Release Our People!

"We had hoped and worked for the safe return of the four members of the family from Hamas captivity."

"I send my deepest condolences to the family. I thank the IDF and Israel Security Agency forces for their determined operation to return our hostages."

"We will continue to make every effort to bring all of our hostages home -- both the living and the dead." 

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu

 

"I hope that all the captives, whether alive or not, will return."

"We don’t need to keep receiving news every week about one or two captives coming back to us in coffins."

"I hope there will be peace, quiet, and tranquility for the whole world. Enough already with all this suffering for these innocent souls."

"We were told by the army that Hamza was also killed, but his body has not been recovered. At the funeral, [Ziadna’s] children ran around shouting, ‘how can it be? Our father’s name was on the list of captives; he’s supposed to come home.’ Now, that hope is gone."

"The family is angry that the government isn’t making a deal to free the captives. Unfortunately, two days [after seeing the list], we received the heartbreaking news — for the whole family, for the entire city, for the world — that they were murdered, and this was their fate."

"It’s so very sad for the entire family. We’re all in shock."

Youssef Ziadna

 

"We continue to do everything to fulfill our supreme moral obligation -- the return of all the hostages, living and dead, to Israeli soil."

"Deep condolences to the Ziyadne family upon the discovery of the bodies of Youssef and Hamza, who were kidnapped by Hamas murderers on October 7 and were rescued in a heroic operation by our heroic soldiers."

Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz

Funeral of Youssef Ziadna, who was killed in Hamas captivity in Gaza, in Rahat, Israel on Jan. 9, 2025.

The bodies of two hostages, Youssef and Hamza Ziyadne, were locaed by troops with the Israel Defense Forces during military operations in the Gaza Strip, it was announced on Wednesday. Defense Minister Israel Katz and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu expressed "deepest sorrow for the terrible news that the Ziyadne family received today". 

On that infamous day of October 7, 2023, among other Israelis taken captive by Hamas operatives and some Palestinian civilians who had joined the terrorist invasion from Gaza into southern Israel, six Arab Muslim Bedouin Israeli citizens were kidnapped, and taken into Gaza. There were four members of the Ziadna family, and two others; Fouad al-Talalka, 22, and Qaid Farhan al-Qadi 53, from the Bedouin Israeli community of Houra, kidnapped from kibbutz Magen. Qadi was returned to Israel in August, found in an IDF rescue mission in a southern Gaza tunnel.

 

Youssef's remains, confirmed by the IDF and Israel Security Agency (Shin Bet), were discovered in a tunnel in the Rafah area of southern Gaza. Hamza's death was not immediately confirmed, although the announcement stated that the discoveries in the tunnel raised 'serious concerns' for his life. "Our hearts ache. We wanted them to return to our family alive, but unfortunately they returned dead. Aisha and her brother Bilal were waiting to embrace them. This is a difficult and shocking disaster", said Youssef's brother, Ali Ziyadne.

53-year-old Youssef Ziyade and his children Hamza, 22, Bilal, 28, and Aisha, 17, residents of the Israeli Bedouin community of Rahat, were working in Kibbutz Holit, close to the border with Gaza, when they were abducted by Palestinian Hamas terrorists on October 7. As part of the November 2023 ceasefire agreement between Jerusalem and Hamas following 55 days of captivity, the two younger children, Bilal and Aisha were released.

 

Israeli authorities estimate there remain 98 hostages in Hamas captivity in Gaza, 94 of whom were abducted during the October 7 attacks. Negotiations to release the remainder of the hostages have been ongoing. Hamas insists that consideration will only be given to their release in exchange for their conditions, among which is the condition that it be agreed they can return to Gaza. Their negotiators claim that it is Israel that is holding up the release of the hostages.

In the latest round of negotiations, when Israel demanded a list from Hamas of the hostages being held, those that are alive and those whose corpses Israel insists must be released as well, Hamas responded that it would need a week or more to compile such a list. That was followed up by Hamas announcing that as a result of Israeli 'aggression' it cannot now find where most of the abductees are. There are, however, estimates by Israeli intelligence that no more than 20 of the hostages may still be alive. 

 

This is part of the Hamas excruciating psychological warfare; after having begun this conflict by inflicting pain and suffering on an unarmed civilian population, conducting an organized mass rape, perpetrating torture and mutilation on Israeli girls and women, incinerating entire families in their homes, slaughtering infants, the elderly, and taking farming villages in stealth early-morning invasions, looting and destroying, slaughtering 1,200 people, including foreign farm workers, it invokes Israeli 'aggression' in response to its own atrocities.

 

And to eke out as much misery and anguish as it possibly can, torturing the families of the vulnerable, starving and beaten hostages by circulating photographs and videos of those purportedly still alive, their gaunt and battered faces barely resembling the healthy youth they had once been as they plead for release from their living hell. Now Hamas coyly denies it can even place all of the hostages known to be in their hands, knowing the anguish they cause the hostages' loved ones and revelling in the divisions it causes between the hostage families and Israeli government authorities determined to destroy their ability to carry out any future atrocities against Israel.

 

Funeral of Youssef Ziadna, who was killed in Hamas captivity in Gaza, in Rahat, Israel on Jan. 9, 2025

 

 

Hamas Psychopathy on Ego-Steroids

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in a meeting with relatives of hostages held in Gaza, at the Prime Minister’s Office in Jerusalem on January 22, 2024. (Prime Minister’s Office)

"Contrary to what is [being] said, there is no genuine proposal by Hamas."

"On the other hand, there is our initiative, which I will not detail."

"If we agree to this [the Hamas demand that the Israel Defense Forces withdraw from Gaza and end its war with Hamas] we will not be able to guarantee the security of our citizens."

"We will not be able to return the evacuees safely to their homes, and the next October 7 will only be a matter of time."

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu

Demonstrators hold up portraits of hostages held by the Hamas terror group during a rally to demand their release, near the Prime Minister’s Residence in Jerusalem on January 22, 2024. (Ahmad Gharabli/AFP)

Israel has been attempting to negotiate through third parties with Hamas for the release of the remaining 136 Israeli hostages being held by the terrorists in Gaza. Public pressure and the desperate pleas of the hostages' families, along with the state's own fervent intention to have all Israelis rescued from the plight of further traumatic treatment at the hands of Hamas and other terrorist groups in Gaza have exerted pressure on the government which cannot function solely on its pledge to destroy any future capability of Hamas and Islamic Jihad to mount further attacks on Israel and its citizens. 

The Israeli Prime Minister speaking to representatives of the hostage families in a meeting, apprised them of that simple fact; no offers that could be seriously contemplated have been received from Hamas whose suggestions for the release of the remaining hostages come from a source that believes it has the upper hand in the certainty of how dearly Israelis take the well-being of their citizens to enable it to put forward the kind of offers that no sane government could ever contemplate; certainly not one tasked with the security of its nation.

Benjamin Netanyahu did on the other hand, confirm that during negotiations Hamas demanded the retreat from Gaza of the Israel Defense Forces, and that Israel commit to ending its war with the terrorist group -- a unilateral demand in that whatever Israel might commit to in withdrawing its troops and its commitment to destroy the terrorist group, Hamas would have no intention of stopping its intermittent violent attacks against Israel. Hamas's arrogance demands "the release of all the Nukhba (terrorist commando) murderers and rapists, and leaving Hamas intact."

Troops operating in the Gaza Strip in an undated photo released on January 23, 2024 (Israel Defense Forces)

 

A committee session at the Israeli parliament in Jerusalem (Knesset) saw several dozen relatives of Israelis held hostage disrupt the event with demands that the lawmakers make a greater effort to free their family members. Many of the protesters carried photographs of their family members taken to Gaza. 

 

"Is it reasonable that 260 trucks of flour are entering Gaza now while my brother is eating nothing", Adi Angrest shouted. His brother Sgt. Matan Angrest remains a  hostage in Gaza. "It doesn't make any sense that my brother isn't eating anything when they bring them [Palestinians] 260 trucks of flour!"

 

French Defence Minister Sebastien Lecornu was in Israel to meet with Prime Minister Netanyahu in Jerusalem. Issues being discussed included the Paris-brokered agreement where medicines were to be delivered to Israeli hostages suffering from chronic illnesses that were destined to be provided to them entered the Gaza Strip last week and which the International Committee of the Red Cross stated they had no intention of delivering to the hostages. Instead, they said, the deliveries would be entrusted to Hamas. 

Mr. Lecornu was informed by Netanyahu that he is awaiting evidence that any of the medicines had actually reached the Israeli hostages, emphasizing that the implementation of the agreement must be monitored. Official Israeli figures state that 136 hostages remain in Gaza out of the total of 240 taken there on October 7. An unknown number are believed to have been killed there. 100 of the hostages had been released in November through a deal brokered by Egypt and Qatar.

Israeli authorities have no reason to believe that the hostages received any of the life-saving medications prescribed for their medical conditions. Instead, there is a common belief that just as Hamas operatives had commandeered much of the fuel, food, water and medicines sent by the international community into Gaza through border crossings to alleviate Palestinian shortages, so too did the Hamas terrorists advantage themselves with the delivery into their hands of medications meant for ailing Israeli hostages.

Friends and family members mourn during the funeral of IDF soldier Hadar Kapeluk in the Mount Herzl cemetery in Jerusalem on January 23, 2024, a day after he was killed in combat in the Gaza Strip (Photo by Menahem KAHANA / AFP)

Surrender Says Russia, and We'll Give You Peace

"[The dosage and type of toxin used was not enough to be life-threatening] and most likely was intended to scare the victims as opposed to cause permanent damage."

"The victims said they were not aware of who might have had an interest in an attack."

Bellincat

"We have destroyed the myth of the invincible Russian army."

"We are resisting against the aggression of one of the strongest armies in the world and have succeeded in making them change their goals."

Kyiv Mayor Vitali Klitschko

The gutted remains of Russian military vehicles on a road in the town of Bucha, close to the capital, Kyiv,

 

The Wall Street Journal published a report on a little-commented incident whereby during peace negotiations Russian oligarch Roman Abramovich -- whom Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskii prevailed upon to use his access to Russian elite circles and involve himself in negotiations between Ukraine and Russia -- and the Ukrainian team of negotiators were exposed to a toxic substance from which they are recovering. The symptoms were visibly red eyes, painful tearing and skin peeling on hands and faces.

Their deteriorated health condition resulting from the poisoning by an as-yet-unknown substance did not keep either the negotiators nor Mr. Abramovich, from being fully engaged in matters around arranging for ongoing negotiations to put a halt to the Russian invasion of Ukraine and its deadly destruction. Experts who examined the event reached the conclusion that "poisoning with n undefined chemical weapon" was the likely cause.

As for the ongoing and maddeningly inconclusive peace talks to convince Vladimir Putin to withdraw his troops from Ukraine, Dimytro Kuleba, Ukraine's foreign minister felt a ceasefire remained the only hope his country could have from the talks. "We are not trading people, land or sovereignty", he said in response to the Kremlin's demands and intention to hive off the Donbas from Ukraine to be included within Russian territory.

 

The aftermath of Russian artillery shelling on a residential area in Mariupol where a rocket hit a house, according to the Armed Forces of Ukraine, is seen in this screengrab from a video uploaded on social media  (Armed Forces of Ukraine/Handout via REUTERS)

The threat of Russian attacks continue to block exit routes east and west for civilians desperate to leave their besieged towns and cities. The devastated port of Mariupol's situation appears doomed. Within the Russian troop encirclement, an estimated 160,000 residents remain trapped in the siege.  The city with its formerly 400,000 population has been reduced by constant artillery shelling and bombs to a ghostly vestige of its once-vibrant presence  with 90 percent of its infrastructure in rubble.

 

In the city of Kharkiv a pre-dawn missile hit a school. "They've not been able to take the city, so they've decided to destroy it", observed a Ukrainian who had taken shelter in the school when his home had been bombed out. In Irpin, close to Kyiv, the mayor spoke of Ukrainian forces in full control. Ukrainian military had recaptured the eastern town of Trostyanets as the military continued their offensive to restore their ground.

 

The Russian defence ministry stated that its  troops destroyed ammunition depots in the Zhytomyr region west of Kyiv, the prize goal that Moscow keeps seeing eluding their grasp. As well, they claimed that 41 Ukrainian military depots  had been hit in the past two days, reports that remained unverified in a conflict known as much for its propaganda as for its total lack of human scruples.

 

 Kyiv Mayor Klitschko spoke of 100 people killed in the capital, four children among them. Russian bombing had destroyed 82 multi-storey buildings in the capital as well. Also figures that elude verification. Even while the inescapable reality is that one is a staunchly fierce defender of its territorial integrity, the other a brutally unscrupulous imperialist dictatorship.

A charred Russian tank and captured tanks in the Sumy region of Ukraine  (REUTERS)

Negotiating an End to Conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh

"The final stage of genocide is denial [Turkey's refusal to acknowledge its genocidal war against Armenians in WWI]. By being this aggressive, there's fear that Turkey has ulterior motives in this conflict."

"There's now documented evidence that Turkey has been ferrying religious, extremist fighters from Syria into Azerbaijan to fight Armenian forces."

Kyle Matthews, executive director, Montreal Institute for Genocide and Human Rights Studies, Concordia University

 

"My message was very clear, that Turkey and all external parties should stay out of the conflict ... we had a firm discussion where I was firm with him [Turkish foreign minister Mevlut Cavusoglu] as to where Canada stands."

Canadian Minister of Foreign Affairs Francois-Philippe Champagne

A house burns after shelling by Azerbaijan's artillery in Stepanakert, the separatist region of Nagorno-Karabakh, late Saturday. (The Associated Press)

"We are moving towards a truce tonight or tomorrow, but it's still fragile", explained the office of French President Emmanuel Macron on Friday. So fragile, in the light of a response from Azerbaijan's president that it became abundantly clear the 'agreement' was barely that, and it was not destined to last. Turkey, for one does its best to undermine any initiatives to try to lead Azerbaijan away from its war trajectory that emanate from France, the U.S. and Russia. 

As far as Recep Tayyip Erdogan is concerned the trio's initiatives to end the conflict were certain to fail. A complete withdrawal of Armenian forces from Nagorno-Karabakh is a primary requirement both he and Azerbaijani leader Ilham Aliyev, demand, before talks leading to a ceasefire can even begin. The two weeks of fighting between Armenian and Azerbaijan forces and the ethnic Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh has resulted in hundreds of deaths along with civil infrastructure destruction.

The disputed region has seen two weeks of intense fighting   Reuters

Urging high-level cessation talks between Armenia and Azerbaijan has consumed the efforts of France and Russia and the United States. Those efforts have drawn the haughty contempt of Turkey's Erdogan citing the inability of previous such interventions to solve the problem of the breakaway disputed region which internationally is recognized as Azerbaijan even while Nagorno-Karabakh is in the control of ethnic Armenians representing the majority of the region's population.

Armenians are all too aware that Turkey, which had, under the Ottoman Empire during World War One, engaged in genocidal horrors against Armenians, is once again imperiling Armenian lives. The Azeri President Ilham Aliyev, admitted that following joint military exercises between Turkey and Azerbaijan, Turkish F-16 jets hadremained in his country for weeks. What reason other than for moral and active support for Azerbaijan's planned assault on Nagorno-Karabakh?

Armenia's claims that a Turkish warplane had shot down an Armenian jet, an accusation denied by both Aliyev and Erdogan, certainly have a hook to hang a military cap on. Fighting in the enclave, an ethnically Armenian one with separatist intentions despite the internationally recognized borders of Azerbaijan, flared up at the end of September as the most serious outbreak of violence since 1994 between Azerbaijani troops and ethnic Armenian forces.

The two countries, mediated by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, took 10 hours to agree to a ceasefire   EPA

The fierce clashes have succeeded in claiming hundreds of lives representing both sides of the conflict. Turkey has positioned itself through Erdogan's political aspirations, as a power broker in the South Caucasus, where Turkey had repeatedly refused to help lead Azerbaijan to truce talks. Russia extended an invitation to the foreign ministers of Armenia and Azerbaijan in a move by Moscow to reassert its influence in  he former Soviet republics.

 

Russia's Vladimir Putin retained a sensible perspective emphasizing the need to negotiate an end to hostilities, a cooling off period during which prisoners could be exchanged and the bodies of fallen troops handed over for burial. Even Canada became involved placing Turkey on notice that it should remove itself from the conflict. Relations between Canada and Turkey are somewhat strained since the export of drone technology to Turkey was suspended, giving Canada the opportunity to look into claims Canadian-produced drones were used by Azeri forces against ethnic Armenian tanks in Nagorno-Karabakh. 

In this image taken from a video provided by ArmNews TV, people carry out an injured man from the Holy Savior Cathedral after the church was shelled by Azerbaijan's artillery outside Stepanakert in the self-proclaimed Republic of Nagorno-Karabakh on Oct. 8, 2020. (ArmNews TV via AP)

As for Friday night's agreed-to truce, it wore pretty thin fairly quickly with heavy shelling by both sides continuing overnight irrespective of the grudging agreement. An uncomplicated scenario where Azeri shelling hit the enclave and a response from the Armenians ensued. Leaving both sides to insist it was the other who 'started it'. Even as Nikol Pashinyan, Armenia's president states his open attitude to a ceasire, Ilham Aliyev his Azerbaijani leader made it clear he had no intention of backing off until such time as Armenian forces withdrew.

 

As their two foreign ministers sat down in Moscow for ceasefire talks, Azerbaijaini's Ilham Aliyev condened years of peace talks which failed to yield "an inch of progress", and restated  his pledge to continue fighting until his country succeeded in recapturing all of Nagorno-Karabakh. Some of the rural areas that Aliyev claims to have taken are located outside Karabakh itself, and were more or less deserted, their residents streaming into Karabakh for haven from the Azeri forces. 

 

According to Vahram Pohhosyan, speaking for Aravik Harutyunyan, Nagorno-Karabakh's leader, Sunday saw a 'calmer' situation in the precarious truce. The overnight shelling of Stepanakert however, represented “a disrespect of the agreements reached in Moscow”. The international community, he went on, could put an end to the fighting for good, by recognizing the independence of the province of Nagorno-Karabakh.

 

An Azerbaijani officer stands amid the rubble of a residential building destroyed in the fighting in Ganja. Photograph: Valery Sharifulin/TASS

Islam's War Without End

"It is not in the authority of the United States to decide, they are only a facilitator."
"The government of Afghanistan has made no commitment to free 5,000 Taliban prisoners."
"The people of Afghanistan need to believe that we've gone from war to peace, and not that the agreement will be either a Trojan horse or the beginning of a much worse phase of conflict."
Afghan President Ashraf Ghani

Afghan President Ashraf Ghani. | Rahmat Gul/AP Photo

"The United States has no legal standing to sign a peace agreement or to determine the future of Afghanistan."
Foreign Ministry, Iran

"You are a tough people and have a great country and I understand that you are fighting for your homeland. We have been there for 19 years and that is a very long time and withdrawal of foreign forces from Afghanistan now is in the interest of everyone."
"We had a good conversation. We’ve agreed there’s no violence. We don’t want violence. We’ll see what happens. We had actually a very good talk with the leader of the Taliban."
U.S. President Donald Trump

Abdul Ghani Baradar, the head of the Taliban’s political office. Photograph: EPA

You bet they're tough. They're well practised murderers who will stop at nothing to reinvest themselves as Afghanistan's political as well as faith leaders. It's clear enough that the White House under Donald Trump, given his pre-election promise wants to be shed of its self-imposed obligations in Afghanistan. It's been a generation-long commitment, and the theistic battle between these hard-line Islamists and ordinary Afghans who would prefer to live normal lives in Islam rather than revert to 7th Century 'pure' Islam is an internal struggle, one that an outside interlocutor will never settle.

But it is beyond telling that the Taliban absolutely refused, in its negotiations with the United States, to include the Afghan government, a duly democratically elected government representing the people of that war-torn country, to enter a three-way negotiation. The reason is clear enough, and beyond the Taliban claims that they won't negotiate with an 'illegal' government. Their intention was to persuade the United States to leave Afghanistan, and knowing the U.S. mood that wouldn't be an impossible task.

The Afghan government of President Ashraf Ghani is 'illegal' because democracy, as the Taliban see it, has no place in Islam. Those only who practise pure Islam have the right to govern. Their way is the way of Islam and total obedience to Islam through the auspices of these 'scholars' totally immersed in bloody jihad is the only route to the authority of governing the country.

The agreement reached by the the U.S. negotiator with the Taliban leaders was simply an agreement between those two parties; relieving the U.S. of its tired presence in the country and relieving the Taliban of having to counter American military power, leaving it to continue its vicious violence against the Afghan people. Even Iran gets its oar in, sneering that the U.S. hasn't the moral or religious authority to broker peace between the government and its lethal adversary.

Iran, of course, does have the 'authority' of Islam even if Iran and Afghanistan face opposing sectarian viewpoints. And it practices its authority ruthlessly in its unwavering dedication to terrorism. It now also has another weapon at its disposal, with the novel coronavirus it has inherited from China, a seemingly extremely severe strain with more deadly consequences that it has begun exporting to the Western world.

The accord the U.S. signed with the Taliban was to release combat and political prisoners as a 'confidence-building' measure and all relevant sides would coordinate, and of course approve. But the most relevant side has failed to 'approve', knowing full well the intention of the Taliban to return to its brutal campaign of mass murder as soon as Afghanistan is clear of a U.S. presence. Once the U.S. departs, any remaining vestiges of a NATO presence will disappear as well.

An accord to release 5,000 deadly committed jihadists with blood on their hands, in exchange for a thousand Afghan government captives? What kind of equitable balance in 'good faith' does that represent?  From an ethnic perspective, U.S. negotiator Zalmay Khalilzad may have the confidence of the United States in establishing an uneasy rapport with these jihadists, but it's all smoke and mirrors. The women and girls of Afghanistan know what is in store for them should there be an initial power-sharing agreement with the government and the Taliban.

It would be no time at all before the Taliban manage  handily to cut out any interference in managing the affairs of Afghanistan, where the country will revert to the status quo existing before the UN approved, U.S.-led, NATO mission to oust al-Qaeda from Taliban protection in Afghanistan, to which Pakistan proved its reliability in acting as a partner with the U.S. in its struggle against terrorism, by nurturing the presence of both the Taliban and al-Qaeda in their wild and ungoverned mountainous border states.

U.S. Special Representative for Afghanistan Reconciliation Zalmay Khalilzad and Taliban co-founder Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar sign a peace agreement during a ceremony in the Qatari capital Doha on Feb. 29, 2020.Karim Jaafar / AFP - Getty Images

Marketplace 101: Oversupply? Dial Back Production

"It is very unusual. I am guessing -- [U.S.Trade Representative Robert] Lighthizer may have worried that unrestricted Canadian exports globally could suppress global and hence U.S. prices, and putting a cap on them would prevent this."
Robert Litan, fellow, Brookings Institution, Washington

"A Canadian cheese processor who was buying from the U.S. could suddenly buy from a Canadian producer just as cheaply. So it changed things."
"If everything had been left the way it was, the Canadian milk industry would have been left to drown in its own skim."
"We found a way to clear it, now we'll have to find something else."
Al Mussell, lead researcher, Agri-Food Economic Systems

"So when the U.S. negotiated to get rid of Class 7 pricing, it clearly also sought to put limits on how much of that milk could be exported to third parties."
Andrew Novakovic, professor of agriculture, Cornell University

"[The changes in the USMCA reflect an ongoing effort by the U.S. administration to] manage and reduce trade, not increase it."
"This is clearly designed to deal with the underlying problem which is the potential for excess production of those products in Canada leading to incentives for Canadian producers of those three products to dump them on to global markets."
Chad Bown, senior fellow, Peterson Institute for International Economics, Washington

The new United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement includes greater access to the Canadian market for dairy products from south of the border. (CBC)

The year of trade talks to refurbish the NAFTA free trade agreement between Canada, Mexico and the United States was a tense, dramatic and often Byzantine affair, the United States as the 'senior' partner in terms of size and influence, power and determination, conducting the orchestra, putting the minor instrumental players in their subordinate place throughout the process while re-arranging the seating order in the orchestral pit. What the big guy wants is what the big guy gets.

"We're extremely disappointed with what we understand has been agreed to, with the almost 3.6 per cent access — dairy market access — being given to the U.S., as well as eliminating some of our competitive dairy class, so that will obviously have a majorly negative impact on our industry."

"It's death by 1,000 cuts. Every time there's a trade deal, they're giving another portion of our markets away. It seems as though they wait until the 11th hour and then they give away a portion of it and it simply is devastating for the industry."
"[While Americans get more access to the Canadian market, the USMCA decreases Canada's access to the U.S. market]. So it'll have a double impact. It's a major blow for dairy farmers in Canada but also for the other 200,000 people who are, in one way or another, involved in the dairy industry."

David Wiens, dairy producer, Grunthal, Man., chair, Dairy Producers of Manitoba 

Canada's supply management was not exactly eviscerated to rescue Canada from its solitary side-lining, but the inroads made of surrendering 3.6 percent, hasn't delighted the dairy industry one bit, foreseeing a future when the agreement will begin to noticeably bite. Canadian dairy farmers and their organizations found truly inventive ways to skirt whatever inroads their American counterparts relied upon in bringing their products to Canada. Among the issues was an abundance of protein concentrates and powders.

A Class 7 designation was brought to bear linking to reduced pricing; at one time when American milk products like excess skim milk flooded the Canadian market, Canadian farmers began to produce their own basic product upon which processing of higher-level dairy products could rely, and the importation of the U.S. variety was reduced; a kind of milk-war between nations. At the same time the glut of skim milk from domestic markets was solved for Canadian dairy farmers.

The issue of U.S. dairy producers being stuck with their own oversupply infuriated them no end, and they lobbied furiously in Congress to have Canada's supply market system opened and to have access to the Canadian market for their skim milk surplus for protein concentrates and powders. The thing of it is, the U.S. dairy oversupply problem wouldn't be solved even if it could supply all of Canada's Class 7 skim milk, since Canada hasn't a large enough market to absorb all the U.S. product to begin with.

The American problem is oversupply altogether; in most instances with such a huge population, ten times that of Canada's, the U.S. can absorb most of everything it produces in all consumer areas. Now restrictions have been placed on Canada's global exports of some dairy products, signed into the USMCA through unrelenting pressure. At one time the global community was obsessed with fat-free dairy products and skim milk powder was in high demand. Now, despite obesity a growing public health problem, suddenly people are turning away from lighter products, wanting creamier dairy.

And supply management itself which should logically move farmers to produce less of an unpopular product hasn't yet seemed to kick in. It's a problem shared both by Canada and the U.S. The answer to which is to shed whatever warehoused surplus there is, however that will be managed, and then to gear down production to match market demand. The Class 7 designation meant that Canada could sell its low-fat products at  home and abroad, far different from other Canadian dairy products with their higher prices reflecting supply management.

The result on the global scale of undercutting U.S. dairy prices enraged U.S. dairy farmers who didn't appreciate the competition in international markets leading to lost sales; Canada was taking advantage of high dairy prices for some products in exchange for selling others at lower prices. A new remediating scheme is now installed under USMCA, incorporating U.S. pricing, Canadian processor margins and yields with the final price analogous to Class 7.

The hitch for Canada, however, is that exports are now limited to 55,000 tonnes of milk protein concentrates and skim milk powder in the first year of the agreement and reduced to 35,000 in the second year, the threshold increasing by 1.2 percent each following year with exports in excess of the stipulated amount subject to export taxes of 54 cents per kilogram Canadian.The Canadian dairy industry shipped 75,000 tonnes of skim milk powder in 2017 and that differential reduction stings. 

And the problem on both sides of the border of a huge excess of skim milk hasn't been solved to anyone's satisfaction, nor could it be through this mechanism. Is the American dairy industry happy? Despite the introduced restrictions to Canada's dairy exports there are those in the U.S. who feel the restrictions don't address the severity of the issue.

Dairy farmers in Ontario are expressing concern about the new USMCA trade deal. (CBC)

One of a Kind, All Right....Antagonizing the Tyrant

"The Toronto staff tried numerous times to engage her as it became more apparent she had no plans to include us. We were desperate for face time, for some acknowledgment that our jobs mattered and that the hard work we did was appreciated."
"It was infuriating to see her launch her political bid. Not once did she visit staff at the Toronto office, yet here she was now claiming that this was her home."
"Her lines on championing the middle class were beyond hypocritical. These were good-paying union jobs that were outsourced."
Unnamed former Toronto editor

"When you talk to her about rules of origin, or the dairy, or intellectual property or whatever -- some of these subjects that are extraordinarily complex -- she understood them, and could discuss them."
"Typically, politicians don't -- they are interested in the big picture."
"I never saw Chrystia react to any of that kind of criticism [from the Trump administration]. She's got a pretty thick skin."
David MacNaughton, Canadian ambassador to Washington

"Instead of backing away from the story -- because it was such a dangerous story to report on -- Chrystia blew it wide open. It took a tremendous amount of guts, because gangsters and oligarchs were involved in a lot of murders back then -- of journalists and others."
"Chrystia is like raw steel. It is kind of misleading, you know, you see this relatively short woman with a high-pitched voice, and you might think you can run roughshod over her. Well, guess what? You will have met your match and ten times over."
Bill Browder, founder, CEO, Hermitage Capital Management Ltd.

Chrystia Freeland with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Canadian trade negotiator Steve Verheul. PATRICK DOYLE/AFP/Getty Images

Chrystia Freeland's Ukrainian heritage speaks loud and clear through her scorn for Russia. It's not just the history between Russia and Ukraine and the horrors of the Holdomor, the USSR's rape of Ukraine, the breadbasket of the east, that left millions of Ukrainians to starve to death, and the current Russian Federation's violent intervention supporting secessionist ethnic Russian Ukrainians along with the piracy involved in requisitioning Crimea. She loathes Russia for many reasons. And along with that fact is the one that her grandfather was a fascist ally of Nazi Germany; righteous rage alongside unsavoury connections of anti-Semitism and Holocaust complicity.

But she is, of course, the darling of Canada's large Ukrainian community. The one that resisted the very notion that the Holocaust be commemorated in Canada by a dedicated memorial to the worst atrocity of state-authored genocidal annihilation the world has seen in still-living memory. A journalist by trade, with an outstanding academic record, a reportedly impeccable memory and a facility with a number of languages, she left journalism at the high echelons she had attained internationally, to run for public office. Sound familiar?

While it didn't work for Michael Ignatieff with his admirable journalistic background, his academic human rights teaching and leadership posts at Harvard and his dedication to human rights, it is working splendidly for Chrystia Freeland, that aspirational change of professions. Of course, Mr. Ignatieff aimed a little higher, attempting to win the vote for the Prime Ministership while Ms. Freeland responded to the Liberal Party's blandishments and sweetener of a cabinet position. Hers is the second-most-important position next to the PM's, however.

Mr. Ignatieff may have been scorned as the "just visiting" aspirant in view of his decades abroad, but on the other hand, he shares that with the globe-trotting Ms. Freeland. Both had influential contacts globally and within Canada, and the Liberal Party had high hopes in each instance when it succeeded in recruiting each in a desperate effort to regain the balance of power in Parliament, lost when Liberal arrogance and corruption at the time had finally succeeded in disgusting voters sufficiently to toss them out of power and bring in the Conservative alternative.

Mr. Browder was wowed by a journalist with a keen nose for an explosive expose that she would be credited for, giving his campaign to punish Russia by persuading liberal democracies, including Canada, to enact the Magnitsky Act in memory of his Russian lawyer who had uncovered state corruption and paid for his impudence with his life, while Mr. Browder, whose business was a victim of Russian state corruption -- in her high-profile reportage for the Financial Times as Moscow chief correspondent, furthering his plans for revenge. Chrystia Freeland made many influential connections throughout her career.

It is why the Toronto editor prefers to have his name withheld from his criticism of her casual betrayal of Canadian journalists whom she had hired for a large news venture as head of Thomson Reuters's digital news platform, Reuters Next. She had signed up well known journalists with rich contracts in Toronto with a view to adding them to the staff for this new project. She had become an employer powerhouse, in the process of promoting Reuters, burnishing her own personal brand in the process. She remains so well connected that the Toronto editor fears employment repercussions.

And then, suddenly, even while the Toronto employees wanted more information on their contracts and to learn more about their proposed function, Freeland simply closed down the Toronto operation affecting the employment of 25 people, favouring the jobs moving to Bangalore, India. This woman's conscience doesn't appear to have suffered, at the very time when, having joined the Liberal Club of Entitlement, she was already secure in her entitlements. So much so that nothing seems to faze her, not even negotiating though tumultuous and taut meetings to achieve a new NAFTA.

So secure in herself, in fact, that she never thought twice of cautionary diplomacy when she set out to deliberately and publicly join forces with those Americans who went out of their way to deplore and criticize the President of the United States of America. And while it's perfectly in line for American citizens to do that, when the Foreign Minister of a trading partner, a continental neighbour and political/social ally goes out of her way to attract the thin-skinned attention of a Donald Trump, heads swerve and those in power react, as did Mr. President when he stated baldly his dislike of her, setting another precedent after her own.

Named Diplomat of the Year (really!) by Foreign Policy magazine, her Washington speech was replete with warning about the rich getting richer, the middle class abandoned and people becoming "vulnerable to the demagogue who scapegoats the outsider, the other -- whether an immigrant at home or a foreign actor", pretty rich stuff from a woman whose Toronto home is pricey real estate over a million, who hauls in a hefty salary and can anticipate a golden handshake in retirement. As for the tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminum for national security: "absurd", a "naked example of the U.S. putting its thumb on the scale in violation of the very rules it helped to write".

Undiplomatically true, but not for a Minister of Foreign Affairs to triumph over Trump with, but a journalist of which she is no longer part of that profession. Followed by her panel appearance on Taking on the Tyrant, with its video comparing Trump to Vladimir Putin, and Bashar al-Assad, the Syrian mass slaughterer. Eliciting from the volatile Trump the inevitable: "We are very unhappy with the negotiations and the negotiating style of Canada. We don't like their representative very much". He has lots of company there.

Arrogance? Between Justin Trudeau and Chrystia Freeland it's a tossup.

At the United Nations in September, Donald Trump told reporters that the U.S. side didn’t care much for Canada’s chief negotiator Chrystia Freeland. NICHOLAS KAMM/AFP/Getty Images

Righteously Preaching to the Disinterested

"It is not a question of dictating to the parties ... Only direct negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians can lead to peace. No one will do it in their place."
"The world cannot, should not resign itself to the status quo."
French President Francois Hollande

"[A two-state solution is] threatened [and must be reinforced]."
"Given where things are going and what is happening, that is particularly important [to endorse the communique resulting from the Paris Mideast peace conference]."
"This is not the right time [for the U.S. to move its embassy to Jerusalem]. We think it's ill-advised."
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry

"[Israel and the Palestinians are urged to] officially restate their commitment to the two-state solution."
Mideast peace conference closing declaration

Thomas Samson, Reuters -- Paris Peace Conference

"We have particular reservations about an international conference intended to advance peace between the parties that does not involve them - indeed which is taking place against the wishes of the Israelis - and which is taking place just days before the transition to a new American President when the U.S. will be the ultimate guarantor of any agreement."
"There are risks therefore that this conference hardens positions at a time when we need to be encouraging the conditions for peace."
British Foreign Office statement 

So here it is, a statement issued by a consensus of sanctimonious opinion arrived at when representatives of 72 nations, called together by the Government of France to sit in judgement on a nation desperate to preserve itself from the forces seeking endlessly to destroy it, intimating that this nation of Jews -- among an ocean of hostile Islamic nations supporting the inalienable rights of Palestinians to covet and challenge by whatever means manipulable to take ownership of heritage Judaic land and sacred sites -- is to blame for the inability of both sides to come to a peaceful accommodation.

Israelis, who have experienced constant violent assaults on civilians by Palestinians who have systematically been incited from childhood to their adult years to view Jews as interlopers and threats to the Arabs' aspirations to take possession of a geography they claim as theirs, while prodding the international community through public relations and slanderous BDS campaigns to view Israel as an illegitimate state, are held responsible for the 'plight' of the Palestinians. That plight resulting from the original refusal to accept the partition offered by the United Nations.

Consolidated over the years by one refusal after another to accept Israeli offers for settlement of geographical disputes, turning that refusal into a permanent state of 'oppressive occupation' forced on Palestinians by an 'apartheid' state. The global community appears to feel comfortable with naming Israel an apartheid state, responsible for the stalemate in negotiations, even while 20 percent of the Israeli population represents Israeli Palestinian citizens of the state. Among them Arab Christians, Kurds and Druze, all Israeli citizens.

And the Palestinian Authority which steadfastly refuses to recognize a Jewish State, and which has stated unequivocally that no Jews would ever be permitted to live amongst Arabs in a Palestinian State, celebrates itself as a noble and courageous 'resistance' to the apartheid occupier. The state of 'occupation' thrust upon Israel, resulting from never-ending violent assaults by Palestinians. Israel surrendered all of Gaza to the Palestinian Authority represented by Fatah. Which their rivals Hamas, championing the destruction of Israel, wrested from Fatah, to use the Strip as a launching pad for rockets aimed at Israel.

That's quite the precedent for clearing any Jewish presence out of land claimed by Palestinians, despite the very real fact that the lands that settler-communities are on in the "West Bank" represent land traditionally part of the ancient Judaic empire. Now, 72 nations focus on what they convince themselves is Israeli intransigence to sue for peace with the unfortunate Palestinians. And nations which are themselves embroiled in domestic human rights abuses sit in judgement on a nation whose actions are based on humanitarian, liberal-democratic values and survival.

The final declaration of the Paris conference that wrapped up on Sunday afternoon did give brief mention to PA incitement and "terror" in reference to attacks on Israel, but this, it seems, is an issue readily overlooked, as though with the general consensus that Israel's very presence is a provocation of Palestinians. John Kerry, like his president, now voices his contempt for Israel which failed to take the advice of the Obama administration conveyed by its Secretary of State; payback time tastes so bitter-sweet to the outgoing.

And what do the Palestinians think about the conference? Depends on who you're asking. Official PA representatives are pleased no end, since it was largely their perspective for Western consumption that was being expressed on the part of the conference. "Today two states is possible; tomorrow … [it] might be too late, because Israel is slipping into a situation in which it will be an apartheid state by de jure and by de facto", according to Mohammad Shtayyeh, senior adviser on negotiations to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, using the language beloved of the West.

Yet, according to a recent poll undertaken by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research in Ramallah, most Palestinians claim to believe the two-state solution is no longer viable. "We want a one-state solution where we return to our lands. I want to go back to my country. I don’t care who will rule me. There will be elections, I will have a vote",  claimed Nashat Salhieh, a refugee living in the Al-Amari refugee camp not far from Mr. Abbas’s headquarters in Ramallah.

Even the Palestinians themselves are fed up with negotiations that have not gone anywhere. Now, 36 percent of Palestinians support a single state and some, as far as they're concerned claim they would willingly live under Jewish rule, that in fact their lives were better before the Palestinian Authority was formed to administer the two territories semi-autonomously, that Israeli employers had treated them better and paid them on time. Reflecting the reality of internal divisions, a stagnant economy, and widespread corruption.

The Christian Science Monitor interviewed Palestinians for a recent article related to the issue, where a young man, fearing employment repercussions, asked to be unnamed, and said four of his brothers were arrested in 2002 and given life sentences. He had never held any trust in a two-state solution despite having a teaching job in Jerusalem. "I always told them, [his friends] you are wrong. And now they are all like me. I want one state – a Palestinian state from the river to the sea." But he wants it to be run by "completely different leaders" than those now in power.

"We [Palestinians and Israelis] have lived with each other so long that we cannot separate from each other. I believe in one state with Israel because in my view a Palestinian state would need to be based on religion, on Islam, and this will not happen. [Palestinians want] all of [the land,] without Israel. We cannot live with the Israelis because they are uncomfortable with us and we are uncomfortable with them", said a grinning, self-contradicting Motassem, a Ramallah mechanic.

French Hubris and Palestinian Perfidy

"I can see that this has been weakened on the ground and in the minds. If we let it wither away then it would be a risk for Israel's security to which we are resolutely attached."
"However, I am realistic on what this conference can achieve. Peace will only be done by the Israelis and Palestinians and by nobody else. Only bilateral negotiations can succeed."
French President Francois Hollande

French President Francois Hollande delivers his New Year wishes to members of the foreign diplomatic corps, at the Elysee Palace in Paris, France, January 12, 2017. REUTERS/Ian Langsdon/Pool

"It's a rigged conference, rigged by the Palestinians with French auspices to adopt additional anti-Israel stances."
"This pushes peace backwards. It's not going to obligate us. It's a relic of the past."
Israeli President Benjamin Netanyahu

If Francois Hollande believes what he expressed in his statement above, then what is the purpose of his having taken centre stage in once again manoeuvring Israel into a corner? France ignominiously voted at the United Nations along with all other members of the Security Council to deprive Israel of any support whatever in this ongoing conspiracy of isolation and blame of it and it alone for failure to arrive at an accommodation with the Palestinians. The sanctimonious tone of that statement is in direct contrast to France's actions.

Scheduled to take place in Paris on January 15, 72 nations will send representatives to the conference that President Hollande has called, for the purpose of endorsing an international framework for peace between the conflicting principals, Israel and the Palestinians. Israel is not at war with the Palestinians. The Palestinian Authority has, and continues to, incite its population to violence against the Jewish State. And while the State of Israel recognizes that the Palestinians want a state of their own, the Palestinians refuse to recognize the reality of a Jewish state in their midst.

Israel has been prepared, through previous negotiations, to surrender to the Palestinians most of their demands. Israel's sole 'demand' of the Palestinians can be addressed by the fact that it wants to live at peace with its neighbour. But until Israel was forced by incessant lethal attacks by Palestinians against Israelis, to build a separating wall, peace was not to be found. And nor is it yet to be found from an incorrigible dedication to destroying Israel expressed by Palestinians in Gaza under Hamas under whose charter the destruction of Israel is the first order of business.

It is not for lack of attempting to negotiate reasonably and fairly with the Palestinians that all such negotiations have failed. Time and time again Israeli negotiators have been given the authority to submit to Palestinians' demands, and time and time again, though most of those demands have been met, the Palestinian negotiators were instructed to walk away. The signal demands of "right of return" by the original estimated 700,000 Palestinians (and their descendants who now number in the millions) who fled when Israel declared its statehood after accepting the UN's partition plan which the Palestinians summarily rejected, and demands that east Jerusalem be surrendered to the Palestinians cannot be accommodated for obvious reasons.

That President Hollande of France feels himself obligated to bring the world together to sit once again in judgement of Israel -- which is effectively what is occurring -- at the conference two days hence -- is beyond absurd. This is a president of a country that is incapable of defending itself against Islamists with French citizenship. France has absorbed a number of deadly terrorist attacks coordinated both from within France and from jihadis entering France from elsewhere. The millions of Muslims that France has absorbed has created mass dysfunction, and critical threats. French Jews have become increasingly under threat by French Islamists.

And with this record of pathetic coping, President Hollande feels entitled to act as primary negotiator in this matter. Neither Prime Minister Netanyahu nor Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has been invited to attend the conference. A conference convened for the express purpose of 'solving' the dilemma of two peoples living side by side in constant enmity and threat. A situation where world opinion through the auspices of the United Nations had made it clear that sympathies are constrained toward Israel, and empathy wholly handed out to the Palestinians. An absurdity of profound proportions when the attacked are blamed and the attackers are seen as the victims.

President Abbas of the Palestinian Authority and the Fatah movement evades direct peace talks with Israel. Demanding that settlement construction first be stopped. But over the years peace talks ended in no advance toward accommodation of each side by the other in an unbalanced act of evasion and doublespeak where the Palestinians portray themselves to the international community as the oppressed whereas their violence has forced Israel to become an 'occupier' in self-defence. President Netanyahu reiterates to a deaf world that the conflict can be resolved only by direct peace talks, repeatedly inviting his counterpart to resume negotiations.

The Flaw In The IAEA/Iran Agreement

"Why not make this public so we can see whether is this a good agreement or not? Put the facts on the table and then we can have a better understanding of what takes place. I don’t see any reason for secrecy here."
"The key question is: will the IAEA be present during the sample-taking or not? It looks to me that they might be witnessing the sample-taking through some camera view, or from a distance. If that’s really the case I have a lot of reservations about the reasonability and credibility of the arrangements."
"You need to know what you sample, how you sample, and if the sample is representative of the object you sample. You need to be present and see physically the place. Therefore, for the IAEA to do a credible job they need to get to that chamber and take independently their samples."
"This is not only just to take swipe samples and then that thing gets resolved. This is [a] much more wider thing the IAEA wants to investigate. Therefore, again, the camera view is not [satisfactory] for that."
"I don’t think you can establish through the camera if that has been done. On the spot, you can see some places where [such alterations meant to hide nuclear activity] has been done in a imperfect way. These are the places you want to sample. You can’t see this from a camera. You have to look at things from various angles. Therefore it’s essential to be physically present."
Ollie Heinonen, one-time deputy director-general, International Atomic Energy Agency

Iranian nuclear negotiator Javad Vaeedi and then-deputy Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency Olli Heinonen, after talks in Tehran, July 12, 2007. (photo credit: AP Photo/Vahid Salemi)

According to a leaked draft of the agreement on Iran's nuclear program, reached through lengthy negotiation between the permanent members of the UN Security Council, China, Russia, United States, France, Britain, plus Germany and with European Union input, there is no clarification over how inspections, particularly at the disputed-approach military site at Parchin, inspections will be conducted. 

Much hinges on how that data is received through inspections meant to provide definitive information on Iran's nuclear activity. Ollie Heinonen, in an interview, expressed grave doubts over the workability and trustworthiness of the possibility that Iran may insist on providing the IAEA with photographs, videos and environmental samples. In other words, that the IAEA and the P5+1 would agree to accepting that Iran, which has in the past used deception and is famously skilled in deceit, would provide its own data and samples, not an outside, neutral agency.

 

It’s difficult to assess changes that might have been done to such a questionable and hidden facility — such as the installation of false walls or efforts to hide or sanitize equipment — efforts to evade notice which the Islamic Republic of Iran is particularly skilled at, by merely looking at photographic or video material provided by them as proof of what they assert to be true.

Article five of the Safeguards Agreement between the IAEA and Iran addresses the requirement for confidentiality of proprietorial data, of commercially sensitive matters, and of safety and security-related issues, but should the AP report be correct and any Parchin investigation restricted to the provision of footage to IAEA inspectors by Iran: "There’s no need to keep secrecy around this approach. There’s no safety-related information that is compromised if this procedure is made public."

 

As someone integrally involved in IAEA inspections for close to three decades, and a man who headed the Department of Safeguards for the agency, Mr. Heinonen emphasized that the taking of samples at a site suspected of having hosted illicit nuclear activity is not simple. The IAEA's Parchin mission is not meant only to take environmental samples, but it is crucial to carefully examine the diagnostic equipment and technical arrangements on site. To do this, the IAEA must have a physical presence, right there, and right then.

Sketch of a large-explosives containment vessel believed to have been situated inside Iran’s Parchin military site, in which hydrodynamic experiments can be conducted. (photo credit: AP)

 

There are various ways in which the surfaces of equipment at Parchin could be surreptitiously altered: the Iranians could add layers of paint or lacquer, scrape them, or both, said Mr. Heinonen . "One must welcome this global innovation and outside-the-box thinking", Energy Minister Yuval Steinitz said sarcastically at the time. "One can only wonder if the Iranian inspectors will also have to wait 24 days before being able to visit the site and look for incriminating evidence?"

2004 satellite image of the military complex at Parchin, Iran. (AP/DigitalGlobe-Institute for Science and International Security)

Any of the 35 states on the International Atomic Agency’s board of governors can demand of the  secretariat that it disclose the secret agreements should they feel it would aid their understanding of any particular verification process. Canada has done just that on a number of occasions. Israel,  a member of the IAEA since its founding in 1957, has been adamant in demanding all secret side agreements with Iran be released.

"In order for there to be a truly informed discussion of the deal with Iran it is crucial that all relevant documents be opened to scrutiny", insisted a senior Israeli official.The six world powers who negotiated the deal — the US, Britain, France, Russia, China and Germany — are currently on the IAEA board, along with Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, known to be not so pleased with the agreement with Iran.

"It’s up to the member states. They are in the driving seat here. If they are happy with [the current arrangements], then fine. But one should exercise good judgment how to proceed with that", emphasized Mr. Heinonen in the interview. However, should the IAEA agree to the current arrangements and inspect Parchin at a remove via video cameras, reversal of the procedure would be difficult to obtain.

"It would be very difficult to make another mission there after you’ve already agreed on certain technical arrangements. This is the time to do a proper job", he stated unequivocally.