Connect with us

Latest

News

CONFIRMED: Russia opposed to Kurdish separatism in Middle East

Russia is comitted to the existing borders of Iraq, Syria, Turkey and Iran.

Published

on

3,819 Views

This morning, Russian Presidential Spokesman Dmitry Peskov was asked to clarify the Russian position on a referendum for unilateral secession among ethnic Kurds in northern Iraq. Iraq has condemned the move on multiple occasions.

Today, Peskov stated the Russian position in the following way,

“Russia’s position is the one in favour of territorial integrity of regional states”.

This is confirmation that Russia supports the existing borders of all states in which Kurdish militants seek to carve out new political territory. Such states include Iraq, Syria, Turkey and Iran.

This is fitting with Russia’s general commitment to the integrity of states globally as well as an indication of Russia’s historically good relations with Turkey and Iran, as well as Russia’s continually good relations with Syria and its restored positive ties with Iraq.

While Russia has generally had good relations with Kurdish groups over the centuries, Russia is clearly prioritising its relationship with states over relationships with non-state bodies.

Turkey which generally had better relations with Iraq Kurds vis-a-vis PKK aligned Syrian Kurds, has recently announced that it will implement sanctions against so-called Iraqi Kurdistan if the referendum, scheduled for the 25th of September, takes place.

With the exception of Israel, all regional powers are opposed to Kurdish separatism. The US has tended to distance itself from the Kurdish referendum in Iraq, in spite of the US having generally good relations with Iraq Kurds.

Currently, the US is in charge of a Kurdish led proxy militia in Syria known as the SDF. It is suspected that while the US will continue to urge dialogue between Baghdad and Iraqi Kurds, the US might take a more aggressive line in favour of Kurdish separatism in Syria owing to America’s humiliation in light of the failure of its regime change policy against Damascus.

In spite of international warnings to cancel the referendum, including from the UN, separatists in Iraq have stated that they will proceed with the unilateral vote on the 25th of September.

 

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of
colum
Guest
colum

Who were the signataries to the current borders of Syria, Iraq and Turkey?

JNDillard
Guest
JNDillard

Those borders are both recognized and guaranteed by the United Nations. All other questions are irrelevant.

colum
Guest
colum

No they ain’t. Aren’t the UN the same cabal that supported the creation of Israel (Britian was involved with both the UN and the loss of kurdistan). The UN is in the pocket of globalists and is not the peace keeping world police. Kurdistan was conveniently written of the map by a couple of key UN members for imperialist reasons thus it is no surprise the UN care little for the borders (also add the fact the UN came in after Kurdistan was conveniently removed after WW1). Now I know few are going to agree with my views, but my… Read more »

Melotte 22
Guest
Melotte 22

Kurds are ethnic minority in Syria representing approx.10% of Syrian population. Most of them are actually refugees from Turkey, accepted by Syria.
Once ISIS is defeated, it is in their best interest to accept Syria as their country and work with Syrian government for some sort of autonomy. Asking for anything more is going to be disastrous for Kurds. They should also avoid a trap of being a new US puppet in the region, once ISIS is defeated.

Trauma2000
Guest
Trauma2000

It is too late for the puppet thing. They are already being used by the U.$. as ‘canon fodder’ and dumb soldiers so that U.$. soldiers can stay out of harms way.

JNDillard
Guest
JNDillard

“The Kurds deserve at least a greater autonomy if not sovereignty in the areas of their home lands as a protected people.” I totally agree. They deserve a significant degree of autonomy within the context of existing nation states recognized by the UN. While it is a lousy model to site, for various reasons, the US Indian nations have something like that. And some “nations” have made out very well with casinos. Generally, compromise is better than civil war. The Catalans are about to test that theory.

colum
Guest
colum

To ‘cite’ your comment, Compromise is better than bloodshed, but compromise is the very least that must be done, especially by the ruling powers. Ultimately the situation the world over is one of wrongfully displaced peoples that has occurred via imperialism and conquest. I still believe the Kurds should be granted their own land and sovereignty or at the very least something akin to Northern Ireland. They need to be recognised as Kurds with their own culture and (unlike Northern Ireland) a fair represtation in the governments of the ‘supervising’ nations that make up the Kurdish homeland. The kurds cannot… Read more »

Trauma2000
Guest
Trauma2000

@ Colum re: “sovereignty or at the very least something akin to Northern Ireland. They need to be recognised as Kurds with their own culture” It is too late for that. They would end up as a pariah nation, landlocked between 4 other nations that they have ‘burnt’ one way or another. With the current state of affairs in the Middle East, there is ‘safety in numbers’ and the recognition they had as part of Syria was far greater than anything they had anywhere else. Now they are just being used by the U.$. as ‘an excuse for war’ on… Read more »

PJ London
Guest
PJ London

The Sykes–Picot Agreement
Splitting up of the Ottoman empire after WW1.
Try Google.

colum
Guest
colum

And they were?

PJ London
Guest
PJ London

It is spelled “GOOGLE.COM”
About 267 000 results (0,87 seconds)

colum
Guest
colum

I invited that, now tell me the name of the signataries of those who erased Kurdista.

PJ London
Guest
PJ London

There is not, nor has there ever been a ‘Kurdista’. They had been offered a large degree of autonomy under Hussein, Assad, and all the Turkish governments, instead they set about killing and erasing the Arabs, the Turks and to a much lesser extent the Iranians. Their antics have caused the Iraqis, the Syrians and the Turks to be really, really annoyed. Like the Chechens, they are about to be royally spanked. The Kurdish idiots, like the Chechens and the Georgians and a dozen other minorities believed that the Americans would ‘have their backs’. Even the Israelis believe it. They… Read more »

Suzanne Giraud
Guest
Suzanne Giraud

“There is not, nor has there ever been a ‘Kurdista'” 100% – until go-ogle or wikip start fiddling with more of our history.
They were always a nomadic tribe, with the same sick habits as their relations in that other occupied territory (where Kurds are also found) who practice ‘ethnic cleansing’
apartheid wherever they decide settle.

Gavin Allen
Guest
Gavin Allen

More pathetic nonsense from ADAM GARRIE… “Russia supports the existing borders of all states in which Kurdish militants seek to carve out new political territory. Such states include Iraq, Syria, Turkey and Iran.” Yeah, right. Adam likes to ignore reality and swim in fiction. In Syria, the “Kurdish militants” project is actually a polyethnic Syrian project to bring real democracy to their society. But of course Adam likes to kiss the murderer Assad’s arse. “the US might take a more aggressive line in favour of Kurdish separatism in Syria” – the DFNS already exists, and is a part of Syria.… Read more »

PJ London
Guest
PJ London

Talk about “pathetic nonsense” there is no such animal as the DFNS. Not now, not ever. Nor will there be a ‘state’ in Iraq’. You think Iran is going to let the Kurds set up a ‘State’? Dream on dummy. The only reason US is in the area is to steal the oil. Iraq and Syria were willing in the past to allow certain autonomy under the control of the countries, but the Kurds (thanks to the Americans) have screwed that up. when ISIL and Nusra have been buried, then SDF and Peshmerga will be next. The Kurds have been… Read more »

Norman
Guest
Norman

You smell bad Gavin Allen.

JNDillard
Guest
JNDillard

Another example of the US shooting itself in the foot. Actually, more like the groin or head. Why not alienate both Turkey and Iraq by supporting the Kurds? ISIS will very soon be defeated in Syria and Iraq. When they are, the last excuse for US presence in northern Syria and Iraq will be gone. At that point, what will the US do? Yes, it can continue to bribe the Kurds financially to maintain their military presence there, but as the Syrians and Iraqis increasingly turn to war against the Kurds to regain what is lawfully theirs, the position of… Read more »

Freethinking Влади́мир
Guest
Freethinking Влади́мир

Iraq is entirely divided and that means the US always will find reasons to maintain their presence. Syria is different: the US will remain present, but in Kurdish occupied territory. The defeat of the US isn’t worth much because the western population doesn’t realize its defeat because it’s not a straightforward one. The masses haven’t learned to think in terms of hybrid and proxy wars, despite their high opinion of themselves.

Le Ruse
Guest
Le Ruse

Historically, the Kurds were always on the US/Israhell side & they always end it up with the shit end of the stick ?? So as J Wayne said, Life is hard & it’s harder if you’re stupid ??

Freethinking Влади́мир
Guest
Freethinking Влади́мир

They couldn’t have done it without US support. The Kurdish regions are nothing but more forward operating bases for the Americans.

seby
Guest
seby

The truth is, giving the Kurds (which ones?) a state is almost like giving the Romany a State. They indeed have had a sad history wherever they stayed put. It could be said Syria treated them the best. Anyway, we know what this is all about. The old divide and conquer game of imperialists. The biggest absurdity and a giveaway on this truth, is that the zionists (a previous beneficiary of imperial divide and conquer) are ok with giving them a State but not the Palestinians, who really have the most right to one. That is if you use a… Read more »

Trauma2000
Guest
Trauma2000

@ Seby re: “The biggest absurdity and a giveaway on this truth, is that the zionists (a previous beneficiary of imperial divide and conquer) are ok with giving them a State but not the Palestinians, who really have the most right to one. ” And that is the crux of it isn’t it. The Palestinian have MORE right to live in ‘Palestine’ than anyone else; but it was stolen from them under the most horrible of subterfuges. They got lied to on a grand scale. It is a disgrace what has been inflicted on Palestine. But, irony of ironies, the… Read more »

tapatio
Guest
tapatio

Reality is that the Kurds, like the Jews (a European tribe), the Wahhabi and Salafists, are nothing but a TRIBE…………..they are not a nation.

Like the Jews and their Wahhabi and Salafist minions, they should NEVER be granted nation status. The decision of the General Assembly, to grant the Jews nation status, in 1947, was catastrophic for the Middle East and a disaster for the world.

Latest

May Forces Brexit Betrayal to its Crisis Point

We’re 29 months later and the U.K. is no closer to being out of the EU than the day of the vote. 

Published

on

Authored by Tom Luongo:


The only words that were left out of Theresa May’s announcement of achieving Cabinet approval over her Brexit deal were Mission Accomplished.

Theresa May was put in charge of the U.K. to betray Brexit from the beginning.  She always represented the interests of the European Union and those in British Parliament that backed remaining in the EU.

No one in British ‘high society’ wanted Brexit to pass.   No. One.

No one in Europe’s power elite wanted Brexit to pass.  No. One.

No one in the U.S.’s power elite wanted Brexit to pass.  No. One.

When it did pass The Davos Crowd began the process of sabotaging it.  The fear mongering has done nothing but intensify.  And May has done nothing but waffle back and forth, walking the political tight rope to remain in power while trying to sell EU slavery to the both sides in British Parliament.

We’re 29 months later and the U.K. is no closer to being out of the EU than the day of the vote.  Why?

Because Theresa May’s 585 page ‘deal’ is the worst of all possible outcomes.  If it passes it will leave the EU with near full control over British trade and tax policy while the British people and government have no say or vote in the matter.

It’s punishment for the people getting uppity about their future and wanting something different than what had been planned for them.

Mr. Juncker and his replacement will never have to suffer another one of Nigel Farage’s vicious farragoes detailing their venality ever again.  YouTube will get a whole lot less interesting.

It’s almost like this whole charade was designed this way.

Because it was.

May has tried to run out the clock and scare everyone into accepting a deal that is worse than the situation pre-Brexit because somehow a terrible deal is better than no deal.  But, that’s the opposite of the truth.

And she knows it.  She’s always known it but she’s gone into these negotiations like the fragile wisp of a thing she truly is.

There’s a reason I call her “The Gypsum Lady.” She’s simply the opposite of Margaret Thatcher who always knew what the EU was about and fought to her last political breath to avoid the trap the U.K. is now caught in.

The U.K. has had all of the leverage in Brexit talks but May has gone out of her way to not use any of it while the feckless and evil vampires in Europe purposefully complicate issues which are the height of irrelevancy.

She has caved on every issue to the point of further eroding what’s left of British sovereignty.  This deal leaves the U.K. at the mercy of Latvia or Greece in negotiating any trade agreement with Canada.  Because for a deal between member states to be approved, all members have to approve of it.

So, yeah, great job Mrs. May.  Mission Accomplished.  They are popping champagne corks in Brussels now.

But, this is a Brexit people can be proud of.

Orwell would be proud of Theresa May for this one.

You people are leaving.  Let the EU worry about controlling their borders.  And if Ireland doesn’t like the diktats coming from Brussels than they can decide for themselves if staying in the EU is worth the trouble.

The entire Irish border issue is simply not May’s problem to solve.  Neither is the customs union or any of the other stuff.  These are the EU’s problems.   They are the ones who don’t want the Brits to leave.

Let them figure out how they are going to trade with the U.K.  It is so obvious that this entire Brexit ‘negotiation’ is about protecting the European project as a proxy for the right of German automakers to export their cars at advantageous exchange rates to the U.K. at everyone’s expense.

Same as it was in the days of The Iron Lady.

If all of this wasn’t so predictable it would be comical.

Because the only people more useless than Theresa May are the Tories who care only about keeping their current level of the perks of office.

The biggest takeaway from this Brexit fiasco is that even more people will check out of the political system. They will see it even more clearly for what it is, an irredeemable miasma of pelf and privilege that has zero interest in protecting the rights of its citizens or the value of their labor.

It doesn’t matter if it’s voter fraud in the U.S. or a drawn out betrayal of a binding referendum. There comes a point where those not at the political fringes look behind the veil and realize changing the nameplate above the door doesn’t change the policy.

And once they realize that confidence fails and systems collapse.

Brexit was the last gasp of a dying empire to assert its national relevancy.  Even if this deal is rejected by parliament the process has sown deep divisions which will lead to the next trap and the next and the next and the next.

By then Theresa May will be a distant memory, being properly rewarded by her masters for a job very well done.


Please support the production of independent and alternative political and financial commentary by joining my Patreon and subscribing to the Gold Goats ‘n Guns Investment Newsletter for just $12/month.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

The DOJ Is Preparing To Indict Julian Assange

Ecuador’s relationship with Assange has deteriorated considerably with the election of President Lenin Moreno.

Published

on

Via Zerohedge…


The US Justice Department is preparing to indict WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange which, after sensitive international negotiations, would likely trigger his extradition to the United States to stand trial, according to the Wall Street Journalciting people in Washington familiar with the matter.

Over the past year, U.S. prosecutors have discussed several types of charges they could potentially bring against Mr. Assange, the people said. Mr. Assange has lived in the Ecuadorean embassy in London since receiving political asylum from the South American country in 2012.

The people familiar with the case wouldn’t describe whether discussions were under way with the U.K. or Ecuador about Mr. Assange, but said they were encouraged by recent developments.

The exact charges Justice Department might pursue remain unclear, but they may involve the Espionage Act, which criminalizes the disclosure of national defense-related information. –WSJ

In short, the DOJ doesn’t appear to have a clear charge against Assange yet. Then there’s the optics of dragging Assange out of Ecuador’s London Embassy and into the United States, then prosecuting him, and if successful – jailing him.

Prosecuting someone for publishing truthful information would set a terrible and dangerous precedent,” said Assange lawyer Barry Pollack – who says he hasn’t heard anything about a US prosecution.

“We have heard nothing from authorities suggesting that a criminal case against Mr. Assange is imminent,” he added.

Moreover, assuming that even if the DOJ could mount a case, they would be required to prove that Russia was the source of a trove of emails damaging to Hillary Clinton that WikiLeaks released in the last few months of the 2016 election.

An indictment from special counsel Robert Mueller that portrayed WikiLeaks as a tool of Russian intelligence for releasing thousands of hacked Democratic emails during the 2016 presidential campaign has made it more difficult for Mr. Assange to mount a defense as a journalist. Public opinion of Mr. Assange in the U.S. has dropped since the campaign.

Prosecutors have considered publicly indicting Mr. Assange to try to trigger his removal from the embassy, the people said, because a detailed explanation of the evidence against Mr. Assange could give Ecuadorean authorities a reason to turn him over. –WSJ

It’s no secret that Assange and Hillary Clinton aren’t exactly exchanging Christmas cards, however would WikiLeaks’ release of damaging information that was hacked (or copied locally on a thumb drive by a well-meaning American), be illegal for Assange as a publisher?

Despite scant clues as to how the DOJ will prosecute Assange aside from rumors that it has to do with the Espionage Act, the US Government is cooking on something. John Demers – head of the DOJ’s national security division, said last week regarding an Assange case: “On that, I’ll just say, we’ll see.”

The U.S. hasn’t publicly commented on whether it has made, or plans to make, any extradition request. Any extradition request from the U.S. would likely go to British authorities, who have an outstanding arrest warrant for Mr. Assange related to a Swedish sexual assault case. Sweden has since dropped the probe, but the arrest warrant stands.

Any extradition and prosecution would involve multiple sensitive negotiations within the U.S. government and with other countries. –WSJ

Beginning in 2010, the Department of Justice beginning under the Obama administration has drawn a distinction between WikiLeaks and other news organizations – with former Attorney General Eric Holder insisting that Assange’s organization does not deserve the same first amendment protections during the Chelsea Manning case in which the former Army intelligence analyst was found guilty at a court-martial of leaking thousands of classified Afghan War Reports.

US officials have given mixed messages over Assange, with President Trump having said during the 2016 election “I love WikiLeaks,” only to have his former CIA Director, Mike Pompeo label WikiLeaks akin to a foreign “hostile intelligence service” and a US adversary. Former Attorney General Jeff Sessions has said that Assange’s arrest is a “priority.”

Ecuador’s relationship with Assange, meanwhile, has deteriorated considerably with the election of President Lenin Moreno – who called the WikiLeaks founder a “stone in our shoe,” adding that Assange’s stay at the London embassy is unsustainable.

Ecuador has been looking to improve relations with the U.S., hosting Vice President Mike Pence in 2018 amid interest in increasing trade.

Ecuador’s Foreign Relations Ministry declined to comment. This month, Foreign Relations Minister José Valencia told a radio station the government hadn’t received an extradition request for Mr. Assange.

Mr. Assange has clashed with his Ecuadorean hosts in over internet access, visitors, his cat and other issues. Last month, he sued Ecuador over the conditions of his confinement. At a hearing last month, at which a judge rejected Mr. Assange’s claims, Mr. Assange said he expected to be forced out of the embassy soon.  –WSJ

Assange and Ecuador seem to have worked things out for the time being; with his months-long communication blackout mostly lifted (with strict rules against Assange participating in political activities that would affect Ecuador’s international relations). Assange is now allowed Wi-Fi, but has to foot the bill for his own phone calls and other communication.

In October, a judge threw out a lawsuit Assange filed against Ecuador from implementing the stricter rules,.

“Ecuador hasn’t violated the rights of anyone,” Attorney General Íñigo Salvador said after the court ruling. “It has provided asylum to Mr. Assange, and he should comply with the rules to live harmoniously inside Ecuador’s public installations in London.”Assange’s attorneys say he will appeal the ruling – however it may be a moot point if he’s dragged into a US courtroom sooner than later.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Trump Understands The Important Difference Between Nationalism And Globalism

President Trump’s nationalism heralds a return to the old U.S. doctrine of non-intervention.

The Duran

Published

on

Authored by Raheem Kassam, op-ed via The Daily Caller:


President Macron’s protests against nationalism this weekend stand in stark contrast with the words of France’s WWII resistance leader and the man who would then become president: General Charles de Gaulle.

Speaking to his men in 1913, de Gaulle reminded them:

“He who does not love his mother more than other mothers, and his fatherland more than other fatherlands, loves neither his mother nor his fatherland.”

This unquestionable invocation of nationalism reveals how far France has come in its pursuit of globalist goals, which de Gaulle described later in that same speech as the “appetite of vice.”

While this weekend the media have been sharpening their knives on Macron’s words, for use against President Trump, very few have taken the time to understand what really created the conditions for the wars of the 20th century. It was globalism’s grandfather: imperialism, not nationalism.

This appears to have been understood at least until the 1980s, though forgotten now. With historical revisionism applied to nationalism and the great wars, it is much harder to understand what President Trump means when he calls himself a “nationalist.” Though the fault is with us, not him.

Patriotism is the exact opposite of nationalism: nationalism is a betrayal of patriotism … By pursuing our own interests first, with no regard to others,’ we erase the very thing that a nation holds most precious, that which gives it life and makes it great: its moral values,” President Macron declared from the pulpit of the Armistice 100 commemorations.

Had this been in reverse, there would no doubt have been shrieks of disgust aimed at Mr. Trump for “politicizing” such a somber occasion. No such shrieks for Mr. Macron, however, who languishes below 20 percent in national approval ratings in France.

With some context applied, it is remarkably easy to see how President Macron was being disingenuous.

Nationalism and patriotism are indeed distinct. But they are not opposites.

Nationalism is a philosophy of governance, or how human beings organize their affairs. Patriotism isn’t a governing philosophy. Sometimes viewed as subsidiary to the philosophy of nationalism, patriotism is better described as a form of devotion.

For all the grandstanding, Mr. Macron may as well have asserted that chicken is the opposite of hot sauce,so meaningless was the comparison.

Imperialism, we so quickly forget, was the order of the day heading into the 20th century. Humanity has known little else but empire since 2400 B.C. The advent of globalism, replete with its foreign power capitals and multi-national institutions is scarcely distinct.

Imperialism — as opposed to nationalism — seeks to impose a nation’s way of life, its currency, its traditions, its flags, its anthems, its demographics, and its rules and laws upon others wherever they may be.

Truly, President Trump’s nationalism heralds a return to the old U.S. doctrine of non-intervention, expounded by President George Washington in his farewell address of 1796:

” … It must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves, by artificial ties, in the ordinary vicissitudes of [Europe’s] politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities.”

It should not have to be pointed out that the great wars of the 20th century could not be considered “ordinary vicissitudes”, but rather, that imperialism had begun to run amok on the continent.

It was an imperialism rooted in nihilism, putting the totality of the state at its heart. Often using nationalism as nothing more than a method of appeal, socialism as a doctrine of governance, and Jews as a subject of derision and scapegoating.

Today’s imperialism is known as globalism.

It is what drives nations to project outward their will, usually with force; causes armies to cross borders in the hope of subjugating other human beings or the invaded nation’s natural resources; and defines a world, or region, or continent by its use of central authority and foreign capital control.

Instead of armies of soldiers, imperialists seek to dominate using armies of economists and bureaucrats. Instead of forced payments to a foreign capital, globalism figured out how to create economic reliance: first on sterling, then on the dollar, now for many on the Euro. This will soon be leapfrogged by China’s designs.

And while imperialism has served some good purposes throughout human history, it is only when grounded in something larger than man; whether that be natural law, God, or otherwise. But such things are scarcely long-lived.

While benevolent imperialism can create better conditions over a period of time, humanity’s instincts will always lean towards freedom and self-governance.

It is this fundamental distinction between the United States’ founding and that of the modern Republic of France that defines the two nations.

The people of France are “granted” their freedoms by the government, and the government creates the conditions and dictates the terms upon which those freedoms are exercised.

As Charles Kesler wrote for the Claremont Review of Books in May, “As a result, there are fewer and fewer levers by which the governed can make its consent count”.

France is the archetypal administrative state, while the United States was founded on natural law, a topic that scarcely gets enough attention anymore.

Nationalism – or nationism, if you will – therefore represents a break from the war-hungry norm of human history. Its presence in the 20th century has been rewritten and bastardized.

A nationalist has no intention of invading your country or changing your society. A nationalist cares just as much as anyone else about the plights of others around the world but believes putting one’s own country first is the way to progress. A nationalist would never seek to divide by race, gender, ethnicity, or sexual preference, or otherwise. This runs contrary to the idea of a united, contiguous nation at ease with itself.

Certainly nationalism’s could-be bastard child of chauvinism can give root to imperialistic tendencies. But if the nation can and indeed does look after its own, and says to the world around it, “these are our affairs, you may learn from them, you may seek advice, we may even assist if you so desperately need it and our affairs are in order,” then nationalism can be a great gift to the 21st century and beyond.

This is what President Trump understands.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Trending