“Electing Saudi Arabia to protect women’s rights is like making an arsonist into the town fire chief”

Saudi Arabia Elected to UN Women’s Rights Commission

Saudi Arabia was elected to the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women.

The addition of the Gulf nation was first flagged by UN Watch, a nongovernmental body that monitors the United Nations. The Commission on the Status of Women’s main mission is to assess the challenges to reaching gender inequality, according to the U.N. website.

The organization’s executive director slammed the election, which occurred in a secret vote during the U.N.’s Economic and Social Council

“Electing Saudi Arabia to protect women’s rights is like making an arsonist into the town fire chief,” Hillel Neuer said. 

Neuer called the election “absurd,” noting that all women in Saudi Arabia “must have a male guardian who makes all critical decisions on her behalf, controlling a woman’s life from her birth until death. Saudi Arabia also bans women from driving cars.”

Saudi Arabia, a top U.S. ally, is also on the U.N. Human Rights Council

America’s Yemen Crisis Is Bigger than Just Yemen

 

America's Yemen Crisis Is Bigger than Just Yemen

EDITOR’S CHOICE | 22.04.2017

America’s Yemen Crisis Is Bigger than Just Yemen

Broken alliances and competing political factions are emperiling America’s goals

Mohamed ZEESHAN

Long before the Trump administration launched missiles at an Assad regime air base in Syria and dropped the world’s most lethal nonnuclear bomb in Afghanistan, it undertook its first military offensive in Yemen. In late January, just two weeks into his term, President Trump ordered a military raid on suspected Al Qaeda targets in that country.

That operation then became infamous for the death of a Navy SEAL, but it has been followed more recently by increased U.S. military attacks on terrorists holed up in Yemen. But whether or not Washington’s military involvement is part of a larger policy in Yemen, America needs to deal with an increasingly difficult conflict of interests in that country, which threatens to make the war against terrorist groups far harder.

But Hadi’s stronghold on the country was short-lived. In September 2014, the new resident was forced to flee to the south, after his presidential palace and the capital city of Sanaa were captured by Shiite rebels called the Houthis. Hadi attempted to move his capital city to the southern port city of Aden, but in early 2015, he fled to Riyadh in exile, where he still resides despite the odd flying visit to Aden.

Meanwhile, Saleh has begun to exert increased influence over the Houthi establishment in Sanaa, leaving his imprints on its leadership and filling in positions in its rebel government with his own people. Yet, today, Yemen still lacks an effective centralised authority. Neither the rebels in Sanaa, nor Hadi’s government in Aden, seems to have the capacity to control the entire country.

The underlying cause of this complicated civil war could be traced back to the age-old divisions between the North and the South. While Yemen was reunited in 1990, the resource-rich South always held resentment towards what it saw as the unfair exploitation of its economy by the Saleh government in the North, where the capital Sanaa is located. Saleh’s crackdown on protesters in the South strengthened calls for secession from leaders in the region.

When Saleh was deposed in 2012, the national dialogue process that followed had promised to heal these old wounds. Hadi was himself from the South, and therefore raised hopes among fellow southerners. Yet, despite protracted negotiations, the talks could not produce an agreement on the political status of the South: several popular southern leaders boycotted the negotiations and campaigned for secession, and while the dialogue finally agreed on a federal structure with greater autonomy for the South, it was unable to work out the details of the devolution of power.

The breakdown of the transition government—and the takeover of Sanaa by rebels, increasingly controlled by Saleh—only tested the South’s patience further. Now, with Hadi away in Riyadh, reports suggest that secessionist leaders have once again come to dominate the South’s political landscape, with no compromise in sight. Even in Aden today, the transition agreement seems all but dead, with the local governor and police chief calling the shots, as the Houthis make inroads. As one southerner was quoted as saying, “Hadi has already brought the Houthis to Aden, and then brought al-Qaeda, so we are not stupid to trust him anymore.”

In the midst of all this, the international community is struggling to salvage the irreparably crippled Hadi government—despite most public opinion across the country now seeming to be against him. Saudi forces have been bombing rebel holdings in the North, causing widespread collateral damage but doing nothing to strengthen the transitional government. United Nations resolutions have placed embargoes on the Houthi rebels, and repeatedly called for the complete implementation of the transition agreement that put Hadi in charge.

But the Iranians also seem determined not to let the Saudi-sponsored agreement see the light of day. In recent months, they have stepped up weapons support to the Houthi rebels, turning the Yemeni battlefield into the latest theater in the Middle East’s own Cold War. With Hadi away in exile and his government being overwhelmed by secessionists in Aden, it seems inconceivable at this point that the Iranians would lose this battle to the Saudis.

With all this chaos in the background, America’s war against Al Qaeda and ISIS is under threat. On the one hand, Washington wants to preserve its alliance with the Gulf states, who are fighting to save their irretrievably lost transition agreement. As a former U.S. Defense Department official pointed out in the Atlantic recently, when Saudi Arabia’s Prince Mohammed visited the United States last month, the red carpet was well and truly rolled out.

Yet, on the other hand, Washington can’t afford to let Yemen’s chaos prolong indefinitely, lest ISIS militants cash in on the instability and lawlessness, just as they lose territory in Syria. In August of last year, a UN report said that both Al Qaeda and ISIS have already begun to gain a foothold in the southern and eastern parts of the country.

The challenge for Trump would be in reconciling his Saudi alliance with the fact that the Saudi-backed Hadi government is no longer in a position to rule. Backing the aimless Saudi operation—whether verbally or militarily—will only make Iranian interests in the country more deeply entrenched, and the conflict unending. If Trump wants to get rid of militants in Yemen, he’s going to have to find a way to bring the Middle East’s Cold War rivals to agree on a government.

 

Mohamed Zeeshan is a scholar of international affairs at Columbia University and online editor of the Columbia Journal of International Affairs. He has written for The Diplomat, India Today and HuffPost India.

Twitter hashtag: #NoMoreJewishWars

Well, Donald Trump finally went and did it. He launched a missile attack on a Syrian airbase. Conflicting reports have been coming out on the precise number of casualties. A report at SANA says nine civilians, including four children, were killed, but makes no mention of deaths or injuries among Syrian soldiers.

A report at RT, however, mentions that according to the governor of Homs province, three soldiers were also killed. The Russian Defense Ministry has also chimed in, noting that the combat efficiency of the strike seems to have been “quite poor,” with only 23 out of 59 missiles reaching their target.

But there may be more to come, at least according to US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley.

“The United States took a very measured step last night. We are prepared to do more, but we hope that will not be necessary,” Haley said.

The “logic” (if we can use that word) being employed by the Trump administration is, in effect: kill the soldiers who are fighting the terrorists. And somehow by doing that we will defeat terrorism and make America great again.

The mainstream media, as per usual, are happily stoking the furnace. In an article published yesterday, Time Magazine assures us that Assad “has been the main villain in Syria for a long, long time,” while the Associated Press, in piece published today, seems to be trying to build a case for Russian involvement in the attack. The story is premised upon nothing more than comments from unnamed “U.S. military officials,” who allege that a drone was “seen hovering” over the site at the time of the alleged chemical attack. The drone, they claim, belonged to “either Russia or Syria.”

But there are indications that people may finally be waking up. In the course of reading about all this today, I came across a hashtag set up on Twitter entitled #NoMoreJewishWars . Here are several tweets I found there, posted over the past 24 hours or so. What I find especially interesting about it is that there seem to be a number of military people posting stuff there.

This is the litmus test of trump. If he goes through with this nobody in this country should stand by him.

This is the man who the Zionists and Neocons in the media want us to believe is evil.

Never again. Never again will we allow our government to lie us into war.

No Syrian ever told me I was “privileged” because I was born into a European descended family. Only jews do that.

Rabbis Urge President Trump To “Act Decisively” In http://forward.com/scribe/368405/rabbis-urge-president-trump-to-act-decisively-in-syria/ 

Photo published for Rabbis Call For “Targeted Airstrikes On Assad Regime”

Rabbis Call For “Targeted Airstrikes On Assad Regime”

Rabbis urge President Trump to act decisively in Syria; call for targeted airstrikes on Assad regime.

forward.com

Friendly reminder that the US entered WWI on exactly this date 100 years ago. A whole century of Jewish-led wars.

Not one patriotic American is for bombing the Syrian army. Only hostile alien interloper jews want war.

how long this going to go on for? America first doesnt mean intervene in a Syrian civil war so Israel can annex the land

Bahrain Crackdown: Regime Files Lawsuit to Dissolve Political Party

Local Editor

The apartheid Al Khalifa regime’s government filed a lawsuit Monday to dissolve a political party, the second-such organization it had targeted in the last year as part of an intense crackdown on opposition in the island nation.

Waad political party

The country’s so-called Justice, Islamic Affairs and Endowments Ministry accused Waad of “supporting terrorism,” according to a statement. The announcement, coming just a day after Bahrain’s parliament approved a constitutional amendment allowing military tribunals to try civilians, recalled the clampdown that followed the nation’s 2011 Arab Spring protests.

The party could not be immediately reached for comment, but it long had been the target of authorities. One Waad politician previously was arrested and briefly faced charges for speaking to The Associated Press in November during a visit by Britain’s Prince Charles and his wife Camilla.

Bahrain had already dissolved the country’s largest Shiite opposition group, al-Wefaq, and doubled a prison sentence for its secretary-general, Sheikh Ali Salman.

Regime forces, with help from Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, crushed the 2011 uprising by opposition who sought political reform.

Since the beginning of a government crackdown in April, activists had been imprisoned or forced into exile. Bahrain’s main Shiite opposition group had been dismantled. Independent news gathering on the island also had grown more difficult.

Bahrain later made reforms following a regime-sponsored investigation into the 2011 demonstrations and the crackdown following it, but several of them had been overturned in recent weeks. Along with allowing military tribunals, the kingdom restored the power of its feared domestic spy service to make some arrests.

In January, Bahrain executed three men charged of a deadly bomb attack on police. Activists said that testimony used against the condemned men was obtained through torture.

Source: News Agencies, Edited by website team

06-03-2017 | 15:15

Six Years Ago: The US-NATO-Israel Sponsored Al Qaeda Insurgency in Syria. Who Was Behind The 2011 “Protest Movement”?

Global Research, March 06, 2017
Global Research 3 May 2011
SYRIA: Who is Behind The Protest Movement? Fabricating a Pretext for a US-NATO "Humanitarian Intervention"

Author’s note

The war on Syria started six  years ago in Daraa on the 17th of March 2011.

The following article first published in May 2011 examines the inception of the jihadist terrorist insurgency.

It recounts the events of March 17-18, 2011 in Daraa, a small border town with Jordan. 

Media reports have finally acknowledged that the so-called “protest movement” in Syria was instigated by Washington. This was known and documented from the very inception of the Syrian crisis in March 2011.

It was not a protest movement, it was an armed insurgency integrated by US-Israeli and allied supported “jihadist” death squads? 

From Day One, the Islamist “freedom fighters” were supported, trained and equipped by NATO and Turkey’s High Command. According to Israeli intelligence sources (Debka, August14, 2011): 

NATO headquarters in Brussels and the Turkish high command are meanwhile drawing up plans for their first military step in Syria, which is to arm the rebels with weapons for combating the tanks and helicopters spearheading the Assad regime’s crackdown on dissent. … NATO strategists are thinking more in terms of pouring large quantities of anti-tank and anti-air rockets, mortars and heavy machine guns into the protest centers for beating back the government armored forces. (DEBKAfile, NATO to give rebels anti-tank weapons, August 14, 2011) 

This initiative, which was also supported by Saudi Arabia and Qatar, involved a process of organized recruitment of thousands of jihadist “freedom fighters”, reminiscent of  the enlistment of  Mujahideen to wage the CIA’s jihad (holy war) in the heyday of the Soviet-Afghan war: 

Also discussed in Brussels and Ankara, our sources report, is a campaign to enlist thousands of Muslim volunteers in Middle East countries and the Muslim world to fight alongside the Syrian rebels. The Turkish army would house these volunteers, train them and secure their passage into Syria. (Ibid, emphasis added)

These mercenaries were subsequently integrated into US and allied sponsored terrorist organizations including Al Nusrah and ISIS. 

The Daraa “protest movement” on March 17-18 had all the appearances of a staged event involving covert support to Islamic terrorists by Mossad and/or Western intelligence.

Government sources pointed to the role of radical Salafist groups (supported by Israel).

In chorus, the Western media described the events in Daraa as a protest movement against Bashar Al Assad.

In a bitter irony, the deaths of policemen were higher than those of “demonstrators”.

In Daraa, roof top snipers were targeting both police and demonstrators.

Reading between the lines of Israeli and Lebanese news reports (which acknowledge the police deaths) a clearer picture of what happened in Daraa on March 17-18 had emerged. The Israel National News Report (which can not be accused of being biased in favor of Bashar al Assad) confirmed that:

“Seven police officers and at least four demonstrators in Syria have been killed in continuing violent clashes that erupted in the southern town of Daraa last Thursday. … and the Baath Party Headquarters and courthouse were torched, in renewed violence on Sunday. (Gavriel Queenann, Syria: Seven Police Killed, Buildings Torched in Protests, Israel National News, Arutz Sheva, March 21, 2011, emphasis added)

The Lebanese news report also acknowledged the killings of seven policemen in Daraa.

[They were killed] “during clashes between the security forces and protesters… They got killed trying to drive away protesters during demonstration in Dara’a”

The Lebanese Ya Libnan report quoting Al Jazeera also acknowledged that protesters had “burned the headquarters of the Baath Party and the court house in Dara’a” (emphasis added)

These news reports of the events in Daraa confirmed that from the very outset this was not a “peaceful protest” as claimed by the Western media.

Moreover, from an assessment of the initial casualty figures (Israel News), there were more policemen than “demonstrators” who were killed.

This is significant because it suggests that the police force may have initially been outnumbered by a well organized armed gang of professional killers.

What was clear from these initial reports is that many of the demonstrators were not demonstrators but terrorists involved in premeditated acts of killing and arson.

The title of the Israeli news report summarized what happened: Syria: Seven Police Killed, Buildings Torched in Protest

The US-NATO-Israel agenda consisted in supporting an Al Qaeda affiliated insurgency integrated by death squads and professional snipers. President Bashar al Assad is then to be blamed for killing his own people. 

Does it Sound familiar? 

The same “false flag” strategy of killing innocent civilians was used during the Ukraine Maidan protest movement.  On February 20th, 2014, professional snipers were shooting at both demonstrators and policemen with a view to accusing president Viktor Yanukovych of “mass murder.”

It was subsequently revealed that these snipers were controlled by the opponents of president Yanukovych, who are now part of the coalition government. 

The “humanitarian mandate” of the US and its allies is sustained by diabolical “false flag” attacks which consist in killing civilians with a view to breaking the legitimacy of governments which refuse to abide by the diktats of Washington and its allies.

Michel Chossudovsky, March 6 2016


SYRIA: Who is Behind The Protest Movement? Fabricating a Pretext for a US-NATO “Humanitarian Intervention”

by Michel Chossudovsky

Global Research, May 3, 2011

There is evidence of gross media manipulation and falsification from the outset of the protest movement in southern Syria on March 17th [2011].

The Western media has presented the events in Syria as part of the broader Arab pro-democracy protest movement, spreading spontaneously from Tunisia, to Egypt, and from Libya to Syria.

Media coverage has focussed on the Syrian police and armed forces, which are accused of indiscriminately shooting and killing unarmed “pro-democracy” demonstrators. While these police shootings did indeed occur, what the media failed to mention is that among the demonstrators there were armed gunmen as well as snipers who were shooting at both the security forces and the protesters.

The death figures presented in the reports are often unsubstantiated. Many of the reports are “according to witnesses”. The images and video footages aired on Al Jazeera and CNN do not always correspond to the events which are being covered by the news reports.

Alawite Map

There is certainly cause for social unrest and mass protest in Syria: unemployment has increased in recent year, social conditions have deteriorated, particularly since the adoption in 2006 of sweeping economic reforms under IMF guidance. The IMF’s “economic medicine” includes austerity measures, a freeze on wages, the deregulation of the financial system, trade reform and privatization.

(See IMF  Syrian Arab Republic — IMF Article IV Consultation Mission’s Concluding Statement, http://www.imf.org/external/np/ms/2006/051406.htm, 2006)

With a government dominated by the minority Alawite (an offshoot of Shia Islam), Syria is no “model society” with regard to civil rights and freedom of expression. It nonetheless constitutes the only (remaining) independent secular state in the Arab world. Its populist, anti-Imperialist and secular base is inherited from the dominant Baath party, which integrates Muslims, Christians and Druze.

Moreover, in contrast to Egypt and Tunisia, in Syria there is considerable popular support for President Bashar Al Assad. The large rally in Damascus on March 29, “with tens of thousands of supporters” (Reuters) of President Al Assad is barely mentioned. Yet in an unusual twist, the images and video footage of several pro-government events were used by the Western media to convince international public opinion that the President was being confronted by mass anti-government rallies.

Tens of thousands of Syrians gather for a pro-government rally at the central
bank square in Damascus March 29, 2011. (Reuters Photo)

Syrians display a giant national flag with a picture of Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad during a
pro-government rally at the central bank square in Damascus March 29, 2011. (Reuters Photo)

The “Epicenter” of the Protest Movement. Daraa: A Small Border Town in southern Syria

What is the nature of the protest movement? From what sectors of Syrian society does it emanate? What triggered the violence?

What is the cause of the deaths?

The existence of an organized insurrection composed of armed gangs involved in acts of killing and arson has been dismissed by the Western media, despite evidence to the contrary.

The demonstrations  did not start in Damascus, the nation’s capital. At the outset, the protests were not integrated by a mass movement of citizens in Syria’s capital.

The demonstrations started in Daraa, a small border town of 75,000 inhabitants, on the Syrian Jordanian border, rather than in Damascus or Aleppo, where the mainstay of organized political opposition and social movements are located. (Daraa is a small border town comparable e.g. to Plattsburgh, NY on the US-Canadian border).

The Associated Press report (quoting unnamed “witnesses” and “activists”) describes the early protests in Daraa as follows:

The violence in Daraa, a city of about 300,000 near the border with Jordan, was fast becoming a major challenge for President Bashar Assad, …. Syrian police launched a relentless assault Wednesday on a neighborhood sheltering anti-government protesters [Daraa], fatally shooting at least 15 in an operation that began before dawn, witnesses said.

At least six were killed in the early morning attack on the al-Omari mosque in the southern agricultural city of Daraa, where protesters have taken to the streets in calls for reforms and political freedoms, witnesses said. An activist in contact with people in Daraa said police shot another three people protesting in its Roman-era city center after dusk. Six more bodies were found later in the day, the activist said.

As the casualties mounted, people from the nearby villages of Inkhil, Jasim, Khirbet Ghazaleh and al-Harrah tried to march on Daraa Wednesday night but security forces opened fire as they approached, the activist said. It was not immediately clear if there were more deaths or injuries. (AP, March 23, 2011, emphasis added)

The AP report inflates the numbers: Daraa is presented as a city of 300,000 when in fact its population is 75,000;  “protesters gathered by the thousands”, “casualties mounted”.

The report is silent on the death of policemen which in the West invariably makes the front page of the tabloids.

The deaths of the policemen are important in assessing what actually happened. When there are police casualties, this means that there is an exchange of gunfire between opposing sides, between policemen and “demonstrators”.

Who are these “demonstrators” including roof top snipers who were targeting the police.

Israeli and Lebanese news reports (which acknowledge the police deaths) provide a clearer picture of what happened in Daraa on March 17-18. The Israel National News Report (which cannot be accused of being biased in favor of Damascus) reviews these same events as follows:

Seven police officers and at least four demonstrators in Syria have been killed in continuing violent clashes that erupted in the southern town of Daraa last Thursday.

…. On Friday police opened fire on armed protesters killing four and injuring as many as 100 others. According to one witness, who spoke to the press on condition of anonymity, “They used live ammunition immediately — no tear gas or anything else.”

…. In an uncharacteristic gesture intended to ease tensions the government offered to release the detained students, but seven police officers were killed, and the Baath Party Headquarters and courthouse were torched, in renewed violence on Sunday. (Gavriel Queenann, Syria: Seven Police Killed, Buildings Torched in Protests, Israel National News, Arutz Sheva, March 21, 2011, emphasis added)

The Lebanese news report, quoting various sources, also acknowledges the killings of seven policemen in Daraa: They were killed  “during clashes between the security forces and protesters… They got killed trying to drive away protesters during demonstration in Dara’a” 

The Lebanese Ya Libnan report quoting Al Jazeera also acknowledged that protesters had “burned the headquarters of the Baath Party and the court house in Dara’a”  (emphasis added)

These news reports of the events in Daraa confirm the following:

1. This was not a “peaceful protest” as claimed by the Western media. Several of the “demonstrators” had fire arms and were using them against the police:  “The police opened fire on armed protesters killing four”.

2. From the initial casualty figures (Israel News), there were more policemen than demonstrators who were killed:  7 policemen killed versus 4 demonstrators. This is significant because it suggests that the police force might have been initially outnumbered by a well organized armed gang. According to Syrian media sources, there were also snipers on rooftops which were shooting at both the police and the protesters.

What is clear from these initial reports is that many of the demonstrators were not demonstrators but terrorists involved in premeditated acts of killing and arson. The title of the Israeli news report summarizes what happened:  Syria: Seven Police Killed, Buildings Torched in Protests.  The title suggests that the “demonstrators” rather than the police had the upper hand.

The Daraa “protest movement” on March 18 had all the appearances of a staged event involving, in all likelihood, covert support to Islamic terrorists by Mossad and/or Western intelligence. Government sources point to the role of radical Salafist groups (supported by Israel)

Other reports have pointed to the role of Saudi Arabia in financing the protest movement.

What has unfolded in Daraa in the weeks following the initial violent clashes on 17-18 March, is the confrontation between the police and the armed forces on the one hand and armed units of terrorists and snipers on the other which had infiltrated the protest movement.

Reports suggest that these terrorists are integrated by Islamists. There is no concrete evidence as to which Islamic organizations are behind the terrorists and the government has not released corroborating information as to who these groups are.

Both the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood (whose leadership is in exile in the UK) and the banned Hizb ut-Tahrir (the Party of Liberation), among others have paid lip service to the protest movement. Hizb ut Tahir (led in the 1980s by Syrian born Omar Bakri Muhammad) tends to “dominate the British Islamist scene” according to Foreign Affairs. Hizb ut Tahir is also considered to be of strategic importance to Britain’s Secret Service MI6. in the pursuit of Anglo-American interests in the Middle East and Central Asia. (Is Hizb-ut-Tahrir another project of British MI6? | State of Pakistan).

Supporters and members of Islamist party ''Hizb Ut-Tahrir'' wave their party's flags and chant slogans during a protest in Tripoli, northern Lebanon, to express solidarity with Syria's protesters, April 22, 2011. REUTERS/ Mohamed Azakir

Hizb ut-Tahrir anti-Assad rally in Tripoli, Lebanon (40 km from Syrian border), April 22, 2011. Hizb ut-Tahrir is banned in Syria

Syria is a secular Arab country, a society of religious tolerance, where Muslims and Christians have for several centuries lived in peace. Hizb ut-Tahrir (the Party of Liberation) is a radical political movement committed to the creation of an Islamic caliphate. In Syria, its avowed objective is to destabilize the secular state.

Since the Soviet-Afghan war, Western intelligence agencies as well as Israel’s Mossad have consistently used various Islamic terrorist organizations as “intelligence assets”. Both Washington and its indefectible British ally have provided covert support to “Islamic terrorists” in Afghanistan, Bosnia, Kosovo and Libya, etc. as a means to triggering ethnic strife, sectarian violence and political instability.

The staged protest movement in Syria is modelled on Libya. The insurrection in Eastern Libya is integrated by the Libya Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) which is supported by MI6 and the CIA. The ultimate objective of the Syria protest movement, through media lies and fabrications, is to create divisions within Syrian society as well as justify an eventual “humanitarian intervention”.

Armed Insurrection in Syria

An armed insurrection integrated by Islamists and supported covertly by Western intelligence is central to an understanding of what is occurring on the ground.

The existence of an armed insurrection is not mentioned by the Western media. If it were to be acknowledged and analysed, our understanding of unfolding events would be entirely different.

What is mentioned profusely is that the armed forces and the police are involved in the indiscriminate killing of protesters.

The deployment of the armed forces including tanks in Daraa is directed against an organized armed insurrection, which has been active in the border city since March 17-18.

Casualties are being reported which also include the death of policemen and soldiers.

In a bitter irony, the Western media acknowledges the police/soldier deaths while denying the existence of an armed insurrection.

The key question is how does the media explain these deaths of soldiers and police?

Without evidence, the reports suggest authoritatively that the police is shooting at the soldiers and vice versa the soldiers are shooting on the police. In a April 29 Al Jazeera report, Daraa is described as “a city under siege”.

“Tanks and troops control all roads in and out. Inside the city, shops are shuttered and nobody dare walk the once bustling market streets, today transformed into the kill zone of rooftop snipers.

Unable to crush the people who first dared rise up against him – neither with the secret police,  paid thugs or the special forces of his brother’s military division – President Bashar al-Assad has sent thousands of Syrian soldiers and their heavy weaponry into Deraa for an operation the regime wants nobody in the world to see.

Though almost all communication channels with Deraa have been cut, including the Jordanian mobile service that reaches into the city from just across the border, Al Jazeera has gathered firsthand accounts of life inside the city from residents who just left or from eyewitnesses inside who were able to get outside the blackout area.

The picture that emerges is of a dark and deadly security arena, one driven by the actions of the secret police and their rooftop snipers, in which soldiers and protestors alike are being killed or wounded, in which cracks are emerging in the military itself, and in which is created the very chaos which the regime uses to justify its escalating crackdown. (Daraa, a City under Siege, IPS / Al Jazeera, April 29, 2011)

The Al Jazeera report borders on the absurd. Read carefully.

“Tanks and troops control all roads in and out”,  “thousands of Syrian soldiers and their heavy weaponry into Daraa”

This situation has prevailed for several weeks. This means that bona fide protesters who are not already inside Daraa cannot enter Daraa.

People who live in the city are in their homes: “nobody dares walk … the streets”. If nobody dares walk the streets where are the protesters?

Who is in the streets? According to Al Jazeera, the protesters are in the streets together with the soldiers, and both the protesters and the soldiers are being shot at by “plain clothes secret police”, by “paid thugs” and government sponsored snipers.

The impression conveyed in the report is that these casualties are attributed to infighting between the police and the military.

But the report also says that the soldiers (in the “thousands”) control all roads in and out of the city, but they are being shot upon by the plain clothed secret police.

The purpose of this web of media deceit, namely outright fabrications  –where soldiers are being killed by police and  “government snipers”– is to deny the existence of armed terrorist groups. The later are integrated by snipers and “plain clothed terrorists” who are shooting at the police, the Syrian armed forces and local residents.

These are not spontaneous acts of terror; they are carefully planned and coordinated attacks. In recent developments, according to a Xinhua report (April 30, 2011), armed “terrorist groups” “attacked the housing areas for servicemen” in Daraa province, “killing a sergeant and wounding two”.

While the government bears heavy responsibility for its mishandling of the military-police operation, including the deaths of civilians, the reports confirm that the armed terrorist groups had also opened fire on protesters and local residents. The casualties are then blamed on the armed forces and the police and the Bashar Al Assad government is portrayed by “the international community” as having ordered countless atrocities.

The fact of the matter is that foreign journalists are banned from reporting inside Syria, to the extent that much of the information including the number of casualties is obtained from the unverified accounts of “witnesses”.

It is in the interest of the US-NATO alliance to portray the events in Syria as a peaceful protest movement which is being brutally repressed by a “dictatorial regime”.

The Syrian government may be autocratic. It is certainly not a model of democracy but neither is the US administration, which is characterized by rampant corruption, the derogation of civil liberties under the Patriot legislation, the legalisation of torture, not to mention its “bloodless” “humanitarian wars”:

“The U.S. and its NATO allies have, in addition to U.S. Sixth Fleet and NATO Active Endeavor military assets permanently deployed in the Mediterranean, warplanes, warships and submarines engaged in the assault against Libya that can be used against Syria at a moment’s notice.

On April 27 Russia and China evidently prevented the U.S. and its NATO allies from pushing through an equivalent of Resolution 1973 against Syria in the Security Council, with Russian deputy ambassador to the UN Alexander Pankin stating that the current situation in Syria “does not present a threat to international peace and security.” Syria is Russia’s last true partner in the Mediterranean and the Arab world and hosts one of only two Russian overseas naval bases, that at Tartus. (The other being in Ukraine’s Crimea.)” (Rick Rozoff,   Libyan Scenario For Syria: Towards A US-NATO “Humanitarian Intervention” directed against Syria? Global Research, April 30, 2011)

The ultimate purpose is to trigger sectarian violence and political chaos within Syria by covertly supporting Islamic terrorist organizations.

What lies ahead?

The longer term US foreign policy perspective is “regime change” and the destabilization of Syria as an independent nation-state, through a covert process of “democratization” or through military means.

Syria is on the list of “rogue states”, which are targeted for a US military intervention. As confirmed by former NATO commander General Wesley Clark the “[The] Five-year campaign plan [includes]… a total of seven countries, beginning with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia and Sudan” (Pentagon official quoted by General Wesley Clark).

The objective is to weaken the structures of the secular State while justifying an eventual  UN sponsored “humanitarian intervention”. The latter, in the first instance, could take the form of a reinforced embargo on the country (including sanctions) as well as the freezing of Syrian bank assets in overseas foreign financial institutions.

While a US-NATO military intervention in the immediate future seems highly unlikely, Syria is nonetheless on the Pentagon’s military roadmap, namely an eventual war on Syria has been contemplated both by Washington and Tel Aviv.

If it were to occur, at some future date, it would lead to escalation. Israel would inevitably be involved. The entire Middle East Central Asian region from the Eastern Mediterranean to the Chinese-Afghan border would flare up.

Michel Chossudovsky is an award-winning author, Professor of Economics (Emeritus) at the University of Ottawa, Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) and Editor of globalresearch.ca. He is the author of The Globalization of Poverty and The New World Order (2003) and America’s “War on Terrorism” (2005). He is also a contributor to the Encyclopaedia Britannica. His writings have been published in more than twenty languages.  He spent a month in Syria in early 2011.

Trump is a caricature version of Obama ترامب نسخة كاريكاتورية لأوباما

Trump is a caricature version of Obama

فبراير 28, 2017

Written by Nasser Kandil,

It is clear that the new US President Donald Trump has changed his electoral speech which based on the call to pay attention to the US interior, to reduce the degree of the engagement in the role of the global policeman, and the interventions and the wars with the exception of the priority of the war on ISIS which its entry is Russian US cooperation, knowing that these terms and vocabularies were quoted from Trump’s speeches in the elections, into the focus on a foreign policy that based on a speech that rebuilds what his electoral speech has affected his relation with the allies, and based on the recalling back the speech of the abstention from the involvement in the settlements which are imposed by the attempt to cooperate with Russia in preparation for a global alliance against the terrorism.

The era of the Former US President Barack Obama who was accused of failure by his opponents, and who was accused of extremism by Trump, because in his opinion he made ISIS and has implicated America with the war of Syria to change the regime in it, has been characterized with the attempt to combine the two policies of pleasing the allies in the NATO and in the region especially France, Britain, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Israel on one hand, and the attempt to proceed in settlements during the cooperation with Moscow on the other hand, after Obama spent his first mandate and half of his second mandate in leading the allies in the west and the region to the wars of the Arab Spring specially the war of Syria, and bringing the fleets in preparation for the war, but he was forced to retreat to avoid a full confrontation which America is not ready for it, then he discovered that he did not have ready allies for the settlements which he reached to their titles with Russia, so he fell in the waiting, slowdown, and the dual language, towards the vacancy.

Trump has succeeded in making a speech that was characterized with courage in running the settlements which Obama has hesitated in their running, since they are the only place in which the US President can test his bravery, because the field of escalation and wars is determined with the inability, this was before the Russians have positioned in the region and before the victories of Aleppo, so how after them. After the arrival of Trump to presidency he faced the complexities which prevent him from going on in the US political, diplomatic, legislative, and military policy towards qualitative step of change that is represented by the alliance with Russia. Trump has involved in wide confrontations in the US interior through improvised steps, speeches, and random positions that based on the racism and arrogance, that integrated with the abstention of the US institution, so he submitted quickly and was the resignation of his National Security Advisor Michel Flynn on the basis of a phone call with the Russian ambassador in Washington as an expression of that submission.

Trump who regressed from the choice of settlements through arrogant insolent speech inherits a president who has experienced all the opportunities to test the power, the pressures, and the sanctions, he has imposed exhausted sanctions on Russia, paved the way for the war of Ukraine, has brought the fleets to the Mediterranean Sea, moreover he has brought Al-Qaeda and sent ISIS, and has tried till the last moment through the sanctions and the negotiation to subdue Iran. He has left only two choices for the one who will come after him, the first choice is the further investment on ISIS and Al Nusra publicly and making the war on Syria prior to the war on terrorism, and the escalation against Russia on that basis. This choice has been represented by Hillary Clinton, while the second choice is the involvement with Russia and the cooperation and having an understanding with it on making the settlements in preparation for the participation in the war on Al Nusra and ISIS, this includes openness to the Syrian country. These are the titles foreshadowed by Trump.

Trump retreated in front of the abstention of the US intelligence, its military personnel, diplomats, and those who work in media, they are the elites which fought Trump to prevent his arrival, and this means that his fall is the inevitable exit from the international chaos not the fall of the choice of settlements. The choice of escalation for which Clinton has aspired and which was represented by her means Trump’s loss of his supporters without gaining his opponents, it is a choice that is determined with failure and with the high cost in the light of the direct Russian engagement in Syria and the strict Iranian position towards her.

Trump turns into a caricature version of Obama through the inability to take decision and the falling into stalemate with the difference that Trump has filled the vacancy with screaming, so his stage is characterized with some of the black comedy.

Translated by Lina Shehadeh,

ترامب نسخة كاريكاتورية لأوباما

فبراير 23, 2017

ناصر قنديل

– من الواضح أنّ الرئيس الأميركي الجديد دونالد ترامب قد انقلب على خطابه الانتخابي الذي قام على الدعوة للاهتمام بأميركا من الداخل وتخفيض درجة الانخراط بدور الشرطي العالمي، والتدخلات والحروب، باستثناء أولوية الحرب على داعش، ومدخلها تعاون روسي أميركي. وهذه مصطلحات ومفردات مقتبسة من خطابات ترامب في الانتخابات، إلى التركيز على سياسة خارجية تُبنَى على خطاب ترميم ما خرّبه الخطاب الانتخابي مع الحلفاء وتستعيد خطاب الممانعة في الانخراط بالتسويات التي يُمليها التوجّه للتعاون مع روسيا تمهيداً لحلف عالمي ضد الإرهاب.

– اتسمت مرحلة الرئيس الأميركي السابق باراك أوباما المتّهم بالتخاذل من خصومه، والمتّهم بالتطرّف من ترامب. فهو برأيه مَن صنع داعش ومَن ورّط أميركا بحرب سورية لتغيير نظام الحكم فيها، بمحاولة جمع سياسيتي إرضاء الحلفاء في الأطلسي وفي المنطقة، خصوصاً فرنسا وبريطانيا والسعودية وتركيا و»إسرائيل» من جهة، ومحاولة السير بالتسويات في طريق التعاون مع موسكو من جهة أخرى، بعدما أمضى أوباما ولايته الأولى ونصف ولايته الثانية في قيادة الحلفاء في الغرب والمنطقة لحروب الربيع العربي، خصوصاً حرب سورية وصولا لجلب الأساطيل تمهيداً للحرب، واضطر للتراجع تجنّباً لمواجهة شاملة ليست أميركا جاهزة لها، ليكتشف أن التسويات التي توصل لعناوينها مع روسيا ليس لديه حلفاء جاهزون لها، فوقع بالانتظار والتباطؤ واللغة المزدوجة، وصولاً للفراغ.

– صعد ترامب على كتف خطاب يعِد بالشجاعة في خوض غمار التسويات التي تردّد أوباما في خوضها، باعتبارها المكان الوحيد الذي يُتاح فيه للرئيس الأميركي أن يختبر شجاعته. فميدان التصعيد والحروب مسقوف بالعجز، قبل أن يكون الروس قد تموضعوا في المنطقة، وقبل انتصارات حلب، فكيف بعدهما، وبعد وصول ترامب ظهر أمامه حجم التعقيدات التي تحول دون السير بالآلة الأميركية السياسية والدبلوماسية والتشريعية والعسكرية نحو خطوة نوعية من التغيير تتمثل بالانتقال للتحالف مع روسيا، وتورّط ترامب في مواجهات واسعة في الداخل الأميركي وبخطوات مرتجلة وخطابات ومواقف عشوائية تتأسس على العنصرية والغطرسة، تكاملت مع ممانعة المؤسسة الأميركية فرضخ سريعاً وكانت استقالة مستشاره للأمن القومي مايكل فلين بناء على اتصال أجراه بالسفير الروسي في واشنطن تعبيراً عن هذا الرضوخ.

– ترامب المنكفئ عن خيار التسويات بخطاب متعالٍ ومتغطرس، يرث رئيساً لم تبقَ فرصة لاختبار القوة والضغوط والعقوبات لم يختبرها، فهو مَن ضيّق خناق العقوبات على روسيا ومَن فتح حرب أوكرانيا ومَن جلب الأساطيل إلى المتوسط ومَن جلب القاعدة وأرسل داعش، ومَن خاص حتى اللحظة الأخيرة من العقوبات والتفاوض محاولات تركيع إيران، وأبقى الباب مفتوحاً من بعده لخيارين لا ثالث لهما: الأول هو الذهاب لمزيد من الاستثمار على داعش والنصرة علناً، وجعل الحرب على سورية أسبقية للحرب على الإرهاب، والتصعيد بوجه روسيا على هذا الأساس. وهذا الخيار مثّلته هيلاري كلينتون أو الذهاب لخيار الانخراط مع روسيا والتعاون والتفاهم معها على صناعة التسويات تمهيداً للتشارك في الحرب على النصرة وداعش، وما يتضمّنه ذلك من انفتاح على الدولة السورية. وهذه هي العناوين التي بشر بها ترامب.

– تراجع ترامب أمام ممانعة مخابرات أميركا وعسكرييها ودبلوماسييها وإعلامييها. وهي النخب التي قاتلت ترامب لمنع وصوله، يعني سقوطه. وليس سقوط خيار التسويات مخرجاً حتمياً من الفوضى الدولية. فخيار السير بالتصعيد الذي كانت تبتغيه كلينتون وتمثّله بأصالة، يعني خسارة ترامب لمؤيّديه من دون كسب خصومه، وهو خيار مسقوف بالفشل وبكلفته العالية في ظل الانخراط الروسي المباشر في سورية، والموقف الإيراني الصلب تجاهها.

– يتحوّل ترامب لنسخة كاريكاتورية عن أوباما، بالعجز عن أخذ القرار والوقوع في الجمود، مع فارق ملء ترامب للفراغ بالصراخ، ما يمنح مرحلته بعضاً من الكوميديا السوداء.

(Visited 1٬361 times, 1٬361 visits today)

من حلب الى الجليل والتخلص من نفايات الربيع العربي .. “كعب” اسرائيل في ديمونا

بقلم ارام سرجون

أعترف ان ماأنجزته تكنولوجيا الايديولوجيا في مخابر الموساد وال سي آي ايه كان باهرا في أن ينقل العقل العربي في خلال سنوات قليلة من عقل عدو الى عقل خادم للموساد ومشاريع الغرب ..

تكنولوجيا الايديولوجيا الرهيبة حولت النصر الالهي لحزب الله الى غضب الهي على المسلمين عندما صار العرب والمسلمون لايرون في ذلك الانتصار انجازا لهم بل انجازا لايران .. و”للشيعة “.. حتى بعض الفلسطينيين الذين لاتزال سكين اسرائيل على أعناقهم نسوا اعناقهم النازفة ونسوا السكين وصاروا مقلاعا بيد داود ليقتل به صاحب النصر الالهي وحلفاءه ..

واعترف أكثر أن حقن كل التراث في جرعة واحدة مكثفة قدرها خمس سنوات لاشك سيجعل عملية التخلص من سموم التراث غير المنقّى في العقل والقلب عملية تشبه التلوث باليورانيوم والمواد المشعة لاتزول آثارها الا بعد مئات السنين .. فالتراث الروحاني دوما عميق في أعماق التاريخ وهو مثل العناصر الكيماوية المشعة تبقى متوهجة شعاعيا ولاتنطفئ .. وتعيش آلاف السنين .. والتراث الديني يستحق أن يسمى يورانيوم التاريخ لقدرته على البقاء كعنصر مشع لايخمد ..

ونحن كجيل حل به هذا البلاء الذي استخرجته ورشات وحفارات السلفيين من بين رمال الصحراء لايجب أن نترك هذا اليورانيوم الذي تسرب ولوث المياه والتربة وستسقى منه الخلايا .. لايجب ان نتركه هائما على سطح الأرض فاما اما ندفنه من جديد في الأعماق أو نبطل مفعوله ..

 المعضلة ببساطة هي الثقافة المذهبية المعمدة بالدم والمجازر وعملية كي الروح التي ستلوث كل الثقافة القادمة لأنها لوثت مياه الثقافة الراهنة التي ستشرب منها الثقافة القادمة فكل الثقا فة العربية تلوثت بالمذهبية لان الدافع وراء الثورة السورية لم يكن الا ايديولوجيا المذاهب التي صنعتها تكنولوجيا الايديولوجيا الغربية .. فكيف اذا نختصر الزمن ولاننتظر مئات السنين حتى تنجلي هذه اللوثة المذهبية التي تشبه كارثة مفاعل تشيرنوبل الذي تسرب منه الاشعاع السام وتسبب بكارثة .. ونحن لدينا مفاعل (تشيرنوبل المذاهب) في العراق والشام حيث تلتقي العناصر المشعة التراثية المسيحية والاسلامية بشقيها السنية والشيعية .. لأن مرجل المذاهب والأديان ومفاعلها الكبير الذري وانشطارات الاسلام الكبرى ونهوض كل الديانات الأخرى السماوية وقعت في العراق وبلاد الشام وليس في المغرب أو ماليزية .. في هذه البلاد تكمن الطاقة الخلاقة الهائلة للعرب والمسلمين وتنتج الطاقة المشرقية في هذا المفاعل العملاق .. الذي تشقق في الزلزال الأخير وتسرب من الشقوق والتصدعات المذهبية الاشعاع القاتل اذي بدأ بتسميم الشرق .. ولايتوقف التسرب الا باغلاق الشقوق المذهبية

كيف نوقف التسرب الاشعاعي المذهبي؟؟ هل نوقفه بتدمير السعودية التي تضرب على هذا المفاعل كي ينفجر وينفجر معه الشرق كله؟؟ أم نوقفه بتدمير تركيا التي عبثت به وتسللت اليه وكانت تريد للمفاعل ان ينتج لها الطاقة العثمانية ..؟؟ والجواب سيكون: لايقتل المذهبية الا ان تقاتل المذاهب عدوا واحدا ..

الحقيقة أن أي حرب هنا أو هناك لن تحل المشكلة المذهبية الراهنة التي ستنتقل ان تركناها لتعيد انتاج كل أنواع التفاعلات المشعة المؤذية .. العرقية والدينية والعشائرية .. ولكن ربما هناك حل وحيد لهذه الحرب المذهبية .. ولايملك مفتاحه الا حزب الله .. ومفتاحه هو الجليل أو ديمونة .. ولاشيء سيعيد النصر الالهي الا عملية بقياس تحرير الجليل او قصف ديمونة الذي سيكون بمثابه كعب أخيل أو كعب اسرائيل .. فهل يقدر حزب الله أن يقدم على تحرير الجليل أو قصف ديمونا لهدم الربيع العربي وهدم الوهابية وهدم التسرب الاشعاعي المذهبي؟؟ .. واذا مااهتز الجليل أو ديمونا اهتزت القبائل العربية .. وأفاقت الشعوب التواقة للنصر .. وغاصت سقيفة بني ساعدة في الرمال ودخل “الجمل” الذي نسبت له معركة الجمل الى متحف الديناصورات .. ولكن هل هذا واقعي أم حلم طوباوي؟؟

وهنا دعونا نتحدث عن الواقعية التي تفترض أن اقتحام الجليل أو ضرب ديمونا خياران خطيران لان اسرائيل والعالم كله لن يسمح لحزب الله أن يفعل هذا دون رد عنيف .. ولايبدو هذا السيناريو واقعيا في ظل الظروف الراهنة .. ولا يجب تضخيم التصورات والامكانات للقيام بهذا المشروع الضخم وتكليف حزب الله به وهو لايملك حتى المبرر للبدء به .. لأن حزب الله في هذه الظروف لايمكن أن يقدم على المبادرة نحو اقتحام الجليل الا في حالة واحدة تمنحها له القيادة الاسرائيلية بيدها وهي أن تبادر اسرائيل بالهجوم على حزب الله .. فان حدث هذا فان حزب الله لايجب أن يفوّت فرصة ذهبية تأتي مرة في العمر كما حدث عام 2006 (عندما أعطت اسرائيل دون قصد الذريعة لحزب الله لامطارها بالصواريخ واذلالها) تنقله لتنفيذ الخيار “الضرورة” الذي قد تقدمه له اسرائيل نفسها هذه المرة أيضا ويمكنه عندها أن يحول الفخ الاسرائيلي لتدميره الى فرصة لاتفوّت لتدمير المفاعل المذهبي الطائفي التي تشغله اسرائيل في المنطقة وتلوثها بنفاياته التكفيرية الوهابية ..

ان من يحلل كلام السيد حسن نصر الله عن تحرير الجليل في احد الخطابات فانه يلاحظ أنه ربطه “بظرف ما قد تطلب فيه قيادة المقاومة من المجاهدين في حزب الله بالتحرك لتحرير الجليل” .. وهذا يعني أن الظرف المنتظر هو ظرف تقدم فيه المبررات الكاملة لتبرير التحرك أمام العالم وهذا سيكون في حال اطلاق اسرائيل عملية عسكرية عنيفة وشاملة ضد حزب الله او سورية أو ايران .. وتبدو اشارة السيد حسن نصرالله الى خيار ديمونا على أنها كلام رادع يحمل الانذار لاسرائيل التي يمكن ان تحرض ترامب على التحرش بايران أو مساندتها لتدمير حزب الله .. ويرى كثيرون ان كلام السيد نصرالله ليس لحماية ايران من تصريحات وخطط ترامب ونتنياهو العسكرية لأن ترامب قد يلغي الاتفاق النووي أو يعطله لكنه لن يهاجم ايران عسكريا على الأغلب .. الا أنه قد يساند عملية اسرائيلية ساحقة لتدمير حزب الله تتلو سقوط الاتفاق النووي .. لأن اسرائيل تدرك أن ايران من غير حزب الله يقل تأثيرها كثيرا على اسرائيل فتصبح مثل ليبيا أو الجزائر مؤيدة لفلسطين وعاجزة بحكم البعد والفاصل الجغرافي .. فاذا وقعت اسرائيل في غواية الثأر من حزب الله بعد اسقاط الاتفاق النووي فان هذا سيجعل ايران وحلفاءها غير ملزمين بأي ضبط للنفس وستطلق يد حزب الله في الجليل لتنفيذ الخيار الضرورة .. وسيكون التهديد الذي أعلن مؤخرا بضرب ديمونا سببا في ردع أي تدخل غربي أو ناتوي لحماية أو استرداد الجليل من حزب الله الذي أطلق معادلة ديمونا الرادعة ضد جنون وانتقام غربي من أجل اسرائيل في حال تحققت معادلة تحرير الجليل .. الضرورة تأتي من حقيقة أن حزب الله يجب أن يفكر في حرب تحرير الجليل عندما تتحول الحرب عليه الى فرصة له .. لا يستعيد بها الجليل فقط بل يستعيد موقع الحزب المقاوم الجليل ذي الشرف الرفيع الذي لايضاهيه أي شرف الذي عملت على تجريده منه ماكينات الاعلام الوهابي والاخواني .. شرف انجاز تحرير أول قطعة من فلسطين منذ احتلالها .. ودفن كل نفايات التلوث الوهابي والتكفير التي لوثت العقل العربي والمسلم ولوثت حتى الخلايا والدماء والمياه في الشرق ..

لاأعرف كيف تفكر الأقدار ولكنها ليست حمقاء بالتاكيد .. بل ان الحمقى هم الاسرائيليون الذين اعتقدوا في حساباتهم أن الربيع العربي سيطلق الربيع الاسرائيلي لأن الحرب السورية ستكون خاطفة واياما معدودات وينتهي كل شيء .. وتبدأ بعدها تصفية الحساب مع حزب الله ومع كل من قاوم يوما لاسدال الستار على نهج الممانعة التي بدأت بعبد الناصر ووصلت الى زمن السيد حسن نصرالله والرئيس بشار الأسد .. وكانت معركة القصير مفصلا وخبرا سيئا لاسرائيل لأنها أظهرت أن حكاية الأيام المعدودات لن تكون واقعية أبدا وأن اقتحام القصير أثبت تماسك محور المقاومة في أحلك الظروف .. ولكن لم يكن القادة الاسرائيليون يتصورون سيناريو أسوأ من سيناريو تحرير حلب بعد أن اعتقدوا أن حلب ربما تقصم ظهر النظام وان لم تسقطه .. لأن التوقعات المتفائلة والسعيدة كانت تتحدث عن معركة قاسية جدا وطويلة ستنهك الجيش السوري وحزب الله الذي قد يموت هناك بعيدا عن الجليل .. لأن خبرة العسكريين في اقتحام المدن سيئة ومريرة .. ولاتنتهي الا بصعوبة وطيف هزيمة بعد دفع ثمن باهظ .. ولكن الجيش السوري فعلها مع حلفائه ..

الاسرائيليون استفاقوا على حقيقة لم يضعوها بالاعتبار بعد معركة حلب وهي ان حزب الله سيتمكن من استعادة قسم كبير من قواته التي شاركت في تلك المعركة .. وقد تكون قريبا وجها لوجه مع الجليل تنتظر نهاية الحرب السورية .. ورغم الاختلاف البيئي والجغرافي بين جبهة حلب وجبهة الجليل الا ان الحقيقة التي لابد من الاقرار بها هي أن اقتحام الجليل اكثر سهولة بكثير من اقتحام حلب .. حيث ستوفر الأحراش والغطاء النباتي للمقاتلين تمويها ومظلات ممتازة عند الاختراق كما أن الاقتراب من المستعمرات سيحيد فاعلية سلاح الجو خاصة أن المساحة في شمال فلسطين ضيقة ومحدودة بالقياس الى معارك الحزب في سورية حيث الانتشار الواسع للجغرافيا المترامية التي تشتت قوى وكتائب الحزب الذي سيتكثف ويتركز بكامل قوته في جبهة ضيقة شمال فلسطين .. ناهيك عن أن التفوق في حرب المدن سيعطي حزب الله التفوق بلا منازع عند اقتحام هذه المستعمرات والمستوطنات الشمالية ..

ضرورة حرب الجليل تأتي من حقيقة ان حزب الله قد آذته الحرب المذهبية المفروضة عليه أكثر مما أوجعته حرب تموز وكل مواجهاته مع اسرائيل .. ويدرك الحزب أن اسرائيل كانت موفقة في اختيار المواجهة غير المباشرة معه عبر وكلاء المذهب الوهابي الذين سعّروا الصراع المذهبي واضطر حزب الله لكي يدافع عن نفسه وعن منظومته وسمعته وعن تاريخه الذي حاولت اسقاطه الحرب المذهبية .. ولكن لايمكن للحرب المذهبية أن تنتهي أو تتحرك بسرعة الا بحرب أخرى تلغيها .. مثل حرب تحرير أو مواجهة قومية تجعل الهم الطائفي أقل أهمية .. والحزب يرى أن من مصلحته تدمير الحرب المذهبية البشعة التي تشن عليه التي لن تتوقف من داخل لبنان ومن دول النفط التي تحقن الجمهور بالكراهية المذهبية بشكل متواصل .. فكما صار معروفا فان نصر تموز هو الذي جعل حزب الله متفوقا ومدرسة ملهمة للشعوب العربية التي اذهلها النصر الالهي ولم تفتش عن مذهب الحزب الذي انتصر لأنها نسبت الانتصار اليها واعتبرت الحزب جزءا من تركيبتها وثقافتها الاسلامية لأن مالدى الحزب من خلفية دينية لاهوتية له امتدادات وتماهيات مع الثقافة المنتشرة في العالم الاسلامي عموما .. كما أن نصر 56 المصري ضد العدوان الثلاثي الخارجي جعل الجماهير العربية ميالة لأن تنتسب الى النصر المصري لأنه واجه عدوا مشتركا للجميع وانتصر فانتمت الجماهير بعواطفها الى فكر المنتصر وهذا مانشر الدعوة القومية الناصرية بسرعة الى أن منيت بالهزيمة فانفض الناس عنها والتفوا حول أوهام كثيرة لاستبدالها ..

ان الأكاديميين العسكريين الاسرائيلييين لديهم قناعة ان حزب الله لن يجد طريقة اسرع لاستعادة مكانته الممانعة التي شوهتها المرحلة الاعلامية الحالية في الربيع العربي الا بنصر مبين وساحق ومذهل على اسرائيل يتوق اليه ويتحرق لانجازه اذا ماتلقف الفرصة .. نصر يضعه في مقدمة القوى العربية التي ستنال المجد وتكون انتصاراته سببا في تراجع المرحلة المذهبية لأن ايقاظ النصر على اسرائيل هو الوحيد الذي يرقأ الجراح ويسكت الأصوات التي تشوه الروافض المتهمين انهم يتآمرون مع الصهاينة والفرس على الاسلام وأهل السنة وفق المنطق الوهابي ويغسل اسم حزب الله مما ألصق به زورا من أنه لايريد تحرير فلسطين بل نشر المشروع الفارسي الشيعي بدليل انخراطه في الدفاع عن سورية التي سوقت عربيا واسلاميا على أنها دفاع عن طائفة ونظام حكم وهلال اخترعه ملك الأردن الذي ينتمي الى أم يهودية ..

الاسرائيليون يؤمنون بهذا الكابوس .. ومن يتابع المناورات الاسرائيلية يلاحظ أنها تتضمن عمليات اسعاف في المدن وعمليات اخلاء سريعة للمناطق المأهولة بسبب صواريخ أو تعرضها للاقتحام من قبل “ارهابيين” .. لكن هناك نشاطا محموما في الشمال لرفع السواتر والشراك وحقول الألغام .. يبدو أن المناورات القادمة ستكون من أجل اخلاء المدن المستهدفة بسرعة قصوى كي لايبقى مدنيون لتمكين سلاح الجو من ابادة القوات المهاجمة وتحطيم كل شيء على رؤوس المقاتلين ..

هل يمكن أن يحول الحزب أي هجوم اسرائيلي من ورطة الى فرصة؟؟ وهل هناك فرصة افضل من هذه؟؟ جيش تمرس على أقسى أنواع حرب المدن والاقتحام .. ومقاتلون منظمون وشرسون ومدربون تدريبا عاليا ولايفصل بينهم وبين الجليل الا سياج .. وحاجة ماسة لاطفاء حرب مذهبية تطهرهم من نفايات الاتهام والتزوير التي ألقيت عليهم .. انه السفر الى الجليل .. والمعراج الى النقاء الجهادي .. في رحلة بدأت من حلب الى ديمونا .. مرورا بالجليل ..

%d bloggers like this: