Draw Media
هه‌واڵ / جیهان

France just seized a superyacht owned by the chief executive of Rosneft company

“Thank you to the French customs officers who enforce the sanctions of the European Union against those close to the Russian authorities,” France’s Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire wrote in a tweet. The yacht belonged to Igor Sechin​​—chief executive of Russian oil producer Rosneft, who has been previously dubbed “Darth Vader” by Russian media. It was seized as it tried to leave the Mediterranean port of La Ciotat in a breach of European Union sanctions on Russian oligarchs, Reuters reported. The yacht, Amore Vero, is estimated to be worth $120 million, according to the website SuperYachtFan.com, and allegedly houses a swimming pool that turns into a helipad, as well as multiple decks including one with a Jacuzzi. The seizure of the Amore Vero comes as Western nations are rapidly enforcing severe sanctions against Russia’s wealthy elite, including asset freezes and the confiscation of status symbols like yachts and jets, following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Sechin was at the very top of a list, published Feb. 28 by the European Union, of Russian oligarchs who would be subject to sanctions. He is one of President Vladimir Putin’s most trusted and closest advisers, as well as his personal friend, according to the EU, which called Sechin’s connections to Putin “long and deep.” Sechin’s net worth is unknown, but in 2015 Reuters reported that he was earning a minimum of $295,000 to $390,000 per month as chief of Rosneft. Sechin was previously sanctioned by the U.S. in 2014, according to the U.S. Treasury Department. He said he considered the move an endorsement of his effectiveness at Rosneft, according to the Wall Street Journal. Sechin did not immediately reply to Fortune’s request for comment. Sechin is not the only member of the Russian elite who got a yacht seized this week. In a separate incident, German authorities seized a $594 million luxury yacht—the world’s largest by volume—owned by Russian billionaire Alisher Usmanov, on Wednesday. Usmanov has a net worth of $14.2 billion, according to Forbes. Usmanov was identified by the EU last month as “one of Vladimir Putin’s favorite oligarchs.” President Biden vowed in his speech on Feb. 24 that the U.S. would make sure people who personally gained from the Kremlin’s policies “share in the pain.” And so far, the Russian elite in Putin’s inner circle have started to feel the effects of European sanctions, one yacht at a time.

Read more

“Europe can no longer remain reliant on Kremlin gas”

“Our way of life is worth defending. It is worth the cost. For the next generation, for all those in Ukraine and around the world who believe in Europe. For all those who want to be free.” Addressing the extraordinary Plenary Session of the European Parliament on “Russian aggression against Ukraine”, European Parliament President Roberta Metsola set our four important principles for the future of the European Union. First, Europe can no longer remain reliant on Kremlin gas. “We need to re-double our efforts to diversify our energy systems towards a Europe that is no longer at the behest of autocrats. This will put our energy security on stronger footing.” Secondly, President Metsola said that Europe can no longer welcome Kremlin cash and pretend there are no strings attached. “Putin’s oligarchs and those who bankroll him should no longer be able to use their purchasing power to hide behind a veneer of respectability, in our cities, communities or our sports clubs.” Thirdly, investment in our defense must match our rhetoric. President Metsola emphasized that “Europe must move to have real security and defense Union. We have shown the last week that it is possible and desirable, and more than anything it is necessary.” Fourthly, President Metsola spoke about the importance of fighting the Kremlin’s disinformation campaign. “I call on social media and tech conglomerates to take their responsibility seriously and to understand that there is no being neutral between the fire and the fire brigade. Thanking Ukrainian President Zelenskyy for showing the world what it means to stand up, President Metsola said that the European Parliament recognizes Ukraine’s European perspective. “As our Resolution clearly states, we welcome Ukraine’s application for candidate status and we will work towards that goal. We must face the future together.” In her speech, President Metsola also announced that having a long, proud history of being a thorn in the side of autocrats, the European Parliament will seek a ban on any representative of the Kremlin from entering its premises. “Aggressors and warmongers have no place in the House of democracy.”    

Read more

“Rosneft finances the cost of the Russian war in Ukraine"

Draw Media The Russian company Rosneft, which works at 6 of the Kurdistan region's oil farms and owns 60 percent of the Kurdistan Region's oil pipeline, is accused of financing the cost of the Russian war in Ukraine. The British Petroleum Company, a British group known as BP, announced its withdrawal from its 19.75% stake in the Russian company, Rosneft. BP accuses Rosneft of financing the war: “Rosneft finances the cost of the Russian war in Ukraine, and as a protest against the war, we are pulling out of our partnership with this company." Bernard Looney resigned from the board of Rosneft with immediate effect. “The Ukrainian war has led us to reconsider our work with Rosneft," (BP) chief executive officer Bernard Looney said in a statement. The decision of some global oil companies has shown an effect on Russia’s economy, particularly the Shell Company, which owns 27.5% of (Gazprom’s Sakhalin II), and Exon Mobil, which has been dealing with Russian companies belonging to the Rosneft Group for 25 years. Another company, Glinkur, owns 11 percent of the Russian energy company AN+, along with several other companies that work with Russia. The Suspension of British BP with Russian Rosneft comes after the western allies-imposed sanctions on Russia over Russia's attack on Ukraine. Including the expulsion of some Russian banks into the Swift system of international financial exchange. This poses a major risk to the Russian company’s work.   Rosneft in The Kurdistan Region The Russian company Rosneft owns 60% of the Kurdistan region's oil pipeline shares (the part of the pipeline that is inside the region's territory on Turkey’s border). In addition, the company is searching for oil in 6 Kurdistan fields, which are located on the Erbil-Duhok border, including: • Bartla • Zaweta • Harir • Bejil • Qasrook • Daratu      

Read more

Russia’s war in Ukraine: complete guide in maps, video and pictures

Draw Media: theguardian: by Andrew Roth, Dan Sabbagh, Paul Scruton, Harvey Symons, Finbarr Sheehy, Glenn Swann and Niels de Hoog What is the latest? Russian forces have reached the outskirts of Kyiv and carried out an amphibious assault from the Sea of Azov near Mariupol, a day after attacking Ukraine from three sides on a massive scale. In the capital air raid sirens wailed and heavy gunfire and explosions were heard in a number of districts, as Russian military vehicles approached from the north-west. The defence ministry in Moscow claimed its forces had taken control of the strategic Hostomel airfield to the north-west after a day of fighting. Pressure was also intensifying around Chernihiv, about 90 miles (145km) north-east of Kyiv, Ukraine’s military said, with Russian forces trying to bypass the city and head to the capital down the E95 road to Kozelec and ultimately Kyiv’s eastern suburbs. Further east, about 125 miles from the capital, the city of Konotop was lost to Russian forces. According to the Pentagon, 10 amphibious landing ships unloaded thousands of naval infantry to the west of Mariupol, potentially cutting off the port city on the Sea of Asov. Fighting was reported to be continuing around Kherson on the Dnieper River and in Melitopol. Elsewhere, Ukraine’s forces were believed to be holding firm in the eastern Donbas region, while the eastern city of Kharkiv, which has a population of more than 1 million, was gradually being surrounded. What happened on Thursday? Russia attacked Ukraine along multiple axes, bringing to a calamitous end weeks of fruitless diplomatic efforts by western leaders to avert war. Fighting and other military activity took place around and on the way to Kyiv, including an ambitious attack by helicopters on the Hostomel military airbase. Ukraine lost control of the Chernobyl nuclear site in the north, where fighting raged after Russian troops crossed the border from Belarus. One Russian line came through the Senkivka border crossing near Chernihiv. Tanks seen moving into Ukraine across the Senkivka border on 24 February. Photograph: Ukraine border guard A substantial attack was also aimed towards the eastern city of Kharkiv. Russian forces also headed north and east from Crimea. Social media footage showed them reaching Kherson on the Dnieper, 80 miles (130km) inside Ukraine. How did we get here? Over the past few months Russia has forward-deployed hundreds of tanks, self-propelled artillery and even short-range ballistic missiles from as far away as Siberia to within striking range of Ukraine. Moscow’s rhetoric also grew more belligerent. Vladimir Putin demanded legal guarantees that Ukraine would never join Nato or host its missile strike systems, concessions he was unlikely to receive. A flurry of diplomatic activity did little to ease tensions. The second half of February was long seen as the most likely period for a potential offensive. Russian soldiers stayed on in Belarus beyond the end of planned military exercises, and the Winter Olympics, hosted by ally China, concluded. The invasion was preceded on 22 February by Putin saying Russia would recognise the territorial claims of its two proxy states in east Ukraine. He had already ordered his forces into Russian-controlled territory in Ukraine. On 22 February a Reuters witness saw columns of military vehicles including tanks and armoured personnel carriers (APCs) on the outskirts of Donetsk, the capital of one of the territories claimed by Russia. What do we know about Russia’s deployments? Scores of battalion tactical groups – the smallest operational unit in Moscow’s army, consisting of about 800-1,000 troops – were put in place near the borders of Ukraine in both Russia and latterly Belarus prior to the invasion. As of 18 February the US estimated that Russia had between 169,000 and 190,000 personnel in and around Ukraine. An estimated 32,000 separatist forces were already operating in the breakaway areas of Donetsk and Luhansk – some of whom were likely to be unacknowledged Russian forces – before the invasion. Many of the heavy weapons stationed near Ukraine arrived as far back as spring 2021. Over the new year Russia also began to move tanks, artillery, air defence systems and fighter jets to Belarus for joint exercises in February. That deployment has since grown. Deployments at Zyabrovka (AKA Pribytki) airfield in Gomel, Belarus, 15 miles (25km) from the border with Ukraine, on 10 February. Photograph: Maxar Technologies/Reuters Half of Russia’s air force is now deployed near Ukraine, according to western estimates. Russian warships conducted training exercises in the Black Sea in the run-up to the invasion. This footage released by the Russian defence ministry shows a Ka-27PS helicopter taking off and landing on the deck of a frigate during exercises on 22 February. These satellite image composites show the buildup of troops in Yelnya and Pogonovo over the new year. Satellite photographs also show increased deployments in Novoozernoye in western Crimea. The US estimates 10,000 troops moved into Crimea in late January and early February. This image from 18 February shows deployments including armour, helicopters and field hospitals in Novoozernoye:  Photograph: EyePress News/Rex/Shutterstock Satellite images taken on 20 February showed troops and equipment being moved from holding areas to what the UK defence secretary described as potential launch locations. How do the militaries compare? Russia’s invasion pits the Kremlin’s large, recently modernised military against an adversary largely using older versions of the same or similar equipment, dating back to the Soviet era. Russia has significant numerical advantages on land and in particular in air and at sea, although the Ukrainians are defending their homeland. What is the historical context? In 2014 Putin sent troops to annex Crimea, a mainly Russian-speaking region of Ukraine. Russia also incited a separatist uprising in Ukraine’s south-east, clandestinely sending soldiers and weapons to provoke a conflict that grew into a full-blown war. A 2015 peace deal established a line of demarcation and called on both sides to make concessions. Since then low-level fighting has continued along the front, and both sides have accused the other of violating the agreement. Going back further, Russia has long opposed any attempts by Ukraine to move towards the EU and Nato. One of Putin’s often repeated demands is a guarantee that Ukraine never joins Nato, the alliance of 30 countries that has expanded eastwards since the end of the cold war. What is the role of Nord Stream 2? On 22 February, the German chancellor, Olaf Scholz, stopped the certification process for the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline in response to Russia’s recognition of the two self-proclaimed republics. First announced in 2015, the $11bn (£8.3bn) pipeline owned by Russia’s state-backed energy company Gazprom has been built to carry gas from western Siberia to Lubmin in Germany’s north-east, doubling the existing capacity of the Nord Stream 1 pipeline and keeping 26m German homes warm at an affordable price. Europe’s most divisive energy project, Nord Stream 2 bypasses the traditional gas transit nation of Ukraine by running along the bed of the Baltic Sea. It has faced resistance within the EU, and from the US as well as Ukraine, on the grounds that it increases Europe’s energy dependence on Russia, denies Ukraine transit fees and makes it more vulnerable to Russian invasion. … we have a small favour to ask. Millions are turning to the Guardian for open, independent, quality news every day, and readers in 180 countries around the world now support us financially. We believe everyone deserves access to information that’s grounded in science and truth, and analysis rooted in authority and integrity. That’s why we made a different choice: to keep our reporting open for all readers, regardless of where they live or what they can afford to pay. This means more people can be better informed, united, and inspired to take meaningful action. In these perilous times, a truth-seeking global news organisation like the Guardian is essential. We have no shareholders or billionaire owner, meaning our journalism is free from commercial and political influence – this makes us different. When it’s never been more important, our independence allows us to fearlessly investigate, challenge and expose those in power. Support the Guardian from as little as $1 – it only takes a minute. If you can, please consider supporting us with a regular amount each month. Thank you.  

Read more

Vast Leak Exposes How Credit Suisse Served Strongmen and Spies

By Jesse Drucker and Ben Hubbard Leaked data on more than 18,000 accounts shows that the Swiss bank missed or ignored red flags. The client rosters of Swiss banks are among the world’s most closely guarded secrets, protecting the identities of some of the planet’s richest people and clues into how they accumulated their fortunes. Now, an extraordinary leak of data from Credit Suisse, one of the world’s most iconic banks, is exposing how the bank held hundreds of millions of dollars for heads of state, intelligence officials, sanctioned businessmen and human rights abusers, among many others. A self-described whistle-blower leaked data on more than 18,000 bank accounts, collectively holding more than $100 billion, to the German newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung. The newspaper shared the data with a nonprofit journalism group, the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project, and 46 other news organizations around the world, including The New York Times. The data covers accounts that were open from the 1940s until well into the 2010s but not the bank’s current operations. Among the people listed as holding amounts worth millions of dollars in Credit Suisse accounts were King Abdullah II of Jordan and the two sons of the former Egyptian strongman Hosni Mubarak. Other account holders included sons of a Pakistani intelligence chief who helped funnel billions of dollars from the United States and other countries to the mujahedeen in Afghanistan in the 1980s and Venezuelan officials ensnared in a long-running corruption scandal. The leak shows that Credit Suisse opened accounts for and continued to serve not only the ultrawealthy but also people whose problematic backgrounds would have been obvious to anyone who ran their names through a search engine. Swiss banks have long faced legal prohibitions on taking money linked to criminal activity, said Daniel Thelesklaf, the former head of Switzerland’s anti-money laundering agency. But, he said, the law generally hasn’t been enforced. Candice Sun, a spokeswoman for the bank, said in a statement that “Credit Suisse strongly rejects the allegations and inferences about the bank’s purported business practices.” She said many of the accounts in the leak date back decades to “a time where laws, practices and expectations of financial institutions were very different from where they are now.”     Ms. Sun said that while Credit Suisse can’t comment on specific clients, many of the accounts identified in the leaked database have already been closed. “Of the remaining active accounts, we are comfortable that appropriate due diligence, reviews and other control related steps were taken, including pending account closures,” she said. The leak follows the so-called Panama Papers in 2016, the Paradise Papers in 2017 and the Pandora Papers last year. They all shed light on the secretive workings of banks, law firms and offshore financial-services providers that allow wealthy people and institutions — including those accused of crimes — to move huge sums of money, largely outside the purview of tax collectors or law enforcement. The new disclosures are likely to intensify legal and political scrutiny of the Swiss banking industry and, in particular, Credit Suisse. The bank is already reeling from the abrupt ousters of its two top executives. With its ironclad bank-secrecy laws, Switzerland has long been a haven for people who are looking to hide money. In the past decade, that has made the country’s largest banks — especially its two giants, Credit Suisse and UBS — a target for the authorities in the United States and elsewhere who are trying to crack down on tax evasion, money laundering and other crimes. In 2014, Credit Suisse pleaded guilty to conspiring to help Americans file false tax returns and agreed to pay fines, penalties and restitution totaling $2.6 billion. Three years later, the bank paid the Justice Department $5.3 billion to settle allegations about its marketing of mortgage-backed securities. Last fall, it agreed to pay $475 million to U.S. and British authorities to resolve an investigation into a kickback and bribery scheme in Mozambique. And this month, a trial got underway in Switzerland in which Credit Suisse is accused of allowing drug traffickers to launder millions of euros through the bank.   The Justice Department and the Senate Finance Committee are also looking into whether U.S. citizens continue to hold undeclared accounts at the bank. Several former Credit Suisse employees told federal prosecutors late last year that the bank continued to hide hundreds of millions of dollars for clients long after its 2014 guilty plea, according to a whistle-blower lawsuit filed last year by a former bank official and a lawyer for other former employees. (The suit was dismissed after the Justice Department said it “threatens to interfere with ongoing discussions with Credit Suisse” about dealing with Swiss bank accounts held by U.S. citizens.) The media consortium has nicknamed the latest leak “Suisse Secrets.” Of the more than 18,000 bank accounts involved, roughly 100 U.S. citizens held accounts, but none are public figures. Among the biggest revelations is that Credit Suisse continued to do business with customers even after bank officials flagged suspicious activity involving their finances. One account holder was Venezuela’s former vice minister of energy, Nervis Villalobos. Employees in Credit Suisse’s compliance department had reason to be wary of doing business with him. The bank had a 2008 report by an outside due-diligence firm detailing corruption allegations involving Mr. Villalobos and Venezuela’s state-owned oil company, Petróleos de Venezuela, according to a Spanish police report obtained by the media consortium. (The Times reviewed the report.) Credit Suisse nonetheless opened an account for him in 2011, the leaked bank data shows. The account, which was closed in 2013, held as much as $10 million. Lawyers for Mr. Villalobos, who was criminally charged by the Justice Department in 2017, didn’t respond to requests for comment.   All told, there were 25 Credit Suisse accounts, containing a total of about $270 million, that belonged to people accused of being involved in a wide-ranging conspiracy surrounding Venezuela’s oil company. The accounts remained open after the scandal started to become public, but were closed by the time criminal charges were filed. The bank also kept accounts open for a Zimbabwean businessman who was sanctioned by U.S. and European authorities for his ties to the government of the country’s longtime president, Robert Mugabe. The accounts stayed open for several months after the sanctions were imposed. The leaked bank information included many accounts linked to government officials across the Middle East and beyond. The data raises questions about how public officials and their relatives accumulated vast fortunes in a region rife with corruption.   . The sons of former President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt, Alaa and Gamal Mubarak, held a total of six accounts at various points, including one in 2003 that was worth $196 million. In a statement to The New York Times, the Mubaraks’ lawyers declined to comment about specific accounts but said the suggestion that any of the Mubaraks’ assets had been “tainted by any illegality or a result of any favoritism or use of influence” would be “both unfounded and defamatory.” Any assets they held, the statement said, were from their “successful professional business activities.” " King Abdullah II of Jordan, one of the few officials in the leaks who remains in power, had six accounts, including one whose balance exceeded $224 million. Jordan’s Royal Hashemite Court said in a statement that there had been no “unlawful or improper conduct” in relation to the bank accounts. They held portions of the king’s private wealth, which was used for personal expenses, royal projects to help Jordanians and the maintenance of Islamic holy sites in Jerusalem, of which he is the custodian. Senior intelligence officials and their offspring from several countries that cooperated with the United States in the war on terrorism also had money stashed at Credit Suisse. As the head of the Pakistani intelligence agency, General Akhtar Abdur Rahman Khan helped funnel billions of dollars in cash and other aid from the United States and other countries to the mujahedeen in Afghanistan to support their fight against the Soviet Union. In 1985, the same year President Ronald Reagan called for more oversight of the aid going into Afghanistan, an account was opened in the name of three of General Khan’s sons. (The general never faced charges of stealing aid money.) Years later, the account would grow to hold $3.7 million, the leaked records show. Two of the general’s sons, Akbar and Haroon Khan, did not respond to requests for comment from the reporting project. In a text message, a third son, Ghazi Khan, called information about the accounts “not correct,” adding, “The content is conjectural.”   In 2003, the year that the United States invaded Iraq to topple Saddam Hussein, Saad Kheir, the head of Jordan’s intelligence agency, opened an account that would eventually hold $21.6 million. The account was closed after Mr. Kheir’s death in 2009. The family of Mr. Mubarak’s long-serving and brutal spymaster, Omar Suleiman, had an account, too. Mr. Suleiman died in 2012. Efforts by the reporting project to reach his family were unsuccessful. The leaked records were provided to Germany’s Süddeutsche Zeitung more than a year ago by an unidentified whistle-blower. Of the dozens of news organizations collaborating on the project, none were based in Switzerland, where a 2015 law restricted journalists from writing articles based on internal bank data. The whistle-blower said in a statement to the media consortium that Swiss bank-secrecy laws were “immoral.” “The pretext of protecting financial privacy is merely a fig leaf covering the shameful role of Swiss banks as collaborators of tax evaders,” the whistle-blower said.  

Read more

Jordan crisis: How Prince Hamzah and Saudi Arabia fit in

DRAW: By Frank Gardner - BBC Saudi officials have categorically denied suggestions their country had any role in the alleged coup attempt in Jordan. On Saturday Jordan's popular former Crown Prince Hamzah was placed under de facto house arrest and accused of undermining national security after attending tribal meetings where King Abdullah, his half-brother, was openly criticised. Prince Hamzah then released to the BBC two videos, calling his country's government corrupt and incompetent, and saying that people were afraid to speak out for fear of harassment by the security forces. The crisis has since been de-escalated after mediation by the king's uncle, but speculation is rife as to Saudi Arabia's role. Jordan bans reporting on royal rift A chronology of key events Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan flew to the Jordanian capital Amman with a delegation in order, say Saudi officials, to "express complete solidarity with Jordan's King Abdullah and his government". This, they said, was the single, unified Saudi position and any suggestion that Saudi Arabia was involved in trying to destabilise its much smaller neighbour was "far-fetched nonsense". So what exactly is the Saudi connection here? When the crisis was at its peak over the weekend, Jordanian officials said their security agencies had been monitoring the activities of Prince Hamzah and more than a dozen officials for some time. They spoke of mysterious, unnamed "foreign entities" as having been involved in what they said was a plot to destabilise the country and its royal family - something denied by Prince Hamzah. IMAGE COPYRIGHTEPA image captionA frame maker displays pictures of King Abdullah in Amman It turns out there are essentially two separate issues here. One is Prince Hamzah, the popular elder son of the late King Hussein, who rattled Jordan's security chiefs with his recent contacts with disgruntled tribal figures. The other involves a number of officials who are alleged to have had links to at least one other country. One of the most prominent figures arrested on Saturday was Bassem Awadallah, the former head of Jordan's Royal Court and now an economic adviser to Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. He holds dual Saudi-Jordanian citizenship and has appeared as a moderator at Saudi Arabia's high-profile Future Investment Initiative forums. The Washington Post reported that the Saudi foreign minister's delegation was refusing to leave Jordan without taking Bassem Awadallah back to Riyadh with them. This, say Saudi officials, is untrue. Bassem Awadullah has a number of powerful international connections. As well as his position close to Saudi Arabia's crown prince, he has links to the de facto ruler of the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed. He has reportedly been involved in recent UAE-backed purchases of Palestinian land around Jerusalem. Saudi Arabia profile Jordan country profile Saudi Arabia and Jordan meanwhile, although vastly different in economic terms, have much in common. Their deep historic ties go back centuries and tribal links straddle the joint desert border. When, in my 20s, I lived with the Bedouin from the Bani Huwaitat tribe in southern Jordan, they frequently used to roam into Saudi Arabia and back, exchanging goods and news while tending their sheep, goats and camels. As surviving Sunni Arab monarchies in a part of the world rocked to its foundations by the Arab Spring uprisings, both countries' rulers have a vested interest in supporting each other. It is certainly hard to see the logic behind either of Jordan's most powerful neighbours - Saudi Arabia or Israel - wanting to destabilise this small, relatively impoverished kingdom. Under the late King Hussein and now his son King Abdullah, Jordan's monarchy, the Hashemite dynasty, has managed to survive the buffeting winds of Middle Eastern politics. A 1994 peace treaty with Israel, while domestically unpopular, has brought some regional stability. But Jordan has few natural resources and its already overstretched infrastructure has had to cope with huge influxes of refugees, first from Iraq and later from Syria. The Covid-19 pandemic has temporarily killed off the tourist industry, dealing another blow to a weak economy. Popular resentment at what is seen as government mismanagement is growing. Yet governments in the region know that were Jordan's monarchy to fall, this could trigger a dangerous chain of events. Hence the rapid and public declarations of support for King Abdullah from his neighbours. Waiting in the wings, both al-Qaeda and the Islamic State (IS) group would be only too delighted to see chaos reign in a country that has so far been a linchpin of stability in the Middle East.  

Read more

All Contents are reserved by Draw media.
Developed by Smarthand