The Second Round of Retaliation Between Israel and Iran Has Just Begun

Joe Biden is caught in a trap caused by his own weakness

APRIL 19, 2024

PHILIP GIRALDI

Given the lying and fact twisting that have routinely been part and parcel of accounts of what is occurring in the Middle East, the past several weeks have nevertheless been shocking in terms of how an abysmally low standard of truth can be reduced even farther. Looking at developments objectively, one comes up with a series of facts. First of all, Israel was not at war with either Syria or Iran during the first weeks in April. Iran had never attacked Israel prior to that point and Syria last fought Israel in 1973, over fifty years ago. Israel, however, has regularly been assassinating Iranian officials and scientists and it has been frequently been bombing Syria since 2017, increasing the pace to weekly and sometimes even daily attacks over the past six months paralleling the Gaza fighting. A particularly devastating attack took place on March 29^th when the Israeli military launched massive strikes against a weapons storage depot in Syria’s northern province of Aleppo which killed at least 40 people, most of them Syrian soldiers. The air strikes produced a series of explosions that also killed six Lebanese Hezbollah fighters.

But three days later on April 1^st a very damaging and unprovoked attack was directed against the Iranian Embassy’s Consulate General, which was located in an upscale neighborhood in Damascus, Syria’s capital. The building was completely destroyed by missiles fired from F-35 fighter planes that had crossed over the Syrian border from Israel, killing Iranian diplomats as well as Brigadier General Mohammad Reza Zahedi and Zahedi’s deputy, General Haji Rahimi, and also Brigadier General Hossein Amirollah, the chief of general staff for the al-Quds force in Syria and Lebanon. Syria subsequently confirmed that a total of 13 people were killed in the attack, including six Syrians and a Lebanese Hezbollah militiaman. Both Iran and Hezbollah vowed revenge.

Attacking a diplomatic mission is considered a major war crime according to the Vienna Convention, but there was no condemnation of the incident coming from the US and the usual suspects in Western Europe. Instead of doing what was right by pressuring Israel to stop attacking its neighbors and thereby possibly preventing a major war in the Middle East, President Joe Biden repeated his pledge that the United States would regard as “ironclad” its commitment to guarantee Israel’s security if Iran were to strike back. This guaranteed to Israel that any action taken by it would be supported by Washington. The Biden Administration also predictably voted against a Russian and Chinese drafted UN Security Council resolution to condemn the Israeli attack on the Iranian Consulate, which was a clear violation of international law and an act of war committed by Israel. The US reportedly cast its veto vote “no” after “Diplomats said the US told council colleagues that many of the facts of what happened on Monday in Damascus remained unclear.” What was actually unclear was the fog that generally surrounds the Biden foreign policy and national security team since it was pretty transparent who was the aggressor in terms of means, motive and outcome.

When Iran did retaliate on April 13^th, it carried out a carefully calibrated moderate strike against military targets intended to do damage but not cause a large number of casualties. It reportedly hit several airbases from which the Israeli fighter bombers had begun their attack on Damascus as well as an Israeli Air Force intelligence center in the formerly Syrian Golan Heights. No one was killed in spite of the 300 estimated drones and missiles that were launched, most being intercepted by Israel and its allies. But the attack nevertheless sent a message from Tehran that next time it could be much worse, both immediate in timing and “considerably more severe” than its response on Saturday night had been. Iran also claims that it attempted to prevent an escalation by warning the US about their plans, which would be passed on to Israel, that a “controlled” retaliation was coming. The Pentagon denied that it had been told anything, which may mean that Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin was asleep at his desk once again.

Not content with the outcome, Israel inevitably struck back on Friday, hitting a major airbase near Isfahan, and, to make sure no one was missed, targets in both Iraq and Syria. Iranian military sources advise however that the loud explosions heard by local residents were Iranian air defenses shooting at some flying objects, presumably drones. Per the New York Times and other accommodating media, the strike was a warning that Israel could penetrate Iranian airspace and not intended to do serious damage. The Pentagon was apparently informed shortly before the Israeli action. Iran’s counter-counter retaliation is now pending, but it is clear that Netanyahu will not be deterred by electoral considerations in the United States to stay his hand in his own counter-counter response.

And how does the United States fit into the story? The White House response to the Iranian attack on Israeli territory was inevitably completely unlike the previous uncritical response to Israel’s Consulate General attack, namely condemnation of Iran and the repetition of the usual tripe about “Israel has a right to defend itself” and the sanctity of the “ironclad” defense arrangement. Biden also attempted to cover himself against political blowback due to his licking Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s shoes in the upcoming November election by making it known that he had spoken with and advised Netanyahu, recommending not carrying out a reprisal of the reprisal, which Washington would be unable to support as it could/would lead to major escalation. Netanyahu, not fearing Biden’s displeasure, blew the advice off and he and his war cabinet made clear that they were working on a response as well as setting a timetable for invading Rafah in south Gaza, which Biden had also recommended against.

The White House completed its groveling to Netanyahu by vetoing a UN Security Council resolution on April 18^th that would have advocated full UN membership status for the state of Palestine, demonstrating that kicking the Palestinians is always a good way to maintain Israeli favor! The vote was 12 (including France, Japan and South Korea) in favor, two abstentions (the shameless United Kingdom and, surprisingly, Switzerland) and an American veto. The US insisted that elevation of Palestine’s diplomatic status can only be obtained after negotiations between the Palestinian Authority and Israel. US Ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield absurdly raised another objection: “Right now, the Palestinians don’t have control over a significant portion of what is supposed to be their state. It’s being controlled by a terrorist organization.” She was referring to Hamas but the comment actually more correctly is applicable to Israel. In any event, a leaked White House memo had previously revealed that Biden opposes full UN membership and statehood for the Palestinians without Israel’s approval, which, of course, will not be forthcoming.

So we have Israel as the aggressor against two countries that were not declared enemies and had not attacked the Jewish state in any way in many, many years. But when Israel attacked them, committing a major war crime Joe Biden and company preferred to sit on their hands and mumble, saving their vituperation for when Iran staged a deliberately mild counter-attack as a warning. That is called hypocrisy, to turn things on their head to provide the answer that one wants to see and it applies equally to Biden accusing the Russians of “illegal occupation” in Ukraine while Israel’s theft of Syria’s Golan Heights and ongoing seizure of the West Bank goes unchallenged by Washington. And the pushback against Iran is unlikely to diminish very soon as the Jewish controlled US Congress also has the bit between its teeth to demonstrate how much it loves Israel. Congressman Steve Scalise, GOP House Majority Leader, has announced that “In light of Iran’s unjustified attack on Israel, the House will move from its previously announced legislative schedule next week to instead consider legislation that supports our ally Israel and holds Iran and its terrorist proxies accountable. The House of Representatives stands strongly with Israel, and there must be consequences for this unprovoked attack.” Over at the Senate Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas is advocating punishing Iran by beating on its possible friends in the US, physically attacking folks who are demonstrating in support of the Palestinians. Cotton said that the “pro-Hamas criminals” should be confronted by angry citizens who “take matters into [their] own hands” and confront the offenders, endorsing the use of force against peaceful demonstrators.

But there is also the back story behind why Israel likely attacked the Iranians in Syria in the first place. I and a number of other observers immediately after the Israeli attack assumed that the Jewish state had staged a deliberate over-the-top provocation to draw Washington into its wars. Just as in the case of the October 7^th Gaza attack by Hamas, which Israel had full knowledge of and let happen, Netanyahu sought to create a situation in which it would goad Iran into being forced to retaliate to force an “ironclad” Biden to protect its “ally” by taking on Iran directly.

Why did Israel do it beyond the obvious desire to destroy Iran just like it is destroying the Palestinians? It was done because Israel has likely become aware that it is viewed as the world’s greatest pariah state due to its genocide in Gaza, to include the recent horrific killing of hundreds of Palestinians in the Al-Shifa hospital in Gaza as well as the targeted assassination of seven employees of a charity that was bringing in food to those starving due to Israel’s blocking the entry of relief supplies. And also because Israel is actually not winning its war against Hamas, it needed to shift the narrative to something different. That would be using its time-honored technique of making itself once again the “victim” in confronting a powerful new enemy, Iran, which would make the problem of bad public relations with the world over Gaza be in part mitigated.

A shift in the story would also presumably bring with it the expected help from the United States and its European allies to do the hard work in killing Iranians. And the trick seems to have worked, predictably. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak of Britain has been recently facing demands to cut off arms shipments to Israel because of the devastating death toll in Gaza, but on the following Monday, he was able to salute the British warplanes that had shot down some Iranian drones sent by Iran to attack Israel. It was a telling example of how Israel has been able to scramble the equation in the Middle East. Faced with a intensively publicized barrage of Iranian missiles, Britain, the United States, France and others rushed to help the Israelis who had in fact started the conflict. The United States is also currently planning on increasing the pressure on Iran through a series of tough new sanctions being prepared by Treasury Secretary Janice Yellen, saying “Treasury will not hesitate to work with our allies to use our sanctions authority to continue disrupting the Iranian regime’s malign and destabilizing activity.” Yellen notably did nothing when Israel committed a major war crime in its attack on the Iranian Consulate General in Damascus, nor has she supported sanctions over the Israeli Gaza genocide. She is, of course, Jewish. More aid for the Jewish state is also still waiting for a congressional vote to approve the $14 billion currently in the pipeline, with Washington Report claiming that this year’s total US aid to Netanyahu will likely exceed $25 billion “in direct costs related to its fervent support for Israel.”

Right now, the dilemma for the US government will be that it must pull out all the stops in supporting Israel or face inter alia retaliation by the Israel Lobby working through its donors and media resources to defeat Biden in November. And there hovers in the peripheries of one’s mind the worse grim possibility that Israel, if rebuffed by its “allies,” will use its secret nuclear arsenal to blow up the Middle East and presumably a large chunk of adjacent areas in Europe and Asia as well. There are stories already circulating suggesting that the Israeli nuclear reactor at Dimona might have been an Iranian target and that Israel is right now preparing to take out Iranian nuclear research sites. Netanyahu is calling the shots while a befuddled White House looks on. Israel has baited a trap and Joe Biden has stepped right into it.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is inform@cnionline.org.

Related Pieces by Author

• Gaza Strikes Back
• Israel’s Quest for a Palestinian-free Palestine Continues
• The United States Vetoes Yet Another UN Humanitarian Ceasefire Over Gaza
• The Antisemitic Moment
• War and Peace in an Ocean of Lies

Recently from Author

• War and Peace in an Ocean of Lies
• More Deaths in Gaza
• Israel’s Quest for a Palestinian-free Palestine Continues
• Where Does Israel-Gaza Go from Here?
• Israel Uber Alles?

Israeli-Saudi normalization in Checkmate, a realist analysis

23 Feb 2024

Source: Al Mayadeen English

There is a fundamental contradiction between the goals of KSA and “Israel” and the end that each of them seeks for this genocide despite their opposition to the aspirations of the Palestinian people (Illustrated by Mahdi Rteil to Al Mayadeen English)

By Ali Jezzini

A realist analysis attempting to shed light on the complications of Israeli-Saudi normalization in light of the Israeli genocide in Gaza, and the discrepancies in the aims of each party.

The Israeli war on Gaza has entered its fourth month. The occupation regime faces an open case in the International Court of Justice for carrying out genocide on the one hand and is exposed to activism against the crimes it is committing by all humanitarian organizations around the world, as well as many countries. Despite all of this, and in contradiction to all logic, there is still strong talk about normalizing the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia with the Israeli regime.

This may seem utterly illogical at first glance, given that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia markets itself as one of the most important Arab and Islamic powers, and thus positions itself as a defender of the interests of this group. How, then, does it extend its hand to those who not only commit these crimes against humanity but also those whose leaders make genocidal statements? This in addition to a clear and unequivocal rejection of the two-state solution that Saudi Arabia has set as a condition for normalizing relations makes the situation more bizarre.

Answering these questions requires an analysis of the geopolitical reality in the region, alongside a short historical overview, and a presentation of the interests and concerns of each party, as well as their political and security goals.

US hegemony and its goals in the war in Gaza

Despite the sharp transformations that have affected the international system in the recent period, which mainly affected the unilateral dominance of the United States after the Cold War, Washington still maintains the role of the primary hegemon who is trying to prevent the system from turning into fully multipolar.

US hegemony depends on a military power represented by the world’s first military budget, which is equivalent to about 40% of all global military spending, as well as a large number of military bases around the planet. In addition to military power, the United States has an unparalleled ability to influence the global economy due to countries using the US dollar as a trusted currency for exchange. US military power punishes countries that do not respect its hegemony, or in most cases use sanctions linked to its banking and monetary system.

As a hegemon, the United States works to prevent the formation of regional powers that oppose it, whether alliances or sovereign states. Here we turn to the series of alliances undertaken by the United States, which rely mainly on focal points around the planet to prevent powerful countries from challenging its hegemony. Former US State Secretary Mike Pompeo defines these entities or states as “beacons of democracy,” although they are more akin to land-based aircraft carriers. These entities are Taiwan, “Israel” and Ukraine.

The United States is using Taiwan, in addition to Japan and South Korea, mainly to prevent China from becoming an absolute regional hegemon in East Asia or as a method to contain its power projection. It is using Ukraine in Europe to prevent Russia from becoming a hegemon in Eastern Europe and to also prevent Germany from becoming a hegemon in Western Europe. On the other hand, “Israel” represents an exception to American policy. Aside from the ideological aspect, “Israel” plays the role of the region’s policeman par excellence for the United States either by destroying or deterring all countries with sovereign national projects. “Israel” here is the focus of the fight against the axis of resistance in West Asia, led by Iran, to prevent this axis from turning into a regional hegemon and anti-American force.

In light of this, any weakening of the Israelis, or threat to them, from a geopolitical standpoint poses a risk to the hegemony of the United States in one of the most important spots in the world from a geographical standpoint, as well as the one richest in fossil energy resources. In this context, the United States is more concerned about “Israel’s” security than “Israel” itself. But, as an absolute hegemon, it faces dilemmas that are radically different from those faced by “Israel”. Such discrepancy is what is putting the two parties on opposite sides with time, and this is what we will discuss in more detail in the section related to the Israelis of the article.

Balance of power in the Middle East

“Israel”, Saudi Arabia, and most of the Gulf states belong to the American axis in the West Asia region, and despite the Chinese breakthrough in economic investment, US-Western hegemony over these countries is still at its height. Because of Saudi Arabia’s self-proclaimed Islamic authority, it faces difficulty in normalizing its relations with the Israeli entity due to the so-called “Arab street’s” continued opposition to such a step, and the genocide in Gaza has contributed to reviving the Palestinian cause in an important part of this street.

From its inception, Saudi Arabia has primarily benefited from or fought national states in traditional centers of power, such as Nasser’s Egypt, or initially cooperated with Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq before sacrificing him in the US-led coalition invasion in 1991. Finally, it financed the destruction of Syria and added fuel to the fire of the war that has been raging since 2011. As a non-traditional power with fewer population that only owns holy places and oil wealth, it benefits mainly from neutralizing the positions of traditional powers in the region, which has a larger population. Without absolute American protection for the Gulf states, and an Israeli military role in the subjugation process, Saudi Arabia’s role will be incomplete or unachievable.

Since the victory of the Islamic Revolution in Iran in 1979, Saudi Arabia has been hostile to it, not only because it was presenting an Islamic sovereign counterweight that was exclusive to Saudi Arabia in the previous stage, but because it threatens the existing dependency structure in the region as it is the main element in the axis of resistance.

Following Yemen entering the Resistance Axis, the war on Syria’s failure to change the regime, and the loss of Israeli deterrence on October 7, normalization and direct military cooperation became more necessary for the American Axis members to confront the dangers of the liberation process led by the Resistance Axis. “Israel”, which was supposed to be the leader of this axis militarily, technologically, and financially, is still reeling from the wounds of October 7. What makes matters worse nowadays is that the United States is facing a crisis in Ukraine, and it needs to move to confront China in East Asia as quickly as possible.

Why does Saudi Arabia act the way it does?

At a point before October 7, and according to press leaks, one of Saudi Arabia’s conditions for normalizing relations with “Israel” was its direct association with the United States through a defense treaty similar to Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation. This condition indicates the primacy of security for Saudi Arabia. The primacy of security has been greatly enhanced after the failure of the Saudi coalition to impose its will on Yemen, and Yemen has turned into an essential and effective pillar in the current war in support of Gaza.

Normalization in this context was a necessity for Gulf security, which since 1991 has been closely linked to the Western security concept through the stationing of more than 40,000 American soldiers in the region. Normalization, then, was not a transitional and pivotal point as former US President Trump tried to market, but merely a shift in the level of security and military relations that already existed, even if no direct diplomatic and trade relations existed.

Related News

• Thousands of Hamas fighters in northern Gaza, most tunnels intact: NYT
• ‘Israel’ still responding negatively and obstructing talks: Hamdan

Both Saudi Arabia and the United States here are accelerating toward normalization  while the blood has not yet dried in Gaza, as each of them is aware of the problem that may be imposed by the shift of hegemonic focus from West Asia to East Asia. Normalization between Saudi Arabia and “Israel” here aims primarily to bridge any potential gap in military power to confront the axis of resistance in the future.

The problem here is that Saudi Arabia stipulated a two-state solution as the condition for the peace and normalization process. US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken exposed the Saudis when he announced that a mere commitment to this solution by the Israelis is sufficient and not its immediate implementation. The Saudis certainly objected and denied the announcement, but based on the course of events, it would not be unlikely that they made such a pledge.

The two-state solution here is not presented by Saudi Arabia because it embraces the Palestinian issue nor that it is particularly fond of the Palestinian people and its ambitions, but in an attempt to bury the main point of conflict between the Arabs and the Zionists, in preparation for its leadership of this future Arab-Israeli alliance.

The two-state solution proposed by Saudi Arabia, despite its meager demands, and even though it is giving up most of historical Palestine, is rejected by the Israeli entity in all its sects, right, and left, above and below.

Saudi Arabia, then, faces a major dilemma. On the one hand, it sees normalization as a future security necessity, since there are no guarantees about the future of the region after the Arab uprisings in 2011 if they are to occur again in the context of the massacre taking place in Gaza. In other words, no one can guarantee that the normalization will not be rejected by the Arab street and lead to the situation exploding in the region if the Saudis are unable to obtain something that they can market as a solution to the Palestinian issue.

In conclusion, normalizing relations with the Zionists who insist on ethnic cleansing and the policy of apartheid and treating the Palestinians as if they were sub-humans may be a step that carries dangers to Saudi Arabia and its Axis that are greater than the danger of the Axis of resistance. Here, Saudi Arabia, led by Mohammed bin Salman, sees itself as being forced to bet on one of two losing horses.

An Israeli checkmate

The Zionist project, as the last settler colonial project, depends on many ideological foundations supported by material strength for survival. The Al-Aqsa flood operation on October 7 demonstrated the extent of the Israelis’ fateful dependence on American support, not only in terms of weapons, technology, and international diplomatic backing in the UNSC, but also through the presence of Direct military action for the first time, represented by sending two aircraft carriers and a nuclear submarine.

“Israel” in this context is a land-based aircraft carrier for the US hegemon in the region. On another note, “Israel” must show the Arabs surrounding it that it is omnipotent. Most of these Arabs have come under states ruled by elites who marketed their legitimacy through some sort of a liberal dream and the absurdity of resistance to the US. Therefore, these elites also derive their legitimacy from “Israel” itself, in one way or another, and from its chieftain, the United States. “Israel” must also convince the settlers to reside by planting the idea of its invincibility and its capability to deter everyone at the same time at all spectrums through disproportionate punishment.

Any shaking of these concepts exposes this Western fortress in West Asia to the dangers of collapse, disintegration, or rolling a downhill path. Internally, the combination of the extremism and racism of the Zionist doctrine and the settlers’ belief in “Israel’s” invincibility succeeded in greatly complicating the scene. Due to the continuous pivoting of Israeli politics towards the extreme right, it is natural that exaggeration in setting and inflating war goals is the daily bread of politicians. This means that achieving a total and comprehensive victory becomes not an option, but rather a necessity to preserve this mythical self-image that Israeli society has, or it will simply disintegrate and enter into an internal conflict that unleashes reverse migration.

As a result, most Israelis believe, according to opinion polls, that some sort of complete victory over the resistance in Palestine should be the goal, as crazy and unachievable as this goal is. Most Israelis believe that “voluntary migration” a.k.a ethnic cleansing is something that should be encouraged and carried out in Gaza, not to mention the genocidal statements made by Israeli officials, which alerted them to one of the most clear genocides in history, not only in action but in intent. Which is unambiguous.

In light of the above, the goals of Israeli politics and society here contradict those of Saudi Arabia. Here Israeli exceptionalism appears. There is no one like “Israel”. Normal countries win without having absurd conditions of their victory being the genocide of the other party. Racist colonial entities on the other hand need that.

Because of the high and unachievable conditions for victory, “Israel” has placed itself in a checkmate, either an internal conflict, or destruction that will have a disastrous impact not only on its international reputation and relations, but at the expense of sabotaging the path of normalization and its law, and even the risk of revolutions erupting in the Arab world, endangering the pro-US Saudi leadership. 

US-sponsored Israeli-KSA ties between a rock and a hard place 

Although Saudi Arabia and “Israel” largely agree on the goal of eliminating resistance in Gaza, they differ sharply in the way and outcome each side prefers for the war to lead to.

Given the primacy of the Chinese challenge to American hegemony, the United States wants, in any way, to freeze the current situation in West Asia and maintain its policeman there, i.e. Israel, as it pivots east. The failure to weaken Russia and push its political system to collapse has strengthened the United States’ desire to avoid a war that it sees as secondary in West Asia while China grows stronger.

There is no doubt that America wants to eliminate the resistance movements, thus a victory of the Israelis in Gaza is essential to the US more than “Israel” itself, but it fears that the genocide in Gaza will lead to the eruption of a war in the region led by the resistance axis on the one hand, and on the other hand, it fears a political collapse and revolutions in the fabric of its allied countries. Its allies in the region are mainly Jordan, Egypt, and then Saudi Arabia, and the UAE. Therefore, the ideal outcome is a two-state solution, and an alliance of Arab-Israeli regimes to confront the axis of resistance while reducing the cost of US presence in the region.

The Saudi view here is very close to the American one, as it wants to end the resistance movements in the Arab world as a continuation of its victory over the national projects of the last century, but it fears that the shedding of Palestinian blood might push its current leadership of the Arab world, ensured by subjugating Egypt and destroying Iraq and Syria, to the abyss. Therefore, it prefers to end the Palestinian cause through a two-state solution, establish a Saudi-Israeli alliance with US support, and deter the Axis of resistance.

The Israelis, based on the above, are in a completely different place. They want to ethnically cleanse Gaza and eliminate the resistance, no matter how much it costs in human losses, and they do not intend to back down, even if it means dragging the United States into a regional war that is not one of its current priorities.

Indeed, the dog is following here and not the opposite. It is not that the Israelis are craving for a regional war for their own sake, but rather because they, as the last settler colonial entity and the last of the “exceptional peoples” in the international system, believe that they are entitled to what no one else is entitled to, to ensure the survival of their racist regime.

In light of the racist and superior nature of their regime, they are forced to show those whom they see and treat as sub-human who are the bosses here, otherwise, the social and political cohesion of the Israeli colonial entity will be in danger.

Conclusion

There is a fundamental contradiction between the goals of each party and the end that each of them seeks for this genocide despite their opposition to the aspirations of the Palestinian people. These differences appear incompatible, even if the interest is common, as any concession from any party here means that it exposes its other future ally to a future existential threat.

It is unlikely that the United States will be able to reconcile the two parties without one of them giving up what it declares to be its core interests and putting its fate in jeopardy. Another option would be that the already existing war expands and blows the chessboard and all the pieces away. What is certain is that the coming days will bring radical and pivotal changes to the nature of international and regional relations in West Asia, if they do not lead to the collapse of some states and regimes.

As Vladimir Lenin said: “There are decades where nothing happens, and there are weeks where decades happen,” and it appears we are living such an era.

Related Videos

On what basis did Saudi Arabia restructure its foreign policy? Why Saudi Arabia wish to defeat Hamas?

Evening | Netanyahu’s plans for the post-war…or war 02-23-2024

Related Stories

• Saudi statement refutes US-Israeli claims on normalization: Okaz
• Blinken to submit Saudi time-restricted normalization deal to ‘Israel’
• Why is Saudi Arabia open to normalize relations with ‘Israel’?
• British charities and companies funding the genocidal occupation forces in Gaza
• Hezbollah took control of Israeli drone in 3 minutes: Israeli media
• Navy boat burning off ‘Nahariya’ coast leaves Israeli settlers in fear
• 60% of ‘Israel’ to be without power if war expands: Israeli media
• MSF slams US, decries tragedy of young Gaza children wanting death
• Ecuador refuses US plan to use ‘scrap’ weapons in war in Ukraine
• Meta knew of child exploitation subscriptions, allowed them anyway
• Dr. Philip Salem: Lebanese architect of the cancer cure, ICTriplex

The Resistance Has a Plan for Israel. But on the Other Side, Fantastical U.S. Stratagems Ensure a Cascading Failure

FEBRUARY 19, 2024

Source

Alastair CROOKE
Former British diplomat, founder and director of the Beirut-based Conflicts Forum.

ALASTAIR CROOKE 

We have entered a period of breakdown and violence, as the forces pulling apart the old status quo cascade and mutually reinforce one another.

In a speech on Tuesday, Hizbullah leader Seyed Nasrallah said that the Party will continue the border offensive until at least the Gaza massacre stops. The war in Gaza however, is far from over. And Nasrallah warned that even were a ceasefire to be reached in Gaza, “should the enemy perform any action, we will return to operating according to the rules and formulas that existed before. The purpose of the resistance is to deter the enemy, and we will react accordingly”.

Israel’s Defence Secretary Gallant has underlined that contrary to international consensus expectations, he too expects the war in Lebanon to continue. Gallant said the military has stepped up its attacks against Hizbullah by one level out of ten:

“The Air Force planes flying currently in the skies of Lebanon have heavier bombs for more distant targets. Hizbullah went up half a step, whilst we, a full one … We can attack not only at 20 kilometres [from the border], but also at 50 kilometres, and in Beirut and anywhere else”.

It is not clear what ‘red line’ Hizbullah would have to cross for Israel to significantly escalate its response to much higher levels; Israeli leaders have suggested that an attack on a strategic site; or an attack leading to major civilian casualties; or a substantive barrage on Haifa might constitute the breaking point.

Nonetheless, with three military divisions rather than the usual one now deployed in the north of Israel, the IDF has more forces poised for action on the northern border than it has preparing for an incursion into Rafah – at this point. It is clear, as Chief of Staff Halevy has specified, that Israel is “preparing for war” against Hizbullah (more than preparing for Rafah).

Is the threat to Rafah a bluff to put pressure on Hamas to concede on the deal and hostages? One way or another, both Israel’s political and military chiefs are adamant: The IDF will incurse into Rafah – ‘at some point’.

The qualitatively different Hizbullah’s strike on Safed on Israel’s northern regional command HQ on Wednesday – which that resulted in 2 dead and 7 further casualties – is being treating in Israel as the gravest attack since the start of the war, with Ben Gvir calling it a “declaration of war”. Subsequent Israeli attacks killed 11 people, including six children, in a barrage of strikes on villages across southern Lebanon, in retribution for the Safed blitz – with the fierce exchange of fire still continuing.

The ‘Safed Strike’ deep into the Galilee very likely was intended to signal that Hizbullah is not about to capitulate to western demands that it provide Israel with a ceasefire that is intended to facilitate evacuated Israelis to return to their homes in the north. As Nasrallah confirmed in a scathing attack on those external (Western) mediators who serve only as Israel’s lawyers, and neglect to address the massacres in Gaza:

“It is easier to move the Litani River forward to the borders, than to push back Hezbollah fighters from the borders, to behind the Litani River … They want us to pay a price without Israel committing to a thing”.

In these circumstances, Nasrallah clarified that residents of northern Israel will not return to their homes – warning that even more Israelis risk being displaced:

“‘Israel’ must prepare shelters, basements, hotels and schools to house two million settlers who will be evacuated from northern Palestine, [were Israel to expand the war zone].”

Nasrallah outlined what is clearly the agreed Axis of resistance’s overarching strategic plan. (There has been a flurry of meetings between senior Axis principals over the last week, across the region, for which Nasrallah is speaking):

“We are committed to fighting Israel until it is off the map. A strong Israel is dangerous to Lebanon; but a deterred Israel, defeated and exhausted, is less of a danger to Lebanon”.

“The national interest of Lebanon, the Palestinians, and the Arab world is that Israel leaves this battle defeated: Therefore, we are committed to Israel’s defeat”.

Put bluntly, the Axis has its vision of the conflict’s outcome. And it is a “deterred, defeated and exhausted” Israeli State. By implication, it is an Israel that has relinquished the Zionist project – one that is reconciled to the notion of living as Jews between the River and the Sea – albeit with rights no different to others living there (i.e. Palestinians).

On the other side, the western strategic plan, as the Washington Post reports – which the U.S. and several Arab countries hope to present within a few weeks – is a long-term plan for peace between Israel and the Palestinians, including a “time frame” for the establishment of a provisional de-militarized Palestinian “state”:

“Imperatively, it begins with a hostage deal accompanied by a six-week cease-fire between Israel and Hamas. While it may be termed “cessation of hostilities” or an “extended humanitarian pause,” such a cease-fire will signal the de facto end of the war along the lines and scale that it has been fought since 7 Oct.”

The plan addresses “Post-war Gaza”, in terms already well-known. As senior Israeli commentator, Alon Pinkas, affirms:

“Parallel to the announcement U.S., Britain and possibly other countries will consider and eventually make a joint statement of intent by recognizing a provisional, demilitarized and future Palestinian state – without delineating or specifying its borders”.

“Such a recognition does not necessarily contradict Israel’s legitimate and reasonable demand to have overriding security control over the area west of the Jordan River in the foreseeable future … [it constitutes] a practical, timebound, irreversible path to a Palestinian state living side-by-side in peace with Israel … whose recognition could also be submitted to the UN Security Council – as a binding resolution. Once the Arab countries sign off on such a framework, the U.S. believes that neither Russia nor China would veto it …

“Within the “regionalization” phase however, the Americans will craft a regional security cooperation mechanism. Some in Washington imagine a reconfigured region with a new “security architecture” as a harbinger to a gradual Mideast version of the European Union, with greater economic and infrastructure integration”.

Ah – the New Middle East again!!!

Even Alon Pinkas, an experienced former Israeli diplomat, concedes: “If the plan seems too fantastical to you: You’re not alone”.

The basic improbabilities to this plan simply are disregarded. Firstly, Israel’s Finance Minister Smotrich responded to the reported American-Arab plan, saying: “there’s a joint American, British and Arab effort to establish a terrorist state” next to Israel. Second, (as Smotrich further notes): “They see the polls. They see how the absolute majority of Israelis oppose this idea [of a Palestinian State]”; and thirdly, some 700,000 settlers were installed in the West Bank – precisely to block any Palestinian State.

Is the U.S. really going to impose this onto a hostile Israel? How?

And, from the Resistance perspective, ‘a provisional, demilitarized and future Palestinian ‘state’, without delineated or specified borders, is not a state. It is truly a Bantustan.

The reality is that when a Palestinian State might have been a real prospect (two decades ago), the international community turned a willing ‘blind eye’ – for decades – to Israel’s successful and complete sabotage of the project. Today, circumstances are much changed: Israel has moved far to the Right and is in the grip of an eschatological passion to establish Israel on the entire “Land of Israel”.

The U.S. and Europe have only themselves to blame for the dilemma in which they now find themselves. And a policy stance – such as outlined by Biden – plainly said is doing untold strategic damage to the U.S. and its compliant European allies.

Even on the Lebanon track, let us be plain too, Israel’s demands from Lebanon go far beyond a mutual ceasefire. There is no guarantee, even should a ceasefire be reached in Gaza as part of a comprehensive hostage/end-of-war deal, that Nasrallah will agree to withdraw all his forces from the border with Israel, or conversely, that Israel will comply with its commitments.

And with the U.S. defining its Palestinian ‘solution’ as an improbable, provisional, disarmed and wholly impotent Palestinian entity, nestled within a fully militarised Israel, exercising ‘full security overlordship from the River to the Sea’, it would not be surprising were Hizbullah rather, to opt to pursue the Axis’ plan of a defeated, exhausted post-Zionism.

Israeli commentator, Zvi Bar’el, writes:

“Even were the American assumptions to become a working plan, it is still unclear what policy Israel will adopt on Lebanon. Even pushing Hezbollah back so that Israeli communities are no longer within the range of its anti-tank missiles does not remove the threat of tens of thousands of medium and long-range missiles. The deterrence equation between Israel and Hezbollah will continue to determine [the true] reality along the border”.

[The current U.S. working assumption, as presented by the Administration’s special envoy Amos Hochstein in his previous visits to Lebanon], “is that a border demarcation agreement between Israel and Lebanon will result in final and full recognition of the international border and thus deny Hezbollah the formal basis for justifying its continued fight against Israel to liberate occupied Lebanese territories. At the same time, it allows the Lebanese government to order its army to deploy its forces along the border in order to assert its sovereignty over its entire territory and demand that Hezbollah forces pull back from the border”.

This is just more wishful, ‘fantastical’ thinking. And it contains a flaw: Hochstein’s work plan does not include an agreement on the Sheba’a Farms, but only on the ‘Blue Line’ – the border agreed in 2000, but which is not recognized by Lebanon as an international border. If the issue of the Sheba’a Farms is not settled, Hezbollah will not be bound by a limited demarcation accord that omits the Sheba’a area.

Since Hamas’s attack on Israel on 7 October, every stratagem and protocol, dug from some musty West Wing cupboard, and upon which the U.S. leant, has failed. What was supposed to be a limited and compartmentalized military operation in Gaza by the IDF has turned into a regional firestorm. Aircraft carriers sent to deter other actors from getting involved failed with the Houthis; U.S. bases in Iraq and Syria became targets, with attacks on U.S. bases continuing, despite U.S. attempts at delivering deterrent ‘punches’.

Quite clearly, Netanyahu is ignoring Biden, and ‘defying the world’ – as this week’s headlines attest:

“Defying Biden, Netanyahu Doubles Down on Plans to Fight in Rafah” (Wall Street Journal)

“As Israel corners Rafah, Netanyahu defies the world” (Washington Post)

“U.S. won’t punish Israel for Rafah op that doesn’t protect civilians” (Politico)

“Egypt Builds Walled Enclosure on Border as Israeli Offensive Looms: Authorities are surrounding an area in the desert with concrete walls as a contingency for possible influx of Palestinian refugees” (Wall Street Journal).

Netanyahu has vowed to forge ahead, saying on Wednesday that Israel would mount a “powerful” operation in the city of Rafah, once residents have been “evacuated”. Israelis explicitly say the White House is not opposed to the Rafah blitz, provided Palestinians are given the opportunity to “evacuate” (to where, is left unsaid). (Meanwhile, Egypt is building a refugee camp inside its border, surrounded by concrete walls …).

At this point, all of the U.S.’ various problems – the political polarization, widening war, funding for wars, the alienation amongst the swing-state Arab constituencies and Biden’s sinking ratings – are beginning to feed into, and reinforce, each other. What began as a foreign-policy issue – Israel defeating Hamas – has become a significant domestic crisis. Dissatisfaction within the U.S. at Israel’s conduct of the war is fuelling the growth of significant protest movements. Who can truly believe that yet another trip by Blinken to the region will solve anything at this point, asks Malcom Kyeyune?

It is hard to say where things in the region will stand, a couple of months from now. We have entered a period of breakdown and violence, as the forces pulling apart the old status quo cascade and mutually reinforce one another.

HOW ARAB STATES ARE HELPING ISRAEL COMMIT GENOCIDE

FEBRUARY 16TH, 2024

Source

Mnar Adley

Palestine’s Arab neighbors seem to have taken a bold stance on Israel’s genocide of Gaza in a public show of solidarity with Palestinians. But behind those strong words, states like Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the UAE are quietly assisting Israel.

These four nations are working together to circumvent the actions of one of the few regional actors who are challenging Israel concretely: Yemen’s Ansar Allah. In a bid to alleviate pressure on Israel from the Ansar Allah (a.k.a the Houthi) blockade of the Red Sea, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Jordan have established land corridors, ensuring cargo destined for the apartheid state arrives safely in Israeli hands.

According to Hebrew Channel 13, Israeli-linked cargo ships arrive in the UAE to unload goods. Trucks then transport these goods through UAE and Saudi highways to Jordan. They eventually reach Israel via the Jordan River Crossing.

German shipping company Hapag-Lloyd announced that it was working with Saudi Arabia and the UAE to create a land route “bypassing the Houthis,” which connects ports in the UAE and the Saudi port of Jeddah facilitating cargo movement to Israel through the Suez Canal.

Egypt has also joined the effort, operating container ships from its ports to the Israeli port of Ashdod, further supporting the land bridge initiative and assuring Israeli commerce is not interrupted amid its genocidal campaign in Gaza.

But that is just the start of their complicity.

Take Turkey, for example. Around 40% of Israel’s energy needs are met by an oil pipeline running through Turkey. President Erdoğan could simply shut the flow of oil off to Israel, which would shut down the economy and the military assault in days. But he continues not to do so, despite offering strong condemnation of Israel in words. 

Morocco, meanwhile, is building a military intelligence base for Israel near its border with Algeria. The site will be utilized for collaboration for military training, intelligence and security.

Israeli arms manufacturer Elbit Systems also recently announced the establishment of two weapons factories in Morocco, helping to diversify Israel’s weapons production capabilities, as activists in other countries shut the factories down.

In 2021, Morocco also signed the Abraham Accords – a normalization treaty with Israel that Bahrain and the UAE had already agreed to. The Emirates has long been a hub for Israeli intelligence, and it is now well established that the two nations aid each other on intelligence matters.

Moreover, last year, Edge Group, a UAE state-owned corporation, invested $14 million in Israeli drone manufacturer Highlander Aviation. So the Israeli police employ their airspace management system, which was tested by the Israeli Air Force.

The relationship between the UAE and Israel has grown now that Elbit Systems established an entire subsidiary organization – Elbit Systems Emirates – in order to establish what it called “long term cooperation” with the UAE military.

Meanwhile, despite its rhetoric, Saudi Arabia has been quietly collaborating with Israel for some time. The Saudi-backed group Affinity Partners owns a stake in the Israeli company Shlomo Group.

During the conflict in Gaza, the Shlomo Group contributed trucks and military equipment to the Israeli military’s Shaldag and Maglan units, as well as food packages to the IDF.

Saudi Arabia is well-known to be one of the Israeli intelligence industry’s best customers. Saudi security forces have used Israeli tech provided by NSO Group and Cellebrite to spy on people and hack their phones, including for the infamous murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi.

These states could do so much besides empty rhetoric to help the people of Palestine and blunt the Israeli attack on Gaza, including arms embargoes, sanctions on trade and travel, and halting the military and intelligence collaborations.

The people of the Arab world are dead against the genocide in Gaza and collaborating in it. They have come out in mass across their countries protesting Israel’s war and have even vowed to march through their borders to Gaza to defend their Palestinian brethren.

But it is clear, for these leaders – their actions speak louder than their words.

Mnar Adley is an award-winning journalist and editor and is the founder and director of MintPress News. She is also president and director of the non-profit media organization Behind the Headlines. Adley also co-hosts the MintCast podcast and is a producer and host of the video series Behind The Headlines. Contact Mnar at mnar@mintpressnews.com or follow her on Twitter at @mnarmuh

Sayyed Nasrallah: ‘Israel’ to pay with blood for civilian deaths

16 Feb 2024

Source: Al Mayadeen English

Hezbollah Secretary-General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah speaks on a screen via a video link during a ceremony to mark the anniversary of the martyrdom of Hezbollah leaders, in the southern suburbs of Beirut, Lebanon, February 16, 2024 (AP)

By Al Mayadeen English

Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah underlines that the Israeli occupation’s crimes in southern Lebanon will be responded to in kind and that Hezbollah will not only strike military sites.

The Israeli occupation will pay with blood for its killing of civilians in southern Lebanon, as this is a sensitive issue for the Resistance and a red line that was crossed, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah said during a speech on Friday to commemorate the fallen leaders of the Islamic Resistance in Lebanon.

“The aggression on Nabatieh and al-Sawaneh is a momentous development in the ongoing confrontation because it targeted civilians,” he underlined, stressing that the Israeli occupation killed civilians intentionally. 

“The enemy will pay with blood for its shedding of our women and children’s blood in Nabatieh and al-Sawaneh,” he stressed.

“Civilians are a sensitive issue, and the enemy must understand that it has gone too far if it gets to killing our civilians,” the Lebanese Resistance leader affirmed, noting that the occupation deliberately killed civilians to force the Resistance to halt its operations, as “all the pressures exerted since October 7 had the goal of shutting down the southern front.”

“Bombing ‘Kiryat Shmona’ with dozens of Katyusha rockets and several Falaq missiles is a preliminary response,” Sayyed Nasrallah underlined.

The Islamic Resistance in Lebanon – Hezbollah continued on Thursday targeting Israeli military sites and settlements in support of the Palestinian people in Gaza and the Palestinian Resistance, as well as in response to the Israeli occupation’s attacks on Lebanese villages and civilian homes in southern Lebanon. 

The Islamic Resistance issued a brief statement announcing that its fighters targeted the Israeli settlement of “Kiryat Shmona” with dozens of Katyusha rockets as an initial response to the massacres in Nabatieh and al-Sawaneh.

Furthermore, the fighters of the resistance targeted the Samaqa site with missiles, with several direct hits confirmed.

The Islamic Resistance also declared that its fighters, using suitable weapons, attacked espionage equipment at the Marj, al-Raheb, and al-Naqoura locations in addition to the Ruweisat al-Alam site in the occupied Lebanese Shebaa Farms.

While lamenting the loss of civilian life, Sayyed Nasrallah went on to underline that military casualties were a natural part of any battle of liberation. “We are at the heart of a battle that spans over 100km, and the martyrdom of Resistance fighters is part of this battle,” he said.

As he went on to vow that the Resistance would retaliate against the Israeli occupation, he said the response to the massacre in southern Lebanon “must be an escalation in jihadist work on the battlefront,” warning the Israeli occupation that the Resistance has a massive missile power that would allow it to strike Israeli targets from “Kiryat Shmona” all the way to “Eilat”.

Capitulation is not an option

Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah addressed the minority calling for the Resistance to halt its operations and allow for the continuation of the bloodshed in Gaza, saying capitulation “bears a great, devastating cost that could even become existential.”

“Capitulation means subservience and humiliation, and it will allow for violations of our elders, our youth, our women, and our property,” he explained.

In a similar vein and in light of the Arab and Islamic worlds allowing Gaza to be violated as they stood idle, Sayyed Nasrallah asked: “Is it not humiliating and a symbol of weakness that entire states ruling over 2 billion Muslims are unable to administer medicine and food to the people of Gaza?”

Related News

• ‘From Kiryat Shmona to Eilat’: Hezbollah showcases missile capability
• Israeli military sites, settlements under Gaza Resistance’s fire

Speaking further on internal Lebanese issues, he pledged that the Resistance’s arms “are not to be used for altering the Lebanese political regime or constitution and imposing a sectarian status quo in the country.”

Moreover, he said the Resistance’s arms “are to protect Lebanon, and the land borders are demarcated; the only way any negotiations take place will be on the basis of exiting our Lebanese soil.” 

“The US is preventing the Lebanese Army from having adequate arms and missiles for defending Lebanon and deterring any aggression on it,” he added.

US to blame for the bloodshed

If an investigation is opened into October 7, Sayyed Nasrallah said, “the basis for the moral and legal pretexts Netanyahu and Biden are using for their goal of destroying Hamas will collapse.”

“Many people have fallen for the historic Israeli false narrative regarding October 7, including countries that claim to be friendly with Hamas,” he said. “The Palestinian Resistance has been subjected since October 7 to the worst humiliation and smear campaigns any Resistance movement has been subjected to in our contemporary history.”

“The worst case of hypocrisy witnessed by the world today is the stance of the US administration regarding what is going on in Gaza,” he further said, noting that if Washington were to stop arming the Israeli occupation, “the war on Gaza will stop whether Netanyahu wills it or not.”

“The United States is more insistent than “Israel” on the destruction of Hamas,” Sayyed Nasrallah added, holding the US responsible for “every drop of blood in the region, while Israeli officials are mere tools used in this bloodshed.”

“[Israeli Security Minister Yoav] Gallant has nearly gone mad,” he jokingly said about the Israeli official. “He’s talking about [striking] 50km [deep into Lebanon] and [striking] Beirut. It appears that he forgot that the Resistance – he might be [having a mental breakdown] and he forgot, although we have addressed this several times – has major precision missile capabilities.”

Resistance sole option

“The Resistance in Lebanon and Palestine broke Israeli deterrence and destroyed its image while shifting the balance of power by establishing a deterrent,” he added.

The Israeli occupation’s goal of the siege on Gaza prior to October 7, was to kill all of Gaza silently while the world stood idle.

“The goal of the Israeli occupation is to expel all the people of the West Bank to Jordan, the people of Gaza to Egypt, and the people of the occupied Palestinian territories to Lebanon,” he underlined.

“It is our responsibility to prevent the displacement of Palestinians, which requires a major confrontation,” he added.

“No matter how much we praise it, we will not be able to describe the legendary Resistance in Gaza and the historic resilience of the people of Gaza,” Sayyed Nasrallah said, commending all Gazans for their steadfastness.

Further stressing that the Lebanese Resistance was acting in solidarity with the people of Palestine, he said: “The Israelis and Americans did not think that the Resistance in Lebanon would have the bravery or the will to launch a front in support of Gaza.”

“Our goal in the Axis of Resistance as peoples, states, and Resistance fighters was and will remain the defeat of the enemy,” he said. “The enemy’s defeat is by foiling its plans,” he further stressed.

“The goal of the Axis of Resistance is inflicting the largest amount of losses on the enemy during this battle to force it to withdraw,” he explained.

Finally, commenting on the ongoing negotiations between the Palestinian Resistance and the Israeli occupation, Sayyed Nasrallah said, “The parties involved in political negotiations are the Palestinian Resistance factions that delegated Hamas, and we have no hand in the ongoing talks.”

Related Videos

The war is entering a new phase

Dialogue of the week: answers to questions from friends and participants

Israeli media after Sayyed Nasrallah’s speech: Alertness and anxiety in the north

Evening | In the discourse of deterrence and clarity… a dedication to the formula of not harming civilians

Analyst Bulbaba Salem: This is the difference between Abu A’ah’s speech today and his previous speeches.

Related Stories

• Nasrallah’s masterful strategic behavior: Israeli Gen. op-ed
• Israeli media call Sayyed Nasrallah’s speech ‘most intense’ in a while
• Sayyed Nasrallah: Lebanese front contingent on Gaza; all options open
• War with Hezbollah to be ‘Israel’s’ deadliest: 130-page Israeli report
• Blackwater founder calls on US to colonize Africa, Latin America
• Who is Imad Mughniyeh, Hezbollah’s mastermind legendary strategist?
• Sayyed Nasrallah: Lebanese front contingent on Gaza; all options open
• Israeli fibs: What really happened when two captives were retrieved?
• ‘Israel’ behind attack on Iranian gas pipelines, NYT claims
• Sayyed Nasrallah: ‘Israel’ to pay with blood for civilian deaths
• Al-Aqsa Flood marks the beginning of the end of ‘Israel’: Abu Obeida
• Israeli fibs: What really happened when two captives were retrieved?
• ‘Israel’ behind attack on Iranian gas pipelines, NYT claims
• Sayyed Nasrallah: ‘Israel’ to pay with blood for civilian deaths
• Al-Aqsa Flood marks the beginning of the end of ‘Israel’: Abu Obeida

Operation Al Aqsa Flood

How Yemen is inflating Israel’s war cost

DEC 1, 2023

Source

By targeting Israel and Israeli-owned vessels, the Yemeni resistance threatens Israel’s trade-based economy and exacts an international cost for Tel Aviv’s devastating war on Gaza.

Photo Credit: The Cradle

Khalil Harb

Despite facing its own war-stricken challenges and humanitarian crises, Yemen has consistently demonstrated unwavering support and solidarity with Palestine. In the Arab world, the poorest state in West Asia stands unparalleled in organizing massive pro-Palestinian demonstrations. 

However, recent events mark a historic shift, as the Ansarallah-led government, for the first time, has directly engaged in strikes against Israel that originate from the territory of “Happy Yemen.”

The extensive range covered by Yemen’s missiles and drones in their journey toward Israel – exceeding two thousand kilometers – serves as a resounding rebuttal to US attempts to contain the conflict from becoming a wider West Asian one. 

If there were any doubts about Sanaa’s prominent role within the Axis of Resistance previously, they are now unequivocally laid to rest.

Ansarallah answers back 

The Yemeni escalation began with an open declaration, transitioning from the stage of mere threats against Washington’s military support in the war on Gaza. It progressed to the launching of missiles and drones towards the city of Um al-Rashrash (Eilat), followed by a strategic shift to naval operations against Israeli-linked vessels, as announced by the Yemeni Armed Forces on 19 November. Notably, this escalation culminated in what is believed to be the first attempt to target a US military ship with missiles.

Since Ansarallah leader Abdulmalik al-Houthi’s warning to the US, Yemen’s resistance activities have intensified, spanning from Um al-Rashrash to the Red Sea, the Bab al-Mandab Strait, and the Gulf of Aden. 

This new dimension to the Resistance Axis’ reach creates regional confusion for the US military, which has unabashedly sided with Israel’s assault on Gaza, and works to conceal the genocide employed against 2.3 million civilians in the besieged Strip.

The repercussions have reverberated in US political and security recalculations across the entire region. Perhaps most significantly, these actions have compelled the occupation state to reassess its economic losses and the costs of prolonged war. 

The latest economic fallout is a notable incident involving the container ship Zim Europe, operated by the Israeli shipping company Zim. Concerned over Yemeni threats against Israel-linked ships, the vessel was forced to alter its course, deviating from its planned route through the Suez-Bab al-Mandab Canal. 

Instead, the Zim Europe embarked on a sea journey 56 percent longer, circumnavigating Africa through the Atlantic Ocean and Cape of Good Hope, reflecting the economic and logistical hurdle now faced by Israeli shipping companies.

At the same time, the US Central Command (CENTCOM) reported that “two ballistic missiles were fired from Houthi-controlled areas in Yemen toward the general location of USS Mason (DDG-87) and M/V Central Park.”

This incident occurred in the Gulf of Aden as part of what was described as a rescue mission for the cargo ship Central Park, operated by Zodiac Marine and owned by Israeli billionaire Eyal Ofer. 

But what does this mean from a broader perspective? 

Global trade disruption 

First, Ansarallah in Yemen has positioned itself outside the jurisdiction of any temporary truces declared in Gaza. 

Second, if the reports from CENTCOM are accurate, this incident marks the first notable clash between Yemeni forces in Sanaa and US forces. This confrontation gained momentum as the Israeli aggression on Gaza intensified, with Ansarallah claiming the downing of an American MQ-9 Reaper drone in Yemeni territorial waters on 8 November. 

Third, the cost of the war is dramatically escalating for Israel. An optimistic calculation in early November was that a year-long war fought solely on the Gaza front would cost Tel Aviv over $50 billion, or 10 percent of Israel’s GDP. That’s an unrealistic figure given that Israel is already engaged on its northern border with the Lebanese resistance, Hezbollah, and has significantly widened its military scope in the occupied West Bank. 

Moreover, it does not consider the extraordinary costs associated with disrupting Israeli trade. The occupation state imports and exports nearly 99 percent of goods via waterways and shipping. These imports include much of the country’s food supply, which Israel does not, and cannot, produce.

Today, according to Foreign Policy magazine, “only Russia’s and Ukraine’s Black Sea ports incur significantly higher war risk premiums than Ashdod [Israeli port] does.” And if Israel’s conflict with Hezbollah escalates, that will take out Haifa’s port too, which the Lebanese resistance targeted in the 2006 war.

All of this has vast international repercussions too. The disruption of commercial traffic between the Suez Canal and Bab al-Mandab doesn’t only apply pressure on Israel: approximately 12 percent of global trade annually, including about 21,000 ships and 6 million barrels of oil per day (9 percent of the total transported by sea), relies on this route. 

Bab al-Mandab is a vital link in the trade between East and West Asia and Europe. Um al-Rashrash, strategically located in the Red Sea, plays a key role in this trade movement, connecting Israel to East Asian markets. 

The role of this port was strengthened after the signing of the US-brokered normalization agreement with the UAE and Bahrain three years ago, where it was agreed to transport shipments of UAE crude oil to Um al-Rashrash, to be transported through the Eilat-Ashkelon pipeline – that is, from the Red Sea to the Mediterranean Sea. 

The recent missile and drone strikes on Um al-Rashrash undermine not just Israel’s security but its economic ambitions, including vital tourism traffic that contributes substantially to its revenue. Tel Aviv’s obscure stance on the “Yemeni front” may stem from a desire to avoid security and political embarrassment resulting from this distant support.

The immediate impact of the Yemeni attack on Israel’s maritime trade is evident in the rapid rise in transportation costs. Israeli ships may need to avoid the Red Sea and Bab al-Mandab altogether, opting for longer routes around Africa or resorting to higher-cost air transport. The fees of insurance companies, especially for Israeli ships or those transporting goods intended for the occupation state, will likely continue to increase.

Israel’s imminent implosion 

These economic challenges take on new dimensions, considering the Israeli Ministry of Finance’s estimate that the cost of the war exceeds $270 million per day, with Israel expected to bear a significant portion, in addition to US taxpayers. 

Pre-existing Israeli political and social unrest, coupled with a decline in foreign reserves, forced borrowing, and economic contraction, could substantially damage its economy. The World Bank’s estimation that 34.6 percent of Israel’s GDP depends on trade in goods is a case in point. Tens of billions of dollars in Israeli-Asian trade are also at risk due to the regional disruptions in the Red Sea.

All of this uncertainty adds to other concerns, such as a retreat of investors from risk, a sharp decline (by 70 percent) in the volume of invested capital since last October, and the mass “exodus” of settlers to their countries of origin. 

Sanaa’s participation in the Palestinian resistance’s Al-Aqsa Flood operation may also impact the ongoing US-backed, Saudi-led war in Yemen, particularly given unofficial reports of Saudi Arabia intercepting missiles launched toward Israel. 

Any hasty US attempt to intervene to protect Israel and confront Ansarallah’s decisions may lead to an increase in aggression against Yemen. This raises questions about the vulnerability of coalition partners, Saudi Arabia and the UAE, to Yemeni missiles once again. 

It would also prove how the US and its regional allies are a destabilizing force in West Asia – a force that the Axis of Resistance is effectively countering in the political, military, and economic realms.

Hezbollah drones reaching Haifa daily: Sayyed Nasrallah

 November 11, 2023 

Source: Al Mayadeen

Hezbollah Secretary-General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah

Speech by Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah on the occasion of “Martyr’s Day”

By Al Mayadeen English

Hezbollah Secretary-General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah underlines that the Israeli occupation is losing on numerous fronts, including before the West, due to its own actions as it also grows weaker in the region.

The aggression being carried out against Gaza by the Israeli occupation is a dangerous, exceptional development; these crimes reflect the brutality of the Israeli occupation, Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah said on Saturday.

Speaking during a ceremony commemorating Martyr’s Day, Sayyed Nasrallah said the Israeli occupation’s crimes were a mere reflection of its brutal nature aimed at subjugating the peoples of the region and breaking their will to demand their rights.

“The goal of the Israeli occupation’s crimes is to push the people to give up and forget about their land, prisoners, sanctities, and the whole of Palestine,” the Hezbollah chief said. 

He also underlined that the Israeli occupation, through its aggression and crimes in Gaza, including the aggressive and deliberate killing of civilians, is “sending a message to Lebanon.”

However, Sayyed Nasrallah explained that “Israel” was making yet another mistake and has not yet learned from its past. “It will not achieve its goal; the massacres it has committed throughout history, including Deir Yassin, bear testament to its failure.”

“The culture of Resistance has intensified generation after generation, despite the massacres that culminated in the great action taken by the al-Qassam Brigades on October 7,” he underlined.

Israeli project failing

“The Israeli occupation’s crimes over the past decades, and even the aggression of July 2006 did not see the Lebanese people abandon the Resistance,” Sayyed Nasrallah added, another testament to his assertions regarding the Israeli occupation’s failure.

“The Israelis must despair when it comes to achieving their goals – not our people whose choices have proven to be those of victory, liberation, and dignity,” he stressed, noting “Israel’s” own actions doomed its bids for the normalization of ties with Arab countries.

“The enemy is inflicting many losses upon itself, including by showing its true, brutal self,” the Hezbollah chief added. “The occupation dealt mighty blows to the normalization bids that it has its eyes set on. Our peoples’ stances against normalization will grow more staunch now.”

Related News

• Blinken touring Middle East like salesman: Iran Security Minister
• US blocking ceasefire in Gaza, Iran’s Raisi says ahead of Saudi visit

“Israel” had losses on fronts other than the Arab World, as well, as Sayyed Nasrallah noted that the change in public opinion, especially Western public opinion, including in the United States and Europe, was “of great importance.”

He also highlighted how “Israel” was today under substantial pressure in terms of time, and its allies are abandoning it one by one, and today, “it no longer has any supporters other than the US and British regimes.”

“The United States is directing this battle and making every decision in it, and they should be under utmost pressure […] The party that can stop this aggression is the one directing it, and that is the United States,” he said.

People expect action from OIC

The Palestinian people, Sayyed Hassan said, demand that the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, which brings together 57 countries, do the bare minimum and come out with a stance against the Israeli occupation.

“The Palestinian people hope that the summit held in Riyadh will manage to pressure the United States to put an end to the aggression,” he said.

“The Palestinian people hope that the summit in Riyadh would succeed in opening a humanitarian corridor for the transport of aid and wounded civilians,” Sayyed Nasrallah underlined.

This comes amid an emergency meeting of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) aimed at addressing the escalating tensions in the region and the Israeli aggression on Gaza.

‘Israel’ broken, Resistance victorious

“The Resistance’s fighters are fighting with high spirits despite the painful psychological situation, which proves Israel’s ineptitude,” Sayyed Nasrallah stressed.

“The Israeli occupation today is still unable to show one angle where it is victorious or where the Resistance fighters are broken and defeated,” he said.

Moreover, in what was seemingly an invitation for the Resistance in the West Bank to join the confrontation, Sayyed Nasrallah explained that an escalation in acts of Resistance in the occupied West Bank “might force the enemy’s hand to pull some of its units from the border with Gaza and Lebanon.”

He went on to talk about the achievement of the Yemeni Armed Forces, “The Yemeni missile and drone attacks on Israeli sites have important reverberations, regardless of their interception,” he said. “The Yemeni Armed Forces supporting Palestine is highly important, as it is an army and a Resistance in one.”

In terms of the consequences of the attacks carried out by Yemen, Sayyed Nasrallah revealed that “Israel” was “forced to mobilize a part of its air defenses, Iron Domes, and Patriot systems in Eilat, taking them from southern and northern occupied Palestine.”

Related Videos

President Bashar al-Assad’s speech at the extraordinary Arab-Islamic summit on Gaza

Special coverage | A reading of Sayyed Nasrallah’s speech on the occasion of Martyr’s Day 2023-11-11

Israeli planes are exposed to “terrifying” radar interference in the skies of Lebanon.. A military expert explains the “Doomsday” plan!

Brigadier General Shehadeh: The Lebanese Resistance has surprises that will amaze everyone who thinks of any foolishness

Related Stories

• Israeli analysts say do not ‘underestimate’ Sayyed Nasrallah
• Nasrallah is ‘smart’, ‘Israel ought to be prepared’: Former PM Barak
• Sayyed Nasrallah: On the Lebanese front, all options are on the table
• Iron dome misfires, missile falls on Israeli hospital
• US can’t help ‘Israel’ defeat Hezbollah, Iran: Former US intel officer
• Escalation of Gaza aggression makes battle expansion inevitable: Iran

---

Operation Al Aqsa Flood

Brigitte Gabriel distinguishes Christians as non-Arabs: Debunked

October 14, 2023

Source: Myriam Charabaty

Brigitte Gabriel gets debunked. (Zeinab El Hajj – Al Mayadeen English)

By Al Mayadeen English

Islamophobe and “Israel”-apologist Brigitte Gabriel wants to push forward rhetoric against Islam during Operation Al Aqsa Flood to absolve “Israel” of its crimes and denounce the Resistance, but her rhetoric gets debunked.

Brigitte Gabriel, who claimed that “The difference, my friends, between Israel and the Arab world is the difference between civilization and barbarism,” tries to push Israeli rhetoric through a Christian Zionist lens, but Lebanese Christians will not stand for it. Especially not amid the liberation taking place through Operation Al Aqsa Flood; as “Israel” commits genocide in the Gaza Strip but the people, including Christians, continue to support their Resistance movement.

Lebanon was the only Christian-majority nation in the Middle East.

It’s where I was born.

We prided ourselves on inclusivity. Always welcoming Arab Muslim refugees from all over the Middle East.

We had the best economy despite having no natural oil. The best universities.…— Brigitte Gabriel (@ACTBrigitte) October 12, 2023

Below is the post debunked!

Lebanon was the only Christian-majority nation in the Middle East. It’s where I was born. We prided ourselves on inclusivity. Always welcoming Arab Muslim refugees from all over the Middle East. We had the best economy despite having no natural oil. The best universities. They called Beirut the “Paris of the Middle East” and the Mountains of Lebanon was a tourist destination. 

While Lebanon was a Christian-majority, the French-ordered country was only inclusive if you had enough money to be so. In 1943 the Lebanese Republic was considered an independent state and remained under French mandate until 1945. However, it was only in 1946 that the French troops withdrew from the newly independent Republic. 

Just two years later, in 1948 the Palestinian Nakba occurred and the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people at the hands of Jewish Zionists began. Those who escaped the genocide are those who have lived in the Nakba and were forcefully displaced with the hope that one day they will return. 

Some of these Palestinian escaping death and occupation came to Lebanon and with them some of the richest Palestinian families such as Sursok and Bustros and others who had a positive impact on the Lebanese economy which was predominantly, by then, a rentier economy. 

The refugees were indeed Arabs who were forcefully displaced and were welcomed by another Arab republic, Lebanon. If the French mandate made it seem like Christianity is a national identity, there might be a need to reconsider as many of the Palestinian refugees at the time were indeed Christians. The Christian-Arab dichotomy is false for Christians of the region are in fact Arabs. One is a religion while the other is a national identity. 

But a turncoat to her nation would know the difference and just choose to alter the truth to entertain Israeli rhetoric pitting the Lebanese civil war as only a Muslim vs Christian war.

My early childhood was idyllic, my father was a prosperous businessman in town and my mother was at home with me, an only child. Slowly, the Arab Muslims began to become the majority in Lebanon and our rights began to wither away. 

While Gabriel, whose name is Hanane Qahwaji/Nour Semaan, pitted the war to fit Israeli rhetoric, the truth was that the war was one of identity between those who wanted to make peace with the enemy and those who refused to allow that to happen and demanded the rightful liberation of Palestine and the return of its people to their land and homes without condition.

Lebanon has historically always been a multi-religious republic despite the majority-minority differences. And even today with Christians a minority, primarily thanks to the proxy wars waged by the West as well as the regional instability significantly caused by the Occupation entity, “Israel”, this remains true. 

Gabriel whose name is not even credible and has been accused of fabricating her “surviving terror” story in Lebanon, even by historians based in the US, cannot possibly find a way to spin the truth. 

Hundreds of Christians in the South of Lebanon, even in predominantly Muslim regions vouche they are living their regular lives. Even those that have grave political disagreements with their surroundings, among which is Hezbollah have a greater than needed margin for free speech without consequences.

Soon, we would find ourselves unable to leave our small Christian town without fear of being stopped and killed by Arabs. 

Once again, Christians in Lebanon are Arabs. That’s a historical fact. Several priests and patriarchs have reaffirmed this claim using historical facts. But mainly Christianity is a religion that came after Judaism and before Islam. As such the people of this region have often adopted various religions without changing their collective national identity.

In Lebanon your religion is on your government-issued ID. 

Related Videos

Special coverage Al -Aqsa Flood Epic 2023-10-14

Special coverage The Israeli enemy is targeting media teams in southern Lebanon

Related News

• Liberation movements in a historical echo: Latin America to West Asia
• Al-Qassam Commander: Gaza liberation proof that resistance only path
• In footage, Al-Quds Brigades march into settlements

---

Operation Al Aqsa Flood

Saudi Arabia to invite Syria’s Al-Assad to Arab League Summit in May

2 Apr 2023

Source: Agencies

By Al-Mayadeen English 

The spokesperson for the Arab League secretary general, Gamal Roshdy, states that the Arab League is not informed beforehand of every decision or move between Arab countries on the bilateral level.  

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad addresses parliament in Damascus, Syria on August 12, 2020 (Reuters)

According to sources, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad may be invited by Saudi Arabia to the Arab League summit that is due to be hosted in Riyadh on May 19, which would put an end to Syria’s regional isolation that it has been suffering from since 2011. 

Hossam Zaki, the League of Arab States (LAS) Assistant Secretary-General, confirmed last week that “the 32nd Arab summit is expected to be held in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia on May 19,” adding that heads of government are also expected to attend the Arab Development Summit in Mauritania and the Arab-African Summit in Saudi Arabia this year as well. 

This follows as Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan is scheduled to travel to the capital Damascus in the next few weeks to submit the invitation to al-Assad to the summit. Initial plans for a visit by either Prince Faisal to Syria or by Syrian Foreign Minister Faisal Mekdad to Saudi Arabia were postponed as a result of the February 6 earthquakes that devastated Turkey and Syria.

Several Arab countries rushed to Syria’s aid after the February 6 earthquake that killed tens of thousands in the war-torn country and neighboring Turkey. At the time, Egyptian President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi called his Syrian counterpart in unprecedented support since El-Sisi took office in 2014.

The spokesperson for the Arab League secretary general, Gamal Roshdy, stated that the Arab League is not informed beforehand of every decision or move between Arab countries on the bilateral level.  

“We are not supposed to be informed in advance about the assumed visit,” he said.

Read next: Arab League chief demands end of politicization of aid to Syria

After Syria was suspended from the organization in 2011, both Western and Arab nations boycotted him as a result of the protests that turned violence into war. However, this return to the organization would not only alter the regional approach towards Syria and the conflict but also Syria’s involvement in regional politics. 

Another potential landmark agreement

The beginning of that return started when Saudi Arabia and Syria agreed to reopen their embassies after the end of the month of Ramadan, according to sources familiar with the matter, but the Saudi foreign ministry did not confirm the agreement but confirmed talks were ongoing with the Syrian counterpart to resume consular services.

It does come with conditions – the talks include demands from Saudi Arabia not limited to close cooperation on border security and drug trafficking.

Egypt recently resumed contact with Syria after both parties agreed to fortify cooperation, marking the first official visit by a Syrian foreign minister to Egypt in more than a decade. Egypt served as a mediator alongside Saudi Arabia to facilitate Syria’s return to the League. 

Read more: Syrian Foreign Minister arrives in Cairo

On the other hand, nations like the US and Qatar have been demonstrating opposition to resuming ties with Syria, using al-Assad’s government situation as an excuse and asking to see progress for a political solution in the country.

If Saudi Arabia and Syria establish a concrete agreement and resumption of ties, it will be the second victory against the desires of the West following the landmark agreement earlier last month between Saudi Arabia and Iran.

The previous summit, the 31st, was held in Algeria in November 2022 and was attended by 16 Arab presidents. 

Related Stories

• Syria, Egypt hold talks on restoring diplomatic relations: Reports
• Syrian, Egyptian FMs discuss ‘intensifying channels of communication’
• Syrian Foreign Minister arrives in Cairo

Cuba’s ties to Arab World: Al Mayadeen interviews Cuba President (III)

21 Mar 22:27 

Source: Al Mayadeen

By Al Mayadeen English 

Cuban President Miguel-Diaz Canel touches in an interview for Al Mayadeen on the Palestinian and Lebanese resistance, the confrontation of Western imperialism, and his visit to Algeria.

Cuba’s ties to Arab World: Al Mayadeen interviews Cuba President (III)

During the third part of Al Mayadeen Media Network Chairman Ghassan Ben Jeddou’s interview with Cuban President Miguel Diaz-Canel, the president discussed Algeria, the Palestinian cause, El Comandante, and former President Raul Castro in the context of Cuba, global liberation, and international revolution.

Diaz-Canel said that in this past year, Cuba endeavored on a journey across Western Asia and North Africa to restore direct relations with a group of Arab countries which, due to the years of the pandemic, were not strengthened given that the ties were mostly virtual.

The visit, the President explained, began in Algeria; a country which Cuba shares a deep-rooted connection with, given the relationship shared between leaders of the Algerian revolution and those of the Cuban revolution. Diaz-Canel highlighted that while he belongs to a generation “that grew up hearing about the Algerian revolution” and about “Fidel’s visits to Algeria,” it remained that the current Cuban leadership, unfortunately, until [my visit in November] we did not have the opportunity to visit Algeria.

Algeria’s President and Government, during the visit, proposed a wide variety of cooperation projects which Diaz-Canel noted were enthusiastically welcomed. The visit, the president explained offered the Cuban leadership the opportunity to learn Algeria’s history and culture and to gain a genuine understanding of the depth of the fraternal tie that connects the Cuban people to the Algerian people.

Algeria’s President and Government, during the visit, proposed a wide variety of cooperation projects which Diaz-Canel noted were enthusiastically welcomed. The visit, the president explained offered the Cuban leadership the opportunity to learn about Algeria’s history and culture and to gain a genuine understanding of the depth of the fraternal tie that connects the Cuban people to the Algerian people.

Diaz-Canel recounted what unites the two nations. He reminded that the Algerian-Cuban cooperation was born when Cuban doctors flew to Algeria, during the early years of the revolution, as part of the first Cuban UN health mission abroad.

The Palestinian cause in the heart of Cuba

When asked about Palestine, Diaz-Canel reaffirmed Cuba’s solidarity with the Palestinian cause. The Cuban President reiterated that Cuba “defends the right to establish a Palestinian state with the pre-1967 borders with East Al-Quds as its capital and guaranteeing Palestinian refugees, anywhere in the world, the right of return.”

Moreover, Diaz-Canel argued that Cuba has always defended the Palestinian cause in the face of injustice, violence, and forced displacement.

The topic prompted the President to tell a story from when he served as Minister of Higher Education and attended an international conference on higher education which was hosted by UNESCO. Diaz-Canel, at the time, advocated Palestine’s eligibility for membership in and recognition by UNESCO in an address he gave on behalf of the Cuban government. I wasn’t one of the first speakers at the time, but Cuba was the one who raised the issue of Palestine and demanded that it be recognized by UNESCO. Following this speech, and the speeches of others who supported the integration of Palestine as a member of UNESCO, a resolution was passed in favor of that demand. 

At the time, the US decided to withdraw its support of the organization and even went on to launch an attack campaign against UNESCO simply for allowing Palestine to become a legitimate member of the international organization.

The Cuban President also highlighted that he had recently received Palestinian leaders and discussed the deep-rooted relationship that ties the two people together.

Diaz-Canel highlighted that this has been Cuba’s approach toward all resistance movements across the globe. Especially, Diaz-Canel noted, movements such as Hezbollah in Lebanon whose leaders have defended Lebanon’s independence, sovereignty, and right to self-determination.

When asked about Hezbollah Secretary-General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah, the Cuban President confidently said “he is a leader who knew how to lead a movement that defends the causes of the Lebanese people.”

Fidel restored Cuba’s dignity

Fidel, leader of the Cuban Revolution, gave Cuba, Latin America, and the Caribbean region a legacy, said Diaz-Canel who expressed deep feelings of appreciation and nostalgia for the era of El Commandante. Diaz-Canel said, “I miss him, and I will always miss him, the Cuban people will always miss him too.” 

Fidel led the Cuban Revolution for the dignity of the Cuban people and for the dignity of Cuba, he was a true revolutionary who “defended the rights of people, and fought for social justice without giving in to destabilizing attempts and aggressive imperialist policy against Cuba amid the conditions of the unjust embargo.”

The Cuban President added, “I believe that every historical moment of the revolution has been a milestone of Fidel’s legacy in history.”

Diaz-Canel explained that he is committed to Fidel’s convictions and defends them with all honesty, both as a President and as an intellectual. The President said, “I study Fidel constantly, and in difficult and complicated moments my first question is always: what would Fidel have done in a moment like this?” Diaz-Canel revealed that he turned to Fidel’s writings, speeches, and reflections whenever he needed to find parallels between the challenges of the past and the challenges of today to see how Fidel solved previous challenges.

“We have a great commitment to his legacy, a great commitment to the continuity of the Cuban Revolution, and a great commitment to our people,” said Diaz-Canel.

The President said he is committed to walking in Fidel’s footsteps reaffirming that “Fidel is still present among us even though we always miss him.”

Raul Castro: the perfect second man

When asked by Raul Kobe Castro, Cuban President Diaz-Canel said “Raúl Kobe is authentic, deeply revolutionary and I have great admiration and appreciation for him.” Diaz-Canel explained that he perceived Raul as “the beloved army general Raúl Castro” whom he considered both a mentor and a father.

The Cuban President described Raul as someone who has “the ability to listen, and also gives his opinion in a timely manner, firmly, sincerely and faithfully about what he sees as wrong or not well applied.”

When asked about the role of Raul during the Cuban revolution, Diaz-Canel said “he’s always been the perfect second man.” Raul, according to the Cuban President, complied with Fidel’s directives and set an example to others as he “never looked forward to becoming the first man.”

Raul, he said, ran “the most efficient ministry” in the Cuban revolution, the Ministry of the Revolutionary Armed Forces, “which is not the armed forces of any country, it is the armed forces of the Cuban people” born out of the Cuban revolution. These forces play a significant role not only in protecting the country but also in social and economic dynamics.

After Fidel’s passing away, Raul took over the leadership of Cuba “with tremendous cohesion, honesty, and fulfillment of the revolution and Fidel,” said Diaz-Canel.

Raul is a bold person, said the Cuban President, adding that he paved the way for necessary transformations based on his understanding of the challenges that face the country. 

In particular, Diaz-Canel said Raul is a great host, saying he has witnessed how Raul won the heart of any friendly foreign visitor arriving in Cuba, perhaps because people expect protocol-type dialogues with him. Instead, they find Raul welcoming and able to talk about the most complex issues on the international scene.

Commitment to the people of utmost importance

According to the Cuban President, the government is currently conducting dialogue with the people, and parliamentary candidates are meeting with the electorate ahead of the elections set for March 26. 
“For one to elect a president, one must first be elected by the people as a representative; it is highly up to what the people want – and whether or not they see in each and every one of us the characteristics they want in a representative […] it is all about the people’s assessment first and that of the National Assembly second,” Diaz-Canel underlined.

He explained that he devoted himself to the revolutionary process with paramount commitment, stressing that he felt the weight of the responsibility of the presidency on his shoulders, as “I will never allow myself to betray the Cuban Revolution or not be able to achieve the continuity of the Cuban revolution’s legacy… That idea haunts me every day and forces me to improve my performance. In fact, it challenges me to look deeper and perceive things critically, making me unsatisfied with the milestones we are reaching.

One cannot commit to the revolution if they do not have a prior commitment to the people, one cannot talk about continuity if one was not committed to the people, and one cannot talk about preserving Fidel and Raul’s legacy if one was not committed the people, the Cuban leader underlined.

“We have been through harsh times, and we had to face numerous ordeals, and many citizens still remind of that during the meetings we hold with them, for they say: ‘You did not catch a break’,” he said.

Touching on the “harsh times” in question, Diaz-Canel highlighted how Cuba was hit with various disasters over the years. “At first, there was the plane crash, then came the hurricane in Havana, the floods, the Hotel Saratoga explosion, the burning of the huge oil tanks, Trump’s 243 measures, the placement of Cuba on the States Sponsors of Terror list, and now hurricane Ian and a whole bundle of woes.”

The Cuban president underlined that the country went through difficult times and that it was vigorously looking for ways to get inflation under control and manage the lack of supply for the Cuban people. “We are as seeking to achieve energy stability in the national power grid and succeeding in implementing a wide array of measures that had been included in the socio-economic development strategy we had designed to enable the country to achieve the prosperity that the Cuban people deserve in the shortest time possible and despite all the conditions of the suffocating blockade.”

“I have many cases of dissatisfaction, and I criticized myself during the latest session of the National Assembly of People’s Power in December 2022. It was public self-criticism because I could not solve the problems that the country is facing, including complicated issues that are affecting the daily lives of citizens,” the Cuban leader said, highlighting that while he did not see himself as the reason behind these problems – as the situation has to do with far more than the government’s mistakes and shortcomings, for there is the embargo – he still feels dissatisfied with the fact that Havana cannot promote a set of measures to be more efficient and more effective when it comes to solving such problems.

Cuba’s resilience to help overcome the embargo

The Cuban leader said that while he is convinced that the blockade will not become any easier, he believes that “we have every ability not only to resist it but also to overcome it, for due to our talent, effort, intelligence, and action, we will advance the country’s development.”

Cuba’s first priority, Diaz-Canel told Bin Jeddou, will be defending the homeland and the revolution through the military, ideological, and economic resilience that the country strives to achieve. “By achieving this military, economic, and ideological resilience, we can continue to deepen the effectiveness of the revolution’s social achievements. The goal of the revolution was, above all, to achieve social achievements and to defend social justice.”

The priority is to confront with wisdom, talent, and intelligence the massive political and ideological sabotage campaign launched by the United States administration against Cuban society, directed mainly at the youth in order to create a rift and chasm between the youth and the revolution, the Cuban president underlined. “At the ideological level, we encourage – in fact, we do – the consolidation of the concept of people’s power, which guarantees the critical popular participation and the submission of proposals that can be submitted through the apparatuses of the popular authority that represents the people,” he added, noting that this was a key aspect in confronting foreign attempts at undermining the Cuban revolution. 

According to Diaz-Canel, Havana is obligated to defend the new Constitution adopted by the country a few years ago and to ensure that all the laws that support the articles of the new Constitution are passed.

Furthermore, the Cuban president touched on the socially effective programs that Cuba supports, which are part of the people’s aspirations, among which are a program aimed at empowering women, a program against discrimination in all its forms, especially racial discrimination, a program against cultural colonialism and everything broadcast by the platforms working on bringing back capitalism and neoliberalism while imposing imperialist ideals, and social programs in the areas whose residents live in vulnerable situations.

“Three basic pillars have been established in the administration of the Communist Party of Cuba and the government regarding work on these programs. Among these pillars are science and innovation, as well as scientific research. The second pillar is the digital transformation of Cuban society, which also means a change in mentality.”

The third pillar, according to Diaz-Canel, is communication, i.e., the means of communication in Cuba and how Cuba could produce its own content through using the truth, as well as creating the means for confronting the smear campaign waged by the imperialist forces benefitting from their monopoly on social media platforms and the internet.

Diaz-Canel thanks Al Mayadeen

At the conclusion of his interview, Cuban President Miguel Diaz-Canel directed a message to Cuba, calling on the country to never give up its commitment to defending the sovereignty and independence of the various peoples all over the world, as well as their right to independence, self-determination, and their land. He called on his country to never give up the mentality of a better world being a possibility and that the Cuban people must enable this world through their struggle.

Furthermore, Diaz-Canel told the free media, also known as alternative media, to never stop defending the peoples’ truth, roots, and identity, stressing the need for the media to use its platforms to produce anti-imperialist content, as well as content that combats banality.

The Cuban president also specifically addressed Al Mayadeen and the head of its Spanish department, Al Mayadeen Espanol, Wafiqa Ibrahim, by expressing his gratitude for the network’s compassion toward Cuba and how it treats the Cuban cause as its own.

Diaz-Canel also thanked Al Mayadeen for the support it has given the Cuban people during trying times when it came out to tell the truth about Cuba when defending Cuba was of utmost importance and scarce to see.

“I would also like to thank you for your professionalism; this professionalism through which you did not only address the reality of Cuba and the world alone, but also the viewpoint of the entire Arab World, its values, culture, history, and causes. Today, at this time in particular, I thank you for giving me the opportunity to be in this exclusive interview. I think all of this has a lot to do with the fact that the Arab World and Cuba are two brotherly people. We are two brother nations, and we will always fight hasta la victoria siempre,” he underlined.

Finally, Diaz-Canel thanked Al Mayadeen for its documentary series Enigma, which told the tale of the Cuban revolution, saying it dealt with the Cuban revolution in a very adequate manner through the series.

Related Stories

• Havana and the world: Al Mayadeen interviews Cuba President (II)
• Cuba Revolution, US embargo: Al Mayadeen interviews Cuba President (I)
• Patria participants call to end US embargo, disinformation on Cuba

Havana and the world: Al Mayadeen interviews Cuba President (II)

20 Mar 2023

Source: Al Mayadeen Net

By Al Mayadeen English 

In an exclusive interview for Al Mayadeen, the Cuban President talks about Cuba’s stance on the war in Ukraine, and his country’s relationship with Russia, China, and other countries.

Cuban President Miguel Diaz-Canel

During the second part of Al Mayadeen Media Network Chairman Ghassan Ben Jeddou’s interview with Cuban President Miguel Diaz-Canel, the president discusses Cuba’s assessment of current alliances, in addition to its position on the war in Ukraine.

The Cuban president discussed the solid relationship that consolidates his country with Russia, China, and Iran, as well as his country’s relationship with Latin American leaders, and what he aspires for in the Arab region. He also expressed his admiration for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, and his desire to visit Damascus this year.

The world that Cuba aspires to

During his interview with Al Mayadeen, Diaz-Canel said that “the assessment of alliances in today’s world must be on the current context, and on an analysis of the current situation,” noting that this is related to what happened in the world, as the world is going through a multidimensional crisis.

He stresses that the situation has also been exacerbated by the Covid-19 pandemic, which has plunged the world into a state of uncertainty.

Diaz-Canel added, “Instead of enforcing the language of cooperation and respect for one another, the world has resorted to imposing new sanctions and resolving conflicts using the language of war.” “This is not the world we want and I think it is not the world that the majority of people on Earth want.”

“Today,” the Cuban president said, “we need a world capable of globalizing solidarity, peace, and friendship, a world that has a system of relations that defends pluralism,” noting that “this world is being built in accordance with common values ​​based on peace, solidarity, friendship, and pluralism, which are capable of preserving, first and foremost, the human race.”

He added that this issue was former Cuban President Fidel Castro’s concern from an early age, and it was mentioned in many of his messages to the world on various international occasions, and that Cuba aims to resolve conflicts through dialogue, and for the world to become more democratic.

The Cuban president asserted to Al Mayadeen the need to change the “current global economic system, because it is based on exploitation and inequality, serves the rich at the expense of the majority of the world’s poor, and does not offer developing countries any alternatives, as it is subject to the interests of military-industrial complexes and great Western powers.”

If “we are able to achieve alliances that contribute to achieving pluralism, understanding, respect for others, and the struggle for peace… these alliances will then be valid and supportive.”

In the same context, he refers to the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of America (ALBA), the alternative adopted by Latin America to confront the ALCA Free Trade Agreement, which represents an imperialist project.

One of the most important reasons for the success of these alliances is, according to Diaz-Canel, that they are based on cooperation, solidarity, and sincere stances, and not on concepts that prioritize money and the economy.

The president stressed that the Cuban revolution is based on sharing what it has with others, and that this is what the future of the world should be like.

Blame for Russia-Ukraine war lies with Washington

Regarding Cuba’s position on the Russian-Ukrainian war, Diaz-Canel stressed that this conflict has serious consequences for the world, not just the parties involved. 

The president accused Washington of using its power of influence through the media to spread Russophobia and disinformation on the origin of the conflict, labeling Russia as a culprit while concealing the real reasons behind the war. 

He stressed that “the culprit in this conflict is the United States itself, which resorts to wars to solve its problems and overcome its crises,” adding that “Washington puts the interests of the military-industrial complex at the forefront, as it needs the war to sell weapons and to solve the internal problems it suffers from.”

The Cuban president indicated that the US has always sought to encircle Russia by promoting NATO expansionism on its borders, which he says Russia is aware of. The countries that are accomplices in the war will lose the most, he added, as they began to suffer from food shortages and an energy crisis, while those directly involved in the conflict are losing human lives.

The biggest beneficiary of the war, he said, is the US administration, and there need to be initiatives at the international level that facilitate the process of dialogue between the concerned parties to put an end to the war.

Diaz-Canel reiterated his country’s disapproval of the continued use of the language of war and the imposition of sanctions against Russia instead of dialogue, as these measures do not solve crises, but rather exacerbate the state of war. He added that the way Western nations are dealing with the crisis may drag the world into a possible world war.

He further wondered how Europe, which was the theater of two previous world wars, and the theater for Fascism and Nazism, is incapable of extracting the necessary lessons from history to play an effective role in avoiding a third world war.

Read next: Al Mayadeen CEO decorated with Cuba medal of friendship

Cuba’s relationship with China 

Speaking about Cuban-Chinese relations, the president stressed that his country and China enjoy historical and friendly relations, based on common principles that bring the two countries together.

He added that his country shares convictions with China regarding a structured socialist path in both countries that takes into account the specificities of each; both countries also share strong relations at the levels of their governments, peoples, and parties (the Communist Party of China and the Communist Party of Cuba).

Diaz-Canel praised the Chinese model of socialism and reform, and its establishment of a firm economic base, which transformed it into one of the world’s great powers. He added that China adopted a distinguished position in terms of cooperation and solidarity, as is the case in Cuba, referring in this context to the initiatives and proposals presented by Chinese President Xi Jinping to achieve more harmony on the global level.

The Cuban president said that during his visit to China at the end of last year, he felt assured by the clear Chinese desire to support Cuba out of its crisis. He pointed out that during the visit, decisions were taken regarding the development of bilateral relations.

He said that China is one of Cuba’s main economic partners and that it is directly involved with Cuban energy, transportation, and telecommunication projects, referring also to the wide exchange between the two countries in terms of education, culture, science, technologies, and innovation, calling China “a friend of Cuba.”

Cuba’s relationship with Russia

Regarding Cuban-Russian relations, Diaz-Canel affirmed the high level of political, economic, and commercial relations between Moscow and Havana.

He added that Russia is present in the most strategic sectors that were developed within the national plan for economic and social development in Cuba until 2030: the energy sector, transportation and communications, cybersecurity, the mineral sector, the industrial sector, and in food production.

“There is a whole range of projects under development jointly with Russia.”

Diaz-Canel discussed how Russia sent a plane to assist his country during the Covid-19 pandemic and placed it at the disposal of Havana to transport oxygen cylinders imported from various places in Latin America and the Caribbean. He added that while Cuba was in a crisis, Russia donated factories to help it produce oxygen, and many concentrators, as did China.

The Cuban president touched on his recent visit to Russia, pointing out that he saw that Russian President Vladimir Putin understood Cuba’s problems, and Moscow’s political and governmental will to help alleviate the problems his country suffers from. He added that since that visit, Cuba has constantly been updated with regard to the agreements with Moscow, especially concerning energy and food.

He stressed that China and Russia are friendly states, and that Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin have demonstrated the will to embody a true friendship with Cuba.

During the interview with Al Mayadeen, the Cuban president did not hide his admiration for his Russian counterpart, pointing out that Putin’s speeches are rich in historical references. He added that Putin is constantly referring to lessons from history in order to reaffirm what is happening today, and what needs to be done in the future.

He added that “I don’t think it was Putin who caused the conflict with Ukraine, they were about to impose a siege on the Russian Federation,” pointing out that the Russian president is defending Russia’s interests and security.

“Dialogue with the Russian president is not impossible, but rather possible, provided that it is linked to a sincere will and without the imposition of preconditions.”

Cuba’s relationship with Iran

Speaking about Cuban-Iranian relations, the Cuban president described Iran as Cuba’s sister nation. He said that the foundations of the relationship between the two countries are based on history and mutual respect, as well as the great resistance that the two people waged in the face of imperial blockades and sanctions.

According to the Cuban president, “the Cuban and Iranian people share an understanding of resistance, courage, heroism, dignity, and defiance to the plans of imperialist power.” 

He also expressed his appreciation for the Iranian leader, Sayyed Ali Khamenei, as a politician and as the leader of the Iranian Revolution, admiring his “tremendous capability for logical thinking and analysis,” also describing him as a wise leader.

The Cuban president indicated that the two countries are working on joint projects that serve the economic development of both, especially in the fields of energy and food. He pointed out that Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi might visit his country, while also expressing his desire to visit Tehran this year.

Diaz-Canel stressed to Al Mayadeen that this year will witness a deepening of relations between the two countries, and the adoption of projects that are of mutual benefit. He specified both nations share mutual projects that include scientific research, technology, and energy.

The Cuban president expressed his admiration for Iran’s culture, civilization, and resistance against aggression, and said that the technological development that Iran has achieved despite the embargo and sanctions is very important, and multifaceted, pointing out that being familiar with Iran’s development can benefit Havana.

Read next: Al Mayadeen, Cuban TV discuss cooperation, exchange of expertise

Cuba’s relationship with Latin American leaders

Regarding Cuba’s relationship with Latin American leaders, the Cuban president said that his country has deep ties with four Latin American leaders.

Cuba and Venezuela 

Diaz-Canel pointed out that the late Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez sowed hope in Venezuela, shining throughout Latin America, and that Venezuela has always been an important country and played a key role in Latin America, especially during Chavez’s leadership of the Bolivarian Revolution.

He added that many values ​​have come together in Chavez, as he was Bolivarian in thought par excellence, was well versed in the history of Latin America and the Caribbean, and was an exceptional defender of Simon Bolivar’s thought and of the pioneers of liberation in Latin America.

The Cuban president noted that “Chavez was able, as an exemplary leader, to understand the concerns and aspirations of the Venezuelan people,” adding that the friendship between former Cuban President Fidel Castro and Chavez, “was like a father-son relationship.”

In this context, he referred to the achievements made by the two countries during the Chavez and Fidel eras, especially with regard to the ALBA. 

He added that when Chavez was head of the Bolivarian Revolution, he was preparing cadres who were distinguished by their true commitment to the revolution’s path, to the Venezuelan people, and their loyalty to the revolution, referring in this context to Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro.

The Cuban president described Maduro as a brother to Cuba, and admired how he defended the Bolivarian Revolution against all destabilization attempts planned by the US government. He pointed out that “Maduro, with his efforts and persistence, was able to achieve civil-military unity, preserve the Bolivarian Revolution, and move it forward on the path of victory.”

Cuba and Colombia

Speaking about Colombia, the Cuban president said that there is now a government in Colombia that prioritizes dialogue with Venezuela, adding that Nicolas Maduro and Gustavo Petro have agreed on a whole set of measures that also aim to ensure peace in one of Latin America’s most important regions. 

Cuba and Brazil 

The Cuban president also described his Brazilian counterpart, Lula da Silva, as an exceptional leader, pointing to his prominent role in extracting Brazil from its economic crisis, which turned it into a reference for what can be achieved in the policy of social justice, adding that “Lula doesn’t suit US interests, so the administration worked to discredit him by fabricating legal cases against him.”

He added that Lula did not surrender and did not accept any conditions to be imposed on him, despite his imprisonment and the pressure exerted on him to subdue him. He complimented the Brazilian president, stressing that his new projects help develop programs and investments in the country.

Cuba and Nicaragua

The Cuban president also expressed his admiration for the Sandinista revolution in Nicaragua, noting that it was a success the United States could not bear, and against which it launched a fierce campaign of destabilization, backed by a fierce media campaign to discredit Nicaragua.

“Therefore, I believe that whenever we want to assess the situation in Nicaragua, we must start from where we proceed in our analysis of what the Sandinista revolution contributed to in the areas of economic and social development for the Nicaraguan people, and what the Sandinista revolution means in terms of building a state with national security, and remove everything related to imperialist distortion and tampering.”     

Cuba’s relationship with the Arab world

Regarding the island’s relationship with the Arab world, Diaz-Canel affirmed that Havana has good relations with Arab countries based on respect and mutual understanding of the historical and cultural specifics of each country.

He pointed out that there was space for cooperation, for the defense of common struggles, and coordination of efforts in international forums, adding that Cuba has always felt the solidarity and support of the Arab communities.

Diaz-Canel stressed that there is room to deepen the already strong ties on the economic and commercial level, as the historical foundations laid out for these relations are strong and Cuba looks to strengthen this relationship with the Arab world. 

The Cuban president expressed his admiration for Syria’s courage, steadfastness, and self-confidence in the face of an aggressive campaign aimed at destroying it, noting that Syria, after many years of the unjust war against it, remained a strong and united nation. 

In this context, he praised the role of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, “The Syrian president has shown sincerity to his people and has remained at the forefront without giving up… I have always seen a great deal of steadfastness and composure in him.”

Before concluding the interview with Al Mayadeen, the Cuban President renewed his support for Syria, saying that Havana will remain with the Syrian people, and condemned the ongoing Israeli aggression against it, as well as the sanctions imposed on the Syrian people.

The Cuban president expressed his desire to visit Damascus this year and admired the nation’s steadfastness and the solidity and dignity of the Syrian people.

Read next: Cuba Revolution, US embargo: Al Mayadeen interviews Cuba President (I)

Related Stories

• Cuba Revolution, US embargo: Al Mayadeen interviews Cuba President (I)
• Patria participants call to end US embargo, disinformation on Cuba
• Mexico’s Obrador pledged to lead movement to lift US blockade on Cuba

Arab leaders offer Syria billions in aid, sanctions relief if Assad pushes back against Iran: WSJ

March 16 2023

Arab leaders offered Assad help in lobbying the west to lift crushing economic sanctions, despite Washington’s disinterest in loosening its grip on Damascus

By News Desk

(Photo Credit: SANA via AP)

Arab leaders are offering Syrian President Bashar al-Assad a deal that includes billions of dollars for reconstruction efforts and a pledge to lobby the west to lift sanctions in exchange for “[asking] Iran to stop expanding its footprint in the nation,” according to Arab and European officials that spoke with the Wall Street Journal (WSJ).

Other conditions set by the leaders of the unnamed Arab nations include a pledge from Damascus to engage with opposition and rebel groups, accept Arab troops to “protect returning refugees,” and crack down on the captagon drug trade.

The secret talks reportedly gained momentum following the devastating earthquakes that struck Turkiye and Syria last month, killing 6,000 in the Levantine nation alone.

Nonetheless, a Syrian government adviser told the WSJ that Assad “has shown no interest in political reform or a willingness to welcome Arab troops.” Western powers have also made little effort to lift crushing sanctions or stop politicizing humanitarian aid deliveries.

Last month, US State Department spokesman Ned Price urged the international community not to let humanitarian assistance to Syria be accompanied by normalization, stressing: “[Washington’s] position on the Assad regime has not changed.”

The talks between Damascus and Arab leaders are reportedly backed by Saudi Arabia, which recently agreed to restore ties with Iran in a China-brokered deal. In recent weeks, Saudi officials have called for an end to the isolation of Syria to allow a response to its dire humanitarian crisis.

“There is a consensus building in the Arab world that the status quo is not tenable. And that means we have to find a way to move beyond that status quo,” Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud said earlier this month.

European and Arab officials also confirmed to the WSJ that Syria’s regional reintegration would be high on the agenda at the next Arab League summit, set to be held later this year in Saudi Arabia.

In recent weeks, Jordan and Egypt sent their foreign ministers to Damascus for their first diplomatic visits since the war erupted in 2011.

Cairo in particular is spearheading a reconciliation plan which proposes restoring relations between Syria and Arab states to pre-2011 levels, returning Syria to the League of Arab States, and negotiating the deployment of joint “Arab forces” on the Syrian-Iraqi border, according to exclusive information made available to The Cradle.

Other Arab nations responsible for fueling the war in its early stages, such as Tunisia,  have announced plans to restore diplomatic ties.

Even before the earthquake hit, Arab nations had slowly started to rebuild ties with Syria after more than a decade of war and isolation, citing the failure of the US-sponsored war and concerns about Iran’s growing presence in the country.

Despite these concerns, Iran has welcomed progress between Syria and the Arab world. Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Nasser Kanaani called it “a realistic approach” and “a positive step toward Islamic solidarity.”

Damascus has repeatedly denied “inaccurate reports about Iranian military forces in Syria” and asserts that “the number of Iranian advisors in Syria does not exceed 100.”

Hezbollah, Anti-imperialism, and the Compatible Left

March 11,

Source: Al Mayadeen English

By Sammy Ismail 

A review of Banerjee’s “Fighting Imperialism and Authoritarian Regimes: Between the Devil and the Deep Sea” (2003) and Salamey’s “Hezbollah, Communitarianism, and Anti-Imperialism” (2019).

“such power and the people who excercised it, embodied a mystique, expressed not simply in guns but in books, uniforms, social behavior and a mass of manufactured products. Only by accepting these things and those who brought them would it be possible to penetrate this mystique and grasp the power which lay behind it” (Chris Calpham, Third World Politics: an introduction, 1985)

According to the Middle East Institute, the Washington-based think-tank, Hezbollah today stands as the “most formidable” armed non-state actor in the world. Hezbollah has developed exponentially since the 1980s growing to be the most numerously large political party in the Arab world, and spearheading the Axis of Resistance coalition against Zionism and US imperialism [and its Arab allies] in West Asia at large. The stance on Hezbollah has recurrently caused sharp disagreements among the Left in the Arab World and abroad: whereby some would promote anti-imperialist solidarity with the party, and others would explain away the party’s anti-imperialist achievements to critique other factors.  

Anti-anti-imperialism

In “Fighting Imperialism and Authoritarian Regimes: Between the Devil and the Deep Sea”, Sumanta Banerjee introduces a pertinent debate of leftist circles into academia (2003). Banerjee offers a critique of post-soviet anti-imperialism: contrasting old leftist anti-imperialist liberation movements with contemporary identity-based anti-imperialist liberation movements which presumably fall short of leftist standards of social liberation. He argues that the Left is regressing by uncritically prioritizing the contradiction of imperialism while overlooking other tenants of social liberation which he characterizes as violating “the beliefs and operative norms” of “the Left and democratic forces” (S. Banerjee, 2003, p:183). 

The regression and eventual dissolution of the USSR stifled the popularity of socialist ideals and did away with the blanket ideology that most anti-imperialist actors adopted a variant of. It became a notable trend of liberation movements, especially in West Asia, to turn towards their respective cultures for revolutionary inspiration rather than turning to the literature of scientific socialism. The prior leftwing secular character of liberation movements was replaced by cultural indigenous ideologies: the most distinguished among which is Hezbollah.  

In his article, Banerjee condemns these non-socialist anti-imperialist movements as ‘authoritarian’. He doesn’t directly address Hezbollah but poses a critique generally to all non-socialist anti-imperialist actors. He argues that they hardly any better than their imperialist oppressors such that they too stifle social liberation: thus allegorizing the latter as the ‘Devil’ and the former as the ‘Deep Sea’ (S. Banerjee, 2003, p:184). He adds that the anti-imperialist struggle against US hegemony has been distorted since the time of ‘Che Guevara’ and ‘Nelson Mandela’ (S. Banerjee, 2003, p:183). Many leftists, he argues, have remained uncritically fixated on supporting any party opposing US hegemony regardless of other factors; he theorizes that they have been so blinded by the evils of the Devil that they have obliviously backed up into the embrace of the Deep Sea (S. Banerjee, 2003).

Banerjeee’s argument, essentially, challenges the precedence of the struggle against imperialism in leftist lore and activism. The novel significance of his article is that it formulates a topic heatedly debated in vintage cafes and niche pubs, and introduces it into academia where it can be scientifically unpacked. While he doesn’t address Hezbollah directly, his arguments echo those posed by some leftists against initiatives for political affinity with Hezbollah. 

Communitarianism 

Imad Salamey (2019) comports the aforementioned argument to be point-precise geared toward Hezbollah by introducing the prospect of “communitarianism”. Salamey explains in “Hezbollah, Communitarianism, and Anti-Imperialism” that Hezbollah is one byproduct of the global trend of communitarianism (2019). Communitarianism, Salamey explains, arises as a result of the ferocious expansion of capitalism and the equivocal decline of nation-states with the curbing of governments in favor of laissez-faire market policies (2019).

In the absence of the state’s welfare role, communities turn inwards for a safety net. Hezbollah’s inception in Lebanon came in this context: in light of the Shia community’s social marginalization, the sectarian chaos of the Lebanese civil war, and the recurrent Zionist attacks on the predominantly shia-populated south. Hezbollah arose as the safety net for its immediate community against the ills of capitalism and imperialism. 

Salamey explains that communitarianism is rooted in a “primordial cultural solidarity” which undermines the nation-state (2019); In the case of Hezbollah, this underlying cultural solidarity was of that between the Iranian and Lebanese Shias: which was optimized ultimately in the form of the robust alliance between Hezbollah and the Islamic Revolution’s Guard Corps. 

Before unpacking the communitarian basis of Hezbollah, Salamey aimed to synthesize the general conception of anti-imperialism in Marxist lore and then presented the two as incompatible. He argues that:

1. The Marxist directive for revolution, and by extension anti-imperialist praxis, is premised upon the Westphalian conception of the nation-state (liberation is the liberation of a nation within a state),
2. Communitarianism by definition undermines the nation-state, and Hezbollah is manifestly communitarian (primarily because of its substate identity)
3. Thus, Hezbollah isn’t anti-imperialist (the strive against American imperialism is accidental and not decisively anti-imperialist).  

The conclusion of Salamey’s article builds on that of Banerjee’s: leftists in support of Hezbollah under the pretext of anti-imperialist solidarity are violating the ideological beliefs and operative norms of the Left (Salamey, Hezbollah, Communitarianism, and Anti-Imperialism, 2019; Banerjee, Between the Devil and the Deep Sea, 2003). This Post-Soviet Communitarian critique of Hezbollah roughly presents some arguments typically posed by western and westernized leftists denouncing affinity with Hezbollah. 

Argument 1: Hezbollah isn’t Leftist  

One of the typical discourse narratives posed against affinity with Hezbollah is by wistfully contrasting Hezbollah with the romanticized leftist anti-imperialist icons such as Che Guevara or Nelson Mandela. While this is a unscientific criticism of Hezbollah that is uncommon among credible Leftist intellectuals or noteworthy parties, it is popular among the contemporary ‘woke’ left as a to-go-to argument. 

The objective of conjuring the picturesque revolutionary experiences of Guevara and Mandela is to undermine Hezbollah’s strive for liberation in contrast. Proponents of such speaking points aim to marginalize Hezbollah’s achievements against Zionist colonialism and Takfiri fascism by putting it in competition with icons like Guevara or Mandela: In an effort to present Hezbollah’s anti-imperialist efforts as ‘accidental’ or ‘isolated incidents’ sidelining them in the assessment of Hezbollah’s character. 

These speaking points offer no real critique but only employ symbolic smearing to contain Hezbollah’s popularity momentum from extending to the Left-wing in the Arab World and the West. Such smear-campaigning speaking points are comparable to that posed against the Red Army in the late 1940s. The Red Army led by Stalin had taken on the full brunt of the Nazi war machine and liberated Europe from the ruthless rule of Nazism suffering 8.6 million deaths in the process (which is 10 times more than the deaths suffered by the US, Britain, and France combined). However this fact was actively distorted for western public opinion: presenting the victory over Fascism as a victory of all the “Allied Powers”, presenting the Red Army as only a marginal contributor to this victory, and presenting Stalin as an anti-christian-church-destroyer to the conservative working class in Europe and the US.

Argument 1 marginalizes Hezbollah’s admirable strife against the Zionist and Takfiri footsoldiers of US imperialism. It conditions support for Hezbollah upon the party’s self-identification as a leftist party, factoring out the consequential significance of Hezbollah’s strife against the forces of reaction. A bullet that pierces the heart of a colonizing soldier or a fanatic fascist promotes people’s liberation regardless of the ideological incentives which motivate the soldier.  

Argument 2: Hezbollah isn’t Secular

While argument 1 stands as a strawman argument against leftist solidarity with Hezbollah, other arguments present a more sophisticated version of Argument 1. Primarily, and most commonly, is the argument referring to the Islamic ideology of Hezbollah: an argument that is alluded to by the aforementioned prospect of communitarianism (Salamey, 2019). 

It is argued that Leftists can’t stand in solidarity with Hezbollah despite its anti-imperialist practice and stance because of its Islamic ideology. The Shia Islamic ‘communitarian’ character (or the ‘sectarian’ character of Hezbollah, to put it in the language of Lebanese political discourse), is argued, to devalue Hezbollah’s revolutionary anti-imperialist character.

Proponents of this argument explain that Hezbollah’s strife against Zionists and Takfiris arises from an in-group (shia community) v out-group (non-shia communities) rationale rather than a scientific understanding of imperialism: whereby imperialism is defined as the byproduct of the disproportionate accumulation of capital in favor of some nations at the expense of others, which entails the exploitation of the latter by the former for the purposes of maximizing economic interests (Lenin, Imperialism: the Highest Stage of Capitalism, 1917).

Hezbollah, however, isn’t sectarian despite adopting a religious ideology and employing religious discourse. The party’s praxis isn’t a zero-sum game of competition with other religious groups and this is assessed consequentially (i.e. in terms of results). Even if we were to entertain this faulty accusation and grant the validity of inferring chauvinistic sectarianism from religiosity, Hezbollah’s anti-imperialist character still holds. Assuming that Hezbollah is a “sectarian” communitarian party and interpreting wars in the “middle east” from an orientalist lens as irrational wars between different tribes motivated by identitarian chauvinism, Hezbollah’s praxis remains consequentially anti-imperialist praxis. Even if we were to assume that the Party’s wars against Zionists and Takfiris is motivated by an inter-communitarian feud, this doesn’t change the fact that (1) Zionists and Takfiris were acting as footsoldiers of Imperialism and (2) Hezbollah’s strife against them was successful and effective.  

This line of reasoning is cited by prominent theorists of Scientific Socialism. Marx and Engels hailed the Irish struggle for independence from British colonialism while acknowledging that the Irish liberation movement was prominently led by Catholic clergymen and that the conflict of decolonization had manifested for the Irish fighters as a war for protecting the catholicization of the indigenous population of the Island against the Protestant British invaders (Marx &Engels, On the Irish Question,1867). 

Additionally, Stalin, in “Foundations of Leninism” when addressing the monarchist Emir’s efforts for liberation in Afghanistan, emphasized assessing liberation movements according to the results which they yield rather than according to a checklist of democratic standards (1924). “The national movement of the oppressed countries should be appraised not from the point of view of formal democracy, but from the point of view of actual results, as shown by the general balance sheet of the struggle against imperialism. The revolutionary character of a national movement under the conditions of imperialist oppression does not necessarily presuppose the existence of proletarian elements in the movement, the existence of a revolutionary or a republican program of the movement, or the existence of a democratic basis of the movement.” (Stalin, 1924). 

More so, however, Hezbollah stands as significantly more politically sophisticated than the Irish liberation movement in the 1860s (endorsed by Marx and Engels) or the Afghan Emir’s liberation attempt (endorsed by Stalin). The party’s religious and cultural ideology doesn’t exclude a scientific conception of imperialism as expressly stated in their 2009 manifesto. In the Chapter on Domination and Hegemony, it reads “Savage capitalism forces – embodied mainly in international monopoly networks of companies that cross the nations and continents, networks of various international establishments especially the financial ones backed by superior military force have led to more contradictions and conflicts – of which not less important – are the conflicts of identities, cultures, civilizations, in addition to the conflicts of poverty and wealth. These savage capitalism forces have turned into mechanisms of sowing dissension and destruction of identities as well as imposing the most dangerous type of cultural, national, economic as well as social theft. Globalization reached its most dangerous facet when it turned into a military one led by those following the Western scheme of domination – of which it was most reflected in the Middle East, in Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine, and Lebanon, where the latter’s share was the July 2006 aggression by the ‘Israelis’ ”(2009). 

Islamic Fervor 

Marxism isn’t as vehemently anti-religion as McCarthyists and infantile leftists make it seem. Dominoquo Losurdo unpacks this adequately in “Class Struggle: A Political and Philosophical History” (2016). He explains that, historically, the classes of society achieved initial awareness of the national question through religion: that It was through religious idioms and prospects that people became conscious of real material contradictions. “Marx and Engels carefully avoided indiscriminate liquidation of movements inspired by religion… Religious affiliation can be experienced very intensely and mobilized effectively in political and historical upheaval, but is not the primary cause of such conflict” (Losurdo, 2016). 

In the case of Hezbollah, political theory and praxis of anti-zionism and anti-imperialism was developed in reference to the Epic of Karbala, in which Al-Hussein fought ferociously for justice against the tyranny of Yazid. This cultural narrative is native to the Lebanese Shia even prior to the inception of Hezbollah. The cultural significance and religious rituals of Aashura weren’t parachuted from Iran on the eve of the Islamic revolution. Aashura is a historic watershed of Arab history. It symbolizes an indigenous revolution against the tyranny of the Islamic caliphate: the descendants of the Prophet contended the distorted interpretation of Islam which manufactured political legitimacy for tyrant caliphs by triumphing the authentic interpretation of Islam which promotes the normative ideal of justice.   

One would dismiss this, citing Marx: “religion is the opiate of the masses” (Marx, Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of the Right, 1843). Aashura, however, unlike the religious narratives which promote pacifism referenced by Marx in his opiate metaphor, acted as a catalyst for the masses of the Lebanese Shia community to bear arms against Imperialist projects.

Hezbollah capitalized on the Epic of Aashura which has long been transmitted from generation to generation in this community. The narrative was allegorically projected to contemporary politics following a scientific analysis of the material contradictions as the 2009 manifesto expressly elaborates. The cultural spite against Yazid’s injustice and tyranny was evoked by Hezbollah’s clergymen to be compared to the hegemony of the US empire, and consequently mobilizing hundreds against the proxies of imperialism. This tactic of mobilization proved exceptionally effective in consolidating the world’s most powerful non-state actor, reversing the Arab nation’s setback in their struggle against Israeli colonialism, and snuffing out the deviant Takfiri fascist enterprise in the Levant.

“What human consciousness does is try to understand the world. When social life is calm, so are ideologies; when class conflicts come to existence so too do competing ideologies and conscious statements; and only when a revolutionary class arises can revolutionary ideas come into being” (Peter Stillman, Marx Myths and Legends, 2005)  

Picturesquely, it is the whispered Islamic idioms that teemed serenity and discipline in the hearts of fighters fortified in Bint Jbeil as they took on the full brunt of the Israeli war machine, and it is the battle cry of “Ya Zaynab” which resounded as Kornet ATGMs flattened Israeli tanks back in 2006.  

The Compatible Left 

However, acknowledging criticism and engaging in self-criticism is central to the development and optimization of political praxis. A scientific analysis, regardless of the conclusion it’s comported towards, is generally beneficial. It introduces theoretical concepts that allow one to think better of complicated issues and theorize about them: like the allegory of the devil and the deep sea (S. Banerjee, 2003) or the trend of ‘communitarianism’ (I. Salamey, 2019). 

In the same context, to frame the discourse and filter critique from smear campaigning, it is notable to introduce a term coined by CIA strategists: The Compatible Left.  Which refers to leftist intellectuals and parties coopted by the CIA in an effort to manufacture a Left that is compatible with imperialism. The Compatible Left is also comparable with the Neo-comprador class which James Petras theorizes about in “NGOs: In the Service of Imperialism” (2007). The compatible left is an inconsequential left: it employs leftist lore and language while ensuring that the status quo of imperialism remains robust and unchallenged.

Related Stories

• Hezbollah is ‘Israel’s’ greatest threat: The Jerusalem Post
• Hezbollah praises expulsion of Israeli delegation from AU summit
• Hezbollah: World required to take firm stance against terrorism

The Syrian Earthquake Has United the Arab World

FEBRUARY 15, 2023

Steven Sahiounie

Posted by INTERNATIONALIST 360°

Close to 9 million people in Syria have been affected by the 7.8 magnitude earthquake, 65 seconds in duration on February 6, that Turkish President Erdogan has compared with the power released by atomic bombs. The hardest hit areas are Latakia, Aleppo, and Idlib.

The UN estimates that more than 4.2 million people have been affected in Aleppo province with 400,000 homeless, and 5,000 buildings declared unlivable. Aleppo has more than 1,600 dead and 10,000 injured.

The province of Idlib is a total population estimated at 3 million, but because there is no government or authority there, we can only guess how many have been affected.

UAE Aid plane landing in Aleppo International Airport

The UN says 5.5 million Syrians are without a home after the earthquake, with more than 7,400 buildings having been destroyed completely, or partially in Syria.

In Latakia, there are 820 dead, 142,000 homeless, and over 2,000 injured, with 102 buildings completely collapsed, and others condemned.

A total of 58 trucks have crossed from Turkey to north-west Syria through the Bab al Hawa crossing point over the past five days, carrying aid such as food, tents, and medicines. Those trucks are solely supplying Idlib, under the occupation of the armed group, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham. Eleven trucks have gone through the newly opened border crossing of Bab al Salam today, carrying non-food items such as blankets, and mattresses.

Iraqi AAid plan landing in Damascus international Airport

Location matters in this quake

The map will show that Aleppo, Syria is just south of Gaziantep, Turkey which was the epicenter. Aleppo was heavily damaged in the earthquake, adding more misery to a city that was under the occupation of Al Qaeda terrorists in the eastern section until being liberated in December 2016.

Looking at a map, you see that Latakia is a 2 ½ hour drive west of Aleppo on the M4 highway. It seems like a long distance, but the power of the 7.8 magnitude brought the epicenter and Latakia together because they share the same fault line, which Aleppo does not.

Tunisian Aid plane landing in Aleppo International Airport

UN: no roadblocks to aid, no politics

Rula Amin, UN Refugee Agency Senior Communications Advisor, urged cooperation among nations to help Turkey and Syria. She said there should be no roadblocks to assistance for people in need. Referring to the UN and western aid coming almost exclusively to Idlib, and by-passing those in need in Latakia and Aleppo, she urged all to put politics aside, and focus on getting aid to those in need regardless of whether they are in the US-EU supported area in Idlib, or whether they live in Aleppo and Latakia under the Syrian administration from Damascus. Amin is no stranger to Syria. In March 2011, Amin was one of the very first international journalists in Deraa, covering what she had claimed was a ‘popular uprising’, and even interviewed the cleric who was the key player of the Obama-designed US-NATO attack on Syria for ‘regime change

.’ She did not go as far as to demand the lifting of all US-EU sanctions on Syria to send aid, but her meaning was clear. The sanctions prevent aid from arriving in Damascus. On February 9 the US Department of the Treasury issued General License 23, which allows for a humanitarian waiver of supplies to government-controlled areas in Syria, but must be received by an NGO and not the Syrian government. The 180-day waiver is far too short, as the need is enormous, and will people will need years to grapple with the damages.  Rebuilding homes and businesses may take a decade or more. Also, most governments abroad would be sending official aid to Syria through a government-to-government mechanism, and using an NGO is a tedious stipulation designed to discourage aid from being sent.

Who gave to Damascus?

On Tuesday, a plane landed from Saudi Arabia at the Aleppo International Airport, carrying 35 tons of humanitarian aid.  Aid to Damascus also arrived from: China, Russia, Algeria, Iraq, Iran, UAE, Bangladesh, Libya, Belarus, Jordan, Cuba, Venezuela, Tunisia, Armenia, Turkmenistan, Cyprus, Hungary, India, and Sudan.

Jordanian Aid plane landing in Damascus international Airport

Italy sent two planeloads of aid to Beirut, Lebanon to be transported to Syria by land. This demonstrates the extreme fear that western allies of the US have of the sanctions. By sending the aid to Lebanon, which is not sanctioned, Italy feels more comfortable that the US Treasury will not issue massive penalties against them.

Who refused aid to Damascus?

The US, the EU, and all US allies such as Canada have sent nothing to Syria for the earthquake-ravaged zones of Latakia and Aleppo.  According to America, the European Union, the United Kingdom, and the allies of the US, there is no place called Syria.  There is only a small, rural agricultural province called Idlib.  Syria is 10,000 years old, and Damascus and Aleppo both tie as the undisputed oldest inhabited cities on earth.  But the great minds in Washington, DC. only acknowledge the tiny area called Idlib.  The terrorist-controlled Idlib is suffering, and has innocent unarmed civilians in need of help; however, Latakia, and Aleppo are far bigger and have sustained more deaths, injuries, and structural damages than Idlib. The US and the west have used politics to judge who gets helped, and who is forgotten. The Syrian people will never forget this. The US and EU sanctions have made life unbearable in Syria before the earthquake of the century, and now when politics should be set aside for humanitarian needs, the US doggedly holds on to their dogmatic ideology to make sure the Syrian people know the full disdain of the American government. The Foreign Minister of the United Arab Emirates visited Damascus and met with President Assad after the quake, in an act of defiance of US-dictated policy.

Algerian aid plane in Aleppo International Airport

Where is Government controlled Syria?

The US-NATO attack on Syria beginning in March 2011 has resulted in three separate administrations in Syria.  The biggest territory, about 75%, is the central government in Damascus. Aleppo and Latakia are the two hardest hit by the earthquake which is under the Damascus administration.

The second administration is the province of Idlib, which is an olive-growing region between Latakia and Aleppo. There is no government there.  The 3 million persons there live under the occupation of an armed terrorist group, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, formerly called Jibhat al-Nusra, the Syrian branch of Al Qaeda. The terrorists embedded themselves there in 2012, and until now are safe from attack because the US, EU, and UN all lobby for their protection, and aid. The US supports the Al Qaeda terrorists because they represent the US interests in Syria to be decided upon in a final political settlement in Syria under the auspices of the UN.

The third administration is the Kurdish self-proclaimed region of the northeast, where the US military is occupying the Syrian oil wells, and allowing the Kurds to sell the stolen oil in Iraq to cover their expenses. This area was not affected by the earthquake. This administration exists separate from Damascus only because of the US military illegal occupation

Where is Idlib?

Many of the residents of Idlib most affected by the earthquake have had to sleep outside among the olive groves, in freezing temperatures. The UN acknowledged the international response to Idlib has been a failure.

Raed al-Saleh, head of the White Helmets, an award-winning video troupe headquartered in Washington, DC. has denounced the UN as incompetent in their response to the needs in Idlib. The White Helmets work solely in Idlib and have international donors. Al-Saleh was angry after UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said Syrian President Assad had agreed to allow UN aid deliveries to the area through two border crossings from Turkey for three months. The White Helmets and the terrorists do not recognize the Syrian government.  Damascus had tried to send aid to Idlib, but the terrorists turned it back saying, “We don’t want help from the enemy.”  Previously the UN trucks of aid to Idlib were also stalled after the terrorists demanded a $1,000 fee for each of the 10 trucks.

Why are the borders controlled?

The Syrian government has controlled the border crossings of Syria for security reasons. Serena Shim, an American journalist from Detroit, witnessed and reported seeing a UN food truck carrying Al Qaeda terrorists, and their weapons, from Turkey into Syria near Idlib. She was murdered in Turkey just days after publishing her report.

The terrorists in Idlib are contained in a small area and have weapons including missiles which have frequently been directed at Latakia, and Kessab, a small Christian Armenia village just north of Latakia. The Syrian government wants to keep the weapons from flowing into Idlib while allowing UN, and other humanitarian aid to flow into the 3 million civilians who are held there as human shields.

---

Steven Sahiounie is a two-time award-winning journalist

Related Videos

Arab official momentum towards Damascus

Is the earthquake a gateway to breaking the siege on Syria?

Syria and Jordan: The diplomatic lines are clear

President Bashar al-Assad receives Ayman Safadi, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs and Expatriate Affairs of Jorda

Is the Arab blockade lifted on Damascus?

Related Articles

• Turkiye Bombed Syria Despite Earthquake Devastation
• Iraq Sends 60,000 Tons of Oil to Syria, 30,000 to Turkiye
• Deputy PM Safadi Meets President Assad, Conveys Jordan’s Support to Syria
• Syria Condemns US Blockade Preventing the Delivery of the Earthquake Relief Aid
• Syria Earthquake: WHO’s Tedros Brings Tons of Aid, Visits Aleppo, Meets Dr Assad
• Armenian Church in Aleppo Hosts 600 Earthquake Survivors
• U.S. Sanctions Agravate Earthquake Response in Syria
• Turkey Expels Dozens of Quake-Affected Syrian Families from Shelters

Palestine is My Cause: Arabs Reaffirm Support for Palestinians, Rejection of the Occupation

February 1, 2023

Palestinians in Gaza gathered in large numbers to watch the Morocco-Portugal game at World Cup’s quarterfinals. (Photo: Mahmoud Ajjour, The Palestine Chronicle)

By Ramzy Baroud

– Ramzy Baroud is a journalist and the Editor of The Palestine Chronicle. He is the author of six books. His latest book, co-edited with Ilan Pappé, is “Our Vision for Liberation: Engaged Palestinian Leaders and Intellectuals Speak out”. Dr. Baroud is a Non-resident Senior Research Fellow at the Center for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA). His website is www.ramzybaroud.net

The latest Arab Opinion Index 2022 is yet more proof that Arab societies are diverse in every possible way, from their assessment of their economic situation and living conditions to their take on immigration, state institutions and democracy. With one single exception: Palestine.

76 percent of all respondents to the poll, which is carried out annually by the Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies in Doha, said that Palestine is a cause for all Arabs, not Palestinians alone.

Three important points must be kept in mind when trying to understand this number:

First, Arabs are not merely expressing sympathy or solidarity with Palestinians. They are irrevocably stating that the Palestinian struggle against the Israeli Occupation is a collective Arab struggle.

Second, these views are the same across all sections of society throughout the entire geographic expanse of the Arab world, from the Gulf to the Maghreb regions.

Third, equally important is that the public opinions that have been examined in the poll come from countries whose governments have either full diplomatic ties with Israel or vehemently reject normalization.

The study is quite extensive, as it included 33,000 individual respondents and was carried out in the period between June to December 2022.

Once again, the Arab people collectively reject normalization with Israel, with Algeria and Mauritania topping the list at 99 percent each.

Though some might discount the detailed study by claiming that Arabs inherently hate Israel due to their deep-seated aversion to the Jews, the study breaks down the reason why Arab masses have such a low opinion of Israel.

When they were asked as to why they reject diplomatic ties between their countries and Israel, the respondents mostly “cited Israel’s colonial and expansionist policies, as well as its racism toward the Palestinians and its persistence in expropriating Palestinian land.”

Only five percent cited religious reasons behind their position and that too cannot be dismissed as mere religious zealotry, as indeed many Arabs formulate their views based on the moral values enshrined in their religions; for example, the need to oppose and speak out against injustice.

It must be stated that this is hardly new. Arabs have exhibited these views with an unmistakable consistency, since the start of the Arab Opinion Index in 2011 and one would dare argue, since the establishment of Israel atop the ruins of Palestine in 1948.

But if that is the case, why are the latest poll results deserving of a discussion?

While examining the American public view of Russia, the state of democracy in the US, or the greatest threat to national security, opinion polls often fluctuate from one year to the other. For example, 70 percent of all Americans considered Russia an ‘enemy’ to the US in March, compared to only 41 percent in January.

The massive jump in two months is not directly related to the Russian war in Ukraine, since Ukraine is not a US territory, but because of the anti-Russia media frenzy that has not ceased for a moment since the beginning of the war.

However, for Arabs, neither media shift in priorities, internal politics, class orientation or any other factor seem to alter the status of Palestine as the leading Arab priority.

In 2017 and 2022 respectively, two American presidents visited the Arab region. Both Donald Trump and Joe Biden labored to execute a major shift in the region’s political priorities.

Biden summed up his agenda in a meeting with six Arab leaders in Jeddah in July by stating, “This trip is about once again positioning America in this region for the future. We are not going to leave a vacuum in the Middle East for Russia or China to fill.”

None of these self-serving priorities seem to be paying any real dividends.

That said, the pressure to dismiss the centrality of Palestine as an Arab cause does not only come from the outside. It is also guided by the internal dynamics of the region itself. For example, some pan-Arab news networks, which put much focus on Palestine in previous years, have been relentlessly and, sometimes, purposely, ignoring Palestine as an urgent daily reality in favor of other topics that are consistent with the regional policies of host countries.

Yet, despite all of this, Palestine remains the core of Arab values, struggles and aspirations. How is this possible?

Unlike most Americans, Arabs do not necessarily formulate their views of the world based on the media agenda of the day, nor do they alter their behavior based on presidential speeches or political debates. To the contrary, their collective experiences made them particularly cynical of propaganda and fiery speeches. They formulate their views based on numerous grassroots channels of communication, whether using social media tools or listening to the Friday sermon in their local mosque.

The struggle for Palestine has been internalized in the everyday acts of the average Arab woman or man; from the names they choose for their newborn, to the quiet muttering of prayers before falling asleep. No amount of propaganda can possibly reverse this.

Arab public opinion obviously matters, even though most Arab countries do not have functioning democratic systems. In fact, they matter most because of the lack of democracy.

Every society must have a system of political legitimacy, however nominal, for it to maintain relative stability. It means that the collective Arab view in support of Palestinians and rejection of normalization without an end to Israeli Occupation would have to be taken seriously.

Though some Arab governments are listening to their people and thus condition normalization on Palestinian freedom and sovereignty, the US and Israel insist on ignoring the Arab masses, as they have done for many years. However, if Washington believes that it can simply compel the Arabs to hate Russia and China and love Israel, while the latter continues to kill Palestinians and occupy their land, it will be sorely disappointed, not only today, but for many years to come.

• Israel’s Finance Minister Smotrich Refuses to Transfer Tax Money to PA

Algeria Declaration: Palestine is our central cause

2 Nov 2022 19:06

Source: Al Mayadeen Net

By Al Mayadeen English 

The concluding statement of the Arab Summit emphasizes supporting OPEC+’s decision to cut oil production by two million barrels a day.

The Arab Summit demanded lifting the unjust blockade on Gaza.

The Arab League Summit issued, on its second day in the Palace of Conferences in Algiers, the Algeria Declaration document.

The heads of the Arab states stressed “the centrality of the Palestinian cause and full support for the rights of the Palestinian people, including the right to freedom and self-determination and the right to return, in addition to making the compensation payments for the Palestinian refugees, in accordance with the United Nations General Assembly Resolution No. 194 of 1948.”

The Summit demanded lifting the Israeli blockade on the Gaza Strip and condemning the Israeli occupation’s brutality and barbaric practices against Palestinians, including assassinations and arbitrary arrests.” The Summit also called for the release of all prisoners and detainees, especially children, women, the sick, and the elderly.

The statement emphasized the necessity of “endorsing the pursuit of the Palestinian state to obtain full membership at the United Nations and urging the countries that have not yet recognized the state of Palestine to do so, coupled with the necessity of supporting the legal Palestinian efforts and attempts to hold the Israeli occupation accountable for its war crimes.”

Moreover, the statement confirmed that the Summit supports the policy of OPEC+, which includes oil-producing countries from inside and outside the OPEC organization, in the global energy market.

Algeria confirmed that it “appreciates the balanced policy of the OPEC+ alliance in order to ensure the stability of the global energy markets and sustainability of investments in this sensitive sector as part of an economic approach that ensures protecting the interests of producing and consuming countries alike.”

On October 5, OPEC+ announced reducing oil by two million barrels a day in order to support the markets facing the risk of a decrease in demand for crude oil due to the economic crisis.

The attending states also rejected “all forms of foreign intervention in the Arab countries’ internal affairs” and expressed their insistence on the principle of finding Arab solutions to Arab problems by strengthening the role of the Arab League in preventing crises and solving them through peaceful means and working to strengthen inter-Arab relations.

The attending Arab countries expressed “full solidarity with the Libyan people and support for the efforts aimed at ending the Libyan crisis through a Libyan-Libyan solution that preserves the unity and sovereignty of Libya and safeguards its security and that of the neighboring countries.”

The statement concluded, “All the states should assume a collective leading role to contribute to the efforts made in order to reach a political solution for the Syrian crisis and address all the political, security, humanitarian, and economic repercussions, through what ensures the unity and sovereignty of Syria and realizes the ambitions of its people.”

Algerian FM Ramtane Lamamra: The success of the Algerian summit is the success of all Arabs

Algerian Foreign Minister Ramtane Lamamra considered on Wednesday that the success of the Algerian summit is the success of all Arabs who knew how to come together and agree after the Corona pandemic and realized the importance of unity and the sensitivity of the regional and global situation.

Lamamra said that “the attendance was significant, positive, and constructive, and everyone was eager to apply whatever can contribute to the Arab unity.”

Related Stories

• 2022 Arab Summit: Will it be decisive in solving Palestinian issue?
• Arab Summit launched; Palestine a central cause
• Algeria: Disputed issues unresolved, to be raised at Arab FMs meeting
• Mikati Addresses Algeria Summit, Highlights Lebanon’s Economic Crisis

The Palestinian Resistance is beyond sectarian disintegration

October 29 2022

Source: Al Mayadeen English

By Myriam Charabaty 

Christians are an integral part of Palestine, the region’s social fabric and the Arab world’s identity as a whole. Despite the Collective and Historic-West’s active attempt to isolate and contain the Christian role in the struggle for national liberation through the resettlement of Arab and Palestinian Christians in exile, it remains that the formation of the Arab national identity, through the entirety of its social fabric, is rooted in their unified historical and cultural background and identity.

“We will not kneel! Yes, we seek peace but we will not surrender.”

There is a direct correlation between the extent to which people value their lives and their willingness to defend the Arab identity of Palestine, which is integral to the Arab social fabric of the entire region. This correlation between Arabs and their land has manifested as Resistance movements across the Arab world. More specifically, it became visible in liberation movements seeking to liberate Palestine from the settler colonial entity of “Israel” as a primary front for Arab liberation from Western hegemony. This is to say that “Israel” is merely an agent of hegemony seeking to ensure the continuous security and sustainability of the Western project of the New Middle East as it was initially developed through the enforcement of the Balfour Declaration and Sykes-Picot agreement. 

As Palestinians and Arabs sacrifice their lives for liberation, the narrative of Christians, be it in Palestine or across the Arab world, is being purposefully obliterated. Having systematically fragmented the Christian voice of Palestinians and the surrounding Sykes-Picot-generated entities through settler colonialism and fragmentation practices, it has become necessary to dissect the Western-led Israeli narrative, despite all Western efforts to obstruct that process, and highlight the engagement of the Christian segment in liberation movements, be it armed resistance or otherwise, across the Arab world. 

Christians are an integral part of the region’s social fabric and of the Arab world’s identity as a whole. Despite the Collective and Historic West’s active attempt to isolate and contain the Christian segment’s role in the struggle for national liberation through the resettlement of Arab and Palestinian Christians in exile, it remains that the formation of the Arab national identity, through the entirety of its social fabric ―Christians, Muslims, Druze, Jews, and all minority groups and confessions― is rooted in their unified historical and cultural background and identity. 

“Israel” isolates Christians from Palestine and the cause

The Palestinian people, both Muslim and Christian alike, believe that the land upon which people walk, in Palestine, and Al-Quds more specifically, is sacred. The Greek Orthodox Archbishop of Sebastia, Atallah Hanna, has consecrated on several occasions the relationship between the Church of the Holy Sepulcher and the Al-Aqsa Mosque. He reaffirmed the Arab identity of Al-Quds, that of both its land and people, as an integral part of the larger Arab world in the face of the settler colonial entity that is considered the primary threat in the path toward Arab liberation.

Since the 1948 Nakba of Palestine, the Haganah massacres that led to it, in addition to the establishment of the Israeli settler colonial entity, there has been an active and continuous attempt by the Israelis to alter the identity of Palestine. They sought to eliminate its Arab historic and cultural features in the hopes of putting an end to the righteous Arab Palestinian cause and thus legitimizing their settler existence, as well as the sustainability of the non-nations of Sykes-Picot. The Zionist entity, in other words, looked to install the foreverness of a fragmented Arab national identity. 

In this regard, Christian Palestinians did not stand idle, nor did they ever abandon the Palestinian struggle, nor their Arab identity, neither at home nor in exile. Archbishop Hanna reaffirmed that the settler colonial entity threatened the Arab social fabric, history, and national identity, and noted that it cannot “remove Al-Quds from the Palestinian conscience, be it that of Christians or Muslims.”

He further called on Palestinian Christians everywhere “not to forget their church,” adding that Palestine “is their spiritual roots and their national roots, they belong here, and their identity is rooted in this region’s history. They must never forget their Palestinian heritage.”

Brothers in Arms

On October 23, 2022, the Israeli occupation assassinated Tamer Al-Kilani, a Palestinian Resistance fighter from the Lions’ Den group in the West Bank’s Nablus, via a TNT device planted on a motorcycle next to his.  

This marks the latest of the ever-ongoing assassination policy of the Israeli Occupation Forces (IOF) against Palestinian Resistance leaders. However, since the beginning of 2022, the IOF has intensified its assassinations and has even used drones and TNT devices to conduct them.  

While many Christian resistance fighters became renowned in the earlier stages of the Palestinian struggle, such as Ghassan Kanafani and Georges Habash, since the Second Intifada, there became a generation of Arabs – both Christian and Muslim – that have questioned the role of Christians in Palestinian liberation movements.  

In 2006, shortly after the end of the Second Intifada, there was a general decision between Palestinian Resistance groups and the Palestinian Authority to de-escalate. During that time, two young men were assassinated for insisting on carrying the legacy of those that were martyred before them.  

Martyr Daniel Abu Hamama, in his early 20s at the time, was assassinated alongside martyr Ahmed Musleh who was around the same age, on Easter Sunday after they were driven into an ambush. In 1990, Abu Hamama joined the Palestinian Authority’s special forces apparatus, seeking a job to support his family. As the confrontations intensified prior to the start of the Second Intifada, Abu Hamama joined the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, the military wing of Fatah. 

• The IOF assassinate Palestinian Resistance fighters Martyrs Daniel Abu Hamama and Ahmad Musleh in 2006

The IOF’s bullets obstructed Abu Hamama’s path to Beit Lahm in the West Bank, preventing him from attending the Easter celebration with his family and loved ones.  

That evening, the IOF bullets turned Daniel’s holiday delight into a reminder that the way of the Cross ends in resurrection and is the only way to salvation.

His blood quenched the soil that Christians consider the birthplace of Christianity.  The assassination targeted the car Abu Hamama was in with his two friends, Martyr Ahmed Musleh and Arafat Abu Shaira, who was injured during the attempt. 

According to an eyewitness who spoke to Al-Quds News, “When Daniel fell from the vehicle, bleeding, the occupation soldiers attacked, dragging him to the ground to a warehouse 15 meters away from the vehicle, taking off his clothes,” pointing out that “people in the neighboring area then heard the sound of gunfire inside, which made them believe there’s an interrogation. Then, an execution had taken place before an IOF ambulance came and held his body for two days.”

مقاتلون فلسطينيون يودعون رفيقهم المقاتل الشهيد دانيال أبو حمامة على أبواب كنيسة المهد في بيت لحم قبل إدخال الجثمان للصلاة عليه في الكنيسة – أبريل 2006.

📷 موسى الشاعر pic.twitter.com/SAnmX44RWl

— صور فلسطين (@PalestinianPic) November 9, 2021

His mother’s words ring notably: “Praise be to God, who honored our son by allowing him martyrdom in defense of the dear homeland,” noting that Abu Hamama has “always wished to be martyred.”

A School of Liberation Theology

Abu Hamama would not have been the first or last Christian to join Fatah. Long before him, the protector of Al-Quds and exiled freedom fighter Archbishop Hilarion Cappucci had assisted Fatah for years before he was arrested and then exiled. 

Cappucci was known for having been both a clergyman and a freedom fighter, a boy from Syria’s Aleppo that refused to watch Palestine suffer. When Al-Aqsa Mosque called for help, he ordered for the bells of the Church of the Sepulcher to be tolled. In his approach toward the Palestinian struggle, Cappucci left behind him a legacy. He became a symbol of confrontation on the individual, religious, and national levels. A symbol of unity of ranks in purpose and fate, and thus a symbol of the Arab liberation theology uniting Christians and Muslims across the Arab and Islamic worlds. 

In his own words, Cappucci summarized his legacy, and that of all those who have chosen to follow in his footsteps, when he said “We will not kneel! Yes, we seek peace but we will not surrender. What we demand is righteousness and justice, and God is righteousness and justice. And if God is with us, then who is against us? Therefore, our dark nights must end, and our chains must be broken.”

Furthermore, the Syrian Archbishop of Al-Quds also said “I, who have lived in Al-Quds for long, have prayed to the verses of its minarets and the tolling of its church bells. I have extended my hand, at times of adversity, to assist Palestinian freedom fighters…and because of that I was arrested and exiled,” calling on generations not to abandon this legacy for the sake of Palestine, and stressing that the people of the region depend on it.

Palestine will remain an Arab cause because it affects all of us living in the made-to-fragment Sykes-Picot entities. The liberation of Palestine and its people is the liberation of the Arab nation, and the first step towards the defragmentation of its social fabric, thereby allowing it to become a united nation capable of developing sustainable social, economic, and political organizations, and securing safety and prosperity for all the remaining minorities in the region on its own terms, without the Western dictations that have plagued the Arab world for far too long now.

Related Stories

• Palestinian factions in Gaza declare a strike, mourn Nablus martyrs
• Lions Den: Those who think the group will end are delusional

Contemporary Zionism pursues its assigned role as an advanced military and intelligence base of Anglo-American, European imperialism – Part II

28 Jul 2022

Source: Al Mayadeen English

Niloufer Bhagwat 

The Partition of Palestine to establish a Zionist Military Base in the Arab world; the Partition of Korea and the Partition of the Indian Subcontinent are an extension of the same strategy to set back National Liberation Movements in these regions.

Contemporary Zionism pursues it assigned role as an advanced military and intelligence base of Anglo-American, European imperialism – Part II

To read Part I, click here. (Wrong Link)

The Zionist Israeli colonial-settler, apartheid, military and Intelligence project, was part of the new strategy for control of resource-rich regions of the world, implemented through British, American, and European policy, even as National Liberation Movements in Asia, Africa, and in the Arab world began freeing their countries from British, French and European colonial rule. The establishment of a Zionist military outpost in the Middle East to control adjacent regions was part of the new strategy for continuing colonial exploitation and occupation of several parts of the world by erstwhile colonial powers in collaboration with the United States, by partitioning countries they had earlier colonized, before their withdrawal, to establish proxy governments in various regions of the world, a different strategy to direct colonial rule. At the same time, the Indian Subcontinent was partitioned by the British collaborating with the pro-British comprador classes of different religious groups in India: Muslim, and Hindu, and a new country Pakistan created from this partition, another British project to establish theocratic states, immediately integrated into an Anglo-American Military pact against the Arab world, West Asia, the former USSR, and India. General Zia Ul Haq, then a brigadier in the Pakistan Army (later military dictator and President of Pakistan after a military coup) led a military expedition of Pakistan in 1970 to the Kingdom of Jordan allied with Britain, during what was known as ‘Black September’, to put down by military force the ‘Palestinian uprising’ in the West Bank of Palestine, leading to a massacre of Palestinians. In the Far East, Korea was partitioned by the United States, after the Korean war during which US forces used bio-weapons against the Korean people and its allies the Chinese Peoples’ Liberation Army, all cities of North Korea were destroyed. Thereafter a proxy government of the United States was placed in power in South Korea, a colonial adjunct of the United States in the region, and a US military base to dominate and control the Far East, apart from the US military bases in Japan, which exist till date, including for stationing of nuclear weapons platforms of the United States.

The latest example of the establishment of a US military base and colonization of a country in East Europe is Ukraine, after Victoria Nuland, then-Assistant Secretary of State under the administration of President Obama (presently Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs), led the United States ‘Maidan’ coup of 2014 in Ukraine, which was another Anglo-American- Zionist and NATO project to control the resources of the region, to destroy both Ukraine and the Russian Federation and economically setback Europe, by deliberately inciting war on Europe’s Eastern periphery by initiating genocidal attacks on Eastern and Southern Ukraine’s predominantly Russian population, and attempting to destroy their language and culture and encouraging Ukraine and concerned European governments to renege on the Minsk Agreement signed with Russia. Thereafter an all-out economic war was declared on the Russian Federation, with sanctions imposed on Russia’s oil and gas resources, on Russian shipping, banking, and all its financial institution, to financially strangulate the Russian Federation, to control Russia’s trade in energy resources, in food and other commodities; the key to control several economies, the whole of Europe, Asia, Africa, and South America; and if necessary expand this into a Third World War for the Imperialist restructuring of the world, as earlier by the Second World War. Zionism is a global Imperial Military project integrated with Anglo-American Imperialism and NATO’s wars of aggression and internal subversion in Palestine, in the Arab world,  in Iran, and worldwide, including in Ukraine.

The second reason for the failure by Jurists with exceptions, to examine the real nature of Zionism and the Zionist project of “Israel”, was the touching faith of many jurists in the United Nations and its resolutions, including of the Security Council and General Assembly and other organizations, instead of an objective and critical approach to resolutions and decisions of all UN bodies and instrumentalities. No institution national or international can be above scrutiny or is infallible. This approach led to the flawed academic tendency to accept decisions of all United Nations organizations as ‘gospel’ or ‘divine’ truth. Consequently, there was an ideological disinclination to examine the validity of the United Nations Palestine Partition Resolution of 1947 which led to the establishment of the Zionist entity of “Israel” in 1948, controlled by the financial and banking elite of the Anglo-Saxon-Zionist world, in their own interests. The 1947 Partition of Palestine Resolution was a violation of International Law. Palestinian territory was forcibly seized from the people of Palestine by Jewish European settlers, facilitated through the instrumentality of the British Mandate over Palestine, in reality, British colonial occupation. The Palestine Partition Resolution of 1947 was a violation of the right of Self-Determination of the Palestinian Arab people and a violation of General Assembly Resolutions on National Liberation Movements and anti-Colonial struggles of the people of Asia, Africa and South America among other regions. From the legal and political perspective, there was no basis for the 1947 Partition Resolution. The British Mandate over Palestine was ending and in accordance with International Law and De-colonization, it was necessary for Palestine to revert to the political control of the Indigenous Arab people of Palestine, subjugated by British occupation and colonial rule. For the United Nations to give legitimacy to the European Zionist Jewish Settler project, was a decision promoting European-settler colonization in Palestine, in violation of declared International Law on De-colonization and National Self-Determination, and to repeat in Palestine, what had taken place in past centuries in the United States of America, in Canada, in Australia, in New Zealand, in South Africa, in South West Africa, in South America, among other regions of the world; where ‘neo-Europes’ and European civilization were forcibly transplanted into alien soil, to perpetuate European occupation and colonization and the seizure of land and resources of vast continents exterminating the Indigenous people in a colonial holocaust not of 6 million, but of hundreds of millions worldwide including in India and China, with no reparation till date.

The United Nations Charter is an International Treaty. The United Nations was not established as per its declared objectives to perpetuate a Zionist European Jewish Colonial-Settler and a ‘Racist and Apartheid’ Israeli Regime, massacring Palestinians, and waging a continuous war both on the people of Palestine in the West Bank, Gaza, and other Palestinian territories occupied by “Israel”, and expansionist wars of aggression on its Arab neighbors, to achieve the Zionist objective of dominating the region and seizing all resources, including land and water reservoirs of Palestine and river waters of neighboring states of Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon, including in the Syrian Golan Heights, the Jordan river and Sea of Galilee; with no other justification than the Zionist self-propagated Racist theory of a superior or ‘Chosen People ’, causing widespread ecological devastation from the overuse of waters of the region. “Israel’s” policy is a continuous project for militarization and weaponization of the region against Palestinians, all “Israel’s” neighbors, and beyond against other countries in the wider region and adjacent continents; and includes a covert nuclear weapons program, while destroying peaceful nuclear energy projects of neighboring Arab states of Iraq and Syria; threatening the Iranian Nuclear Energy program, assassinating Iranian scientists, generals and military officers in Iran and in Syria, Iraq, and Lebanon, that is in countries who have military co-operation agreements with Iran. “Israel” has stealthily infected Iranian facilities with the ‘Stuxnet Virus’ or computer worm to disrupt operations, and resisted all proposals for a ‘Nuclear –Free Zone’ for this entire region including for “Israel”. In a new Quad has been established for the Middle East, of the USA, India, “Israel” and the UAE, a so-called “Indo-Abrahamic” Bloc similar to the Quad of the ‘Indo-Pacific’ a strategic alliance of the US, Japan, India and Australia to counter China which is unlikely to be welcomed by the Arab street, which sees such an alliance which includes the United States and “Israel”, as a threat to the military and economic sovereignty of the Arab world and its energy resources, as this West Asia Quad in its statement refers to focus on joint investments in the region, in” water, energy, transportation, space, health and food security, etc. directly related to economic sovereignty of governments and the people of the region . President Joe Biden of the United States and Prime Minister Yair Lapid of “Israel” also signed a joint declaration on the state of the ‘strategic partnership’ between the two countries, which is in fact a military and strategic pact targeting Iran, purportedly to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. In reality, there is a military pact to threaten Iran as a possible prelude to incite a wider war in the region like in Ukraine in furtherance of NATO economic and military hegemony against the Multi-polar world order emerging.

The ongoing genocide of the Palestinian people, the US-UK led Coalition’s repeated wars of aggression on Iraq, to which Ukraine contributed a military contingent as part of the coalition after the invasion of 2003; the US and NATO-led ISIS/Daesh/Jabhat Al-Nusra and their front organizations’ attacks in Syria, Iraq, and Lebanon; the successive Israeli wars of aggression on Syria and Lebanon, and earlier on Jordan and Egypt; Israeli military advisers directing and participating in the war of aggression waged on Yemen are all the direct consequence of the powerful Zionist and Israeli lobbies of the United States, UK, France, among other NATO countries, controlling resources of the region, assisting in the expansionist military objectives of the state of “Israel”, the military and intelligence outpost of NATO.

The opinions mentioned in this article do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Al mayadeen, but rather express the opinion of its writer exclusively.

Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov : Member countries of the African Union

July 29, 2022

Editorial Comment: Mr Lavrov’s visits to Arab states, the Arab League, and African states can only be described as a stunning victory and a complete triumph for diplomacy. A short overview is included in the second part of this Operation Z situation report: http://thesaker.is/sitrep-operation-z-collapses-and-progress/
All of the various transcripts can be read at the MFA site: https://www.mid.ru/en/
Short comments and summaries can be found on the MFA Telegram Channel: https://t.me/MFARussia

---

---

Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s statement and answers to the questions during a meeting with permanent representatives of the member countries of the African Union and the diplomatic corps, Addis Ababa, July 27, 2022

Your Excellencies,

Ladies and gentlemen,

Representatives of the media,

Thank you very much for coming here at our invitation. I believed that being in Addis Ababa, it is absolutely important to meet with the African Union members, like I did during all my previous visits. We could not do this at the headquarters for, as far as I understand, scheduling reasons. And I’m glad that you’ve accepted our invitation to come here to the Russian Embassy to discuss issues which are on the top of international agenda.

Many of our Western colleagues try to send the message that the key, if not the only, problem in international relations is the situation around Ukraine. I tend to disagree with such an assertion and during my visit here and  in my previous encounters with my foreign colleagues, I sense a broad understanding that the issue is much more complex and complicated.

What we witness now, especially as the West launches an unprecedented campaign of sanctions, accusations, threats, vis-à-vis Russia and anybody who dares to support Russia or even not to condemn Russia. This campaign indicates that we are living through a very important historical period, a period where we will all be deciding what kind of universe we are going to have and to leave for our children and grandchildren. The universe which is based on the United Nations Charter, which says that the United Nations is founded on the principle of sovereign equality of states, or we will have the world where the right of force, the right of the strongest dominates.

Actually, what it is all about can be described on the following example. Is it our choice to have the world where we have the so-called collective West, totally subordinated to the United States and feeling free, feeling that it has the right to decide when and how to promote its own interests without following the international law, without any respect to the sovereign equality of states?

When our American colleagues felt in the past that there was a threat to their interests, tens of thousands kilometers from the American coast, be it Yugoslavia in 1999, be it Iraq in 2003, be it Libya in 2011, and many other occasions, without any hesitation, without explaining anything to anybody, very often on false pretexts, they just started military operations levelling cities, killing hundreds of thousands of civilians, like it happened in Iraq in the city of Mosul which was literally levelled. The same happened to Raqqa in Syria, where dozens and hundreds of corpses have been lying for weeks unattended and I don’t recall the progressive civilized community raising any big noise about that situation.

When the Russian Federation, not just overnight, but for the last ten long years has been drawing the attention of the United States and its allies to the unacceptable policy which they have been promoting on Ukraine, building Ukraine as a stronghold to contain Russia, pumping more and more modern arms in Ukraine, planning to build naval and military bases in that country and encouraging in all possible ways Russophobic policies of its leaders; when in 2014 we categorically protested to the West that in spite of its guarantees, the opposition in Ukraine staged a bloody coup and when they came to power, the first thing they did was to demand to cancel the status of the Russian language which has been the historical language of Ukraine from the very beginning. They also demanded the Russians to get out of Crimea. They sent armed groups to storm the Parliament of Crimea and then the eastern part of Ukraine protested against the coup.

The putchists called them separatists, terrorists and started a full-fledged military operation against them. And the West as I’ve said, which had guaranteed only a few days before that – guaranteed a peace deal between the former president and the opposition, the deal which provided for creation of a government of national unity and early elections, – this deal was disrupted overnight and the opposition bragged that they created the government of the winners.

See the difference: the government of national unity and the government of the winners. This was an invitation for the civil war because the opposition called part of its own citizens “losers” while the opposition became “winners”.

So when this all started we managed, together with some other countries, to stop it in February 2015 – Minsk Agreements were signed – keeping Ukraine one-piece.

The eastern territories of Ukraine that originally after the coup declared independence were persuaded not to insist on independence and to agree to stay inside Ukraine by these Minsk Agreements, provided they are given a special status. First of all, the right to use the Russian language.

This was endorsed by the Security Council and this was systemically and totally ignored and sabotaged by the Kiev regime with the encouragement of the West.

There was no direct dialogue between Kiev and those territories in spite of the fact that this was directly demanded from the Ukrainian regime by the Security Council.

And few weeks ago the former President of Ukraine P.Poroshenko who signed the Minsk Agreements, proudly stated to the media that “When I was signing it, I never intended to implement it. We just needed more time to get more weapons from the West in order to enable us to resolve the problem of Ukrainian East by the use of force.” Very honestly.

But this is totally neglected by the West. So we have been knocking on the door of our Western colleagues at least since 2013, telling them that this is absolutely a red line when you create a direct threat to the Russian Federation just on our borders. When you create a Russophobic state, which during all these years, managed to pass series of laws, prohibiting – physically, literally, – the use of Russian language in education, in culture, in media, and even in day-to-day life.

And at the same time, legislation was passed to legalize neo-Nazi theories and practices. Neo-Nazi battalions with swastikas and insignias of Waffen-SS, have been mushrooming in Ukraine and becoming the cornerstone of the Ukrainian Army.

It’s a very radicalized country. They glorify the collaborators of Hitler condemned by the Nuremberg Tribunal and all this is being done with silent encouragement by the United States and the European Union. And the process which I’ve described was accompanied by the Western attempts, not attempts – policy – to pull Ukraine into NATO.

Dozens of military exercises of NATO with Ukraine were held on Ukrainian territory with an obvious anti-Russian dimension. The efforts of Russia during all these years – it was not just, you know, we say today that this is a threat and excuse us, but we need to remove this threat. It has been happening for at least ten years.

When we’ve told our Western colleagues, “Guys, why are you pulling Ukraine to NATO? You know that this is a hostile organization vis-a-vis Russia, they were telling us, ‘Don’t worry, it will not be detrimental to your security.’”

Russia, as any other self-respectful country has the right to determine itself what is good for its security and what is not. In that case, NATO members led by the United States, opted to decide for us what is good for the Russian Federation.

We reminded them that many years ago in 2010, they all signed up a declaration saying that the Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe will be based on the principle of equal and indivisible security, which means that any country can choose alliances, but no country has the right in choosing alliances to increase its security at the expense of the security of other countries. And that no single organization in Europe can pretend to dominate the security space.

NATO is doing exactly this. And NATO, of course, is strengthening the security of its own at the expense of the security of the Russian Federation, because the borders of NATO have been moved just to the borders of Russia.

So we told them, “Guys, political commitments to which your presidents and prime ministers put the signatures don’t work. Let’s make this principle that the security is indivisible and must be equal for all, let’s make it legally binding.”

And we suggested to them respective treaties several times. First, back in 2009 and the last attempt was in December of 2021. And they told us, “Look gentlemen, first there would be no legally binding security guarantees except for NATO members. And second, as regards Ukraine, the relations between NATO and Ukraine are none of your business.” And that was the end of it.

And parallel with this absolute rejection of constructive efforts we have been undertaking for many, many years, parallel to this the Ukrainians, in violation of the Minsk Agreements, started to accumulate huge military force on the line of contact with the eastern part of the country where the two republics have been under siege, basically. They intensified radically the shelling and bombing of those territories.

When we understood that there would be no agreement on security guarantees in Europe which would be equal, when we understood that there would be no implementation of the Minsk Agreements because the Ukrainian leadership publicly renounced this, and when we understood that the only way to save the people in the east of Ukraine was to recognize these two republics, we did so.

We signed the Treaty on Mutual Assistance with them and at their request, we are now exercising a special military operation aimed at saving lives of the citizens of the Donbass and removing any possibility for Ukrainian territory to be used to threaten the security of the Russian Federation.

I am sure that you have been following the events. I know that the Western media presents the situation in a totally distorted manner. If only to mention the so-called food crisis, as if nothing was of concern before February this year.

If you read the reports of the World Food Programme and the Food and Agriculture Organization, you will refresh your memory and establish the fact that the problems in the world food market started at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, when in an attempt to fight this virus and the pandemic consequences the US, the EU and Japan have made an emission for eight trillion dollars’ worth without any economic substantiation, and they use this empty money to buy food and all other goods which they believe would be necessary in case pandemic takes long and there will be closure of countries.

Then there were, of course, increases, long ago, of the price of fertilizers because of the reckless policy of the Western countries on the so-called Green Transition, because the energy supplies, the classical energy resources were more or less discriminated and all this has brought the price of fertilizers high, which of course affected the price of food, and so on and so forth. And then there were not very conducive climate conditions for a couple of years.

And yes, the situation in Ukraine did affect, additionally, negatively affected food markets. But not because of the Russian special operation, rather due to the absolutely inadequate reaction of the West, which announced sanctions, undermining the availability of the food on the markets.

When we explain this to them, they say, “Food and fertilizers are not covered by sanctions”. Yes, but you know, half-truth is worse than a lie. And the truth is that the list of sanctions does not contain an item saying “food”, but what it does contain is prohibition for the Russian ships to call to the ports in the Mediterranean, prohibition for the foreign ships to call on the Russian ports, to pick up food and other cargo, prohibition to insure the Russian ships, because of which insurance prices quadrupled overnight. And of course, prohibition for the main Russian bank, Russian Agricultural Bank, which has always served the payments for Russian food exports – it was listed in the European Union sanctions.

So the latest attempt by our Turkish friends and the Secretary General of the United Nations resulted in a deal between Russia and the United Nations, whereby Secretary General Guterres committed himself to press the Western countries to lift those restrictions, which I just quoted. We’ll see whether he can succeed.

And the same deal as you know, provided for Ukraine an obligation to demine its coastal line for the ships which have been locked there, I think 70 ships from 16 countries since February, to allow them out of the Ukrainian territorial waters, after which Turkish and Russian fleet will ensure their safe travel to the straits and then to the Mediterranean.

So those were the agreements, which could have been announced long, long ago, if not for the Western stubbornness in insisting that they are always right, and all those who don’t agree with them, of course, are always wrong.

A similar situation is taking place with the energy markets. Many years ago, before February this year, the West started discriminating Russian energy projects. First, the project called Nord Stream 1 was limited by 50% of its capacity for no good reason at all. Europe deprived itself of 50% of Russian cheap, accessible gas.

Then Nord Stream 2 was blocked by absolutely illegal action when the legal committee of the European Union ruled that the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline was built and financed and invested, fully aligned with the existing European norms.

But after that, the European Commission changed the rules retrospectively and applied the new rules to the investment which took place legally several years ago.

So Nord Stream 2 is also not available. Poland, several months ago, stopped taking gas from a direct pipeline from Russia. Ukraine stopped one of the two transit lines through its territory from Russia. And there was some hassle with that turbine which went for maintenance to Canada, then Canada didn’t want to bring it back.

I listed five or six factors which immediately negatively affected gas supplies to Europe volume-wise. And, of course, the less you buy from Russia through a pipeline, which is a price established for long-term, the more expensive prices on the spot.

It reached yesterday, I think, $2,200 for a thousand cubic meters. So the attempts to blame us for everything which goes wrong is an attempt with not very clean purposes and intentions.

What is my point? My point is that it’s a period of history where we will have to choose either to go down the current, which the West tries to move, saying that the world must be run not by international law, but by the rules.

They coined an expression “rules-based world order”. And if you analyze the behavior of our Western colleagues in the international arena, you will understand that these rules differ from case to case. There is no single criteria. There is no single principle, except one. If I want something, you have to obey. If you don’t obey, you would be punished.

This is the picture for the future offered to us by the rules-based world order promoted by the West. Basically, this is the unipolar world where the United States, which subordinated to its own will everybody else in the European Union and allies in Asia… This is the offer. Not even an offer, it is an ultimatum actually.

The alternative to this, and I’m sure that the overwhelming majority of the world countries do not want to live as if the colonial times came back, that the vast majority of the states want to be independent, want to rely on their own tradition, to rely on their own history, to rely on their old friends, don’t want to betray their old friends.

And this is basically evident from the fact that except two or three developing countries, no one else in Africa, Asia or Latin America joined the illegal American and European sanctions.

And back to the United Nations Charter. I believe, when we speak about more just, more democratic world order, we don’t need to invent anything. Once again, I quote the Charter which says that the United Nations is based on the principle of sovereign equality of states.

And to recognize that each state is independent, each state has the right to determine how it wants to live, what kind of economic, social, political system it wants to choose on the basis of the will of its people. And I have no slightest doubt that any normal state wants to be like this. Nobody wants to have enemies. This is also an absolute truth. Neither Russia nor any other country present in this hall – I have no doubt.

But if countries, like we witness now the behavior of the West, if they do want to have enemies, as they publicly declared in their doctrines, in the decisions of the latest NATO summit in Madrid – they do want enemies, they appoint enemies, they appoint the order in which they handle these enemies. Now Russia is the first, China is earmarked as the existential challenge for the long term. And all this manifests in renewed thinking about how the world economy and the world system operates.

If the US and the European Union – under the demand of the US – decided to freeze the Russian reserves – and now they seriously start a legal process to prepare the basis to confiscate the Russian money – who knows… If they become irritated by somebody else tomorrow or the day after, they might do the same.

In other words, the reliance on dollar as the instrument supporting the world economy is not very promising, frankly speaking. And it is not by incident that more and more countries are shifting to using alternative currencies, shifting to use national currencies more and more, and this process will be gaining momentum.

This is not to say that we are suggesting some kind of revolution against the dollar, against the United States – this is to state the obvious: the West created a system which was based on certain principles – free market, fair competition, sanctity of private property, presumption of innocence, and something else. All these principles have been thrown down the drain when they needed to do what they believe is to punish Russia.

And I don’t have the slightest doubt that, if need be, they will not hesitate to do the same in relation to any other country which would irritate them one way or another.

I mentioned China as the next target. It’s a very interesting example of how the Americans consider fair competition in practice. Actually, China developed into the number one world economy – everybody recognizes this – and China did so, China achieved those results, working and acting on the basis of the rules established by the West. The IMF, the World Bank, the World Trade Organization, the rules to settle disputes, competition and the stuff. China accepted those rules in developing its own economy and China defeated the West, economically and trade-wise, investment-wise, on its own turf, on the basis of the rules invented by the West.

And what happened next? Already a couple of years ago, the Secretary of Treasury of the United States and some other officials started saying, “We need to reform the Bretton Woods Institutions, we need to reform the WTO and we need to organize this reform between the US and Europe not to allow anybody else to participate in developing new rules.”

Guys, it is absolutely obvious, how they want this world to be operated. And I believe, as long as it is not too late, we would be ready to talk to our Western friends when they come back to their senses about how they think they should live together with all of us in the future. But this conversation can only be made on full equality, with full respect to the legitimate interests of all of us.

If I took too long of your time, I apologize. And I understand there might be a couple of questions, right?

Question: Your Excellency, Sergey Lavrov, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation,

On behalf of the people of South Sudan, the Government and on my own behalf, I wish to take this opportunity to express my personal gratitude to the Embassy of the Russian Federation in Ethiopia for inviting me and my delegation here.

We are grateful that our two countries, the Russian Federation and the Republic of South Sudan enjoy cordial bilateral relations, dating back to the day of our declaration of independence, where the Russian people and their Government were among those who recognized our statehood on July 9, 2011. Since then Your Excellency, the people and the governments of two countries have stood with the people and the Government of South Sudan in many ways.

The people of South Sudan wish to express their gratitude for your immense support in the UNSC, the Human Rights Council in Geneva and other activities where you supported us. First of all, as you explained, Your Excellency, you outlined your view on sanctions. Now we know what’s really going on.

On the current political situation in my country I would like to inform Your Excellency the Minister that the signed revitalized peace agreement of 2018 is holding despite the challenges that you have mentioned. These include numerous sanctions by Western countries and their allies, and an arms embargo. Other factors of concern are natural disasters, such as heavy rains…

Sergey Lavrov: I apologize, can you pass on this text? Because it would be useful and more polite to the others. Ok? Please, pass it. Thank you!

Just one remark. We are against those sanctions which are intended to punish people. And don’t forget that the initiators of these sanctions against you are exactly the same countries who wanted to create South Sudan out of Sudan.

Question: Thank you very much for giving a very detailed and covering all important aspects in your briefing. A short question: How the hegemony of dollar can be controlled by international community because right now the countries like Pakistan and many developing countries are suffering from huge debt that continues to grow. The problem is getting worse. I would like you to clarify the situation.

Sergey Lavrov: I am not an expert in monetary affairs. What I said was it’s an obvious feeling by many countries that the dollar is not reliable, because the capricious behavior could be aimed at anyone in the future.

I know that you can feel this on yourself, if you compare the situation of 20-30 years ago and now. So, it’s life. It’s life. And nobody wants to go to war because of the dollar and I believe this is crazy.  But people want to have some insurance as regards the reliability of their economic and trade relations with their partners. And there are examples, including the use of national currencies, including barter, including clearing mechanisms. Some might say this is going back to the past instruments of conducting trade. But there would be digital currencies, I don’t have the slightest doubt, which are already being developed in China, for example, in Venezuela, in Iran.

We are thinking about this as well. It’s the beginning of a process. Now we have accumulated the elements of the problem and we know that it must be addressed.

Question: With an approach of winter during which gas importations increase. How does Russia going to export its gas and circumvent the sanctions imposed? 15 African countries import more than 50% of their grain from Russia. The situation also affected the exports from African countries to Russia. How does Russia intend to manage trade relations with Africa?

Sergey Lavrov: I think I addressed both issues in my remarks. I hope you listened to me. Antonio Guterres personally promised to make sure that the US and EU remove any obstacles to the export of Russian grain. If you add your noble voice to his efforts, I think it would be useful.

And on gas prices – I also explained how Europe systemically, during the last almost ten years, was creating barriers on the way of bringing to European countries cheap and accessible Russian gas.

I listed five or six specific decisions which were cutting more and more of Russian exports, vacating the room in Europe for much more expensive LNG from the United States, just like, you know, the US insists that Europe sends all its weapons to Ukraine, vacating the arms market in Europe for the import of American weapons. It’s “nothing personal, it’s business.”

As regards your country (Algeria), the Europeans are now thinking of alternative sources of supply. They have suffocated themselves with their own hands the pipeline routes from Russia. Now they are  looking for alternatives. And I know that the Mediterranean, including Algeria, is one of those sources.

They would be asking you to help, and it’s up to your companies to decide, it’s up to your government to decide.

In our case, according to our experiences that when we had long-term contracts with Europe, these long-term contracts protected our interests. But, a few years ago, Europe started cutting long-term contracts saying, “Let’s shift to the spot market”. And the spot market does not guarantee that you will have a long-term investment justified.

So, what we see now is not a scientific, not a responsible approach to the energy markets – it’s a hectic search for something which can save you this winter, with the green agenda shelved for the time being.

The coal is coming back, polluting the atmosphere – it’s a mess, if you take a look at the energy and environment policy that Europe is promoting. I am sorry to say this. We are not getting any happiness or joy from what Europe is experiencing, but they have been doing this to themselves for quite some time already.

Ladies and gentlemen, I have to apologize because the minister – my colleague from Ethiopia – is   waiting for me for the next event. Once again I want to thank you whole-heartedly for accepting our invitation. I hope it was not a waste of time. I tried to be as frank as I can, and we would be ready to promote dialogue with the African Union.

Unfortunately, we could not meet at the headquarters. And we would be ready for a dialogue on all these and any other issues of interest and of importance with you bilaterally. With all of you we have good relations and channels of communication.

I wish you all the best and keep healthy. Thank you very much.

Shaaban: Syria Adherent to the Unity of the Arab Stance

MAY 16, 2022

Posted by INTERNATIONALIST 360° 

Damascus, SANA

Special Adviser at the Presidency of the Republic, Buthaina Shaaban, stressed the importance of strengthening and developing Syrian-Mauritanian relations and activating the agreements and memoranda of understanding signed between the two brotherly countries.

During her meeting with Chairman of the Syro-Mauritanian Parliamentary Friendship Committee Mustafa Aldah Souhaib and the accompanying delegation and the head and members of the Syro-Mauritanian Brotherhood Committee in the People’s Assembly of Syria earlier today, Dr. Shaaban hailed the honorable Mauritanian popular and official attitude towards the terrorist war that Syria was subject to during the past years despite pressures exerted and temptations presented what gives hope for the revival of Arab Nation.
Shaaban noted that Syria is committed to the Arab identity and adherent to the unity of Arab stance and have been always ready to cooperate with any Arab country or party in order to achieve the joint Arab solidarity.

Dr. Shaaban pointed out that the main goal of the war on Syria is to confiscate its independent decision, which it has known for decades, and to make it subservient to the West, when terrorism failed to undermine the Syrian state and Syrian armies, the of conspiring countries such as Turkey and the US moved to occupy parts of Syrian territory.

In his turn, Aldah Souhaib said that “Syria lives in the conscience of all the Mauritanian people though Mauritania is geographically distant from Syria, the mutual official and popular relations have always been at their best and at all levels”. Noting that all black propaganda campaign could not have change the view and attitude of the Mauritanian people towards the reality of the situation in Syria.

Souhaib and members of the delegation called for reformulating the concept of solidarity, Arab discourse and coordination between Arab countries and direct it to Arab youth to raise their awareness of the dangers that threaten the Arab nation and to unify the Arab attitude.

The head and members of the delegation affirmed that they came to Syria carrying a message of thanks and appreciation from the Mauritanian political, cultural and popular activities to Syria for its steadfastness and victories in the terrorist war waged against it.

For his part, the head of the Syrian-Mauritanian Brotherhood Committee in the People’s Assembly off Syria, Mohamed Bakhit, valued the support of the Mauritanian leadership and people, pointing out to the importance of exchanging parliamentary visits and experiences between the two brotherly countries.

Nisreen Othman / Amer Dawaa