جيش سوريّ وطنيّ بتداعيات إقليميّة

د.وفيق إبراهيم

وحيدٌ بين الجيوش العربية في الشرق يدافع عن شعبه ودولته منذ عقد تقريباً بإرادة حديديّة مواصلاً حرباً مفتوحة في وجه الأميركيين والأتراك والإسرائيليين وبعض القوى الأوروبية محجماً المشروع الكردي ومئات التنظيمات الإرهابية المدعومة من الخليج.

هذا هو الجيش السوريّ الذي يحتفل بعيد تأسيسه الخامس والسبعين وسط حرب مفتوحة عليه لها بعدان، الأول محاولات تفتيته بذرائع مناطقية واخوانية وطائفية ورشى مالية ضخمة والثانية كسره في الميدان بفتح عشرات المعارك عليه في آن معاً لبعثرة قواه. فلا هذه أفلحت ولا تلك نجحت.. ولا يألو الجيش العربي السوري بعديده الذي ينيف عن ثلاث مئة الف جندي، من دون احتساب ألوية الردفاء والأنصار يجول في ميادين سورية من حدودها السورية مع الجولان المحتل والأردنية والعراقية والتركية، ولا ينسى حدوده مع لبنان لضبط حركة الإرهاب والتهريب.

كيف صمد الجيش السوري هذه المدة الطويلة متمكناً من تحرير سبعين بالمئة من بلاده، ومحافظاً على تماسكه؟

الإعداد الوطني المدروس لهذا الجيش، ادى الى تماسكه العسكري في وحداته وألويته بعقيدة قتال راسخة تقوم على حماية الدولة بما تشكله من شعب ومؤسسات وتاريخ يزهو على كل دول الإقليم.

هذا الشعور بالانتماء عميق لدى الجندي السوري الذي يتعلم في المؤسسات العسكرية انه يحارب دفاعاً عن أهله وشعبه وآلاف السنوات من عمر سورية.

قد يكون هذا الجانب مطلوباً، لكنه يتعلم أيضاً انه يدافع عن الشرق بأسره عندما يدافع عن ميادين بلاده.

هناك من المتخاذلين السوريين والعرب من يعزو انتصارات الجيش لتحالفاته الإقليمية والدولية، فيرد عليها إعلام أجنبي مؤكداً لها ان هذه التحالفات اتت الى سورية بطلب من دولتها ولوجود تقاطعات في المصالح تتعلق برهبتها من خسارة الدولة السورية وهذا معناه انتشار الإرهاب في بلادها.. ألم يقل الرئيس الروسي بوتين بأنه قاتل في سورية لكي لا يجد نفسه مضطراً لمحاربة الإرهاب في موسكو… وكذلك إيران التي تعرف أن هزيمة المشروع الاميركي ـ الخليجي ـ التركي ـ الإرهابي في سورية، يؤدي الى تخفيف الهجمات على إيران نفسها.

يتبين ان ادوار الجيش السوري متنوّعة لتنوع أهمية سورية في الشرق والإقليم، فضلاً عن مؤسسة الجيش نفسها التي تدرب أفرادها على اساس الانتماء للشعب والدولة.

داخلياً، قاوم الجيش إغراءات مالية من دول الخليج، شملت الأفراد والضباط والقادة بالمباشر حيناً وعبر أصحابهم حيناً آخر وبواسطة أصدقائهم وقرارهم وبلداتهم والمبالغ المعروضة تشكل ثروة وتصل مع القادة العسكريين الى ملايين الدولارات، مروراً بخمسين ألف دولار للجنود العاديين.

إلا أن هذه المحاولات عجزت عن اختراق الأسوار الوطنية العالية للجيش السوري، ولم يتأثر إلا نفر قليل لا يزيد عن ألفين او أقل، لم ينجح مشغلوهم ببناء تنظيم عسكري خاص بهم.. مكتفين ببعض الاعلانات التهريجية لصور عسكريين فارين اصبحوا عمالاً في الخليج وتركيا والمانيا، مخترعين صوراً لمدنيين، جرى إلباسهم ازياء عسكرية مع محاولات تمويهية لإخفاء وجوههم للزوم تمرير الاخبار الكاذبة.

هناك أربعة انواع من التداعيات انجزها الجيش العربي السوري في قتاله المستمر منذ نحو عقد:

الأول هو دفاعه ونجاحه بالحفاظ على وحدة سورية بتحريره معظم مناطقها وبشكل أجهض فيه أي إمكانية لتقسيم او كنتنة ناجحين، فحتى المناطق التي يسيطر عليها أكراد «قسد» في شمال شرقي سورية، لا تستطيع بناء دولة عليها، لافتقارها الى سواحل وطرقات متصلة بخارج متصالح معها وبعثرة مناطقها السوري ورفضها من قبل السكان السوريين من غير الأكراد الذين يشكلون الغالبية فيها، اما المناطق الداخلية فمستقرة في اطار الإيمان الكامل بالاندماج الوطني الداخلي.

لجهة الدور الثاني، فإن ضرب الجيش السوري للإرهاب في بلاده، أفشل حركته بالتموضع والانتشار في لبنان، معطلاً نموه في الأردن، ومحطماً بناه الممتدة الى العراق.

كما منع الإخوان المسلمين المتحالفين مع الأتراك من التموضع في أجزاء من سورية، مجهضاً إمكانية تحرّكها بحرية نحو الجوار المباشر لسورية.

كذلك فإن الجيش السوري دافع بقتاله للإرهاب في سورية عن الأردنيين انفسهم مبعثراً حركته نحو مدنهم وقراهم، علماً أن المملكة الهاشمية رعت في بدايات الحرب السورية، انطلاق الإرهاب نحو سورية وحمته وحاولت التقدم بواسطته نحو درعا عاصمة حوران، وهكذا يحافظ الجيش السوري على وحدة الأردن الذي شاركت دولته في محاولات تدمير سورية.

كذلك فإن لجم الإرهاب في سورية أسهم بإضعافه في العراق وإفساح المجال امام الجيش والحشد الشعبي فيه لتفكيك أوصال اقوى منظمات ارهابية كانت على وشك السيطرة على بغداد نفسها.

فيكون الجيش السوري بعمليات ضربه للارهاب اوقف من نموه في كامل الشرق لأنه حلقة متصلة، كانت تأمل بالسيطرة على سورية لتأمين حريات حركة واسعة لها في الإقليم.

ودول الخليج والأردن التي دعمت الارهاب هي في طليعة المستفيدين من تدمير الجيش السوري للإرهاب في سورية.

هذا ما جعل بوتين يعترف بدور سورية في منع الإرهاب من الانتقال الى مجمل الدول في العالم، ومنها روسيا، الأمر الذي يدعو الى مدى خطورة الرئيس التركي اردوغان الذي استثمر في الارهاب مهدداً بالسماح لمئات الآلاف من النازحين السوريين ومن بينهم ارهابيون الى اوروبا، وعندها بدأ الاتحاد الاوروبي يخصص مساعدات لتركيا كي تعيل بها النازحين فسرقتها وأعادت تنظيم الارهاب التركماني والاخواني بها.

بذلك يتضح دور الجيش السوري وطنياً واقليمياً وعالمياً في مكافحة الارهاب المعولم واجهاض حركته الدولية من جهة ووظيفته في تدمير الدولة السورية من جهة ثانية.

ألا يستحق هذا الجيش وساماً عالمياً على مثل هذا الدور الصانع للاستقرار في سورية والعالم؟ لذلك فإن هذا الجيش الذي يشكل مؤسسة طليعية من مؤسسات الدولة السورية، مثابر على تحقيق دور وطني يؤمن له وليس كمجرد وظيفة، إنه دور الدفاع عن سورية قلب الشرق، وبالتالي عن كامل الإقليم مسهماً في آن معاً في دعم الاستقرار العالمي.

Iraqi PM’s visit to Washington will fail if he is not ‘obedient’: Iraqi politician

Description:

In an interview with Afaq TV, Sa’ad al-Muttalibi, a senior member of the Iraqi State of Law Coalition says that Iraq’s prime minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi will fail on his imminent state visit to Washington, as US officials never treat Iraqi officials as equal counterparts and al-Kadhimi won’t be an exception.

This is especially true as al-Kadhimi is tasked by the Iraqi parliament with pulling US military forces out of the Arab country, al-Muttalibi explains.

The senior politician goes on to say that one of the major problems that US officials had with former Iraqi prime minister Nouri al-Maliki was that he treated American officials as ‘equal counterparts’, while other Arab leaders usually behave as ‘subservient subjects’ when they visit Washington.

Source: Afaq TV (YouTube)

Date: 24 July, 2020

(Important note: Please help us keep producing independent translations for you by contributing as little as $1/month here)

Read Transcript: http://middleeastobserver.net/iraqi-pms-visit-to-washington-will-fail-if-he-is-not-obedient-iraqi-politician/

مشروعان متناقضان… بينهما حرب وجود ونحن واثقون من انتصارنا

د. ادمون ملحم

ما نشهده في بلادنا من قتل ومجازر ودمار وتهجير في فلسطين والشام ولبنان والعراق والأردن ليس إلا مشاهد من حرب طويلة الأمد مفتوحة على أمتنا وعلى وجودنا الإنساني الحضاري. هذه الحرب فُرضت علينا منذ تأسست الحركةُ الصهيونيةُ العالميةُ بهدفِ إيجادِ وطنٍ قوميٍ لليهود في فلسطين مرتكزةً على فكرةِ «أرضِ الميعاد» الممتدةِ بين الفراتِ والنيلِ التي منحَها يهوه السمسارُ لشعبِه «المختار» من دونِ سائرِ الشعوبِ لتكونَ له ملكاً أبدياً كما جاء في قولِه لإبراهيم في سفر التكوين 7:17: «… أعطي لك ولنسلِك من بعدِك أرضَ غُربتِك، كلَ أرضِ كنعان، ملكاً أبدياً، وأكون إلهَهُم».

وهذه الحرب المصيرية أفرزت مشروعينِ متناقضينِ لا يمكنُ التسويةُ بينهُما:

المشروعُ الأولُ هو المشروعُ الصهيونيُ العدواني الذي يريدُ أن يُقوّضَ مُجتمعَنا من خلالِ طمسِ هويتِنا القوميةِ وتراثِنا المناقبيِ الإنسانيِ وتزويرِ تاريخِنا الحضاريِ وأساطيرِنا الجميلِة وسرقِة ثرواتِنا وكنوزِنا وآثارِنا الخالدةِ والحطِّ من قِيمِنا الأخلاقيةِ والدينيةِ الساميةِ وتشويهِ كلّ إنتاجِنا الحضاريِ ومسيرتِنا الثقافيةِ والسياسيةِ والإبداعية.

المشروع الثاني فهو المشروعَ القوميَ الوحدوي الواضح، مشروعُ سوريةَ الطبيعيةَ الحضاريةَ العريقةَ في جذورِها التاريخيةِ والغنيةِ في معطياتِها الإنسانيةِ والثقافيةِ الماضية.

المشروع الصهيوني هو مشروع استعماري سرطاني مدعوم من الغرب الرأسمالي ومتسلحٌ بأعنفِ الوسائلِ الماديةِ والعسكريةِ المدمّرةِ ويرتكز على مزاعم وهميّة خرافية.

أما المشروع القوميّ فهو مشروعٌ مجتمعيٌ إنسانيٌ راقٍ يرتكزُ على مبدأِ الاشتراكِ في الحياةِ والتفاعلِ الاجتماعيِ الطبيعيِ في البيئةِ الواحدةِ وعلى ملكيةِ الأمةِ التاريخيةِ لِوَطنِها وما فيه من ثرواتٍ وخيرات..

المشروع الصهيونيّ يعتمد البطش والإرهاب ولا يمثل إلا الباطلَ العنصريَ والنفسيةَ الهمجيةَ المتحجرةَ في مُعتقداتِها ومزاعمِها التاريخيةِ الخرافيةِ والمُفعمةِ بالحقدِ واللؤمِ والظلمِ والكراهيةِ والعداءِ للشعوبِ..

أما المشروع القومي فهو مشروعٌ حضاريٌ يمثّلُ النفسيةَ الجميلةَ الخلاّقةَ والمفعمةَ بالفضائلِ والقيمِ الساميةِ ويهدف إلى تحسينَ حياتِنا القوميةِ والمساهمة في رقيِ الإنسانيةِ جمعاء. وهذا المشروع تنهضُ به قوةٌ خلاَّقةٌ مؤمنةٌ بحياةٍ جميلةٍ تشعُّ فيها قيمُ الخيرِ والحقِ والجمالِ والحريةِ والسلام..

إنّ نتائج الحرب المصيرية تتوقف علينا نحن وعلى قدرة هذا المشروعُ القومي الطبيعي. فلكي ينهضَ هذا المشروع وينتصرُ يستوجبُ منا جميعاً الخروجَ من حالةِ الفتنِ المذهبيةِ والشرذمةِ والانقساماتِ إلى حالةِ الوحدةِ الاجتماعيةِ والتسامحِ القوميِ، حالةِ الوضوحِ واليقينِ والثقةِ بالنفسِ والعملِ بإرادةٍ واعيةٍ وخطةٍ نظاميةٍ واضحةِ الأهداف.

لا يمكنُ لنا أن نتغلبَ على الخطةِ الصهيونيةِ النظاميةِ الدقيقةِ ونحن نتبادلُ الأحقادَ الدينيةَ ونتقاتلُ على الجنةِ السماويةِ ونتخبطُ بقضايا الفئويةِ والمذهبيةِ والعشائريةِ والخصوصياتِ.. بل نتغلبُ عليها بعقيدةٍ جلّيةٍ واضحةٍ تُحيي حقيقتَنا التاريخيةَ الحضاريةَ وتعملُ لتأسيسِ مجتمعٍ مدنيٍّ ديمقراطيٍّ راقٍ يعي هويتَه وتاريخَه وقضيتَه القوميةَ ومقاصدَه الكبرى في الحياة.

لا يمكنُ لنا أن نتغلبَ على الخطةِ الصهيونيةِ بأنظمةِ الطائفيةِ والجهلِ والتخلفِ والفسادِ، أنظمةِ الهرولة وكبتِ الحرياتِ..

ولا نتغلَّبُ عليها بالسياساتِ الضيقةِ، بسياسةِ المماحكاتِ والخصوماتِ وبنهجِ التخاذلِ والتسكعِ والمساومات… بل نتغلبُ عليها بخطةٍ نظاميةٍ أشدُ نظاماً وأدهى، خطةٍ عقلانيةٍ واضحةٍ في الرؤيا والأهدافِ ودقيقةٍ في التخطيطِ والممارسةِ والإنجاز.. خطةٍ تعملُ لبناءِ الإنسانِ الجديدِ في فكرِه وقلبِه ووجدانِه، الإنسانِ الحرِ المؤمنِ بنفسهِ وإنسانيتِه، الممتلئ بقيمِ الحياةِ الساميةِ والمتسلحِ بقوةِ العلمِ والمعرفةِ والوجدانِ القومي، الإنسانِ – المجتمعِ الذي يعملُ لخيرِ مجتمعِه ورقيِه والذي يرفُضُ العيشَ الذليلَ ويحيا لقضايا الحياةِ العالية، حياةِ العزِ والشرفِ والانتصار.

ولا نتغلبُ على الخطةِ الصهيونيةِ بثقافةِ الهزيمةِ ولغةِ الإحباطِ، بنفسيةِ الخوفِ والصمتِ والخنوعِ وبأساليبِ الفوضى والتبعيةِ والاتكاليةِ والارتجالِ بل نتغلبُ عليها بخطةٍ ساهرةٍ وراصدةٍ وُمحرِّكةٍ إمكانياتِ المجتمع… خطةٍ هجوميةٍ ومصارعةٍ عواملٍ الضعفٍ والانحطاطٍ والفناء.. خطةٍ تُفكرُ برويةٍ وتستشرفُ المخاطرَ والتحديات.. تراهنُ على إرادةِ الحياةِ فينا وعلى ما يكمُنُ في نفوسِنا من قوةٍ مناقبيةٍ ومن خلقٍ وإبداع.. توقظُ النيامَ وتخاطبُ العقلَ والوجدان.. تنفخُ في الشعبِ روحَ البطولةِ والصراعِ والمقاومةِ وتُنَمِّي فيه روحَ الوعي والمعرفةِ العلميةِ والثقافةِ القوميةِ الصحيحةِ التي تزيلُ الغشاواتِ وتَقْضِي على المبادئ الفاسدةِ والثقافاتِ الرجعيةِ المسؤولةِ عن الكوارثِ القوميةِ التي حلَّتْ بنا.

في مواجهةِ المشروعِ الصهيونيِ لا خيارَ لنا إلا خيارَ المقاومةِ والصمودِ، خيارَ الصراعِ والبطولةِ المؤمنةِ دفاعاً عن الكرامةِ القوميةِ والوجودِ القوميِ والحقِ القومي. بفضلِ هذا الخيارِ فقط يمكن ان ننهي زمنَ الهزائمِ المتعاقبةِ على أمتِنا ونبدأ زمناً جديداً هو زمنُ الانتصاراتِ المشهودة، زمنُ المقاومينَ المؤمنينَ والشهداءِ الأبرارِ الذين بهم وحدهم نهزم المشروعَ الصهيونيَ – الأميركاني وسنهزمه حتماً لأن فينا قوة، كما يقول سعاده العظيم، لو فعلت لغيّرت وجه التاريخ.

Israel Reinforces Troops Near Golan Heights Fearing Hezbollah Retaliation To Strikes On Syria

South Front

The Middle East is rapidly moving towards a new round of confrontation between the US-Israeli bloc and Iranian-led Shiite forces.

On July 26, the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) deployed M109 Doher howitzers near the separation line with Lebanon. The deployment of howitzers became the latest in a series of broad measures employed by the IDF near Lebanon recently. Earlier, the 13th “Gideon” Infantry Battalion of the IDF’s elite 1st “Golani” Brigade reinforced troops near the border. The number Israeli Hermes 450 drone reconnaissance flights also significantly increased over southern Lebanon. Additional IDF units were also deployed in the occupied Syrian Golan Heights. On top of this, the IDF announced that it will hold the Lebanese government responsible “for all actions emanating from Lebanon”.

These measures followed the July 20 Israeli strike on Syria, which resulted in the death of a member of Lebanese Hezbollah. Over the past years, Hezbollah has been one of the main supporters of Syrian Army operations against ISIS and al-Qaeda. Tel Aviv increases its strikes on what it calls Hezbollah and Iranian-affiliated targets in Syria every time when the Syrian Army launches active actions against terrorists and seems to be very concerned by the possibility of a Hezbollah response to the July 20 attack.

If Israel is really set to conduct strikes on Hezbollah targets in Lebanon to the retaliatory action by Hezbollah, this scenario could easily evolve into a wider border confrontation between Hezbollah and the IDF.

At the same time, tensions between local resistance groups and the US-led coalition grew in Iraq. On July 24, the Islamic Resistance in Iraq, Ashab al-Kahf, announced that its forces had shot down an unmanned aerial vehicle of the US military over the province of Saladin. The group claimed that the UAV was downed by some ‘new weapon’ and released a photo showing the launch of what appears to be an anti-aircraft missile, likely a man-portable air-defense system.

On the same day, four unguided rockets struck the Pasmaya military camp, which is located 60km south of Baghdad. One of the rockets hit a garage for armoured vehicles, while another one targeted the barracks of the security unit. Two other rockets landed in an empty area. Despite causing some material damage, the rocket attack did not result in any casualties. No group has claimed responsibility for the attack.

The Pasmaya military camp is known to be hosting troops of the U.S.-led coalition and is used for training of Iraqi troops. On July 25, the coalition withdrew its forces from the camp and handed it over to the Iraqi military. According to the official statement, the coalition trained 50,000 personnel and invested $5 million into the creation of training infrastructure there.

Earlier in 2020, the US-led coalition withdrew its forces from several smaller military camps across the country. Some sources tried to present this as a withdrawal from Iraq due to the increasing attacks on coalition forces by anti-US Shiite paramilitary groups. These attacks increased significantly after the assassination of Iraqi Popular Mobilization Units Deputy Commander Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis and Iranian Quds Force Commander Qasem Soleimani in a US drone strike on Baghdad International Airport on January 3, 2020. The attack put the region on the brink of the US-Iranian war and caused a public outcry against the US military presence in Iraq. However, in fact, the US has not been withdrawing its troops from the country, but rather redeploying them to larger bases. The US military even brought Patriot surface-to-air missile systems to provide additional protection to its forces. It also continues isolated attacks on positions of the Popular Mobilization Units, an official branch of the Iraqi Armed Forces that Washington describes as terrorist groups and Iranian proxies.

On July 26, several large explosions rocked the al-Saqer military camp near the district of Dora south of Baghdad. The Al-Saqer military camp hosts forces of the Popular Mobilization Units (PMU) as well as the Iraqi Federal Police. Large quantities of ammunition, which were stored in the camp, exploded. Iraqi Security Media said the ammunition exploded as result of “high heat” and “poor storage”. Nevertheless, sources affiliated with the PMU rejected these speculations. Local sources claimed that the explosions were caused by US drone strikes. An MQ-1 Predator combat drone was spotted over the al-Saqer military camp just after the incident. This was the second situation of this kind that happened in al-Saqer. In 2019, a US drone strike hit a weapon depot at the camp.

The current situation sets almost no prospects for a de-escalation in Iraq. The main goal of attacks by local Shiite groups is to force the US to withdraw troops from the country. At the same time, the US is not planning to withdraw its forces and uses these attacks to justify the increase of its campaign against pro-Iranian forces in the Middle East.

Iran intends build massive railway linking Persian Gulf to Mediterranean: MP

Source

By News Desk -2020-07-26

Shiraz railway station, Iran

BEIRUT, LEBANON (7:00 P.M.) – In a statement to the Fars News Agency on Sunday, Minister of Parliament, Mohebati Yousefi, stressed the need to quickly start implementing a project linking Iran, Asia and the Mediterranean Sea via Syria and Iraq, pointing out that this would reduce the duration of the goods transport operation by three days.

The Iranian parliamentarian indicated that the project will link the Persian Gulf through the port-cities of Basra (Iraq), and Latakia (Syria).

The Iranian parliamentarian stressed the necessity of the rapid implementation of this project, as it has significant economic returns, in terms of transporting passengers and goods between the three countries.

The MP mentioned the strategic benefits gained from this project, as it will facilitate the process of transporting goods from Asia to Europe via land.

He appealed to the responsible authorities to implement this project, the necessity of offering financial bonds to invest in it, in order to accelerate the financing process, which in turn contributes to the rapid implementation of this huge project.

This project has been discussed before and it was agreed upon between the three countries; however, due to the economic downturn and emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic, the railway was put on hold.

خرافة تحييد لبنان!


طلال سلمان.


لبنان الآن على كف عفريت… تحييد البلد المفلس والمتزاحم ابناؤه على السفارات بطلب “الفيزا” للخروج منه في زمن انتهى فيه معسكر عدم الانحياز.

مع وصول السفيرة الاميركية الجديدة في لبنان، دوروثي شيا، وهجومها المباشر (والخارج على الاصول الدبلوماسية وركائز العلاقات بين الدول الصديقة) على “حزب الله”، محرر الجنوب من الاحتلال الاسرائيلي، وصاحب كتلة نيابية وازنة وجماهير عريضة في معظم انحاء لبنان.. هبت رياح الدعوة إلى تحييد لبنان عن المنازعات والصراع في المنطقة.

تحييد البلد المفلس والمتزاحم ابناؤه على السفارات بطلب “الفيزا” للخروج منه، في زمن انتهى معسكر عدم الانحياز بقيادة جواهر لآل نهرو وجمال عبد الناصر وتيتو الذي حفظ وحدة يوغسلافيا. فما أن غاب حتى عادت دولا شتى لا قيمة لها في اوروبا ولا دور لها في العالم كالذي ابتدعه لها تيتو.

تتبع “الدولة” سياسة انكار ما لا يمكن انكاره” فالجوع اصدق إنباء من الكتب”، ومن حسان دياب ومناورات جبران باسيل وسط الإغفاءات المتقطعة لفخامة رئيس الجمهورية، كلها تشهد بأن لبنان بخير..

وماذا اذا استفقنا على سوريا مدمرة أو محتلة، شمالها للأتراك، بذريعة مقاتلة الاكراد، والساحل- طرطوس- اللاذقية – بانياس- للروس مع دوريات مؤللة تلاقي الاتراك بود ظاهر، اما قلبها – دمشق وضواحيها – فللحرس الثوري الايراني مع مقاتلي “حزب الله”.

كذلك فان العراق الذي بالكاد انتهى ترميمه بعد حروب صدام حسين التي دمرت أرض الرافدين، وجعلت الخزينة العراقية خاوية الا ما يلزم كشرهات لمن يتولى الحكم، وبقرب بغداد قوات اميركية، وفي أنحاء شتى قوات من الحرس الثوري الايراني، والكرد ما زالوا يطالبون بنصيبهم في الحكم بعد نيلهم رئاسة الدولة وعدد وافر من الوزارات، مع مناصب رفيعة في مؤسسات النفط الخ.. كل هذا من دون أن يتنازلوا عن مطلبهم بإقامة دولة كردستان المستقلة في شمالي العراق، حتى والجيوش التركية تقتحم تلك المناطق بذريعة مطاردة الاكراد الاتراك المقهورين في ظل السلطان اردوغان.

المهم أن النشيد الوطني الجديد الذي انطلق من الديمان وتولى الترويج له بضعة من السياسيين من ذوي الانتماء “المحايد” أخذوا يرددون نغمة “الحياد” بديلاً من النشيد الوطني.

الحياد بين من ومن؟

بين الاتحاد السوفياتي ومعسكره الاشتراكي الذي سقط بالضربة البوتينية القاضية؟ أم بين دولة الامارات وقطر العظمى؟ أم بين السعودية المذهبة واليمن الذي يموت أهله جوعاً..هذا إذا هم نجوا من رصاص الاخوة – الاعداء من ابطال الاحتلال السعودي – الاماراتي! أم بين الغزو التركي بقيادة السلطان الذي أقحم المعلم التاريخي الذي كان كنيسة آيا صوفيا، في الماضي وغداة نشوء السلطنة، وقرر تحويله إلى مسجد، متنكرا للتاريخ وحتى لأصول الصلاة عند المسلمين، اذ دخل الكنيسة التي صيرت مسجداً، بحذائه خلافاً لقواعد الصلاة.

أما مصر فمشغولة بهموم سد النهضة في الحبشة، خوفاً على السد العالي الذي انقذ المئة مليون مصري من العطش، والذي افتتحه الرئيس الراحل جمال عبد الناصر مع خروتشوف، اظرف رئيس عرفته موسكو، والذي خلع نعليه ليطرق بهما على منصة وفده في الامم المتحدة، حين بدأ الرئيس الاميركي خطابه.. وكان ذلك تعبيراً عن موقف الاتحاد السوفياتي من مشروع الغزو الاميركي لدولة فيديل كاسترو في كوبا.. وهي الجلسة التي حضرها معظم اقطاب دول عدم الانحياز: جواهر لال نهرو، وجمال عبد الناصر وتيتو، في حين كان الوفد الاميركي برئاسة جون كيندي.

يومها، كما يحب الاميركي أن ينسى، ترك كاسترو مبنى الأمم المتحدة في نيويورك ونزل ليجول في أحياء “السود”، الذين كانوا يحاولون الانتفاض ضد الظلم الاسود في البيت الابيض في واشنطن… وهو الظلم الذي تجلى مؤخراً في قتل جورج فلويد بحذاء بعض رجال الحرس، بينما صار البيت الابيض مقراً للمهووسين بقيادة دونالد ترامب، الداعم الاخطر للمشروع الصهيوني الذي يعمل على انجازه رئيس الحكومة الاسرائيلية المشتركة بين نتنياهو ومعارضيه، والذي – يشمل في ما يشمل – منطقة الاغوار التي تحفظ تلالها اجداث بعض ابطال فتح دمشق ومنهم ابو عبيدة الجراح.

يا أمة ضحكت من جهلها الامم…

لبنان الآن على كف عفريت. وسوريا تتمزق أمام عيون الاخوة العرب، والروس والاتراك والايرانيون يتقاسمن اراضيها، والرئيس الروسي بوتين يستقبل الرئيس السوري بشار الاسد في مقر السفارة الروسية في دمشق، ممتنعا عن الصعود للقائه في القصر الجمهوري على بعض الروابي التي غناها امير الشعراء احمد شوقي بقوله:

قُمْ نَاجِ جِلَّقَ وانْشُدْ رَسْـمَ مَنْ بَانُوامَشَتْ عَلَى الرّسْمِ أَحْدَاثٌ وَأَزْمَانُ
هَذا الأَديـمُ كِتابٌ لا انْكِفَـاءَ لَـهُرَثُّ الصَّحَائِفِ، بَاقٍ مِنْهُ عُـنْوانُ
بَنُـو أُمَـيَّـةَ للأنْبَـاءِ مَا فَتَحُـواوَللأحَـادِيثِ مَا سَـادُوا وَمَا دَانُوا
كَـانوا مُلُوكاً، سَرِيرُ الشّرقِ تَحْتَهُمُفَهَلْ سَأَلْتَ سَريرَ الغَرْبِ مَا كَانُوا؟

7,000-year-old artifact returned to Iraq from Italy

Source

By News Desk -2020-07-250

The statue of the Mother Goddess at the ceremony in Rome.

BEIRUT, LEBANON (1:45 P.M.) – The Iraqi Foreign Ministry spokesman, Ahmed Al-Sahaf, announced on Friday, that his country has received the statue of the “Mother Goddess” from Italy.

He said in a press statement, “The Embassy of the Republic of Iraq in Rome received the statue (the Mother Goddess) from the Italian government within an official ceremony that took place in the Italian Ministry of Property and Cultural Activities.”

He added, “The Iraqi ambassador to Rome, Safia Al-Suhail, attended the ceremony in addition to the Italian Minister of Culture.”

The statue of the Mother Goddess is an Iraqi artifact that dates back to prehistoric times (5000 years BC), and symbolizes motherhood and fertility.

قدرات إيران الدفاعيّة تجاوزت مستوى التهديدات

ظريف يؤكد استعداد بلاده لتطوير العلاقات مع السعوديّة والإمارات

أكد وزير الخارجية الإيراني محمد جواد ظريف، استعداد بلاده إلى «تطوير العلاقات مع السعودية والإمارات على قاعدة الاحترام المتبادل».

ورأى ظريف أن «السعودية تريد الاعتماد على قوى أجنبية عدة بدلاً من الاعتماد على جار واحد سيبقى دائماً هنا»، مشيراً إلى أن إيران «دائماً على استعداد لإجراء محادثات بناءة مع السعودية ولا توجد لديها أي مشكلة».

ظريف قال إنه «تمّ التوصل إلى اتفاقات جيدة جداً بين إيران والعراق خلال زيارة رئيس الوزراء العراقي إلى طهران».

ووصف ظريف خلال مؤتمر صحافي مع نظيره الروسي سيرغي لافروف، في موسكو أول أمس الثلاثاء، العلاقات الإيرانية مع روسيا بـ»الاستراتيجية»، منوهاً إلى أن «الحوار المستمر مع الدول الصديقة في الوضع الراهن أمر ضروري».

وعقب مغادرة موسكو، كتب وزير الخارجية الإيراني تغريدة، قال فيها إنه «سلم رسالة مهمة إلى الرئيس الروسي فلاديمير بوتين واتفق مع وزير الخارجية الروسي أيضاً على وضع اللمسات الأخيرة على اتفاق التعاون طويل الأمد مع روسيا».

وأضاف ظريف «لدينا وجهات نظر واحدة بشأن الاتفاق النووي وضرورة الالتزام بالقانون الدولي. واتفقنا على وضع اللمسات الأخيرة على اتفاق التعاون الشامل الاستراتيجي طويل الأمد».

​كما، أجرى وزير الخارجية الإيراني محمد جواد ظريف، أول أمس محادثات مع نظيره الروسي سيرغي لافروف حول الاتفاق النووي والمستجدات الإقليمية والدولية وذلك بعد تقديم رسالة من الرئيس حسن روحاني إلى الرئيس فلاديمير بوتين.

على صعيد آخر، قال القائد العام للجيش الإيراني، اللواء سيد عبد الرحيم موسوي: «إننا تمكنا من تطوير قدراتنا الدفاعية في مجال تعبئة القوى البشرية وتطوير الأجهزة المتقدمة، بما يتناسب ومستوى التهديدات، بل اجتيازه».

ونقلت وكالة «إرنا»، مساء أمس، عن موسوي أن «قوة الدفاع الجوي الإيرانية تضطلع بمهام رئيسية، لكونها تقف في الخط الأمامي لساحات الدفاع عن البلاد»، مشيراً إلى أن «قدرات إيران الدفاعية تخطت مستوى التهديدات في شتى المجالات التعبوية، وامتلاك الأجهزة والمعدات العسكرية الحديثة».

وأفادت الوكالة بأن «تصريحات موسوي جاءت خلال الزيارة التفقدية التي قام بها اليوم، مرافقاً بقائد قوة الدفاع الجوي في الجيش الإيراني، العميد صباحي فرد، للأقسام المختلفة بوحدة الرد السريع التابعة لهذه القوة المسلحة في طهران».

وبدوره، قدم العميد صباحي فرد، قائد قوة الدفاع الجوي للجيش الإيراني، تقريراً حول الإجراءات المتخذة من أجل الارتقاء بالمستويين، الدفاعي والقتالي، وإعادة تأهيل الأجهزة والمعدات لدى هذه القوة.

Towards a “New Cold War” in the Middle East: Geopolitics of the Persian Gulf and the Battle for Oil and Gas

By Germán Gorraiz López

Global Research, July 21, 2020

The foundations of the great Near East were established in the Pact of Quincey (1945) following the doctrine of the Franco-British Sykes-Picot agreements of 1916 that favored the regional division of power in areas of influence and sustained on the tripod US-Egypt- Saudi Arabia. This doctrine consisted in the endemic survival in Egypt of pro-western autocratic military governments, which ensured the survival of the State of Israel (1948) and provided the US Navy with privileged access to the Suez Canal, a crucial shortcut for access direct to the United Arab Emirates, Iraq and Afghanistan, remaining as a firm bastion of US geopolitical interests in the area, especially after the fall of the Shah of Persia in 1980.

The other pillar of the agreement consisted of the privileged access of the United States to Saudi Arabian oil in exchange for preserving its autocratic regime and favoring the spread of Wahhabism (doctrine founded by Mohamed Abdel Wahab in the mid-eighteenth century with the aim of becoming a vision attractive to Islam and exportable to the rest of the Arab countries), with which the Saudi theocracy became a regional power that provided the US with the key to energy dominance while serving as a retaining wall for socialist and pan-Arab currents. Finally, after the Six Day War (1967), the geostrategic puzzle of the Middle East and the Near East was completed with the establishment of autocratic and pro-Western regimes in the countries surrounding Israel (Libya, Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Iran), leaving the Palestinians confined in the ghettos of the West Bank and Gaza.

Iraq and the Biden Plan

The Biden-Gelb Plan, approved by the US Senate in 2007 and rejected by Condolezza Rice, Secretary of State with George W. Bush, provided for the establishment in Iraq of a federal system in order to prevent the collapse in the country after the withdrawal of US troops and proposed separating Iraq into Kurdish, Shiite and Sunni entities, under a federal government in Baghdad charged with the care of the borders and the administration of oil revenues.

Thus, we will attend the appearance of Free Kurdistan presided over by Masoud Barzani with capital in Kirkust and that would include annexed areas taking advantage of the power vacuum left by the Iraqi Army such as Sinkar or Rabia in the province of Ninive, Kirkuk and Diyala as well as all the cities of Syrian Kurdish ethnicity (except Hasaka and Qamishli) occupied by the Kurdish insurgency of the BDP.

The new Kurdistan will have the blessings of the United States and will have financial autonomy by owning 20% of the farms of all Iraqi crude oil with the “sine qua non condition” to supply Turkey, Israel and Eastern Europe with Kurdish oil through the Kirkust pipeline that empties into the Turkish port of Ceyhan. On the other hand, the Sunistan with capital in Mosul and that would cover the Sunni cities of Ramadi, Falluja, Mosul, Tal Afar and Baquba (Sunni triangle), with strong connections with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates and that would later lead to a radical pan-Islamist movement that it will use the oil weapon to strangle the western economies in the horizon of the next five-year period.

Finally, as the third leg of the tripod, we would have Iraqi Chi with capital in Baghdad that will counterbalance Saudi Wahhabism and that will gravitate in the orbit of influence of Iran, which will make Iran a great regional power in clear conflict with Saudi Arabia and Israel.

Iran, guardian of the Gulf and energy power

Iran acquired a regional power dimension thanks to the erratic policy of the United States in Iraq, (fruit of the political administration myopia obsessed with the Axis of Evil) by eliminating its ideological rivals, the Sunni Taliban radicals and Saddam Hussein with the subsequent power vacuum in the area. He also proposed a global negotiation with the contact group to deal with all the aspects that have confronted Western countries for thirty years, both the suffocating embargo that has plagued the Islamic Republic and the Iranian assets blocked in the United States, the role Iran regional cooperation and security cooperation in Iraq and Afghanistan.The Middle East: A Review of Geopolitical Structures, Vectors of Power Dynamic

President Mahmoud Ajmadinejad stretched the rope to the limit in the security that the United States would not attack and would limit any individual action by Israel (a discarded project of bombarding the Natanz plant with commercial jets), as a blockade of the Strait of Hormuz through which it passes A third of the world’s energy traffic could exacerbate the global economic recession and profoundly weaken the entire international political system. Thus, in an interview with Brzezinski conducted by Gerald Posner in The Daily Beast (September 18, 2009), he stated that “an American-Iranian collision would have disastrous effects for the United States and China, while Russia would emerge as the great winner, as the foreseeable closure of the Strait of Hormuz in the Persian Gulf where oil transportation destined for Northeast Asia (China, Japan and South Korea), Europe and the United States passes, would raise the price of black gold to stratospheric levels and would have severe repercussions on the economy global, becoming the totally crude EU dependent on Russia.

According to experts, Iran would possess the world’s third largest proven reserves of oil and gas, but it would not have enough technology to extract the gas from the deepest fields and would require an urgent multimillion-dollar investment to avoid irreversible deterioration of its facilities, which in practice it translates into a huge pie for Russian, Chinese and Western multinationals and an increase in the supply of Iranian crude oil to 1.5 million barrels / day within a year, with the consequent drop in prices. of the Brent and Texas reference crudes.

Furthermore, the revitalization of the 2010 energy cooperation agreement between Iraq, Iran and Syria for the construction of the South Pars-Homms gas pipeline that would connect the Persian Gulf with the Mediterranean Sea would relativize the strategic importance of the Trans-Adriatic Gas Pipeline Project (TAP) , (a substitute for the failed Nabucco gas pipeline designed by the US to transport Azerbaijani gas to Europe through Turkey), as well as the relevant role of the United Arab Emirates as suppliers of crude oil to the West, which would explain the eagerness of Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey for torpedoing him.

America’s “Project of the New Middle East”

Ralph Peters Map: The Project for the New Middle East. Used for teaching purposes at the military academies. (“Unofficial”)  

Are Iraq and Iran the bait for the US to involve Russia and China in a new war?

Former President Carter’s National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski in a speech to the Iranian-American National Council (NIAC) stated that “I believe that the US has the right to decide its own national security policy and not follow like a stupid mule what the Israelis do. ” In addition, Brzezinski, would be faced with the neocon republican and Jewish lobbies of the USA and with his habitual biting he would have discredited the geostrategic myopia of both pressure groups when affirming that “they are so obsessed with Israel, the Persian Gulf, Iraq and Iran that they have lost from the global picture: the true power in the world is Russia and China, the only countries with a true capacity to resist the United States and England and on which they would have to focus their attention ”.

We would thus be at a crucial moment to define the mediate future of the Middle East and Middle East (PROME East), since after the arrival of Donald Trump from the White House the pressure of the pro-Israeli lobby of the USA (AIPAC) would be increasing to proceed the destabilization of Iran by expeditious methods, a moment that will be used by the United States, Great Britain and Israel to proceed to redesign the cartography of the unrelated puzzle formed by these countries and thus achieve strategically advantageous borders for Israel, following the plan orchestrated 60 years ago. jointly by the governments of Great Britain, the United States and Israel and which would have the backing of the main western allies. Thus, after the approval by the Congress and the US Senate of a declaration prepared by the Republican Senator Lindsey Graham and the Democrat Robert Menéndez, who clearly states that “if Israel is forced to defend itself and take action (against Iran), the US will be at your side to support it militarily and diplomatically”, with the Trump Administration we will assist the increase in pressure from the pro-Israeli lobby of the USA (AIPAC) to proceed with the destabilization of Iran by expeditious methods.

In a first phase of said plan, the US Senate unanimously renewed the Sanctions Against Iran Act (ISA) until 2026 and after the launch of a new ballistic missile by Iran, Trump expanded the sanctions against several Iranian companies related to ballistic missiles without violating the Nuclear Agreement signed between the G + 5 and Iran in 2015, known as the Comprehensive Joint Action Plan (JCPOA) and which would only be fireworks to distract attention from the Machiavellian Plan outlined by the Anglo-Jewish Alliance in 1960 that would include the Balkanization of Iran and whose turning point would be the recent assassination of the charismatic General Qasem Soleimani.

This war could lead to a new local episode that would be involve a return to a “recurrent endemism” of the US-Russia Cold War involving both superpowers having as necessary collaborations the major regional powers namely Israel, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Iran.

This Cold War scenario would cover the geographic space that extends from the Mediterranean arc (Libya, Syria and Lebanon) to Yemen and Somalia and having Iraq as its epicenter (recalling the Vietnam War with Lindon B. Johnson (1963-1.969).

Thus, Syria, Iraq and Iran would be the bait to attract both Russia and China and after triggering a concatenation of local conflicts (Syria, Iraq and Lebanon), this potentially could evolve towards a major regional conflict that could mark the future of the area in the coming years.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Featured image is from Silent Crow NewsThe original source of this article is Global ResearchCopyright © Germán Gorraiz López, Global Research, 2020

Tehran, Baghdad Will Sue US for Assassinating General Soleimani, Hajj Abu Mahdi

Tehran, Baghdad Will Sue US for Assassinating General Soleimani, Hajj Abu Mahdi

By Staff, Agencies

Iraq announced that Baghdad and Tehran will jointly sue the US for assassinating top Iranian commander Lieutenant General Qassem Soleimani and deputy head of Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Units, Hajj Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis.

In a statement on Monday, Iraq’s Supreme Judicial Council said the country regards the US assassination of General Soleimani and Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis on its soil as a criminal act.

The Council said it has coordinated its legal procedure with the Iranian Judiciary and the two countries will file a joint lawsuit against the US.

“The investigation into the airport incident began from the first moment and the Iraqi judiciary dealt with that incident as a criminal act that took place on Iraqi land where some of the victims are Iraqis,” the council said in a statement.

The investigation took place according to the Iraqi Code of Criminal Procedure starting with inspecting the scene and meeting with some of the plaintiffs, including the legal representative of the Iranian embassy, the statement added.

“The Iraqi Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Secretariat of the Council of Ministers had been informed of other details regarding the accident, and that the investigation procedures since the time of the accident continue in accordance with the Iraqi law,” the statement added.

The Iraqi Judiciary’s statement comes a day after Iranian Foreign Minister Mohamad Javad Zarif met with Iraqi officials, including the head of the Supreme Judicial Council, in Baghdad.

The statement was also released ahead of Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi’s Tuesday trip to Tehran, where he is to hold high-level talks with Iranian officials.

A US drone attack, commanded by US President Donald Trump, killed General Soleimani and al-Muhandis near Baghdad International Airport on January 3, prompting international condemnations.

Sayyed Nasrallah’s Full Speech on July 7, 2020: The Day He Launched Battle to Confront Economic Crisis

Source

Sayyed Nasrallah’s Full Speech on July 7, 2020: The Day He Launched Battle to Confront Economic Crisis
Click here for Video

Translated by Staff

Televised speech by Hezbollah’s Secretary General, His Eminence Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, on the latest local and regional developments (7/7/2020)

I seek refuge in Allah from the accursed Satan. In the name of Allah the Most Gracious the Merciful. Praise be to Allah, Lord of the Worlds, and prayers and peace be upon our Master and Prophet, the Seal of Prophets, Abi al-Qassem Muhammad Bin Abdullah and his good and pure household and his good and chosen companions and all the prophets and messengers.

Peace and Allah’s mercy and blessings be upon you all. 

I apologize for the delay. We took up a few minutes for prayer time. God willing, we will address this matter in the future.

In the name of Allah the Most Gracious the Merciful. Before I begin talking about tonight’s main topics, I would like to briefly shed light on some occasions.

First, we are nearing the anniversary of the July 2006 war, which the “Israeli” enemy calls the second Lebanon war. It was a war in the full sense of the word.

We remember the enormous sacrifices, the great victories, and the great failure of the American-“Israeli” project in our region that was called the New Middle East.

I just wanted to say as the anniversary is nearing – from July 12 to August 14 – that we have ample time to talk about this war and this occasion as well as speak with the families of the martyrs, the wounded, the mujahideen, those who made sacrifices, were patient, gave their support, the victors, and about those defeated in this war.

The anniversary of the defeat of the takfiri terrorists that were controlling the Jaroud in the Bekaa area is coming in a few days. The Jaroud, as the Lebanese people remember, was liberated in two stages. The first stage was following the confrontation with the Nusra Front. The second stage was following the confrontations with Daesh. The former stage was achieved in the month of July around this time.

The third occasion that I would like to point to is the tenth anniversary of the passing of His Eminence Ayatollah Sayyed Mohammad Hussein Fadlallah, who was a compassionate father, a wise guide, and a strong pillar in all stages. He was all this to us and to this faithful, jihadi, and resisting generation.

After ten years, we still feel that his pure spirit is with us. I am repeating the same text that was in the obituary ten years ago. We feel that his pure spirit, his kind words, his kind smile, and his solid positions have remained in us, will continue to guide us, and be a strong renewed motivation for us to persist and continue jihad.

This is the last point in the introduction. In the past few days, we lost a great scholar and investigator, who came from a long line of scholars and martyrs. His Eminence, the late Allamah Sheikh Mohammad Jaafar Shamseddine, may he rest in peace. He provided Islam, the Islamic culture and thought as well as the youth and the Hawzas with great scientific and educational services. He was also a supporter and a backer of the resistance in Lebanon through all the stages. He made great efforts, even risking his well-being, to unite all the ranks, and face sedition during the most difficult days of the resistance.

On behalf of Hezbollah and myself, I extend our deepest condolences and heart-felt sympathies to his honorable family. And I ask God Almighty to grant them patience and solace and receive him in His mercy. May He accommodate him in his spacious paradise and join him with his loved ones and with Muhammad and his pure household (peace be upon them all).

I intend to discuss three topics.

First part: The economic and the living situation in Lebanon as well as the attempts to address and confront it – this is the Lebanese people’s daily concern

Second part: Lebanese politics

Third part: Regional developments

Before we start talking about the first topic, things must be corrected and stirred in the right direction. The current situation people are living – at the financial, economic, and political levels – requires unity among all Lebanese and cooperation. Therefore, I do not want to enter into quarrels with anyone regarding everything I will present or say, but rather I will try to be as positive as I can. 

Economic collapse or starvation doesn’t affect one area of Lebanon or one group. Unfortunately, some speak this language. So, anyone trying to confront this must do so with the awareness of how to solve the problem for all Lebanese in every area. I should not only care about my people, area, or a couple of villages. It should be a national approach. 

This cannot be simply be disassembled or simplified as some people think. We need a continuous integrated national effort. Each one of us must think of all the Lebanese people and residents on Lebanese territory. This includes the Palestinian refugees, the displaced Syrians, non-Lebanese residents residing in Lebanon. 

At the end of the day when certain things collapse or certain dangers occur, the repercussions will be on everyone. This is a main issue that should be present in any approach. The approach should stem from what our humanity, morals, our religion, and our patriotism tell us. 

Based on the aforementioned, I said that we need to correct some things to be on the right track. 
In the context of correction, when we raised the issue of turning eastward, I was clear in my last speech that this didn’t mean turning our back on the West. I was clear when I said that we must be open to the whole world except “Israel”. 

And I had the courage to say that even though America is an enemy in our political and cultural thought, we will not be an obstacle if it is going to help Lebanon, like any country in the world, and take it out of its crisis.

Turning eastward does not mean being cut off from the rest of the world. On the contrary, it’s turning east, west, north, and south. Turning to any country except for the usurper entity. Any country that is ready can come to Lebanon, invest in Lebanon, work in Lebanon, put deposits in the central bank, provide aid and loans, open lines of credit. We’re completely open to this.

Unfortunately, some tried to improperly classify the matter and say we’re pitting one axis in Lebanon against the other. We never said this. Some have said that the U.S. and the West are Lebanon’s indispensable oxygen. We are not asking you to cut it off. Breathe it. But my question is what will you do if the U.S. cuts it off? Will you die or look for another source of oxygen to stay alive?

We do not want to cut off oxygen from anyone in Lebanon at all. We are also putting all our ideological, jihadist, and political considerations aside, with the exception of the “Israeli” issue. I say, let Lebanon be open to everyone so that it can overcome this difficult stage.

Others said that the goal of turning eastward was to change the face of Lebanon’s civilization and the identity of its economic system – honestly when one looks at the comments and responses, he can only laugh at them – as if Lebanon isn’t in the Middle East but in South or North America. Lebanon is part of the East. Nobody raised this matter. 

For example, if we said that China is going to invest in Lebanon and will commit to projects without taking a penny from the Lebanese state, that is according to the B.O.T. format, does that mean we want to transform Lebanon’s economic structure into a communist or socialist one? This talk is just to disrupt. It is not based on any reason.

Regarding Iran, some said we are trying to turn Lebanon into an Iranian model. We never said this. All we said was that we have a friend called Iran who can sell us fuel/petroleum byproducts in Lebanese pounds. We are asking it for help. Otherwise, they need hard currency, they need dollars and the euros.

When the Iranians accept to sell Lebanon fuel/petroleum byproducts in Lebanese liras, they are making a big sacrifice. What does this have to do with applying the Iranian model or the Iranian economic model. It is like “Lebanon is on the Mediterranean Sea; thus, Brazil exists.” What does this have to do with that? It is just intended to scare and intimidate people and instill doubt. 

Even though we do not have a problem regarding this matter. We only have a few countries in the world that we are friends with or have relations with. We have no problem with you bringing fuel/petroleum byproducts to Lebanon using Lebanese pounds. We will not be intimidated. We will not accuse you of imposing their model onto Lebanon. 

Also, you can rest assured. Lebanon doesn’t currently have the components to be transformed into the Iranian model, not that the Iranian model is a bad thing. The Iranian model enabled Iran to withstand 40 years of wars, sanctions, and blockade. Iran eats what it grows. It has a semi self-sufficient agriculture. It has advanced industries and very sophisticated military industry.

A few months ago, Iran sent a satellite into space. The Iranian model has self-sufficiency in gasoline, diesel, fuel and electricity. It sells electricity and fuel to neighboring countries. It produces over 90% of its medicinal needs. It also sells medicine to neighboring countries.

Hence, this model produces results. Why are you scared of it? Nonetheless, Lebanon doesn’t have the components for the Iranian model. So, rest assured. 

If the brothers in Iran extended a helping hand to their brothers in Lebanon in some way, this should be respected and appreciated, and not a point of intimidation or skepticism.

Iran has withstood 40 years of sanctions and still is. Of course, it has a problem with the hard currency because the world is connected to the dollar, to New York, to America, and to this process. This is problem of the world today. The dollar is what is left of the America’s strength, apart from the military power. The U.S. holds on to the dollar and imposes financial and economic sanctions. However, despite all the threats and the sanctions, Iran was steadfast for 40 years. No country in the world, regardless of its economic model, would have been able to resist for 40 years the way Iran did amid all the wars, sanctions, and blockade.  

Look at Lebanon. It was subject to some sanctions and intimidation, and some people and political forces are ready to cave in and abandon everything.

In any case, we said we did not want to create debates. But I would like to reassure everyone that no one is trying to impose the Iranian model on Lebanon’s economy or change the face of Lebanon’s civilization. We do not want to transform the economic system into a communist or a socialist system.

All we mean by turning eastward is that since France won’t disburse CEDRE funds, the U.S. is imposing sanctions, and the Arab countries won’t help for different reasons, we should accept help from whomever offers.

So, if China, Iran, Iraq, Russia, or any country in the world – be it in the east or the west – is ready to provide assistance, Lebanon should be open to it. It must communicate with this country. It must look for opportunities.

This is just to clarify matters.

We come to where we are today. When approaching the economic, living, financial, and monetary crisis, we must talk about them while people keep pace. We all must have the knowledge and the awareness so that we can together face this challenge and threat.

A lot of the Lebanese have political awareness and culture. Many of them have awareness and culture of the economic and financial issue. But we must generalize this culture so that we can all keep pace and shoulder the responsibilities.

The first part:

There are two levels in the economic crisis.

The first level: There is a big and huge topic when talking about getting Lebanon out of its economic crisis and reaching a stage of economic recovery and stability. This is because there is a debt of about 80 billion to one hundred billion dollars. We have deep economic crises. There is a discussion regarding the old and current economic policies. This is a big topic, of course, that needs the state with all its institutions, the society, and perhaps external help. We are not talking about this topic. 

The second level: There are risks of economic and financial collapse. There are risks of hunger. How do we prevent economic collapse and hunger and their repercussions on the Lebanese people and residents in Lebanon?

We are talking about the second level. How do we prevent collapse and starvation? This must be addressed first before we can deal with the first level.

Of course, if we can achieve this, we will enable the country, the state, the government, the state institutions, the army, the Lebanese people, and the security forces to withstand and continue the path in addressing the first level – getting out of the economic crisis. 

So today I will be talking about several points related to the second level.

1- The first thing we call for when talking about the second level is that we shouldn’t confine ourselves to one path in trying to prevent collapse like confining ourselves to IMF negotiations and awaiting their results before starting on alternative paths. What if these talks fail in six months or a year? Do we only then start looking?

We must not derail this path – negotiations with the IMF. But we must open up all possible pathways that would prevent Lebanon’s collapse and starvation. On this basis, we spoke about a set of ideas, and the topic of turning eastward came up in the general methodology. There must not be a state of despair or surrender among the Lebanese people. Passive waiting must not take over the general performance – to wait and see what the IMF will decide; will the U.S. forgive Lebanon or not? What are the developments that might take place in the region? by doing so, we are not being active. Rather we are waiting passively. This is wrong.

As a state and a people, we must be active. We should not stay home and wait. Whatever path can be opened, we must open it. Whatever path leads to a solution, even if we are not sure it will to results, we must take it. We must knock on all doors to reach a possible outcome.

Today, the Lebanese state and people are facing a threat – the threat of collapse and starvation. This is the most serious threat that can face a people or a state. Should we give up to the threat? Or should we turn it into an opportunity? I say to all the Lebanese people: we as a state and people – we will not talk about the tripartite equation because we need a different and new equation – are able to turn the threat into an opportunity. This threat can even be an occasion to take very important steps that will not only save Lebanon, but they will also put Lebanon on the track for economic prosperity and not repeating the failed policies of the past.

I will say how. We must have hope, confidence in our ability to rise and transform threats into opportunities, and not despair, surrender, and submit. We must have the mentality that we can do so much when it comes to, for example, moving the wheel of the economy. I will shed light on the agricultural and industrial productions later.

The Lebanese government and we were told that Chinese companies are ready to invest billions of dollars in Lebanon. I will not delve into numbers. It is natural for Lebanon to initiate talks – just as PM Hassan Diab did – and not wait since the Chinese did not talk to us or send us anything. 

You can see that the country is in danger. You as an official must initiate talks with China. Ask the Chinese about their conditions and see whether these conditions are in the interest of Lebanon and if Lebanon can accommodate them. So, we opt for this option instead of waiting around ad putting doubt like some Lebanese people are doing. Some said that China is not ready and has no desire to invest in Lebanon. China will not make a problem with the U.S. for Lebanon. 

Hold on. Why are we disagreeing on this? Let us ask the Chinese. What is the point of diplomacy, the Foreign Ministry, and the people concerned with the economy? Let the Lebanese state – not Hezbollah, the Amal movement, the Free Patriotic movement, or any political party – talk to the Chinese. There should be no mediation regarding this matter.  

If you want an indication of the effectiveness of the Chinese offer, just look at the angry American response, from Pompeo, to Schenker, to US State Department aides, to the US ambassador in Lebanon. All of them started saying that the Chinese aid won’t help. China will spy on Lebanon, as if the CIA isn’t. And if something went wrong regarding the financial obligations, they will confiscate the state’s assets. They started talking in this sense to spread fear. This is evidence that this is a useful and serious option. Otherwise, why else would the Americans do this? Why would they want to launch a clear and open campaign? They are launching this campaign to scare the Lebanese people from doing business with the Chinese. This is only evidence that the Chinese offer will release the American stranglehold on Lebanon, and I’ll talk about that shortly. 

Now, the Lebanese government should contact China, send delegations to China, and engage in direct discussions, and through some media outlets. This is one.

2- We also thank our Iraqi brothers. Ministers from the Iraqi government came and met with Lebanese officials, including the prime minister and competent ministers. There was a positive atmosphere that was reflected in the media. We should follow up on this matter.

I repeat and affirm, Iraq is a very great opportunity for Lebanon. It is an open country, a friendly country, and a loving country. The relationship between Iraq and Lebanon as two countries and two peoples are excellent. Iraq is a very large and capable country economically. We can start cooperation at the level of agriculture, industry, medicine, and tourism – there is mutual religious tourism. All these are opportunities. They will allow the flow of money, create job opportunities, and revive the different sectors. 

We already have naysayers saying we shouldn’t pursue the Iraqi option because the U.S. might pressure the Iraqi government. So, should we just sit and despair? Or should the Lebanese government send a delegation, like the Iraqis did, and continue negotiations to reach results. This is also another option to be explored. 

We spoke about these two propositions. Thank God, there are options to be explored. 

3- The third issue that we raised was the central bank. The central bank has to pay billions of dollars. There is a problem in numbers in Lebanon. But there are billions of dollars to cover Lebanon’s need for oil derivatives. If we asked our brothers in Iran to sell us gasoline, oil, gas, oil derivatives, and diesel in Lebanese pounds, this would relieve pressure off the central bank, which is hard-pressed for dollars. 

This amount, if it is available to the central bank, would allow it to give to the banks to solve the depositors’ problems. 

This proposition has a lot of advantages. I will not talk about them because if I did, it would be understood as putting pressure on the Lebanese. 

I don’t want to speak ahead of the brothers in Iran. but eventually, they will declare an official position. But I can tell the Lebanese people this: I guarantee you this.

In any case, we started discussions and presented it to Lebanese officials. There is a calm discussion regarding this matter. let us see how the matter unfolds away from the media and explanations made in the media. Let us where this option will lead. But this option has great advantages on the assets of Lebanon’s central bank, on banks, on depositors, on agriculture, on industry, on electricity plants, on electricity, on the value of the national currency, on the trade balance. We will talk about this detail later.

Of course, there are some who are spreading doubts and intimidation. What’s the end result we will get? I don’t know, but we must still explore all options, so our conscience is clear – we tried everything to rescue Lebanon economically.

In the same context, the Lebanese government should also initiate. It should contact other states. It seems that there is something of this sort. Let them say no. but at the very least, we are trying and looking for options. 

We must also not forget the option of opening up to Syria. The situation should not remain that the whole country has surrendered to the Caesar Act. We must challenge this law. There are loopholes and exceptions. We must not surrender to this law.

In any case, what does this methodology mean? It means that there is a movement towards confronting hunger and collapse. This gives hope to the Lebanese, meaning that we are not powerless, and we did not surrender. At the same time, it sends a powerful message to the Americans and others who wants to strangle Lebanon: we have alternatives, and you won’t be able to blockade, strangle, starve, or defeat Lebanon. This will force America to despair and to do so quickly. This is the importance of this methodology.

Based on the above, one of the options we have in Lebanon is right in front of us. I am not imposing this option as we have agreed from the beginning that there are more than one road and more than one choice. Decades of economic policies in the country – I will not criticize whether they were right or wrong – turned Lebanon into a service-oriented economy with the focus on the banking sector, tourism – that is airport expansion and building ports, highways, and hotels. A country reliant on the service industry. 

These policies were within a vision – a true or false vision is another discussion. What happened due to these policies? These policies led to collapse of two sectors: the agricultural and industrial sectors. These two sectors remained steadfast despite all the conditions that Lebanon went through before and during the civil war and after the invasion in 1982 to 1990s.

The policies that were adopted led to the collapse of these two sectors. In the agricultural sector, you find that the farmer is not supported. There is no budget. There is no financing of agricultural projects. There are no agricultural investments. This of course increases the cost of production. When the farmers are not being supported with the production costs, the cost of production becomes increases. When the cost of production increases, it would difficult for marketing this agricultural product in the Lebanese or foreign markets since other produce are cheaper. Thus, the farmer will be forced to throw them on the streets like we see every year.

Also, some invested in the agricultural sector when the rates the central bank or the banks were high. This person looked at the profit he would be from investing in agriculture or industry. It is more or less 5 or 10%. So, he put his money in the bank and waited for his profit. Basically, these policies destroyed the agricultural and industrial sectors. Thus, we became a consumer country, a country that buys everything. We even import basic foodstuffs from abroad. We became almost completely a consumer country.

Now, we’re feeling the mistake and the danger. But we can still turn this into an opportunity and address the problem. The Lebanese people are afraid of collapse and hunger. What should we do? We have to turn Lebanon into a productive country, regardless of the international economic situation. 

Regardless of the future of the world economy after COVID-19, whatever happens to the U.S. economy or the economy in the region, being productive is essential for any country to live a decent life. Can we survive without oxygen? Can we live without water? Agriculture and industry are like oxygen and water to any people. Former policies asked us to live off imported oxygen and water. I’m just giving an analogy here. our industry and agriculture were put aside. Everything we wear, use, eat, and drink should come from abroad. Today, we can change the equation and start producing.

Here lies the responsibility of the Lebanese state, the Council of Ministers, the Parliament, and officials. Meanwhile, the people’s responsibility is to support the state. We must all cooperate. The Lebanese state should revive the agricultural and industrial sectors. All the political forces as well as the parliamentary blocs, the government, and the officials should all shoulder their responsibilities in reviving these sectors to enable the country to stand on its feet and prevent it from going hungry. The Lebanese people also have a responsibility. They are a big part of this battle and its main driving force.

In other words, we must plant. We have vast swathes of arable land. Lebanon’s climate is suitable as is the environment. It has rivers and springs. The water is only wasted because it flows into the Mediterranean. Land reclamation for agriculture is not a difficult and complicated process if all the possibilities are available. So, what do we need?

We need to make a decision. We need will power and start planting. Let us take the agricultural sector and based on it approach the industrial issue. What do we need?

First, the people should believe in the option to cultivate. Secondly, there should be motivation, will, and determination. Thirdly, we have to cultivate the land. We as Lebanese people, state, political parties, cooperatives, merchants, etc. should help people who are cultivating and reduce the cost of production. We should help those planting and producing sell their produce in the local and external markets. We should cooperate in this whole process. We need guidance; what should be cultivated and how much. The same goes to industry. We might start with craft (handmade) industry or something to do with food that is low cost because we want to stave of hunger. This is the path required now.

What I am saying today is on behalf of Hezbollah and not the Lebanese government. on behalf of Hezbollah, we call on the Lebanese people to fight the battle of reviving the agricultural and industrial sectors. We call for an agricultural and industrial renaissance as a necessary condition for resilience, facing hunger, and living in dignity.

This matter was part of our interests. But our priority was and still is resistance. Then we have the political work. We also have activities related to agriculture and craft industry as well as of social and medical nature. But these activities are limited.

But today we in Hezbollah took the decision to confront collapse and hunger. We say that this is Lebanon’s battle, just as the resistance’s military battles to liberate the land or to fight the takfiri terrorists are Lebanon’s and the Lebanese people’s battles, even though some are not fighting them. This is Lebanon’s battle as well as the Lebanese people’s and people residing on Lebanese territory. Everyone should be fighting it.

That is why the entirety of Hezbollah will be fully committed to this, not just a certain apparatus, unit, or institution. 

Today, I want to announce that we have taken the decision that all of Hezbollah, with its human and material capabilities, relationships, friendships, and alliances will be at the heart of this confrontation, challenge, and battle. And we want to cooperate with everyone, just as we did in the fight against COVID-19. We came out in full force. We saw how the situation in the country was when all the Lebanese people cooperated with each other in the fight against the pandemic – even though we need to emphasize on this again. 

In the same context, I would like to address the supporters of the resistance and tell them that in the past decades and years, we adopted the slogan: “Where we should be, we will be”. So, we were present wherever we were needed. We achieved victory and accomplished goals during every challenge; this is what happened during the resistance and liberation battle, during the confrontations with the takfiri terrorists, and in the face of projects, such as the new Middle East. We assessed whether the challenges required us to be there, and we achieved victory.

Today, I would like to tell our brothers and sisters, men and women, young and old, in the battle of agriculture and industry, we will be where we are required. We will be in this new field.

In other words, we must all become farmers and manufacturers, within the available capabilities. Being a farmer is not shameful. It is a glory and not shameful when our young and old plough the land and cultivate it. Many of the prophets, messengers, and saints throughout history were farmers and peasants grazing sheep, livestock, etc. We have to be farmers not only to save ourselves but also to save our country. We are thinking about all the Lebanese areas and all the Lebanese people. 

Now some may say that Hezbollah is only concerned about its people and its environment. We’re concerned about all Lebanese areas, factions, and people. We are human being with morals and faith. We are nationalists. This is how we think. This is how we think because we are humane. To all my brothers and sisters, this is the new phase we must confront. Wherever we have potential arable land, even a front yard, balconies, and rooftops in Dahiyeh and in cities, we must cultivate it. This is our new battle. 

As for how to agricultural guidance and reducing the cost of production, we will talk about them in future addresses. We have a complete vision on this matter, and we have extended our hand to everyone. 

The same applies to the industrial sector. As I said, we should opt for light homemade products and food products that do not cost much. We have to follow in the footsteps of other people who attained their independence. When we eat what we plant and wear what we manufacture, then we are a people worthy of independence, freedom, dignity, and sovereignty. Here we go back and open the file of the national industry and import from abroad. All these details will come later.

The date 7-7-2020 (Tuesday) is an easy one to remember. Let us say that on this day we want to declare an agricultural and industrial jihad at the popular level. This is not an official decision. In 1988, the resistance in Lebanon was not established by a government or official decision, but rather a popular decision. Today, we should head towards agricultural and industrial jihad, resistance, or renaissance. Call it what you want, we’ll decide on a name later, but this should be our direction.

We should engage in an organized work or individual initiatives. All the Lebanese must cooperate. Popular efforts must also integrate with the efforts of the state to overcome the stage of hunger, the stage of collapse, and the stage of fear and anxiety. We should establish a strategic exit from the coming economic crisis.

The second part: 

Regarding domestic politics, I want to confine myself to one issue that we consider dangerous in Lebanon – the American interference and blatant performance of the State Department in Lebanon, particularly that of the U.S. ambassador to Lebanon.

During the past few months, since Ambassador Shea came to Lebanon – welcome to and to the other ambassadors – we’ve seen the way has been acting in Lebanon – as military governor, a high commissioner, or someone with military authority. She expects everyone in Lebanon to fear her, submit to her, appease to her, listen to her, appease to her, and ask for her approval.  

When we talk about U.S. interference, we can say that they are numerous. As I have mentioned, her movements were clear and blatant. For example, what is the U.S. ambassador’s business with financial appointments. What right does she have in accepting this person and refusing that? This happened, and she spoke with many officials and threatened many others. She demanded that a certain person be appointed deputy governor of the central bank. She also demanded that if this certain person was not appointed deputy governor, then he must be appointed as head of the Banking Control Commission. Some might say that this is not a new thing. 

What is new is that today this matter is being done in the open. All the Lebanese have sensed it. I don’t know what they used to do in the past. Of course, I know. But I don’t have proof. But go ask the officials she spoke to. They’ll tell you the U.S. ambassador told them to appoint specific people and not others as deputy governor of the central bank and if not head of the Banking Control Commission, otherwise the U.S. would withhold funds. Is this how an ambassador should behave? Is this a friendly country or a colonialist country?

This is how a colonialist country acts. Let me give you another example. This might have given some people last week the impression that there will be a change of government and that it will be toppled. This is because they believe and are accustomed to the U.S. being divine. If America said something, then it must be done. 

In the past few days, the U.S. ambassador was quoted by more than one party and person that she said last week that the government is finished, that it must be toppled, and must resign. What is your business? The Lebanese people are the one who determine if the government remains or goes. The Lebanese Parliament determines if the government remains or goes, not the American ambassador or the U.S. State Department. However, she continues to interfere in this issue. She discusses the identity, nature, and composition of the next supposed government. Is this not a blatant interference in Lebanese affairs?

Let me tell you what is more serious and dangerous – the American ambassador appearing on Lebanese, Arab, and non-Arab television channels and attacking a prominent Lebanese party. I do not want to praise Hezbollah and describe its popular, organizational, political and parliamentary size and its impact on the country and the region. Others will talk about this. 

But Hezbollah is a Lebanese party with a huge popular support. It is represented in the parliament and is part of Lebanon’s political life. 

Every day the ambassador attacks Hezbollah, insults it, calls it a terrorist organization, accuses of it stealing and selling drugs, and all this non-sense. Meanwhile, the Lebanese state is silent. However, some politicians, media personnel, and political parties respond to her. But it seems that this lady is comfortable. She sees no problem in insulting, attacking, and offending it on a daily basis.

But what is more dangerous is pitting the Lebanese against each other. The U.S. ambassador is pitting Lebanon’s parties and officials against Hezbollah and its allies, pushing Lebanon towards internal strife and civil war. Should this be met with silence? 

We can add to this the role of the US Embassy in the sanctions, the blockade, the threats, preventing investments in Lebanon, scaring off foreign investors, intimidating the Lebanese officials and government. They are doing this around the clock. This is unacceptable. 

I put this in front of the Lebanese people, all the political forces in Lebanon, the government in Lebanon, and the state in Lebanon, as well as the political forces that claim to be sovereign. An ambassador of country in Lebanon is interfering with appointments, the government, the economic situation, while the Lebanese people are watching. 

Meanwhile, an honorable, brave, patriotic judge made a decision concerning the ambassador’s movement and her dealings with the media. Whether this decision was legitimate or not, constitutional or not, is beside the point. For a Lebanese judge to make such a decision shows that there are honorable and courageous Lebanese judges. The U.S. embassy and the American ambassador were annoyed and demanded an apology from the Lebanese government.

If Lebanon’s ambassador in America spoke about what is happening now in the U.S. and criticized the performance of the Trump administration in dealing with the coronavirus and racism, what would have they done to him? 

We do not want to talk about this issue, but many people stood up to defend freedom of the press in Lebanon. What about Lebanese sovereignty? Defend freedom of the media, but what about Lebanese sovereignty? Are these two things separate? How can freedom and slavery meet? Abandoning sovereignty is slavery. They do not go hand in hand. 

In any case, Judge Mohammad Mazeh made the decision based on his patriotism, awareness, sense of responsibility, and realization that there is an ambassador who is inciting, accusing, insulting, pushes towards sedition, and attacking the Lebanese people.

Personally, because this is the first time I speak after this incident, I am proud of him. We [in Hezbollah] are proud of judge Mohammad Mazeh and in every patriotic, honorable, and brave person who dares in this difficult time to stand in the face of American policies and American administrations because the best kind of jihad is saying the truth in the face of an unjust ruler. 

Today, the most unjust, criminal, terrorist, and brutal ruler on the face of this earth is the American administration. I hope the Lebanese judiciary and the Lebanese Ministry of Justice will reconsider their approach. They should treat this judge and his resignation with the same level of patriotism, honor, courage and respect that he expressed.

Hence, to limit the movement of the ambassador, legal methods must be followed. Great! God willing, the Loyalty to the Resistance Bloc will be submitting a petition to the Lebanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs to summon the U.S. ambassador and ask her to adhere to diplomatic protocol and Vienna Convention. Our deputies will do this. We will not ask other deputies. We do not want to put anyone under the spotlight. This is the first step, but it is not enough.

The people in Lebanon also have a responsibility. Politicians and political forces, the Lebanese people, elites, media personnel, young and old, must raise their voice not in the defense of Hezbollah – we do not want anyone to defend us – but to defend Lebanon. They must raise the voice against starving Lebanon, besieging it, pitting the Lebanese people against each other, the pretentious intervention, the imposition of options or wills on the Lebanese people. You have to defend yourself, or else you can let her be.

Also, in this part, I wish that – I am keen to remain within the limits of decency while addressing her – I request that the U.S. ambassador not appear on our TV stations and lecture us and the Lebanese people about democracy, human rights, and sovereignty. Please do not talk about these because you represent a country that has waged wars, killed and displaced millions, the money and natural resources that you have plundered. Your country is still waging wars and killing all over the world.

Not to mention what is going on in the US, the inhumane actions taken against your people, racial discrimination, etc. You do not have any right to talk about human rights in Lebanon and lecture us. You, your country, and your administration. 

Let’s just talk about America’s behavior in Lebanon, backing “Israel” and its wars on Lebanon before 1982 and the invasion in 1982. Tens of thousands of people were killed and wounded, and homes were destroyed.

You protected and supported all of “Israel’s” wars against Lebanon. We are in July. The July 2006 war was an American decision and an American management. The blood of all the men, women, and children killed in the July war is in the hands of your criminal and murderous country that supports “Israel” and defend it. We do not need to prove this. All the Lebanese people know this.

Even regarding the takfiri terrorist organizations, your President, Trump, admits that it was the previous administration of your country that created Daesh and these terrorist organizations in the region. He accuses Clinton. Is Clinton Lebanese? Is Barak Obama Syrian or Palestinian? They are Americans. They were a president and a Secretary of State. They were the ones who created the takfiri terrorists. You are the one supporting the “Israeli” terrorism and are today empower “Israel” in oppressing the Palestinians and usurping the rest of their land in the West Bank. 

So, you have no place saying these words. You should respect yourself, remain respectful, and know your boundaries. America has been exposed to the people of the region. This, of course, I am speaking to her as a representative of her country. Otherwise, this includes the entire State Department and every American administration – all of who are repeating the same thing.

One last advice for the American administration, and it is also good for the ambassador to hear and pass it on to her administration. You are waging a war on Lebanon. You are taking advantage of a circumstance in Lebanon that is a result of 30 to 40 years of accumulations of bad policies that led it to the current economic situation.

All Lebanese know that the economic, financial, monetary, and living conditions in Lebanon are caused by successive policies – corruption, waste, theft, irresponsible management of the situation, local and regional conditions, immigration, wars, etc.

As for pinning the situation in Lebanon on the resistance is something the Lebanese people will not allow. 

The Lebanese people have reached a point where they are saying that is an economic crisis. While you have come to take advantage of this crisis and besiege the Lebanese people to impose options on them. Your most important objective is to isolate and weaken Hezbollah and end the resistance in Lebanon by starving the people and turning the Lebanese and its supporters against it. Wars have failed; the assassinations have failed; “Israel” has failed; the takfiris have failed; and all your efforts have failed. This is the last weapon in your hands.

I would love to advise you not to waste your time. First, this option will not bear fruit. Hezbollah will never surrender. The resistance in Lebanon will never surrender. Second, the policy that you are adopting regarding Lebanon – the blockade and the sanctions – will not weaken Hezbollah but rather strengthen it. 

This policy will weaken your allies and influence. It will not make the resistance’s environment turn against it. Rather its adherence to the resistance will increase. The policy you are adopting will eventually make the rest of the Lebanese groups turn to the resistance and its local and regional allies because it will have no refuge after you push the country to collapse and starvation. With this policy, you are pushing Lebanon to be completely in this axis and with this team. Go and study it well. 

Therefore, I invite you to abandon this policy. Do not torture the Lebanese people and do not punish them. Do not let the Lebanese people endure this ordeal that will not lead to a result. 

In the first place, international law does not allow you to punish an entire people, starve them, and besiege them, as you did with many countries in the world from Syria to Iraq to Iran to Venezuela, Cuba, and North Korea, as a means to punish or pressure a specific group. This will not lead to a result. Do not play this game and do not waste time.

The third part:

Regarding the regional part, I will talk briefly because I have already taken up a lot of your time. I apologize. 

The most dangerous thing occurring now is the “Israeli” annexation of lands from the West Bank and the Jordan Valley. The Palestinian people are the only ones standing alone in this confrontation, with all their movements, factions, and forces. We’re in constant contact with the different leadership of the Palestinian resistance factions. 

Yesterday I received a message from the dear brother and head of Hamas’s political bureau, Mr. Ismail Haniyeh. We are in contact with the rest of the leadership. 

What I want to say and call for at the end of this address regarding Lebanon and the countries and peoples of the region is that we must not forget the Palestinian cause despite our worries and the economic and living condition we are in. We must stand by our Palestinian brothers as a state, people, and resistance.

Anything we, the Lebanese state, and the other Lebanese factions alongside our Palestinian brothers can do in confronting this dangerous conspiracy, we must do because the its repercussions not only target Palestine and the Palestinian but also threatens Lebanon. it is known how its most dangerous repercussions will be on Lebanon.

Regionally, everyone must raise their voices, take a stand, be in contact with the Palestinian leaders and Palestinian forces, and cooperate in everything that can happen in the face of the annexation scheme.

Of course, we were like this in the past, but I liked to say today that this matter must be escalated because it is a sensitive, fateful, and historic moment.

Peace and Allah’s mercy and blessing be upon you. 

Related

WHEN HEZBOLLAH FLAGS UP THE CHINA AND IRAN OPTIONS THE US TREMBLES

Source

Meeting Between The Lebanese Cabinet With Ambassador Wang Kejian, The Chinese Ambassador To Lebanon

By Elijah J. Magnier: @ejmalrai

Hastily and under the watchful eye of Israeli and US drones, Hezbollah is storing hundreds of tons of food stock, supplied by Iran, in dozens of improvised warehouses on the Syrian-Lebanese border. This new and unusual step by Hezbollah reflects Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah’s recent promise to prevent the starvation threat looming for the Lebanese population. 

The US-Israel war against the “Axis of the Resistance” continues but with different tools. It is progressing from waging wars with armies on the ground as the US did in Afghanistan in 2001 and in Iraq in 2003, and as Israel did in Lebanon in 2006, to the assassination of key figures in Iraq. And now it is the sanctions war on Iran, Syria and Lebanon and the intimidation of Iraq. Last January, following the US’s unlawful targeted killing of Brigadier General Qassem Soleimani – UN rapporteur Agnes Callamard described it as “an act of war” – President Donald Trump threatened to slap sanctions on Iraq “like they’ve never seen before” if Baghdad were to ask for US troops to withdraw from Mesopotamia. Iran has survived 40 years of continuous and escalating US sanctions, and Syria has just been faced with the unilateral and harsh “Caesar’s Act” sanction: the country has already been under EU-US sanctions for the last nine years.

The dire economic situation and the sharp devaluation of the local currency that led to prices of foodstuffs skyrocketing are pressing the Lebanese government and the quasi-state actor, Hezbollah, to look for solutions distinct from the US dictate and objectives. For this purpose, Sayyed Nasrallah proposed that the government look towards the East, to China and Russia, without necessarily turning its back on the West, unless the US continues its harsh punishment which is hitting the entire Lebanese population. 

Sayyed Nasrallah’s suggestion that the government “go East” created a storm in Washington, aware of the growing threat of the colossal Chinese economy and its partners around the globe that are threatening US hegemony. US ambassador to Lebanon Dorothy Shea criticised Lebanon’s overture to China in a move indicating the confusion of the US administration. Sayyed Nasrallah’s blow “below the belt” pushed the US administration off balance. Sayyed Nasrallah proposed turning the country’s compass towards the two countries (China and Iran) declared most despicable by the Trump administration. These countries have the capacity to counteract US actions against Lebanon.

This economic strangulation is known as the “soft war” because it costs the US and Israel no human losses. Nevertheless, what US planning did not foresee is the reaction of the opposite camp. The “Axis of the Resistance” has been pushed to be more creative, to learn ways to survive in solidarity, and to overcome the difficult challenges posed by the US and Israel.

Iran promised to support its allies in the Middle East (and in the Caribbean) by exporting oil to Venezuela under the watchful but impotent eyes of the US. Whereas the US treats those who believe they are allies as disposable pawns, interested only in the well-being of Israel. Indeed, the US ambassador, in a private meeting with Prime Minister Diab, raised the Israeli request to establish maritime and land borders between Lebanon and Israel, a request the government in Beirut has always turned down. The US is trying to offer temporary solutions to Lebanon to keep it in limbo and dependent on Washington’s mood and blessing, as long as the Lebanese government doesn’t take that real step towards China for alternative energy and infrastructure.

Hezbollah’s military capability has confirmed a robust seat for the organisation in many theatres around the Middle East. Sayyed Nasrallah’s last speech was not aiming to increase his popularity but was a road map and a plan of action preparing his group to cover some of the needs of the population. The US may indeed be thinking of even further sanctions and other ways to counter Hezbollah. The so-called “soft war” is only just beginning, but the “Axis of the Resistance” seems indubitably ready to produce counter-measures.

Proofread by:  C.G.B. and  Maurice Brasher

Copyright © https://ejmagnier.com   2020 

(Photos): Russian delegation presents Iraqi PMF’s al-Muhandis with medal of honour

July 16, 2020

(Photos): Russian delegation presents Iraqi PMF’s al-Muhandis with medal of honour

From Middle East Observer

Description:

During a political analysis show marking three years since the liberation of the Iraqi city of Mosul, a city which Daesh (ISIS) had made the capital of its caliphate, the instrumental role of Iran’s General Qasim Soleimani and Iraq’s Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis were highlighted.

More specifically, Al Mayadeen’s Baghdad Bureau Chief, Abdullah al-Badran, presented what he called ‘never-before-seen’ photographs of a Russian military delegation presenting al-Muhandis, the former deputy chief of the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF), with a medal of honor for his leading role in the war against the terrorist organisation.

Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, along with Iran’s General Qasim Soleimani, were killed by a US drone strike earlier this year in Baghdad.

Source: Al Mayadeen News (YouTube)

Date: 12 July, 20   20

Transcript:

Al Mayadeen’s Baghdad Bureau Chief, Abdullah al-Badran:

The most outstanding role, that involved directing all of these (efforts to regather the collapsing Iraqi situation and fight the rapid Daesh advancements)…were carried out by the ones that led all of these (military) operations and employed them in the correct way, that is, the martyr Qasim Soleimani, and of course his trustworthy (comrade-in-arms) in Iraq, the martyr Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis.

For example, what we can present to you surrounding the role of these two martyrs, are these never-before-seen photos of the martyr al-Muhandis, the (former) deputy chief of the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) – Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis. In these photos, he is being awarded a medal of honour by a Russian delegation. This is the Russian delegation…. by the way, these photos (were taken) in his PMF office during a meeting with this Russian delegation that met al-Muhandis and presented him with the medal.

There is a clearer photo that shows the medal of honour pinned to his chest. This is of course recognition by the Russians…When Abu Mahdi Al-Muhandis is awarded this medal, and is honoured…by a Russian delegation, this shows the high regard and praise (the Russians had) for the military, field, and political role of this man and his ability to manage the process of confronting ISIS during a time of failure and collapse.

Important note: Please help us keep producing independent translations for you by contributing as little as $1/month here: https://www.patreon.com/MiddleEastObserver

Iraqi PMF leader: Operations on US forces to escalate day by day

Iraqi PMF leader: Operations on US forces to escalate day by day

Original link 

Description:

Deputy Secretary General of the Al-Nujaba Movement, a faction of Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF), says that ‘resistance operations against U.S. occupation forces in Iraq will escalate day by day’.

In an interview with Al Mayadeen TV, Nasr al-Shimmari added that the country’s ‘resistance forces’ had previously given time for dialogue in order for American forces to leave Iraq, however, it was clear that the ‘US only understands the language of force’.

Source: Al-Alam TV (citing from Al Mayadeen TV)

Date: 16 July, 2020

(Important note: Please help us keep producing independent translations for you by contributing as little as $1/month here)

Transcript:

Iraq: Nasr al-Shimmari, Deputy Secretary General of the Al-Nujaba Movement:

– the Americans cannot change the equations in Iraq

– the Americans have no choice but to withdraw from Iraq or stay and endure the losses that will be inflicted on their forces

– we bless the operations targeting the Americans and the resistance is devising the appropriate methods that will force them to leave

–  the U.S. forces in Iraq are occupying forces and targeting them by the resistance will escalate day by day

– the operations of the resistance are characterized by secrecy, and there is a unified decision among the resistance forces (factions) to confront the American forces

– the government is an executive – and not a legislative – entity, and (thus) cannot prevent the resistance from targeting the American (forces)

– Iran is a friend of all the resistance forces, but the main (side) concerned with confronting the American obstinacy in Iraq are the Iraqis (themselves)

– Washington did not take the initiative to help Iraq confront ISIS by using the pretext that this is was an ‘internal matter’ and not an external attack

– the Americans and the British want to put their (military) forces in areas (of Iraq) where they think the resistance will not (be able to) target them

– Turkish forces invaded Iraqi territory and bombed positions in Iraq and we did not see any American action (in response)

– Neither the prime minister nor the government has the authority to bring foreign troops to Iraq, especially after the parliament’s decision

– We hope that the actions of Al-Kadhimi and his government will be in the interest of Iraq, and we affirm that the future of the country depends on (it attaining its) freedom

– The Americans only understand the language of force and resistance is the only weapon capable of getting them out of Iraq

– resistance had given way for (the path) of dialogue and the implementation of the parliament’s decision for U.S. forces to leave (but that failed)

Related Posts:

بين تموز 2006 وتموز 2020… المقاومة المنتصرة والمستهدفة ومعركة تنويع خيارات لبنان الاقتصادية

حسن حردان

في مثل هذه الأيام من شهر تموز عام 2006 كان رجال المقاومة في جنوب لبنان يسطرون ملاحم البطولة ويحطمون جبروت جيش الاحتلال الصهيوني ويلقنونه دروساً في القتال بكلً أنواعه، في ميادين بنت جبيل ومارون الراس وعيتا الشعب وسهل الخيام… فانهارت معنويات جنود النخبة الصهاينة الذين وجدوا أنفسهم امام قتال حقيقي أصبحوا فيه شخوصاً يصطادهم المقاومون في الليل والنهار. فيما دبابات الميركافا التي كان يحتمي فيها جنود العدو تحوّلت إلى توابيت لهم بعد أن احرقها المقاومون بصواريخ الكورنيت…

وفي مثل هذه الأيام كان يُصنع النصر في كل يوم من أيام العدوان الصهيوني الأميركي رغم الدعم والغطاء اللذين حظيا به من الحكومات الرجعية العربية التابعة، وقوى في الداخل اللبناني امتهنت التآمر مع الأعداء لطعن المقاومة في ظهرها.. كان المطلوب سحق المقاومة وإنهاء النموذج الذي جسّدته بإلحاق الهزيمة بجيش الاحتلال بإجباره على الرحيل مهزوماً ذليلاً عن معظم المناطق التي كان يحتلها في الجنوب والبقاع الغربي، بلا قيد ولا شرط او أيّ ثمن مقابل وذلك للمرة الأولى في الصراع العربي الصهيوني… لكن ميادين القتال كانت تقول انّ من كان يسحق وتدمر قوّته هو جيش العدو الذي حاول دون جدوى تبديد صورة هزيمته عام 2000 امام المقاومة فإذا به يتعرّض لهزيمة ثانية أقسى محدثة زلزالاً في قلب الكيان وجيشه الذي يشكل أساس وجوده…

نفس قوى العدوان وأدواتها تشنّ هذه الأيام عدواناً جديداً على لبنان لكن عبر وسائل الحرب الاقتصادية، بعد أن اخفقت الحرب الإرهابية الكونية بقيادة أميركا في إسقاط ظهر وحصن المقاومة، الدولة الوطنية السورية، وفشلت في القضاء على المقاومة وإخماد شعلتها، وانتصاراتها التموزية التي زلزلت كيان الاحتلال وحوّلت جيشه إلى قوة مهزومة ومردوعة.. واشنطن نقلت الحرب من الميدان الصلب إلى الميدان الناعم حسب نظرية جوزيف ناي.. والهدف طبعاً تقويض عوامل قوة المقاومة المنتصرة والمتنامية، قدرة وشعبية…

لكن المقاومة التي يتألم جمهورها من الحرب الاقتصادية نتيجة تفاقم الأزمات الاقتصادية والاجتماعية والمعيشية.. والتي عرفت كيف تهزم العدو الصهيوني وقوى الإرهاب التكفيرية، هي اليوم قرّرت خوض غمار التصدي للحرب الاقتصادية.. وتحويلها إلى فرصة لإحداث التغيير في السياسات الريعية التي تسبّبت بالأزمات المالية والاقتصادية وأوجدت الثغرات التي استغلتها الإدارة الأميركية لتسعير نار هذه الأزمات ومحاولة النيل من التفاف الناس حول مقاومتهم بتحمّلها مسؤولية تدهور أوضاعهم المعيشية…

مواجهة هذه الحرب ليست سهلة، وهي تحتاج إلى رؤية واستراتيجية متكاملة مرحلياً واستراتيجية لإحباط أهدافها وصناعة النصر في ميدان الحرب الاقتصادية كما صنع في ميادين مقاومة الحروب العسكرية والإرهابية.. وهذه الرؤية والاستراتيجية أعلنها قائد المقاومة سماحة السيد حسن نصر الله، وعنوانها إعلان الجهاد الزراعي والصناعي، ايّ تحويل الاقتصاد الريعي إلى اقتصاد إنتاجي.. أما العنوان الثاني في مواجهة الحرب الاقتصادية، فهو التوجه شرقاً لحلّ الأزمات الراهنة وإبطال النتائج السلبية التي ادى إليها الحصار الاقتصادي والمالي الأميركي.. وهذا التوجه يرتكز إلى عوامل قوة تقوم على التشابك الاقتصادي مع العراق وإيران وسورية وتلقف العروض الصينية.. بدءاً من الإسراع في توقيع عقود مقايضة المنتجات الزراعية والصناعية اللبنانية بالنفط ومشتقاته والفيول من العراق.. والاتفاق مع الشركات الصينية للبدء بتنفيذ مشاريع بناء وتأهيل البنية التحتية وانشاء معامل إنتاج الكهرباء ومعالجة النفايات إلخ… انها معركة مقاومة حرب الاستنزاف الاقتصادية الأميركية، بإيجاد بدائل تكسر الحصار وتضع حدا لهذا النزف الذي يرهق الشعب اللبناني..

إنّ إمكانية الانتصار في هذه الحرب الجديدة مرتبطة بترجمتها من الحكومة اللبنانية إلى خطوات عملية سريعة بأن تسارع إلى توقيع الاتفاقيات مع العراق والاستفادة من أيّ عروض مماثلة قد تبدي ايّ دولة عربية او إسلامية او عالمية الاستعداد لتقديمها إلى لبنان.. وفي طليعة هذه الدول التي قدمت العروض المغرية للبنان وغير المشروطة، إيران والصين..

وقد أعلن الرئيس حسان دياب عزمه على السير في هذا الاتجاه وغيره من الاتجاهات طالما انها تحقق مصلحة لبنان الاقتصادية وتساعده على حلّ أزماته.. وأبلغ ذلك للسفيرة الأميركية التي زارته مؤخراً لاحتواء تنامي الغضب ضدّ التدخلات الأميركية السافرة وتوحي بأنّ بلادها تريد مساعدة لبنان. بعد أن كانت وراء دفعه إلى الانهيار الاقتصادي وتدهور قيمة العملة الوطنية والوضع المعيشي للبنانيين…

فهل نشهد في الأيام المقبلة إنجازات في مواجهة الحرب الاقتصادية على غرار الإنجازات التي كانت تحققها المقاومة في مثل هذه الأيام خلال تصدّيها للعدوان الصهيوني في تموز عام 2006؟

هذا ما ننتظره لنسجل انتصارات جديدة لكن في ميادين مواجهة الحرب الاقتصادية وإسقاط أهدافها القاتلة للناس.. فكل الشروط متوافرة لتحقيق ذلك، لا سيما انّ المقاومة المنتصرة والمقتدرة تحمي اليوم ليس فقط ثروات لبنان النفطية والمائية من الأطماع الصهيونية، وإنما تحمي أيضاً أيّ قرارات تأخذها الحكومة في تنويع خيارات لبنان الاقتصادية وعلاقاته مع كلّ دول العالم في الشرق والغرب وفي الجنوب والشمال انطلاقاً من مصلحة لبنان وهو أمر يسهم في تحرير قرار لبنان الاقتصادي من التبعية عبر وضعه على طريق تحقيق الاستقلال الاقتصادي المرهون بالنهوض بالإنتاج الوطني والتنمية المستقلة..

نفط العراق للبنان عبر سورية يعني بدء التوجّه شرقاً رغم أميركا وقانون قيصرها…

د. عصام نعمان

كل ما جرى ويجري في شوارع مدن لبنان من عنف وتخريب منذ أسبوعين كان بفعل الولايات المتحدة ووكلائها المحليين. الغرض؟ محاولة تعطيل توجّه أهل السلطة شرقاً، نتيجةَ ضغطٍ شعبي جارف، للانفتاح والتعاون اقتصادياً مع الصين وروسيا وإيران مروراً بسورية والعراق.

كان محكوماً على أميركا ووكلائها أن تتراجع وتختار بين ما تعتبره «أهون الشرّين»: نفط العراق للبنان بدلاً من نفط إيران. حلفاء أميركا الإقليميّون امتنعوا عن تقديم أيّ عون مالي أو اقتصادي لبلدٍ كان لهم دائماً ساحة نفوذٍ ومربط خيل ومرتع متعة قبل أن ينتهي قياده، في زعمهم، إلى حزب الله وأنصار إيران.

الصديق وقت الضيق. لكن لبنان في ضائقته الشديدة لم يحظَ بعونٍ محسوس من صديقه التقليدي (أميركا) الحريص على أن يبدو دائماً الدولة المقتدرة والقادرة على فعل كل شيء في كل الأزمنة والأمكنة. بعضٌ من أصدقاء الغرب في سدّة السلطة حاروا وداروا وحاوروا وانتظروا طويلاً أن تمدّ أميركا وفرنسا يد المساعدة لكن دونما جدوى.

ما مردّ الإحجام؟

مردّه أسباب عدّة. قيل إن «اسرائيل» المتوجّسة من تنامي قدرات المقاومة (حزب الله) هي مَن دفع ادارة ترامب الى اتخاذ هذا الموقف بغية إضعاف لبنان وإنهاكه اقتصادياً واجتماعياً ما يمكّن اصدقاء الغرب ووكلاءه المحليين من إلقاء المسؤولية والملامة على حزب الله وحلفائه فيسهل أمر إخراجهم من السلطة.

قيل إن فريقاً من حكام الخليج ساءه أن يرتضي سعد الحريري مشاركة خصومهم في السلطة وأن يرعاهم ويُراعيهم حتى باتوا الشريك الأقوى في شركة الحكم.

قيل إن معارضين من أهل السنّة كما من المسيحيين المتعطّشين الى السلطة ساءهم وأساء الى رغائبهم ومصالحهم تحالفٌ وتشارك بين الرئيس العماد ميشال عون ومحازبيه من جهة ومحازبي «الثنائية الشيعية» (تحالف حركة امل وحزب الله) من جهة اخرى ما أبعد هؤلاء المعارضين عن جنّة السلطة ومنافعها ومباهجها ودفعهم الى الضغط على أصدقائهم ومتعهّديهم من المسؤولين في أميركا وأوروبا والخليج للإحجام عن مدّ يد المساعدة الى مَن صنفوهم أعداءً محليين عتاة للغرب عموماً وحكام الخليج خصوصاً.

الحقيقة أن كل هذه الأسباب والدوافع أسهمت بقليل او كثير في إيصال البلاد الى الوضع المأساوي الراهن الذي وصفته المفوّضة السامية للأمم المتحدة لحقوق الإنسان ميشيل باشيله بقولها «إن لبنان يواجه أسواء ازمة اقتصادية في تاريخه، وأن وضعه يخرج بسرعة عن السيطرة».

غير أن السبب الرئيس للتردّي وخروج الوضع عن السيطرة هو تراجع قدرات الولايات المتحدة ونفوذها ودورها في منطقة غرب آسيا الممتدة من شواطئ البحر الأبيض المتوسط غرباً الى شواطئ بحر قزوين شرقاً.

لتراجع قدرات أميركا وتأثيرها اسباب عدّة، محلية وإقليمية ودولية. محلياً، تراجع اقتصادها منذ ازمة صيف 2008 نتيجةَ هجرة الكثير من شركاتها الكبرى الى الخارج، ولا سيما الى جنوب شرق آسيا والشرق الأقصى حيث اليد العاملة الرخيصة والأسواق الواسعة، ما أدى الى تزايد نسبة البطالة وانحسار نسبة التثمير في مختلف ميادين اقتصادها.

إقليمياً، أصبح للولايات المتحدة منافسون مقتدرون سياسياً واقتصادياً وعسكرياً، ابرزهم ثلاثة: إيران، تركيا و«اسرائيل». فإزاء الكثير من القضايا والتحديات والأزمات أصبح لهؤلاء سياسات ومواقف وتدخّلات تتعارض في أحيانٍ كثيرة مع سياسات أميركا وسلوكيتها على الأرض ما أدّى الى إضعاف تأثيرها في الدول والمجتمعات المعتبرة تاريخياً مرتبطة بها او محسوبة عليها.

دولياً، فقدت الولايات المتحدة رتبتها السابقة كأول واكبر وأقوى أقطاب العالم، لا سيما بعد انهيار الاتحاد السوفياتي في مطلع تسعينيات القرن الماضي. اليوم، تنافسها الصين على الوحدانية القطبية وعلى النفوذ الاقتصادي في القارات الخمس، وثمة من يعتقد ان اقتصاد الصين اليوم أصبح الاول والاكبر في العالم. الى ذلك، استعادت روسيا الكثير من قدراتها ونفوها باجتذابها اوروبا اليها بعدما أصبحت المورِّد الاول للغاز الى مختلف دولها. كذلك اليابان والهند وكوريا الجنوبية وماليزيا التي استطاعت الارتقاء الى مراتب عليا في التصنيع والتبادل التجاري مع شتى الاسواق العالمية.

نتيجة هذه العوامل والتطورات عدّلت الولايات المتحدة مقاربتها للشؤون الدولية وذلك بالتخلي عن مفهوم الحرب الخشنة ومتطلباتها ووسائلها وذلك باعتماد مفهوم الحرب الناعمة Soft Power التي تمارسها بنشاط ومثابرة في شتى أنحاء العالم ولا سيما في غرب آسيا. خلافاً للحرب الخشنة التي تهدف الى كسر إرادة العدو بالعمل على احتلال ارضه وتدمير مرافقه الحيوية، تهدف الحرب الناعمة الى تعطيل ارادة العدو وإنهاكه باستخدام وسائل الحرب الأهلية، والحصار والعقوبات الاقتصادية، والعصبيات المذهبية المفرّقة، والحرب التجارية، والحملات الإعلامية، والخروق السيبرانية، كل ذلك بقصد إنهاك العدو في الداخل وشل حركته في الخارج والضغط عليه لتقبّل مفاوضة أميركا وفق شروطها وشروط حلفائها الأقربين، وفي مقدمهم «اسرائيل».

الى ذلك، ثمة مفاعيل نفسية، مادية ومدمّرة لجائحة كورونا (كوفيد-19) في شتى أنحاء العالم، ولا سيما في الدولتين الأكثر عداء للعرب. ففي الولايات المتحدة أُعلن عن ارتفاع قياسي في عدد المصابين بالفيروس القاتل اذ سُجلت اكثر من 63 الف إصابة يوم السبت الماضي، وانه استناداً الى ارقام جامعة جون هوبكنز ذهب ضحيته أكثر من 133 الف شخص، وان الولايات المتحدة تتصدر قائمة الدول الأكثر تضرراً من تفشي كورونا.

في «إسرائيل» تحدثت السلطات الصحية عن تسجيل قرابة 1,5 الف اصابة بفيروس كورونا يوم الجمعة الماضي. كما تحدثت وسائل الإعلام عن وضع أكثر من عشرة الآف جندي في الحجر الصحي واستدعاء آلاف من جنود الاحتياط للحلول محلهم.

تداعيات كورونا النفسية والاقتصادية في كِلتا الدولتين المناهضتين للعرب من شأنها الحدّ من هامش الحركة والعمل لديهما كما من اعتداءاتهما على دول الجوار الجغرافي، ولا سيما لبنان وسورية والعراق.

اخيراً وليس آخراً، تزويدُ لبنان بالنفط العراقي عبر سورية يعني بدء التوجّه العملي شرقاً رغم حصار أميركا و«قانون قيصر» وعقوباته القاسية، كما يعني ان سورية والعراق سيكرّسان فتح الحدود والمعابر بينهما لما فيه خير البلدين وتنشيط عمليات النقل البري بين موانئ البحر المتوسط وبلدان الخليج.

*نائب ووزير سابق.

IRAQI RESISTANCE FORCES BLEW UP US LOGISTIC CONVOY NEAR BAGHDAD (VIDEOS)

Source

On July 11 evening, a US logistic convoy was blew up on the road between Samawah and Diwaniyah, south of the Iraqi capital of Baghdad. At least 3 vehicles of the convoy were reportedly destroyed or damaged by gunment that attacked the convoy.

There have been no reports about casualties following the attack. US logistical convoys in Iraq are often supported or even operated by private contractors. So, the Pentagon may try to ignore the incident pretending that nothing has happened.

So far, no group has claimed responsibility for the attack. Nonetheless, Iraqi sources say that the attack was conducted by one of anti-US Iraqi resistance groups. Multiple such groups appeared following the US drone strike on Baghdad International Airport in early January 2020.

The drone strike killed the deputy commander of the Iraqi Armed Forces’ Popular Mobilization Forces and the commander of Iran’s elite Quds Force.

More Videos

Related News

حسان دياب لن يكون «كاظميّاً جديداً»؟

د. وفيق إبراهيم

يضعُ الأميركيون كامل إمكاناتهم اللبنانية والإقليمية لإسقاط حكومة حسان دياب وإعادة تشكيل أخرى جديدة تحاكي حكومة «الكاظمي العراقية».

يشمل هذا الولاء مثلاً، حرصاً من حكومة الكاظمي على حصر السلاح بيد الدولة، وهذا يعني تجريد الحشد الشعبي منه، ويتوجّه لنصب حكومة لبنانية جديدة لديها شعار سياسي وهو حصر السلاح اللبناني في يد الدولة، وباللغة الأوضح تجريد حزب الله من سلاحه، أي تماماً كما تطالب الأحزاب اللبنانية الموالية للأميركيين و»إسرائيل».

يبدو بشكل منطقي أن الأميركيين هنا يرون في حكومة حسان دياب سداً يحول دون تطبيق هذه المشاريع، ما دفع بومبيو وفريقه الدبلوماسي والعسكري لطلب إقالة حكومة دياب واستبدالها بحكومة جديدة لا تضمّ وزراء من حزب الله.

هناك أيضاً حظر أميركي على استيراد الكهرباء من سورية ومشتقات نفطية من إيران، فالأميركيون يعرفون أن رئيس الحكومة حسان دياب لا ينتمي للمنظومة السياسية التاريخية التي تعمل على تطبيق ما يريده الأميركيون والأوروبيون، وتلتبس في الموقف مع «إسرائيل».

بما يتبين في معظم الأحيان أن حكومة دياب ليست من نتاج الطبقة التقليديّة التي اعتاد الأميركيون على انصياعها، ولا تشكل جزءاً من منظومة تاريخية فاسدة أفلست لبنان بنهبه وسرقته منذ ثلاثين عاماً بغطاء أميركي وأوروبي وخليجي، وتحاول تحميل وزر هذه المأساة لحكومة دياب.

فلا أحد يصدّق مشاهد الحريري وجنبلاط والجميل وجعجع وهم يتهمون الحكومة الحالية بأنها لم تفعل شيئاً لوقف هذا الانهيار، وهم على علم عميق بأنه نتائج انهيار متراكم منذ ثلاثين عاماً لا يحصل ببضعة أشهر ولا يمكن معالجته في ظل حصار أميركي مباشر على لبنان التجاري والمصرفي، أصاب أيضاً المغتربين اللبنانيين في العالم.

ومن الصعب مجابهة هذا الانهيار وسط ضغط أميركي على صناديق النقد الدولية ومؤتمرات سيدر كي تمتنع عن إمداد لبنان بأي شيء.

يمكن أيضاً اتهام الأميركيين وبضمير مرتاح أنهم يمنعون دول الخليج وخصوصاً السعودية والإمارات عن مدّ يد العون إلى لبنان.

فكيف يمكن لحكومة دياب إيجاد حلول في مثل هذه المناخات الغربية العدائية والعربية الصامتة إلى حدود التآمر؟

وهل بوسعها العمل فيما تقطع القوى اللبنانية «المتأمركة» الطرق الأساسية في البلاد، حتى وصل الأمر بـ «الشيخ سعد الحريري» إلى حد اتهام الحكومة بالنفاق، لأنها «تزعم أنها تريد العمل وليس لديها كهرباء»، متناسياً أن الحكومات التي تولاها أبوه الراحل رفيق الحريري وحكوماته وحكومات السنيورة هي التي منعت إصلاح الكهرباء، وعملت مع آخرين على استئجار باخرتين تركيتين لتزويد لبنان بكهرباء هي الأغلى من نوعها في العالم لأن أسعارها تحتوي على عمولات إضافية ضخمة للرعاة «الأذكياء» و»الخواجات» منهم.

لماذا يريد الأميركيون إذاً نسف الحكومة؟

هذه حكومة لا تأتمر بالخارج السياسي وترفض الانصياع لمطالبه، ولا تقترب إلا ما ترى أنه لمصلحة عموم اللبنانيين، أما لماذا لم تنجز المطلوب؟

فالإجابة واضحة وجلية وتتمركز في الحصار الأميركي الأوروبي المفروض عليها والمستورد خليجياً، فكيف يمكن لهذه الحكومة أن تعتبر أن الخطورة في سلاح حزب الله فيما الطيران الإسرائيلي يختال في أجواء لبنان، وأجهزة مخابراتها تسرح في محافظاتنا ودوائرنا، وتخترق دورياً الشريط الشائك عند الحدود وتحتل قرية الغجر اللبنانية ومزارع شبعا وكفرشوبا والقرى السبع وآبار نفط وغاز عند الحدود مع فلسطين المحتلة؟ وكيف تقبل أيضاً بإبعاد حزب الله عن الحكومة وهو الذي يحوز على أعلى نسبة مؤيدين في لبنان؟ولا علاقة له وباعتراف أخصامه السياسيين بكل أنواع الفساد الذي أوقع لبنان في انهيار اقتصادي عميق جداً.

هذا ما يوضح أن استهداف حكومة دياب يرتبط بنيوياً بمشروع يحاول ترميم تراجع النفوذ الأميركي في الإقليم، فيسدّد على الحكومة اللبنانية من خلال استهداف حزب الله والسعي إلى حكومة جديدة يترأسها سياسيّ بإمكانات الحريري أو البعاصيري ونواف سلام أو ربما الريفي، أي بمستويات لا تطمح إلى دور وطني بل تعتمد على نفوذ «قيصر» للاستيلاء على السلطة.بما يوضح أن «قيصر» يمرّ بدباباته الثقيلة على لبنان وسورية مجتاحاً العراق ومحاولات خنق إيران وإبادة اليمن بقصف جوي بريطاني سعودي لا يرمي إلا على المدنيين.

بالمقابل لا تدخل حكومة حسان دياب في الصراع الوهمي بين شرق وغرب، لأنها تعرف أن العلاقات الدولية لم تعُد مبنية على هذا النحو منذ سقوط الاتحاد السوفياتي في 1989.

بمعنى أن هناك بلداناً تتعاقد حسب مصالحها وفي كل الاتجاهات.. والعلاقات الاقتصاديّة بين الصين والأميركيين تزيد عن 250 مليار دولار فضلاً عن ديون تصل إلى 3 تريليونات دولار.فأي شرق يجري الحديث عنه وأي غرب نريد الخروج منه؟

لذلك فإن على اللبنانيين الضغط على مؤسساتهم الحزبية لتنضبط في إطار دعم الحكومة لأن طبيعة الصراع اللبناني أصبحت بين البحث عن المصالح الشعبية أو الانصياع للمصالح الأميركية، والدليل أن الأميركيين يعملون على تحالفات بين قوى سياسية ودينية لإعادة تعميق لبنان الطائفي المنزوي في قاع التخلف.

لذلك يكفي تسجيل مدى الضغط الأميركي على حسان دياب عبر تسريب معلومة للشهم العريق وليد جنبلاط بأن رئيس الحكومة يطالب بتعويضات من الجامعة الأميركية عن مرحلة تدريسه لمدة طويلة فيها.

والغريب أن هذا أمر طبيعي يفعله الأساتذة الجامعيّون الذين يقبضون تعويضات أو رواتب تقاعديّة عند خروجهم من التدريس.

فلماذا تعتبر السفارة الأميركية أنها حادثة «يمكن ابتزاز دياب بها»؟

وهل يعتقد أبو تيمور أن تعويضات دياب الجامعية هي جزء الريوع والمغانم الإدارية التي يجب تقاسمها على الطريقة الحريرية المعتادة؟

لا بد أخيراً من تأكيد أن موازنة القوى الحالية داخلياً وخارجياً، لا تسمح بأي تغيير حكومة ينقلها من الحيادية والإنتاج إلى واحدة من حكومات الحريري والسنيورة التي تبيع مصالح الوطن لسياسات الخارج مقابل ترسيخها في سلطة جعلتها من أصحاب المليارات والمزارع في بلد يتجه للغرق وهم ثابتون على سياستهم الموالية للأميركيين وحلفائهم.

America’s Sicilian Expedition

Source

July 10, 2020

America’s Sicilian Expedition

by Francis Lee for the Saker Blog

Of all the enemies to public liberty, war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; and from these proceed debt and taxes; and armies, and debts, are taxes of the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few … no nation could reserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.’’ (My emphasis – FL) (1)

Thus was the initial warning by James Madison to the possible development (and dangers) which lie ahead of the great social and political experiment in what was to become the American Republic. In fact these militaristic/ imperial proclivities were also noted by the more astute members and chroniclers of American history and repeated by Alexis De Tocqueville in 1835. He wrote that:

Among democratic nations the wealthiest, best educated, and ablest men seldom adopt a military profession, the army taken collectively, eventually forms a new nation by itself where the mind is less enlarged, and habits are made rude than in the nation at large. Now this small and uncivilized nation has arms in its possession and also knows how to use them; (My emphasis – FL) for indeed the pacific temper of the community increases the danger to which a democratic people is exposed from the military and the turbulent spirit of the Army. Nothing is so dangerous as an army in the midst of an unwarlike nation; the excessive love of the whole community for quiet puts the Constitution at the mercy of the soldiery. (2)

‘Unwarlike’? Well the Republic was to become very warlike for most of its history. Things got started in earnest in 1846-48 with the US/Mexican conflict. This marked the first U.S. armed conflict chiefly fought on foreign soil. It pitted a politically divided and militarily unprepared Mexico against the expansionist-minded administration of U.S. President James K. Polk, who believed the United States had a “manifest destiny” to spread across the continent to the Pacific Ocean. A border skirmish along the Rio Grande started off the fighting and was followed by a series of U.S. victories. When the dust cleared, Mexico had lost about one-third of its territory, including nearly all of present-day California, Utah, Nevada, Arizona, and New Mexico. So the US got the taste of imperial hubris and easy victories early on. This was the beginning of a will to global expansion which has seen the US develop a penchant for global hegemony.

What could be more apposite and sombre of these measured warnings to the present time and the leadership thereof. The United States has transmuted from being an experimental national democracy into a rampaging imperial juggernaut with all the attendant features of empire. In general and in more recent times these imperial conflicts have been wars of choice. No-body had attacked the US since the half-hearted British attempt in 1812 and the Japanese in 1941. The only war of any significance since independence was the internal conflict between the industrial north and the agrarian south.

The Rise of Empire

This awakening of US imperialism was later extended to the Spanish/American war of the late 19th century. New territories in Latin America and East Asia were added through their annexation. The US had thus become the latest newcomer to the imperialist club although it always insisted (rather unconvincingly) that it was different to the more established British, French, Spanish and Portuguese exploitative models. There was a belief, presumably mandated by the deity, in America’s manifest destiny to rule the world. This is the same patter, which is now trotted out by the neo-cons, the Deep State, NSA, MIC, MSM, and political parties. Whether they actually believe in this is something of a moot point.

Yet now the United States finds itself everywhere in a situation of endless simultaneous wars, occupations, blockades (whoops, I mean sanctions), economic warfare, surveillance warfare and one-sided alliances whereby its ‘allies’ are in many ways worse treated than its chosen enemies and are becoming increasingly disenchanted with their subaltern role. This is particularly instanced in the American German falling out over the question of Russian Gas and Nordstream2. Germany has its own national interests which conflict with those of the US. How exactly is this going to play out? It should be understood in this respect that the US does not have ‘allies’ in the generally accepted understanding of the term, but subaltern hierarchies of the ‘Me Tarzan – You Jane’ variety. The ‘Jane’ in the situation are the assembled and invertebrate species of EU vassal regimes who up to this point in their history have always been willing to prostrate themselves at the command of their transatlantic masters.

One of the stranger anomalies of this US global military-economic posture is the influence of Israel – Israel this tiny country, with its tiny population, in the middle east must be obeyed at all costs. And making sure that it is obeyed are the various interest groups in the US which inter alia includes the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) the Anti-Deformation League (ADL) the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA). Most, if not all, of the senior members of these organizations are Jewish, Zionists and/or neo-conservatives. To give an example of their influence and reach take the case of uber-hawk and Zionist lackey Lindsey Graham of South Carolina

Amidst the general routine and prevalent corruption in American political and corporate life the Las Vegas gambling magnate Sheldon Adelson – staunch supporter of his particular interests and the Israeli cause – began throwing around tens of millions of dollars to push legislation to ban internet gambling in order to protect his billion dollar oligopoly casino interests against competition. It wasn’t long before Graham introduced a bill to ban internet gambling. When asked about the curious coincidence of timing Graham said that his Southern Baptist constituents in South Carolina (SC) shared Adelson’s aversion to internet gambling so there was no quid pro quo involved.

It should be borne in mind, however, that Graham had held Federal Office in SC since 1995, and yet he had felt no driving urge to introduce such legislation until 2014. This took place when Graham had apparently undergone a Damascene Conversion precisely at the time that Mr Adelson began to shower him with monies. Graham’s transaction with his benefactor apparently did not meet the Supreme Court’s chief Justice, John Roberts’s, narrow definition of an illegal quid pro quo as expressed in the Court’s 2010 Citizens United Decision.

In another unrelated instance involving Graham, which might be considered as being questionable, there were his political liaisons with a foreign state and its leader – Benjamin Netanyahu – whose policies Graham would be disposed to imbibe and support whatever the policies the Israeli Prime Minster might propose, an arresting statement in light of the Senator’s oath to the American Constitution and the voters he represents. (3)

Yet another instance of a corrupt American official in the pocket of Israeli interests. Moreover, it is not merely lower rank officials who willingly take the knee to Israel, the process reaches up to the highest levels of the US political establishment; so much so that It seems difficult to exactly work out who is whose client state in the US/Israel relationship.

Various right-wing think-tanks (see above) most importantly the American Enterprise Institution, or to give it its full name, The American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research is a Washington, D.C. based think-tank which researches government, politics, economics, and social welfare. AEI is an independent non-profit organization supported primarily by grants and contributions from foundationscorporations, and individuals. This of course is a rather misleading description of what it actually does, and what its alleged goals are, in what is a vehemently pro-Zionist neo-con outfit. Leading figures include Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Mr and Mrs Wurmser as well as the rest of the Zionist neo-con gang whose entire raison d’etre seems to be unconditional support for Israel. This was instanced in the policy statement, A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm (commonly known as the “Clean Break” report) was a policy document that was prepared in 1996 by a study group led by Richard Perle and Douglas Feith  for Benjamin Netanyahu, the then Prime Minister of Israel. The report explained a new approach to solving Israel‘s security problems in the Middle East with an emphasis on “Western values” (i.e., naked imperialism). It has widely been criticized for advocating an aggressive new policy including the removal and murder of Saddam Hussein in Iraq and the ongoing war and annexation of parts of Syria by engaging in proxy and actual warfare and highlighting Iraq’s alleged possession of mythical “weapons of mass destruction”.

It would not be an exaggeration to surmise that US foreign policy is now, and has been for some time, subsumed under Israel’s strategic interests and policies in the middle-east. Exactly what the United States gets out of this relationship is not clear other than the mollycoddling and financing of the Zionist apartheid state for no apparent returns.

The US foreign policy enigma:

I think it was Winston Churchill who once described the foreign policy of the Soviet Union as being ‘’ … a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma; but perhaps there is a key. That key is Russian national interest.’’ It seems that much the same is true of the United States and its foreign policy. The cornerstone of the policy was put in place in the 1990s with the collapse of the Soviet Union, the dismemberment of Yugoslavia and the expansion of NATO up to Russia’s western frontier and the first and second Iraq wars, as well as the destruction of Libya, ably assisted by the British and French. This period of triumphalism for the Anglo-Zionist empire is ending with the imperial overstretch eventuating from 9/11. This episode has been subject to a myriad of various theories and has never been definitively demonstrated as to who were the brains behind this event. That being said the consequences of the event had deep-going ramifications. As one commentator has noted.

‘’The September 11, 2001, terrorist attack and the botched response to it delivered a twofold lesson: first, perpetual intervention in conflicts abroad is likely to spawn what the CIA calls ’’blowback’’ an unintended negative consequences of an intervention suffered by the party that intervenes. It is irrefutable that America’s funding and arming of religious based (i.e., Jihadis- FL) resistance to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan created a Frankenstein’s monster that little more than a decade later brought the war back to the United States. But we have been largely unwilling to join the dots beyond that. Invading Iraq in 2003 spawned further instability in the middle-east and the emergence of more terrorist groups. Why is it that so few of our pundits have noticed the obvious fact that the civil war in Syria and the rise of ISIS are the direct results of our actions in Iraq? Beyond that the United State’s government’s ham-fisted meddling in internal Ukrainian politics helped to set in motion a predictable chain of events that has sparked a new cold war. Actions such as this have drained our Treasury and destabilized large areas of the World. (4)

It also seems pertinent to enquire as to what extent is the United States carrying out policies which could be defined as being the pursuit of its national interests; this as opposed to the interests of internal and itinerant cosmopolitan groups in the US whose sympathies and interests lie elsewhere in overseas climes and not in the US heartlands. But this should be expected from the aims and objectives of these footloose globalist oligarchies in the key positions at the apex of American institutions and exerting what amounts to a stranglehold on policy-making.

Overstretch, Hubris and Messianism

Generally speaking all empires have recognisable contours of development, maturity, and decline; and there is no reason to suppose that America and its empire will be an exception to this general rule. For all that the American ruling class has taken it upon itself to deny these fundamental conditions and processes of empire. A case study was the fate of the British Empire. At the end of WW2 Britain could no longer bear the costs of holding down 25% of the worlds surface. Moreover the populations of empire – particularly in India – did not wish to be held down. Post 1945 the jig was up: the UK was effectively bankrupt, and the US took full advantage of this.

‘’The US concept of multilateralism was expressed in the Lend-Lease programme in its dealings with the UK. The British loan of 1946 and the Bretton Woods Agreements called for the dollar to supplant sterling as the world’s reserve currency. In effect the Sterling Area was to be absorbed into what would be the dollar area which would be extended throughout the world. Britain was to remain in a weakened position in which it found itself at the end of the war … with barely any free monetary reserves and dependent on dollar borrowings to meet its current obligations. The United States would gain access to Britain’s pre-war markets in Latin America, Africa, the middle-east and the far east … the Anglo-American Loan Agreement spelt the end of Britain as a Great Power.’’ (5)

This is the way empires die, new empires arise, decline, and they in their turn also die, and this process admits of no exceptions.

The Big Push

From a geopolitical viewpoint the most important developments in recent years have been the relative decline of America in economic, political, and cultural terms, the rise of China, and the recovery of Russia from the disastrous years of the Yeltsin ascendancy. That being said it should be acknowledged that America is the most powerful global economic and military alliance – but there has been the undermining of this pre-eminence which is symptomatic of its present state. I remember the scene in the film Apocalypse Now with Martin Sheen playing Captain Willard who sums up his (and America’s) dilemma: ‘’Every minute I stay in this room, I get weaker, and every minute Charlie squats in the bush, he gets stronger.’’ That pretty much sums up the situation facing America then and now. As for the $ dominance well that worked provided advantage was not taken of its privileged position, but of course, human nature being what it is, advantage was taken. Moreover, the reserve status of the dollar isn’t, as many suppose, a one-way gravy train. Given that the dollar is the world’s global currency demand will fluctuate. Increased demand will push up the value of the greenback meaning that goods and services exported to the US will become cheaper. However a strong dollar will push up the costs of America’s export producers and lead to a hollowing out of US industry. Hence the Rust Belt. The absurdity of having a domestic currency serve as the global reserve currency means that the US monetary authorities need to engineer a situation whereby an equilibrium match of dollar inflows to dollar outflows is attained. A difficult if not impossible trick to perform. Please see the Triffin Paradox.

This is a situation which the US cannot endure. It must act now to reverse its own decline and prevent the rise of other great powers. The ‘Big Push’ mentality whereby the final victorious outcome against an entrenched enemy became a feature of military ‘thinking’ (sic) during WW1. The British and French offensives on the western front, the battles of the Somme 1916, Ypres III 1917 (Wipers 3 as the British soldiers’ called it) and the Nivelle offensives 1917, did not succeed in bringing about a victory over embedded German opposition and cost hundreds of thousands of casualties for a few blood-soaked hundred meters of gain. The situation was reversed in 1918 when the Germans went on the offensive, but the result was a successful counter-offensive by the British, French, and newly arrived American divisions and finally the Armistice of 1918.

Be that as it may this ‘Big Push’ mentality has seemingly insinuated itself into current US’s strategic thinking. This in spite of the fact that the rather inconsistent results of such past policies does not offer a particularly feasible option – but they may just do it anyway. Who knows?

Thumbing through the history books is always a good guide to how the decision makers behave at the inflexion points of history.

The Sicilian Expedition

In the History of the Peloponnesian War the Greek Historian, Thucydides, gives an account of the key moment in the ongoing wars between Sparta and Athens. This was the invasion of Sicily by Athens or more commonly known as the Sicilian Expedition. The view of Pericles in 430 BC was the status quo option: neither expand the Athenian empire nor diminish it. No withdrawal from Afghanistan.

… do not imagine that what we are fighting for is simply the question of freedom or slavery; there is also involved the loss of empire and dangers arising from the hatred we have incurred in the administration of it. Nor is it any longer possible to give up this empire – though there maybe some people in a mood of panic and in the spirit of political apathy actually think that this would be a fine and noble thing to do. Your empire is now like a tyranny; it may have been wrong to take it; it is certainly dangerous to let it go. (6)

Sound familiar? After the acquisition of empire, the costs of this enterprise start to roll in; the process then begins to move and then stagnate under the weight of its own slowing momentum and popular resistance. But like today’s neo-cons the Athenian war party nonetheless prevailed: the empire must at all costs be preserved. In terms of a modern cost-benefit analysis this would in purely rational business terms conclude that the maintenance of empire was not sustainable; it was a loss-making operation.

Sceptics about the wisdom of the Sicilian adventure including Nicias warned about the irrational exuberance of the war party as follows:

It is true that this assembly was called to deal with the preparations to be made for sailing to Sicily. Yet I still think that this is a question that requires further thought … is it really a good thing to send the ships at all? I think that we ought not to give just hasty consideration to so important a matter which does not concern us … I shall therefore confine myself to showing you that this is the wrong time for such adventures and that the objects of your ambitions are not to be gained easily. What I say is this: In going to Sicily you are leaving many enemies behind you, and you apparently want to make new ones there and have them also on your hands. It is with real alarm that I see this young man’s party (i.e., the war party FL) sitting at his (Alcibiades) side in this assembly all called in to support him and I and my side call for the support of the older men among you. If any one of you sits next to one of his supporters do not allow yourself to be browbeaten or frightened of being called a coward if you do not vote for war. (7)

But such reasoned arguments did not move the war party who gave Nicias’ arguments noticeably short shrift. The war party was on heat and there was no stopping the momentum of war pumped up by an adrenalin of mass psychosis. But this was not the end of the matter.

The war 415-413 BC itself turned out to be an absolute disaster for Athens. After achieving early successes the Athenians were checked by the arrival Spartan general, Gylippus, who galvanized the local inhabitants into action. From that point forward, however, as the Athenians ceded the initiative to their newly energized opponents, the tide of the conflict shifted. A massive reinforcing armada from Athens briefly gave the Athenians the upper hand once more, but a disastrous failed assault on a strategic high point and several crippling naval defeats damaged the Athenian soldiers’ ability to continue fighting and also their morale. The Athenians attempted a last-ditch evacuation from Syracuse. The evacuation failed, and nearly the entire expedition were captured or were destroyed in Sicily. Athens never really recovered after this strategic rout.

The whole sorry episode seems remarkably familiar: deadly examples of overestimating your own strength and underestimating the strength of the opposition. This policy (or lack of) has turned out to be a leitmotif in the US wars of choice against small but determined adversaries. The results of deploying the same playbook operationalised by the same incorrigible Neanderthals in the deep state with the same utterly predictable results. This present ongoing American attempt to construct a world empire through political, economic, and military means seems to be gearing up and preparing to launch its own Sicilian Expedition and this process has already been started. A classic example of imperial overreach. Nevertheless, the policy must go on; and it must be soon or never. One is reminded of Einstein’s famous dictum applicable to the PTB who are in charge of US policy. (8) But do the Americans really believe that they can carry this off? Are they actually crazy? Or is the whole thing nothing more than a brilliant bluff. Time will tell.

NOTES

(1) James Madison – ‘Political Observations’ – 1795. Letters and Writings of James Madison – 1865 – Volume IV

(2) Alexis de Tocqueville – Democracy in America – Volume 2 – pp.282/283

(3) ‘Senator Lindsey Graham – Meeting in Israel with PM Netanyahu – Fox News – 27 December 2014.

(4) Mike Lofgren – The Deep State – p.43

(5) Michael Hudson – Super Imperialism – pp.268/269

(6)Thucydides – History of the Peloponnesian War – The Policy of Pericles – Book 2 – 63

(7) Thucydides – Ibid – Launching of the Sicilian Expedition Book 6 – 8, 9, 10

(8)  “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again but expecting different results.”

TURKEY HAS 37 ‘MILITARY POINTS’ IN NORTHERN IRAQ (MAP UPDATE)

Source

Turkey Has 37 'Military Points' In Northern Iraq (Map Update)

On July 6, the Republic of Turkey Directorate of Communications released a map of the military situation in northern Iraq revealing that Turkey has establsihed 37 “military points” in border areas of the Kurdistan Region and inside the cities of Erbil, Duhok, Zakho and Soran.

The map showcases the growing Turksih military presence in multiple locations, spreading across the Iraq-Turkey and Iraq-Iran border areas. The Turkish army also keeps a military base in Bashiqa, in the disputed province of Nineveh, despite multiple calls from Baghdad to withdraw from the area. With the recent start of a new phase of Turkey’s fight against the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) in northern Iraq, its military presence there is expected to grow even further.

It’s interesting to note that later the Republic of Turkey Directorate of Communications decided to remove its post with the abovementioned map. Likely, Ankara decided to not promote in media locations of its new military positions in the country.

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

%d bloggers like this: