قمة السلاجقة والأعراب لن تبيعوا القدس مرّتين انتظروا المنازلة الكبرى في فلسطين

 

محمد صادق الحسيني

ديسمبر 14, 2017

انتباه انتباه انتباه

يُجمع العارفون بخفايا الأمور بأن ما حصل في اسطنبول يوم أمس، في ما سُمّي بقمة التعاون الاسلامي إنما هو في الواقع تآمر وتواطؤ سلجوقي سعودي مصري على الفلسطينيين ومبايعة مبطّنة لترامب، وكل ما عدا ذلك تضليل، قولوها صراحة ولا تضحكوا على الناس…!

المنافقون في قمة السلاجقة عندما يقولون بالقدس الشرقية عاصمة لفلسطين دون ذكر حدود 4 حزيران 67 يعني تخلياً عن كامل المقدّسات الإسلامية والمسيحية…!

قمة السلاجقة في اسطنبول خطيرة جداً.

وهي اعتراف بـ أبو ديس عاصمة لفلسطينهم. هذا ما اتفق عليه السيسي وسلمان وأبو مازن بأمر عمليات أميركي مبكر صادق عليه صائب عريقات ومدير المخابرات الفلسطينية قبل نحو ثلاثة أسابيع في أميركا…!

وإليكم تبعات وتداعيات هذه القمة التي يرى فيها البعض أشبه بنكبة ١٩٦٧ جديدة:

أولاً: لقد حققت القمة السلجوقية، التي عقدت أمس 13/12/2017 في اسطنبول، لـ«إسرائيل» أكثر بكثير مما حققه ترامب لها عندما اعترف بالقدس عاصمة لـ«إسرائيل». إذ إن هذه القمة قد سجلت اعتراف 57 دولة إسلامية بالقدس الغربية عاصمة لـ«إسرائيل» من دون أن تحدّد حدود القدس الغربية…!

ثانياً: فيما لم يعترف قرار الأمم المتحدة القاضي بتقسيم فلسطين والصادر في 29/12/1947 بالقدس عاصمة لـ«إسرائيل» وإنما أخضعها لنظام التدويل، أي أن تصبح مدينة دولية مفتوحة للجميع وخاضعة لإدارة دولية.

ثالثاً: وبما أن مفهوم «إسرائيل» للقدس الشرقية يقضي باقتصارها على ضاحية أبو ديس، الواقعة خارج سُور الفصل العنصري «الإسرائيلي» وخارج البلدة القديمة في القدس، فإن الاعتراف بالقدس الشرقية عاصمة لفلسطين ومن دون ذكر لحدود عام 1967 فهذا يشكل تماهياً مع المفهوم «الإسرائيلي» الأميركي للقدس…!

وبالتالي موافقة عملية على مفهوم القدس في صفقة ترامب التي يطلق عليها صفقة القرن…!

رابعاً: وهذا يعني تنازل القمة السلجوقية عن القدس الشرقية الأصلية أيضاً، أي البلدة القديمة، وما فيها من مقدسات مسيحية وإسلامية، لـ«إسرائيل»…!

إضافة الى القدس الغربية التي احتلت عام 1948، وهي بالأساس جزء من مدينة القدس العربية الفلسطينية التي كان يفترض أن تصبح خاضعة لإدارة دولية، حسب القرار الدولي 181 القاضي بتقسيم فلسطين.

خامساً: إن كل ما عدا ذلك من كلام أُطلق في هذه القمة لا قيمة له على الإطلاق ولا يتعدّى كونه أرضية لمزيد من الضياع الفلسطيني في غياهب المنظمات الدولية وغيرها لهاثاً وراء عضوية هنا وهناك.

علماً أن الدول التي شاركت في القمة المذكورة هي أعضاء في جميع هذه المنظمات ولَم تقدّم عضويتها أي خطوة على طريق تحرير فلسطين. كما أن هذا الوقت الذي سيذهب هدراً في الركض وراء سراب المنظمات الدولية وقراراتها، التي لم تحترمها لا «إسرائيل» ولا الولايات المتحدة ولو مرة واحدة..!

إن هذا الوقت إنما هو وقت من ذهب بالنسبة لـ«إسرائيل» والتي ستستغله لتعزيز عملياتها المتواصلة في تهويد القدس وإفراغها من أهلها الفلسطينيين بمختلف الوسائل والسبل.

سادساً: أما هدير أردوغان وتصريحاته النارية حول عدوانية «إسرائيل» وعنصريتها، فما هي إلا ذَر للرماد في العيون وتغطية على تآمره مع «إسرائيل» والولايات المتحدة. إذ إن الموقف لا يتطلّب كل هذا الضجيج الفارغ وإنما التوجه إلى العمل الجدي المنظم وعلى الطريقة الإيرانية المتمثلة في تقديم الدعم المباشر، العسكري والمالي واللوجستي لكل فصائل المقاومة التي تقاتل الكيان الصهيوني، لو كان صادقاً..!

وهذا ما لن يقوم به أردوغان، فمنذ انطلاقة الثورة الفلسطينية المعاصرة وحتى الْيَوْمَ لم يسجل التاريخ تقديم سلاجقة تركيا، ومنذ عام 1965 وحتى الْيَوْمَ بندقية واحدة للثورة الفلسطينية، سواء من قبل أردوغان أو من أسلافه من سلاحقة تركيا العلمانيين والإسلاميين، في الوقت الذي سارع الى إقامة قواعد عسكرية تركية في قطر التي لا تواجه أي تهديد خدمة للتحشيد الاستراتيجي ضد إيران وروسيا والصين…!

فأين هي قوات أردوغان التي كان يُفترض فيها أن تهبّ لمساندة المقاومة الفلسطينية في غزة لمواجهة الاعتداءات الإسرائيلية المستمرة والتي كان آخرها عدوان عام 2014!؟

سابعاً: نقول هذا ونحن نستذكر المسؤولية العثمانية/التركية عن ضياع فلسطين، التي دخلها الجنرال اللنبي بتاريخ 11/12/1917 وقامت الادارة الاستعمارية البريطانية بتسليمها للعصابات الصهيونية في العام 1949. أي أن تركيا ملزمة وطبقاً لأحكام القانون الدولي بمساعدة الشعب الفلسطيني في إعادة الوضع في فلسطين الى ما كان عليه قبل احتلالها من قبل القوات البريطانية و«الإسرائيلية» لاحقاً.

وهذا يعني بالتحديد تقديم كل الدعم اللازم للمقاومة الفلسطينية لاسترجاع فلسطين كاملة والاعتراف بالقدس الموحدة عاصمة لها، وكما كانت عندما وقع قائد القوات التركية وثيقة استسلام قواته لقائد الجيوش البريطانية يوم 29/12/1917 وفِي القدس التي كانت عاصمة فلسطين، وليس في القدس الشرقية أو أبو ديس، حسب المفهوم الأميركي «الإسرائيلي».

ثامناً: إن ما صدر عن هذا الاجتماع البائس في اسطنبول الْيَوْمَ لا يرقى إلى الحد الأدنى من مطالب الشعب العربي الفلسطيني الذي لا يعوّل شيئاً على هذا السيرك الاستعراضي المنعدم الفائدة والمعنى.

إن ما يهم الشعب الفلسطيني ويرسم الطريق الصحيح لتحرير بلاده فلسطين وإعادة وتثبيت القدس عاصمة لها هو نداء الانتفاضة الأول الذي صدر من غزة، ونداؤها الثاني أي أمر العمليات التنفيذي الذي صدر في بيروت على لسان سماحة السيد حسن نصر الله يوم أول أمس، والذي بدأ تنفيذه عبر الاتصالات الهاتفية التي أجراها اللواء قاسم سليماني، قائد قوة القدس في الحرس الثوري الإيراني، مع قادة الميدان في قطاع غزة، وتلك التي أجريت مع قادة ميدانيين في الضفة الغربية والتي لم يُعلَن عنها، مما دفع قوات الاحتلال «الإسرائيلي» لتنفيذ حملة اعتقالات واسعة في الضفة الغريبة الليلة الماضية بهدف منع كوادر المقاومة بتنفيذ ما تمّ التوافق عليه في تلك الاتصالات…!

ورغم كلّ ذلك يظلّ الأمل كبيراً على الذين يوصلون الليل بالنهار، وهم يُعدّون للمنازلة الكبرى، التي ستكون أقرب ما يكون بعلامات الساعة أو يوم القيامة، واليد العليا لن تكون إلا لهم.

بعدنا طيّبين، قولوا الله…

Advertisements

المواجهة الشاملة… حتماً!

المواجهة الشاملة… حتماً!

Related Videos

The death of Kissinger’s Shuttle Diplomacy: the Jerusalem factor

December 07, 2017

by Ghassan Kadi for the Saker Blog

No man has possibly served the American Empire as much as Henry Kissinger did, and with all the literature, including screenplays, that have been written about him and his “shuttle diplomacy”, none probably described his biggest ever performance than Patrick Seale in his book “Asad”. After all, even though Kissinger is always remembered as the diplomat who has negotiated terms of settlement with the Vietcong, the Vietnam war was a fait accompli long before the negotiations took off, and if anything, his role was that of damage-control and face-saving; no more, no less.

Kissinger’s true, and perhaps only, major success story was his shuttle diplomacy that paved the way for the historic, albeit infamous, Camp David Agreement between Egypt and Israel.

Before Kissinger’s shuttle diplomacy, a term and modus operandi he initiated, all indirect contacts between Arabs and Israelis were done via the UN and its multitude of organizations, and any would-be peace talks, were done via the USA and the USSR. Even the post Yom Kippur War peace deal that Kissinger himself was meant to broker between the Arabs and Israel, was also meant to involve the Soviets as equal partners to America in the negotiation process. But Kissinger managed to convince Sadat that he can negotiate a better deal for him directly with Israel, and without having to involve Egypt’s war time partner, Syria.

The rest is history, and since then, and technically until the 28th of September 2015, the Soviet/Russian presence in the Levant was reduced to a naval facility in the Syrian port of Tartous. This statement is not to undermine the huge effect of more recent Russian UNSC vetoes since the “War on Syria” started between 2011 and 2015, but effectively, the Russian presence took a turn when Russia engaged itself militarily in attacking terror organizations on Syrian soil on the 28th of September 2015.

In between Kissinger’s shuttle diplomacy triumph and the 28th of September 2015, emboldened by the New World Order single super power status, America reigned in the Levant single-handedly as the only power on the ground.

According to Kissinger’s achievements, some of which were put into American foreign policy law, ensuring the security of Israel became an American undertaking and all of the so-called peace negotiations, including those of Oslo, were only intended to ensure the security of Israel and to maintain the power balance grossly in its favour.

Driven by arrogance and self-grandeur, America did not foresee that it should have used the time it had at the top in order to twist the arm of Israel to coerce it to accept a peaceful settlement with the Palestinians. And every time the Palestinians were prepared to let go of more rights, Israel demanded more privileges. Not only did this inadvertently lead to the formation of Hamas, but even the very pliable and malleable PLO remained unable to reach a peace agreement, despite the large number of huge concessions it gave the Israeli side.

America has had a golden opportunity and ample time to negotiate an Arab/Israeli peace deal. No peace deal at all would keep all parties fully satisfied; especially the hardliners on both sides. That said, with the right intentions, America could have brokered an agreement that pleased a workable majority on both sides of the divide. However, in dealing with the crisis, America did not give Palestinian rights in specific, and Arab/Muslim rights in general, any consideration at all.

This is why all peace talks that followed the era of Kissinger all the way till the end of the days of John Kerry have failed; they were predestined to either fail, or to coerce Palestinians and the rest of Arabs to accept the unacceptable.

At the height of their arrogance, the Americans and Israelis never ever thought that a time will come during which they will lose the upper hand. They never even considered that a time will come during which the balance of power they thought they have set in stone was going to shift, let alone change.

Later on, as the “War on Syria” was waged, the “Anti-Syrian Cocktail” with all of its diverse elements and members; including the USA and Israel, were certain of an easy and prompt victory and the capitulation of the axis of resistance.

The irony is that despite failures to topple Assad, occupy Lebanon or even subdue the besieged and overwhelmed Gaza Strip, the American/Israeli arrogance remained steadfast in its efforts of self-destruction. Self-destruction, because without victories, without being able to enforce political settlements, and without any hopes or enforceable plans to twist events around to its advantage, the American/Israeli axis, make that the American/Israeli/Saudi axis, seemed to be steering itself from the leading role to that of irrelevance.

Whether the fruit of Kissinger’s “shuttle diplomacy” was the love-child of the petro-dollar or the other way around, is a matter akin to what comes first, the chicken or the egg. The two went hand-in-hand, and unabated for a few decades; but the momentum has been lost and the Camp David Agreement zenith cannot be repeated; even on a smaller scale.

But the petro-dollar is also losing its breath. The rise of the joint Russian-Chinese might in particular, and BRICS more generally, is certainly putting the noose around the neck of the Greenback. The American trade deficits compounded with the massive physical gold reserves that the Russians and Chinese in particular are accumulating will soon make the petro-dollar look like “Monopoly” money. Even Saudi Arabia, America’s partner in the petro-dollar fiasco, has recently showed interest in trading with China with gold-backed Yuan.

It is as if the house of cards is tumbling down as what underpins its foundations, one by one, is crumbling.

From the Arab side, Saudi Arabia and its GCC remain within the American camp, and increasingly less covertly, on the Israeli side. GCC state officials have had several meetings with Israeli counterparts over the years, and of late, GCC officials have been making statements declaring that Israel is not an enemy. It is as if they are conditioning Arabs to listen to this rhetoric, clearly with the ultimate objective of normalizing relationships with Israel; something that the Arab street continues to refuse to accept, even in Egypt and Jordan despite their peace treaties with Israel and exchange of diplomatic representation.

In every step of the way however, the American Empire is losing not only its grip on reality, but also that of stature. And in every step of the way, America is putting its regional allies in the Middle East in more tenuous and even embarrassing situations.

Even Erdogan, the great enemy of secular Syria and one who has promised to go into Damascus, triumphant, to pray in the great Omayyad Mosque after the fall Assad, a supposed American ally who continues to be, thus far, a NATO member, finds himself and his national interests closer to Russia than to America. The Turkish-American schism started when the Obama administration did not listen to Erdogan’s ultimatum to choose between supporting Turkey or the Kurds.

Enter the Trump factor.

For better or for worse, and leaving the rest of the world aside if we can, Trump is hastening the process of making America irrelevant in the Middle East.

By moving the US Embassy to Jerusalem, many reactions have followed.

Condemnations came from right across the globe, not only from the Arab and Muslim Worlds. Even EU leaders like the French President and German FM have had their say voicing their shock and disappointment.

To “outsiders”, the reaction of Muslims and Palestinians may seem like an over-kill. Some cynics and critics are wondering about the significance of a tokenistic move by America vis-à-vis the bigger reality of occupation on the ground. Such voices are saying that Trump’s decision did not effectively change anything at all. Others may see the wave of rejection as an irrational Muslim upheaval that will eventually run out of steam. But the bottom line is that with Trump’s decision, America has moved itself further away from the few Arab and Muslim supporters it has left in the Middle East.

To say that this move has pushed America closer towards irrelevance would be an under-rated statement. By agreeing to relocate the American Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, Donald Trump has sealed and dusted that deal that makes America totally irrelevant in the Middle East.

Even the Saudis, the staunch supporters of America and only vocal Arab supporters left, are too embarrassed to back Trump on his decision. So, in effect, with his decision to move the embassy to Jerusalem, Trump has galvanized rivaling Muslim factions and groups into a united voice on the single issue of Jerusalem. Even Saudi Arabia and Iran will not openly disagree with each other on this issue. Erdogan pre-warned Trump and referred to Jerusalem as a “redline”. But so was supporting Kurds. How many breached redlines does Erdogan need before he re-evaluates Turkey’s strategic alliances and perhaps even leaves NATO?

Tokenistic as it may mean to some, Trump’s decision means that no Arab or Muslim leader can be seen supporting it without risking street riots and even revolutions.

On the bigger picture however, American irrelevance means that the few Arab states and organizations that remained in hope that one day, perhaps one day, America will be able to broker for them a proper and just peace deal with Israel, have lost hope; and most likely permanently.

This new phase means that the successes of Kissinger’s “shuttle diplomacy” are already a thing of the past; effectively as of now. Apart from the much smaller role Russia played in Georgia in 2008, with Russia actively on Syrian ground, having succeeded in her first real ever military venture outside its borders since the demise of the USSR, the wheel of fate has made a one hundred and eighty degree turn. To this effect, America has catapulted itself out of the position of sole power and dominance, and in doing so, it inadvertently invited Russia back in with open doors.

Kissinger is not turning in his grave yet. He is alive and “well” and watching the mess of what subsequent American shuttle diplomacy, which ironically tried to shape itself on his image, has created and what it has made out of his achievements; not only in as far as giving America the sole power in the Middle East region, but also in terms of what the reversal of his achievements is going to eventuate into when it comes to his obsession with ensuring the security of Israel.

Russia, Egypt: Agreement to Allow Respective Air Forces to Use Each Other’s Airspace and Bases

Russia, Egypt: Agreement to Allow Respective Air Forces to Use Each Other's Airspace and Bases

ANDREI AKULOV | 04.12.2017 | SECURITY / DEFENSE

Russia, Egypt: Agreement to Allow Respective Air Forces to Use Each Other’s Airspace and Bases

Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu visited Cairo on Nov.29. Offering condolences for the massacre at a mosque in Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula on Nov.24 that killed over 300 people, Shoigu emphasized the need to strengthen cooperation in fighting terrorism. According to him, the military ties between the two countries are at all-time high as Egypt placed new orders for Russian weapons.

It was reported on Nov.30 that the Russian government had approved a draft agreement with Egypt, which would allow the two countries to use each other’s airspace and airbases. The draft deal was set out in a decree, signed by Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev on Nov. 28, which instructed the Russian Defence Ministry to hold negotiations with Egyptian officials and to sign the document once both sides reached an agreement.

The access to Egyptian airports would allow Russian military aircraft to refuel on their way to Syria. The agreement concerns a supplementary logistics hub, which might help Russian aircraft act in a free manner in the Syrian theater, when needed. When in force, the deal will make training of Egyptian Air Force personnel much easier. The document does not cover airborne radar pickets and military transport planes carrying hazardous cargo. The agreement is to be valid for five years and could be extended.

The New York Times writes that the air base deal as an “apparent snub to the Trump administration,” since it represents “the latest extension of Russian power in the Middle East, in this case through cooperation with one of Washington’s closest Arab allies.” According to the source, if implemented, the proposed agreement would deepen Russia’s military presence in the region to the levels unmatched since 1973. In practical terms, the presence of Russian jets in Egypt would raise concerns about the operational security of American military personnel and require coordinating with American military planes in the same airspace.

The New York Times cites analysts who claim that Cairo’s perceived willingness to allow Russian airpower access to Egyptian airbases demonstrates a reduction in United States influence in the region. “Power abhors a vacuum and when the United States pulls back we can’t be under the impression that the world is going to stand by and wait for us,” said Matthew Spence, a former deputy assistant secretary of defense for Middle East policy under the Obama administration.

In August, Cairo criticized the US for its decision to withhold $195 million in military aid and cut $96 million in other aid in response to Cairo’s alleged human rights violations.

Egypt is the most populous country in North Africa and the Arab world, the third-most populous in Africa and the fifteenth-most populous in the world. Last year, the country’s population reached 92 million.

A year ago, Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi publicly affirmed his support for the forces of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to bring Egypt even closer to Russia. The possibility of Egyptian military taking part in the implementation of the safe (de-escalation) zones initiative in Syria is on the agenda. The involvement of Egypt would no doubt hike the country’s international standing.

In recent months, Moscow and Cairo have signed several contracts for MiG-29 fighter jets, Ka-52 helicopters, and other weapons as Russia’s arms sales to Middle East countries have spiked to record-high levels. The two partners have signed several agreements for the renovation of military production factories on Egyptian soil. A protocol has been signed to grant Egypt access to GLONASS, the Russian global satellite positioning system. The Russian-Egyptian 2017 Defenders of Friendship joint tactical drills took place in September, 2017 in the Krasnodar region of the Russian Federation – the first joint airborne training exercise on Russia’s soil to become a regular event in future.

Gaining basing rights in Egypt would allow Russia to project military power into many parts of the region, including the Red Sea, the Horn of Africa and the Mediterranean. The military presence will be legitimized. Russia would have the ability to take part in peace keeping missions in Libya should it choose to.

Libya is a promising area for cooperation. Moscow has a special role to play there. Russia and Egypt can contribute jointly into bringing stability to this war-torn country. Their interests by and large coincide paving the way for coordinated policy and actions. The opposing actors in Libya ask Russia to intervene as a mediator. Libyans remember well the NATO intervention of 2011 and don’t trust the West, especially in view of its failure to achieve any positive results in Syria.

Many Arab countries are turning to military cooperation with Russia as a result of its success in Syria. Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir has just visited Russia to ask for protection against the United States. The possibility of constructing a Russian naval base in Sudan is an issue under consideration.

Russia has special relationship with Iran, Turkey, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Israel and the Gulf states. Saudi Arabia is Egypt’s ally. It provides funds for buying Russian weapons. This October, Saudi King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud visited Moscow – the first ever visit to Russia by a Saudi king. A memorandum of understanding was signed on the purchase of S-400 air defense systems from Russia to mark a shift for Saudi Arabia, which until now has been purchasing arms from the United States and Great Britain. The countries don’t see eye to eye on many international issues but realize how important it is to cooperate and exchange the views.

With Western sanctions in place, Moscow makes breakthroughs to gain influence and access to new markets for Russian arms, goods and energy. It enjoys good relations with all countries of the region. There is not a single state in the region that Moscow has a conflict with. No other country has such an advantage. Moscow does not take sides in the Sunni-Shia conflict, which makes it well suited for playing the role of mediator between the Gulf States backed by Egypt and Iran.

A resurgent Russia has asserted itself in the Middle East as a key international player. The draft agreement with Egypt is a convincing example of its growing clout in the region.

An Israeli war on Egypt; taking a stand is a duty حرب «إسرائيلية» على مصر والموقف واجب

An Israeli war on Egypt; taking a stand is a duty

ديسمبر 4, 2017

Written by Nasser Kandil,حرب «إسرائيلية» على مصر والموقف واجب

There are facts that must be fixed before discussing the position which must be adopted by the forces of the resistance axis, its elites and its followers towards the terrorist operations which target it. For sure, it is a position of solidarity from the initial clear considerations towards the nature of the terrorist aggression against the Egyptian people, its security, and its stability without any ambiguity. What we want to discuss is beyond the initial, humanitarian, moral, and national position especially because in Egypt there are no ambiguities similar to the situation of the war in Libya and the infiltration of terrorism behind local facades in an open civil war.

The first fact is that the debate about the Egyptian-Saudi relationship and its ceilings in the Egyptian foreign policy must not prevent taking into consideration what is going on in Egypt. The subject of the official political discourse of Egypt which sometimes is wrong and sometimes is right is not the war and the position towards it, especially if the one who launches this war bets on the non-cohesion of the axis of resistance behind Egypt in its war, because it monopolizes making use of confusions which are created by the debate about choices, positions, and the resulting differences at least at the level of the public and the elites, in addition to the decision-makers level.

The second fact is that during the crucial moment experienced by the region with the double-breaking of the war waged by Washington against the axis of the resistance, and the terrorism in Syria and Iraq Israel seems at the most difficult state of confusion, and the searching for mechanisms for the new demarcation lines. Due to Egypt’s size and its geographical, political, military, and population status, and its open policy on the major countries and their settlements it is nominated to play roles, while Israel is feeling that it is a source of danger on its plans, and a reason of concern about its considerations whether in Syria or Lebanon. Both of them are a source of concern to Israel directly, especially in Palestine where Egypt as Israel is present powerfully, but they are not present together.

The third truth is that the arrangements of the Israeli house means the arrangement of the so-called backyards, most importantly Golan, the southern of Lebanon, and Gaza, it is an impossible arrangement with the Israeli capacities alone, and it is impossible through the Israeli wars, moreover it is not possible but only if Israel succeeds in embroiling Egypt to exert pressure on Hezbollah in Syria and Lebanon, and through exerting pressure on the resistance in Palestine as a condition for its sponsorship. Israel succeeded in making use of the terrorist operations which targeted Egypt to link them with the relationship between Hamas Movement and the Muslim Brotherhood organization and confusing the Egyptian security about the sponsor party of terrorism, as well as the borders through which the terrorists get the safe shelter. During the crisis of the Gulf-Egyptian relationships with Qatar and its effect on Hamas, the Israeli bet was on the joint Egyptian-Israeli reaping, regarding the future of the resistance weapons in Gaza as a weapon of support of terrorism, which is a condition for lifting the double siege of the Egyptian and Israeli sides on Gaza, but the Egyptian position was decisive by neutralizing the resistance’s weapons from the negotiation.

The fourth fact is that the experience of the Egyptian security and its long history do not allow it to believe the hypothesis of the ability of the terrorist groups to possess the ability to move as armies without borders that form a safe shelter and without a support that protects it in infiltration, moving, transforming weapons, equipments, and funds. Despite all the tension in the relationships of Egypt with Turkey and Qatar and despite all the harm from which Egypt suffered through the long positioning of Hamas under the ceiling of the Muslim Brotherhood and their conflict with the government in Egypt. The Egyptian security succeeded in tracing the lines to discover the Israeli sponsorship of the terrorist groups in Sinai, especially after the Egyptian President has already warned according to the reports received by the security services about the hypotheses of the displacement of ISIS after its defeat in Syria and Iraq towards Sinai, before the last massacre which interpreted these expectations which built on information that documents the Israeli role in transferring and putting the militants of ISIS in Sinai in conjunction with the position of Egypt which sponsors the Palestinian reconciliation, including neutralizing the weapons of the resistance.

Depending on all of that there is a strategic intelligence war between Egypt and Israel, its title is Sinai, as a backyard of Israel and an alternative capital to ISIS or an Egyptian full-sovereign territory. The subject of attraction is the usage of ISIS by Israel to subdue Egypt and to oblige it to change its regional intervention starting from Gaza by positioning in a hostile position against the forces of the resistance, towards linking its intervention in Syria and Lebanon with the same hostile titles in exchange of the security of the Egyptians which Israel thinks that it has control on it by having control on ISIS. So Egypt and its position in the new maps of the region becomes the winning card in drawing balances and in determining the status of Israel as a loser or as a winner in the wars of the region. It is the conflict over Egypt.

If the resistance’s forces in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Iran, and Yemen cannot make an influence in this confrontation but through the solidarity with Egypt, its government, army, people and transcending all the differences about the political and the media performance, and in calling the public and the elites to express this position with strength and stability, the resistance forces in Palestine is called to know that this war is the war of its existence, so it has to wage it along with Egypt strongly, and to disclose what it has as facts and documents about the relationship of ISIS and the other formations of the Takfiri terrorism with Israel. This is the task of Hamas mainly and it has many things to do, but most importantly is the ability of the resistance forces to contribute in a way that does not expose Egypt to danger by making the security of Israel versus the security of Egypt. The proper equation is that the relationship of Israel with tampering the Egyptian security will not put the weapons of the resistance into negotiation, but the security of Israel will be under negotiation, so the Israeli government which is keen on its security has to stop tampering with the Egyptian security, because this tampering aims at driving Egypt to accept the blackmailing by obliging it to discuss the fate of the resistance’s weapons.

Translated by Lina Shehadeh,

حرب «إسرائيلية» على مصر والموقف واجب

نوفمبر 28, 2017

ناصر قنديل

حرب «إسرائيلية» على مصر والموقف واجب

– ثمة حقائق لا بدّ من تثبيتها قبل مناقشة الموقف الواجب على قوى محور المقاومة ونخبها وجمهورها من العمليات الإرهابية التي تستهدفها. وهو بلا تردّد موقف تضامني من الاعتبارات المبدئية لجهة طبيعة العدوان الإرهابي بلا أيّ التباس وطبيعة المستهدَف وهو الشعب المصري وأمنه واستقراره بلا أيّ التباس. وما نريد مناقشته أبعد من الموقف المبدئي الإنساني والأخلاقي والوطني، خصوصاً أنّ في ما تشهده مصر لا التباسات تشبه حال الحرب في ليبيا وتسلّل الإرهاب وراء واجهات محلية في حرب أهلية مفتوحة.

– الحقيقة الأولى هي أنّ النقاش حول العلاقة المصرية السعودية وسقوفها في السياسة الخارجية المصرية لا يجوز أن يحول دون رؤية حقيقة ما يجري في مصر، كما أنّ الخطاب السياسي الرسمي لمصر الذي يُصيب ويخطئ ليس موضوعاً ميدانه هذه الحرب والموقف منها، خصوصاً إذا كان مَن يشنّ هذه الحرب يراهن على عدم تماسك محور المقاومة وراء مصر في حربها لاستفرادها بالاستفادة من الالتباسات والتشويش اللذين يخلقهما النقاش حول الخيارات والمواقف والتباينات الناتجة عن ذلك، على الأقلّ على مستوى الجمهور والنخب، إنْ لم يكن على مستوى صنّاع القرار.

– الحقيقة الثانية أنّ اللحظة الحرجة التي تعيشها المنطقة مع انكسار مزدوج للحرب التي شنّتها واشنطن على محور المقاومة، وللإرهاب في سورية والعراق، وهو في وجه من وجوهه إحدى أدوات تلك الحرب، تبدو «إسرائيل» في أقصى حالات الارتباك، والبحث عن آليات الدخول على خطوط ترسيم الخرائط الجديدة، وتبدو مصر بسبب حجمها الطبيعي ومكانتها الجغرافية والسياسية والعسكرية والسكانية، وسياستها المفتوحة على القوى الكبرى وتسوياتها، مرشحة للعب أدوار، تستشعر «إسرائيل» أنها مصدر خطر على خططها وسبب قلق على حساباتها، سواء في سورية أو لبنان، وكلاهما يعنيان «إسرائيل» مباشرة، ولكن خصوصاً في فلسطين حيث تحضر مصر وتحضر «إسرائيل» بقوة ولا تحضران معاً.

– الحقيقة الثالثة هي أنّ ترتيب البيت «الإسرائيلي» يعني ترتيب ما يُسمّى بالحدائق الخلفية وأهمّها الجولان وجنوب لبنان، خصوصاً غزة. وهو ترتيب مستحيل بالمقدّرات «الإسرائيلية» وحدها، ومستحيل بالحروب «الإسرائيلية»، وغير ممكن إلا إذا نجحت «إسرائيل» بتوريط مصر بجعل الضغط على حزب الله في سورية ولبنان عنواناً لمداخلتها، والضغط على المقاومة في فلسطين شرطاً لرعايتها، وقد نجحت «إسرائيل» باستعمال العمليات الإرهابية التي استهدفت مصر لربطها بعلاقة حركة حماس بتنظيم الإخوان المسلمين، وتشويش الأمن المصري حول الجهة الراعية لهذا الإرهاب، والحدود التي يحظى الإرهابيون عبرها بالملاذ الآمن. وكان الرهان «الإسرائيلي» مع أزمة العلاقات الخليجية والمصرية بقطر وانعكاسها على حماس، أن يكون القطاف مصرياً «إسرائيلياً» مشتركاً، بالنظر لمستقبل سلاح المقاومة في غزة كسلاح داعم للإرهاب، مطروح على الطاولة نزعه كشرط لفكّ الحصار المزدوج من الجهتين المصرية و«الإسرائيلية» على غزة. فجاء الموقف المصري حاسماً بتحييد سلاح المقاومة من التفاوض ضربة على رؤوس «الإسرائيليين».

– الحقيقة الرابعة أنّ خبرة الأمن المصري وعراقته لا تسمح له بتصديق فرضية قدرة جماعات إرهابية على امتلاك قدرة التحرّك بأحجام تعادل حركة جيوش، من دون حدود تشكّل ملاذاً آمناً، ومن دون ظهير يحمي التسلل والانتقال والتدفق ونقل السلاح والمعدّات والأموال، ورغم كلّ التوتر في علاقات مصر بتركيا وقطر، وكلّ الأذى اللاحق بمصر من تموضع حماس لفترة طويلة تحت سقف الإخوان وصراعهم مع الحكم في مصر، فقد نجح الأمن المصري بتتبّع الخطوط والخيوط، ليكتشف الرعاية «الإسرائيلية» للجماعات الإرهابية في سيناء، خصوصاً بعدما سبق ونبّه الرئيس المصري للتقارير التي ترده من أجهزة الأمن حول فرضيات نزوح داعش بعد هزيمتها في سورية والعراق نحو سيناء، قبل المذبحة الأخيرة التي ترجمت هذه التوقعات المبنية على معلومات توثق الدور «الإسرائيلي» في نقل وتوضيع مسلحي داعش في سيناء، بالتزامن مع موقف مصر الراعي للمصالحة الفلسطينية ومن ضمنها تحييد سلاح المقاومة.

– بالاستناد لكلّ ذلك تدور حرب استخبارية استراتيجية بين مصر و«إسرائيل»، عنوانها سيناء حديقة خلفية لـ«إسرائيل» وعاصمة بديلة لداعش، أم أرض مصرية كاملة السيادة، وموضوع التجاذب استخدام داعش «إسرائيلياً» لتركيع مصر وإلزامها، بتعديل وجهة تدخّلها الإقليمي بدءاً من غزة، بالتموضع في موقع عدائي لقوى المقاومة، وصولاً لربط مداخلتها في سورية ولبنان بالعناوين العدائية ذاتها، مقابل أمن مصر والمصريين الذي تظنّ «إسرائيل» أنها تمسكه بإمساكها بـ«داعش»، لتصير مصر وموقعها في الخرائط الجديدة للمنطقة بيضة القبان في رسم التوازنات واستطراداً تحديد مكانة «إسرائيل» كرابح أو خاسر بحصيلة حروب المنطقة، وهو الصراع على مصر بكلّ ما تعني الكلمة.

– إذا كانت قوى المقاومة في لبنان وسورية والعراق وإيران واليمن لا تملك التأثير في هذه المواجهة إلا بالتضامن الحارّ مع مصر حكومة وجيشاً وشعباً وتخطي كلّ الملاحظات التي تطال التباينات حول الأداء السياسي والإعلامي، ودعوة الجمهور والنخب للتعبير عن هذا الموقف بكلّ قوة وثبات، إلا أنّ قوى المقاومة في فلسطين مدعوّة لإدراك أنّ هذه الحرب حرب وجودها، وأنّ عليها خوضها إلى جانب مصر بقوّة، وأن تفضح بما لديها من وقائع ووثائق علاقة داعش وأخواته من متفرّعات الإرهاب التكفيري بـ«إسرائيل». وهذه مهمة حماس بصورة رئيسية ولديها الكثير الكثير، ولعلّ الأهمّ هو تمكّن قوى المقاومة من تقديم الإسهام النوعي الذي لا يعرّض مصر للمخاطرة، بجعل أمن «إسرائيل» في كفة موازية لأمن مصر. فالمعادلة الواجبة هي أنّ علاقة «إسرائيل» بالعبث بالأمن المصري لن تطرح سلاح المقاومة على الطاولة، بل ستضع أمن «إسرائيل» نفسه على الطاولة، وعلى الحكومة «الإسرائيلية» الحريصة على أمنها أن توقف هذا العبث بالأمن المصري، الهادف أصلاً لدفع مصر لقبول الابتزاز بجرّها لبحث مصير سلاح المقاومة.

Related Videos

Related Articles

Jamil Essayyed : The Real Story of Hariri

Related Videos

Related Articles

Egypt Mosque Attack: 230+ Martyred in Sinai Massacre

Local Editor

25-11-2017 | 11:01

Militants martyred more than 230 people at a mosque in North Sinai Friday, detonating a bomb and gunning down worshippers in the deadliest such attack of Egypt’s modern history, state media and witnesses said.

Egypt Mosque Attack

No group immediately claimed responsibility, but since 2013 Egyptian security forces have battled a stubborn Wahhabi Daesh [Arabic acronym for “ISIS” / “ISIL”] affiliate in the desert region, and militants have killed hundreds of police and soldiers.

State media showed images of bloodied victims and bodies covered in blankets inside the Al-Rawda mosque in Bir al-Abed, west of Al-Arish, the main city in North Sinai.

Worshippers were finishing Friday prayers at the mosque when a bomb exploded, witnesses said. Around 40 gunmen set up positions outside the mosque with jeeps and opened fire from different directions as people tried to escape.

“Four groups of armed men attacked the worshippers inside the mosque after Friday noon prayers. Two groups were firing at ambulances to deter them,” said Mohammad, a witness. The public prosecutors’ office said 235 people had been killed and 109 more wounded.

Hours after the attack, Egypt’s military launched airstrikes on targets in mountainous areas around Bir al-Abed, security sources and witnesses said.

“The armed forces and the police will avenge our martyrs and restore security and stability with the utmost force,” Egypt’s President Abdel-Fattah al-Sisi said in a televised address.

“What is happening is an attempt to stop us from our efforts in the fight against terrorism, to destroy our efforts to stop the terrible criminal plan that aims to destroy what is left of our region.”

Egypt later said it would delay the opening of the Rafah border crossing to Gaza after the attack due to security concerns. The crossing had been due to open for three days beginning Saturday. Striking at a mosque would be a change in tactics for the Sinai militants, who have usually attacked troops, police and Christian churches.

The militants have also attacked local tribes and their militias for working with the army and police, branding them traitors.

Sisi, a former armed forces commander who presents himself as a bulwark against extremist militancy, convened an emergency meeting with his defense and interior ministers and intelligence chief soon after the attack.

Security has long been one of the key sources of public support for the former general, who is expected to run for re-election early next year for another four-year term.

Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri contacted Sisi to give his condolences for the attack.

“These attacks revealed the falsity of taking religious as a pretext to commit the most heinous crimes against innocents,” Hariri’s press office said in a statement, “These attacks call for the necessity to unite all efforts to deracinate terrorism from its roots and protect Islam and Muslims from those who violate their security, religion and safety of their homelands.”

US President Donald Trump, in a post on Twitter Friday, called the assault a “horrible and cowardly terrorist attack.”

“The world cannot tolerate terrorism, we must defeat them militarily and discredit the extremist ideology that forms the basis of their existence,” he added. A White House statement called on the international community to strengthen its efforts to defeat terrorist groups.

Russian President Vladimir Putin sent condolences to Sisi, calling the attack “striking for its cruelty and cynicism,” while condemnations poured in from Iran, Saudi Arabia and other countries.

French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian also condemned the attack and said Paris stood with its ally.

Source: News Agencies, Edited by website team

%d bloggers like this: