its acts as preemptive steps aimed at stopping Tehran from acquiring a nuclear bomb. Iran, which denies pursuing a military nuclear program, responded by launching multiple volleys of ballistic missiles at targets in Israel, including in the country's largest city, Tel Aviv. In his interview on Saturday, Polyansky accused Western politicians claiming that Israel's attack on Iran was 'self-defense' of having 'very perverted logic.' 'Of course, every country has the right to defend itself. But in this case, Israel launched an aggression – an attack against Iran – totally violating and breaching the UN Charter and international law… I cannot imagine how it can be framed as legitimate self-defense,' he said. The authorities in Moscow 'totally support the Iranian position… that this is absolutely inadmissible and that nobody should be permitted to act as Israel does,' the diplomat stressed. The attack on Iran is 'a very dangerous provocation against international law, against everything that really keeps our world together, and it can trigger very-very serious consequences regionally and internationally,' he warned. According to Polyansky, the goal of the Israeli strike was to 'undermine' the US-Iran nuclear talks, the next round of which is scheduled to take place on Sunday. Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei said on Friday that diplomacy was made 'meaningless' by the Israeli attack on Iran, which he claimed was 'allowed' by Washington. However, in a later comment Baghaei clarified that Tehran had not yet made a decision to call off Sunday's meeting in Oman. Moscow wants the talks between the US and Iran to continue, Polyansky said. When it comes to resolving 'the controversy around the Iranian nuclear program... we, of course, favor the way of diplomacy and restraint,' he stressed.
