Reflections from news and commentary of the day
Subscribe To
Posts
All Comments
Sunday, January 4, 2026
Xu Feihong on X: "🔹Taiwan has belonged to China🇨🇳 since antiquity. The history and legal facts are very clear. 🔹The government of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) was founded in October 1949, replacing the government of the Republic of China as the sole legal government representing the https://t.co/ip6hkuXG8X" / X
Trump Sets a Devastating Precedent in Venezuela By Michael Hirsh, a columnist for Foreign Policy
link.foreignpolicy.com/view/644279f41a7f1f1e29de6831pt3th.gc/d7ffd1ca
https://link.foreignpolicy.com/view/644279f41a7f1f1e29de6831pt3th.gc/d7ffd1ca
Saturday, January 3, 2026
"Somaliland, Israel prepares a new breaking point." (Strategic Culture, 1/02/26.) - Guest Post
https://strategic-culture.su/news/2026/01/02/somaliland-israel-prepares-a-new-breaking-point/
1/2/26
Somaliland, Israel prepares a new breaking point
Israel’s intention is clear: this geographical area of the Gulf of Aden marks the access to the Red Sea and therefore to the Suez Canal.
Dangerous geographies
In 1944, while war raged in Europe and Asia, and four years before the creation of the State of Israel, a group claiming to represent Jewish refugees during the war approached the Ethiopian government to request refuge in the eastern Ethiopian province of Harrar and in the western part of British Somalia.
The confidential proposal, copied to the US State Department, suggested that the territory “be reserved for the immigration of European Jews and placed under an autonomous regime administered by the refugees themselves.”
Expressing great personal sympathy for the plight of European Jews, Emperor Haile Selassie rejected the proposal, stating that Ethiopia’s “sincere desire” to “help the victims of aggression is in no way consistent with the request that the nation itself reserve an entire province for any group of refugees.”
Somaliland, understood as the only regions of the former British Somalia now under the control of the Isaaq clan, eastern Sudan, in particular Darfur and Kordofan, governed by the RSF’s “Peace and Unity” administration, and southern Yemen, dominated by the STC, in which al-Hirak represents the main but not exclusive component, heir to the 1994 secessionist movement and, further upstream, to the clan aggregations that merged into the former Yemeni Socialist Party of the RPDY, constitute the three main crypto-states that the Israeli-Emirati strategic convergence aims to transform into fully sovereign entities through the recognition of their separation from Mogadishu, Khartoum, and Sana’a.
As noted by Africa expert Filippo Bovo, although these entities do not enjoy any recognition under international law, these secessions have in fact existed for some time. However, this cannot be taken as justification for accrediting them politically, thereby legitimizing the civil and fratricidal conflicts that form their basis. The Isaaq’s aspirations for independence are fueled by the subordination and outright “capture” of other clans within a state run as if it were a private possession. Hemedti’s RSF project to proclaim a state in eastern Sudan is steeped in the blood of ethnic cleansing operations carried out against local non-Arab or non-Arabic-speaking populations, following patterns that directly recall the Janjaweed DNA of this militia. Similarly, the revival of South Yemeni independence evokes the experience of a state that was already structurally unstable (like the other two), in which violent and continuous clan compromises were hidden behind the facade of supposed real socialism, with power conquered or preserved through bloodshed.
In all cases, these are historical identities that Israel and the United Arab Emirates, following their own ‘geopolitical rationale’, exploit and instrumentalise to dismantle unitary states, leveraging local allies and intermediaries. These include countries such as Ethiopia, Kenya, Chad, Libya, Rwanda, and Uganda, as well as a constellation of non-state actors such as al-Shabaab, IS-Somalia, STC, RSF, M23, JNIM, ISWAP, along with various clan and tribal factions willing to cooperate. The area concerned stretches from the Arabian Peninsula to the Horn of Africa, from the Nile Valley to the Great Lakes, from the Red Sea to the Gulf of Aden.
The goal is to ensure the security of strategic routes of primary importance, as well as to preserve highly profitable forms of neocolonial extraction—from gold to critical minerals—while containing or neutralizing those states that, in their geopolitical doctrine, are perceived as significant strategic rivals in the region, including Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey, and Eritrea. To use an automotive metaphor, this strategy of destabilization between Africa and the Middle East, after an already problematic start in Somaliland, now seems to be running on ‘three cylinders’ in southern Yemen: it would be more prudent to stop at the repair shop than to risk continuing the journey.
In an attempt to avoid a head-on collision with Saudi Arabia—which will not release hundreds of billions of dollars of investment in the US economy until Washington ends Emirati support for RSF, STC, and Somaliland—the US has notified Israel, the Emirates, and Ethiopia that it will not recognize Hargeisa’s independence. For Addis Ababa, which was aiming to reactivate the agreements with the Isaaqs provided for in the January 2024 Memorandum of Understanding (recognition of Somaliland in exchange for Ethiopian port and naval access, financed by Abu Dhabi), this was a significant blow. At the same time, Washington is increasingly at odds with the Ethiopian government, both over this issue and over its support for the RSF in Sudan, in coordination with the Emirates, as well as over the pressure exerted on Eritrea regarding the port of Assab.
Subsequently, Riyadh struck a shipment of weapons destined for the STC and coming from the Emirates in Mukalla, southern Yemen. The deterioration in relations between Saudi Arabia and the Emirates is becoming increasingly evident, and this attack is an unequivocal sign of this: the cargo, originating in the Emirates, was destined for an ally of Abu Dhabi but an enemy of Riyadh, in a port—Mukalla—where the Emirates have a presence, control, and investments. The message was also directed at Israel, which operates more discreetly in the same area. Subsequently, Saudi Arabia issued a veritable ultimatum to the Emirates, demanding the withdrawal of their forces from southern Yemen and the cessation of support for the STC.
The STC, in turn, fell into line, announcing the end of relations with Abu Dhabi, ordering the withdrawal of Emirati forces within 24 hours, and imposing a 72-hour border blockade in areas under its control, with the sole exception of routes authorized by Riyadh. The Israeli-Emirati strategy therefore appears increasingly jammed, also proceeding ‘on three cylinders’. The escalation between Abu Dhabi and Riyadh, which today signals the willingness of these two actors to strike each other directly, inevitably involves other regional players—including some that have remained in the background until now—and will in all likelihood produce new flare-ups throughout the region stretching from the Great Lakes to the Nile Valley, from the Horn of Africa to the Arabian Peninsula. For this reason, Somalia-Somaliland, Yemen, and Sudan are the first, but not the only, cornerstones on which it is now more necessary than ever to focus attention.
Activist and head of the Jewish Aid Committee Hermann Fuernberg first described the proposal in a 1943 pamphlet, emphasizing why the territory of Harrar would be perfect:
“This territory is large enough… [and] inhabited by a small agricultural population, which should not create great difficulties. However, it will be necessary to remember the lessons learned from the Palestinian experience, namely to prevent the territory from being invaded by people from other parts of Ethiopia and to keep foreign agitators away.” From this, everything becomes clear.
Never ever
In this regard, the international reaction has been very harsh.
The Chinese Foreign Ministry issued a statement on Monday condemning Israel’s recognition of the breakaway Republic of Somaliland, after Taiwan became the first state to support Tel Aviv’s decision. Beijing expressed its opposition to Israel’s recognition of Somaliland as a “sovereign and independent state” and to the establishment of diplomatic relations with it, as stated by Foreign Ministry spokesman Lin Jian. “No country should encourage or support separatist movements within other states to pursue selfish interests,” he said, while urging Somalia to end “separatist activities and collusion with external forces.” China, he concluded, “firmly supports the sovereignty, unity, and territorial integrity of Somalia and opposes any initiative that compromises its territorial integrity.”
Obviously, Iran, along with other Islamic countries such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey, Djibouti, Iraq, Jordan, and Pakistan, rejected and condemned Netanyahu’s initiative. In an interview with Fox News, Netanyahu spoke of wanting to stabilize “democratic Islamic states” based on the model of what happened in Syria, i.e., placing terrorists as puppet leaders in order to keep entire areas of the country in check.
What about Somalia? Thousands of Somali citizens took to the streets in various cities across the country to protest against Israel’s recognition of Somaliland, denouncing the decision as a violation of international law and a threat to regional stability. Demonstrations took place in Mogadishu, Baaydhabo, Hobyo, and Guriceel, where protesters marched carrying Somali and Palestinian flags and signs condemning Israel’s decision to recognize Somaliland as an independent state.
Somalia’s National Consultative Council — which includes President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud, Prime Minister Hamza Abdi Barre, federal state leaders, and governors — called Israel’s recognition an “illegal act” that could undermine peace and stability in an area stretching “from the Red Sea to the Gulf of Aden.” Abdul-Malik al-Houthi, leader of the Yemeni resistance movement Ansarullah, also condemned the decision on Sunday, warning that any Israeli presence in Somaliland would be considered a direct military threat by the resistance.
The African Union reiterated its support for the unity of Somalia, rejecting any possibility of recognizing Somaliland, while the Arab League called the Israeli initiative a clear violation of international law.
The Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) also expressed strong condemnation, stressing that the decision sets an extremely dangerous precedent.
Similarly, the European Union reiterated its respect for Somalia’s internationally recognized borders. During Monday’s meeting of the UN Security Council, all member countries — with the sole exception of the United States — criticized Israel’s decision, warning that it risks further destabilizing Somalia and neighboring states. Washington refrained from formally condemning Israel’s recognition of the secessionist region, but made it clear that the US position on Somaliland remains unchanged.
Somalia’s ambassador to the United Nations, Abu Bakr Dahir Osman, accused Israel of deliberately promoting the fragmentation of the country, expressing concern that the decision could encourage the forced transfer of Palestinians to northwestern Somalia. “This disregard for law and morality must be stopped,” he said.
Israel’s intention, however, is clear: this geographical area of the Gulf of Aden marks the access to the Red Sea and therefore to the Suez Canal. It is an indispensable route for the business interests of Israel and Europe in general, including the United States. Military trade, crude oil, and many goods from the service sector pass through there. Israel has invested in the IMEC corridor, guaranteeing passage from Suez and Haifa, so total control of traffic in the Red Sea is an indispensable prerogative. But Israel is equally aware that this channel is under the strategic influence of the Houthis and, therefore, of the entire Axis of Resistance, which will leave no escape for the Zionist entity’s ambitions.
Friday, January 2, 2026
Thursday, January 1, 2026
Wednesday, December 31, 2025
Fr. Bob's Reflection for the Feast of the Holy Family - Guest Post - Homily for the Feast of the Holy Family
Homily for the Feast of the Holy Family
In June of 1947, a famous book was published titled “The Diary of a Young Girl.” It is known to most of us as, “The Diary of Anne Frank.” Today, it’s read in countless middle schools across the world.
Anne Frank was born in 1929 to a Jewish family in Germany. When she was just five years old, her family fled to Amsterdam to escape the growing horrors of the Nazi regime. By 1940, however, the Nazis had invaded the Netherlands, trapping the Frank family once again.
Otto Frank, Anne’s father, took his family and hid from the Nazis in a small, upper apartment in Amsterdam, with the help of some non-Jewish friends. They stayed secretly hidden for more than two years, during which Anne carefully detailed her experiences in her diary. She wrote about her fears, her dreams and her faith in humanity.
Eventually, they were discovered. The family was sent to concentration camps, where they endured terrible suffering. Only Otto Frank survived – but he made sure his daughter’s voice, her words and her spirit would never be forgotten.
So, what does this have to do with the Feast we celebrate today – the Feast of the Holy Family?
Much more than we might realize.
It’s easy to picture the Nativity as calm and peaceful, the way it appears on our Christmas cards. But the truth is far different. Jesus’ birth involved poverty, uncertainty and danger.
Bethlehem was small, ordinary and would be considered poor by today’s standards. The manger they laid Jesus in was nothing more than a feeding trough for animals.
And not long after Jesus’ birth, Joseph was warned to flee to Egypt, in order to escape King Herod’s rage. The Holy Family became refugees, strangers in a foreign land, relying entirely on God’s protection and providence.
Both stories – Anne Frank’s and the Holy Family’s – remind us of two powerful truths.
First, that parents will go to any length to protect their children. Otto Frank, Mary and Joseph risked everything to preserve the lives entrusted to them.
And second, these stories show us that love – steadfast, sacrificial love – is the most powerful force in the world. It can carry us through anything, even fear and exile.
While we each belong to our own families, we are also part of a larger one: the Church, the family of God. Servant of God Father Paul Wattson, our founder here at Graymoor, once wrote: “God made the Church as a family of His children on earth.” That is why we gather each week – to be nourished by God’s Word and united by His love in the Eucharist.
My friends, it’s been three days since Christmas. The holiday luster might be wearing off. We’ve eaten the warm meals; enjoyed the family gatherings. Some gifts may have already been returned or exchanged, and the chocolate Santas are on the clearance shelves.
But stop and think about the Holy Family. Recognize unconditional love.
The last words of Anne Frank’s diary were, “Despite everything, I still believe people are good at heart.”
That same spirit of hope shines in the Holy Family – in Joseph’s courage, in Mary’s trust and in the Christ Child, who came to bring light into our world.
May that light of Jesus guide our families, our faith and our hearts in the year ahead.
Yours in Christ,
Fr. Robert Warren, S.A.
Spiritual Director
Tuesday, December 30, 2025
Monday, December 29, 2025
Sunday, December 28, 2025
Saturday, December 27, 2025
Friday, December 26, 2025
Thursday, December 25, 2025
Wednesday, December 24, 2025
Tuesday, December 23, 2025
Monday, December 22, 2025
[Salon] Oil: Reason And Rhyme - ArabDigest.org Guest Post
Oil: Reason And Rhyme
Summary: as US oil output hits a record high and the shale sector prepares to ride out lower prices still, Riyadh faces the very real prospect of history repeating itself.
We thank our regular contributor Alastair Newton for today’s newsletter. Alastair worked as a professional political analyst in the City of London from 2005 to 2015. Before that he spent 20 years as a career diplomat with the British Diplomatic Service. In 2015 he co-founded and is a director of Alavan Business Advisory Ltd. You can find Alastair’s latest AD podcast, Saudi Arabia and an uncertain oil market here.
“Never underestimate the American engineer.”
Kaes van’t Hof, CEO Diamondback, 3 November 2025
It is now almost nine months since the ‘Opec+ eight’ started to unwind their voluntary cuts in oil output after Saudi Arabia had strong-armed them into an unexpected u-turn. When the decision was announced on 3 March Brent crude stood at US$71.62 per barrel (pb). Today, it is hovering around US$62pb, a couple of bucks of which can be attributed to the US’s actions against the regime in Caracas (which some believe to be driven primarily by a desire to seize control of Venezuela’s heavy crude reserves to fuel US refineries) and Ukraine’s escalating strikes on Russia’s oil infrastructure and shadow fleet.
The public justification for a change of policy, which has resulted in a shortfall of roughly US$30pb relative to the Kingdom’s balanced budget price, has never been convincing, i.e. maintaining price stability in the face of the Opec secretariat’s bullish forecasts for growth in demand. And there may not have been a single real reason for it. However, despite the failure of similar efforts in 2014-16, a second attempt to squeeze US shale production and claw back market share lost in recent years is now widely seen as a (if not the) major driver. With a three month time-out now called on further unwinding of the voluntary cuts, it is therefore a good moment to take stock of how things stand today in the US shale sector and its prospects into next year.
Overall, two related — in this particular context — quotes widely attributed to Mark Twain spring to mind. First, ‘reports of my death are greatly exaggerated’. Second, and alluded to in the headline to this Newsletter, ‘history rhymes’. For it increasingly appears that many among the commentariat — and, presumably and for the second time, the Saudis — may have underestimated the resilience of US shale.
Looking first at where things stand today, it is certainly the case that, as this 13 December article in OilPrice.com asserts:
“The US shale exploration and production (E&P) and Lower 48 midstream sectors experienced a volatile and challenging 2025, likely a far cry from what operators envisioned this time last year as the second Trump administration’s ‘energy dominance’ agenda was taking shape”.
As I argued in the 9 November Newsletter, the unwinding of the voluntary cuts was far from the only reason for this…and possibly not even the most important as is at least implied by the tirade of criticism of the Trump Administration revealed in successive Dallas Federal Reserve sector surveys including the most recent which was published last week.
However, despite these various challenges, on 9 December the authoritative Energy Information Administration (EIA) raised its forecast for average US 2025 oil production by 20,000 barrels per day (bpd) to 13.61mbpd, the highest on record. This is not to say that “grumpiness” among oil executives is entirely unjustified; after all, as a result of these challenges the oil-oriented rig count fell from 415 at the start of the year to 386 at the end of last month. Nevertheless, in its 3 December Energy Newsletter (behind a paywall) Bloomberg too elected to reference Mark Twain by describing it as “greatly exaggerated”.
Despite Saudi Arabia’s efforts to squeeze US shale production by increasing Opec+ output, US oil production reached a record 13.61 million barrels per day in 2025 as drillers remained resilient in the face of falling prices [photo credit: Sinopec Saudi Arabia]
Sticking with Bloomberg as we turn to 2026, its commodities opinion columnist Javier Blas, in an op-ed published in late November, pinpointed why doom and gloom over US shale prospects going forward is likely to prove equally misplaced as follows:
“Call it shale 4.0 — an arms race to squeeze more oil from existing wells. Today, American drillers recover, at best, 10-15% of the shale oil in place. That could soon change. Increasing the ratio even by a single percentage point is a prize worth billions of dollars over the lifetime of thousands of wells in Texas, New Mexico, North Dakota and Colorado. ‘The best place to find oil is where you already know you've got oil,’ Chevron CEO Mike Wirth tells me in an interview in New York. ‘We know where the oil is. If we left 90% of the oil behind, it would be the first time in history that we didn't figure out how to do it.’ The industry will need sweat, imagination, time — and dollars — to deliver that prize. But I wouldn’t bet against success.”
This is entirely consistent with forecasts published earlier in November by several shale producers to the effect that they expect to increase output in 2026 as they adjust to an average price per barrel for US benchmark West Texas Intermediate (WTI — currently at US$57.50pb) of US$60 or below. (According to the EIA, the average for 2025 was just over US$65pb.) Furthermore, the impact of the lower oil price is being cushioned to an extent by the boom in demand for LNG being driven by the urgent need for more power for AI-related data centres. In consequence, as David Wethe and Kevin Crowley wrote, also for Bloomberg, on 6 November, quoting sector experts at Macquarie Group:
“…prices will have to fall into the low $50-a-barrel range before the industry pulls back”.
This has not prevented the EIA from forecasting a drop in US average oil output in 2026 of 50,000bpd. But relative to this year’s record high and the International Energy Agency’s latest forecast of a global output surplus next year of close to four million barrels per day this is no more a rounding error.
Putting all this together, the question which Riyadh has to answer between now and the end of March is whether it is prepared to boost output still further and suffer the fiscal consequences of US$55pb Brent crude (at which point WTI would likely be hovering just above US$50) despite there being no guarantee that even this would achieve its objective. Having come this far, and especially after its failure to rein in shale a decade ago, this will not be an easy decision.
Sunday, December 21, 2025
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)