Israeli planning and preparations paid off during the war. The victory, though, proved to be a devastating one. Israel has never recuperated from it. Fifty years after, much of the Jewish state’s energies are devoted to maintaining the brutal occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. And the protracted debate about whether to continue and hold these territories tears Israel’s society apart.

During the 2016 U.S. presidential election, neither Trump nor Hillary Clinton raised the matter of the American war in Afghanistan. The war has cost the U.S. at least $23 billion a year, with an additional $117 billion on reconstruction. Of that reconstruction money, 61 per cent, $71 billion, went towards the creation of the Afghan National Army.

Yet the moment Trump gave the order to launch 59 Tomahawk missiles at a Syrian airbase used in a chemical weapons attack a few days earlier, all was forgotten and forgiven. Finally Trump became president! Finally he put Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in his place! Finally the U.S. showed it had moved beyond former President Barack Obama’s reluctance to use military force!

The US arms and intelligence industries are the main beneficiaries of confrontation with Russia, closely followed by the hierarchy of the defunct US-NATO military alliance who have been desperately seeking justification for its existence for many years. For so long as the military-industrial complex holds sway, there will continue to be sabre-rattling and mindless military posturing.

The UN’s Martin Kobler warned of a ‘dangerous escalation’ in Libya. That phrase sounds shopworn. It has been used so often. There is no end to the war. Like a moving kaleidoscope the fighters change sides. Their loyalties are hard to read. It is even harder to understand the suffering of the people. At NATO headquarters they still smirk about their successful war in Libya. It is a war that broke this country.

The election of Donald Trump raised serious questions about the direction of US foreign policy. Would the president seek better diplomatic relations with Russia? Would he step up, or deescalate, conflict in the Middle East? So far, there are few indications this Republican administration will change course from that of its predecessor.

Those of us in countries like Canada, UK and the U.S. need to strongly oppose the brutal war in Yemen and the siege of civilians in Mosul and any and all intervention in Syria. We need to understand that solidarity with the people of Syria, Iraq and the entire region begins with us actually stopping the reflexive reaction to intervene in countries we don’t live in.

As leftists, our support must go to the revolutionary people struggling for freedom and emancipation. Only through their own collective action can the Syrian people achieve their goals. This concept, which is at the heart of revolutionary politics, faces profound skepticism from some sections of the left. This should not prevent us, however, from building our solidarity on this basis.

Ceasefires in Syria are difficult to arrange and particularly likely to collapse because their successful implementation involves so many parties inside and outside the country who hate and would like to kill each other. All of these powers have their own agendas that may have little to do with the wellbeing of those who want to leave a besieged enclave in safety.

The dangerous competition instigated by the US prompted Soviet Russia to beef up its nuclear capabilities and dragged both countries into the vicious circle of the nuclear arms race. Unfortunately, it seems that the lessons of the past have not been learnt by the West and the question of the “nuclearization” of Europe is being raised again.