A bad day for the USA & israel, Iraq Fully Liberated from ISIL

Iraq Fully Liberated from ISIL

Iraq Fully Liberated from ISIL

TEHRAN (FNA)- Iraq’s Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi declared the end of military operations against the ISIL terrorist group in the Arab country.

“Our forces are in complete control of the Iraqi-Syrian border and I therefore announce the end of the war against Daesh,” Abadi told a conference in Baghdad on Saturday, Iraqi News reported.

The Iraqi armed forces later added in a statement that the country has been “totally liberated” from Daesh.

The announcement came after the Iraqi army soldiers, backed by allied fighters, managed to clear the Western desert bordering Syria of the last pockets of Takfiri militants.

Abadi had reserved announcing an ultimate victory over ISIL until after those last small concentrations were cleansed.

ISIL began a terror campaign in Iraq in 2014, overrunning vast swathes in lightning attacks. Iraqi forces then launched operations to eliminate ISIL and retake lost territory.

Advertisements

Zionists Form Group to Promote Kurdish Statehood

Posted on 

By Richard Edmondson

Perhaps at some point we’ll see a sly Zionist pop up somewhere claiming the Kurds are an “ancient biblical people.”

(And doubtless, if so, he’d have plenty of money to buy off plenty of historians to “verify” his claim).

And maybe in the not-so-distant future we could even anticipate publication of a brand new modern English translation of the Bible with a rewording of the Book of Genesis to include the following: “So Abraham and his wife Sarah and his nephew Lot set out from Harran, but on the way they stopped off and got down and partied with their cousins, the Kurds, before heading off to conquer the land of Caanan.”

Don’t laugh. In the world we’re presently living in absurdities of this nature are well within the possible.

A group of prominent Zionists have now formed the Jewish Coalition for Kurdistan–an organization with the stated objective of promoting “the legitimate rights of the Kurdish people to self-determination”–which may sound like a reasonable goal, but of course establishment of a Kurdish state would likely result in the breaking off of parts of Syria and possibly Iraq, and maybe even Turkey or Iran as well.

In other words, depending upon how successful this new group turns out to be, there’s a high likelihood we could see more bloodshed and violence in the Middle East with more waves of refugees flooding into Europe.

The JCFK is headquartered in Belgium. Its president is Joël Rubinfeld, who has served as secretary-general of the Belgium-Israel Friendship Society, president of the Jewish Community of Belgium, and vice-president of the European Jewish Parliament.

However prominent American Jews are involved with the JCFK as well. Rabbi Abraham Cooper serves on its Honorary Board. Cooper is with the Simon Wiesenthal Center, based in Los Angeles, an organization now building a “Museum of Tolerance” on top of a Palestinian cemetery in Jerusalem. And another member of the Honorary Board is Alan Dershowitz, Harvard law Professor Emeritus and regular contributor on CNN and Fox News.

I posted an article about Dershowitz last week discussing a recent piece he published attacking Congresswoman Betty McCollum over her sponsorship of the “Promoting Human Rights by Ending Israeli Military Detention of Palestinian children Act” in Congress. Dershowitz appears to have something of a bi-polar view of the Middle East (hate the Palestinians/love the Kurds), and while he has been described as a “civil liberties lawyer,” he has also publicly clashed with civil libertarians such as Noam Chomsky, Norman Finkelstein, and Alice Walker. (The latter he accused of “bigotry”–for refusing to allow an Israeli publisher to publish her book, The Color Purple.)

Kurds have long enjoyed support from Israelis as well, although in the past that support has often been kept under wraps for political reasons. Now, however, it is coming out in the open–big time. On Wednesday, November 29, the Israeli Knesset hosted an international conference entitled “Kurdistan and Israel: Together Towards Peace and Stability in the Middle East” (notice the use of the word “Kurdistan,” as if such a state already exists).

The event took place, significantly, on the 70th anniversary of the UN resolution on the partitioning of Palestine, and one of the participants was Rubinfeld, who was there along with a delegation from the European Kurdish Society. A host of prominent Israelis, including Tzipi Livni and Michael Oren, also attended, and the occasion sparked the introduction of a Knesset bill calling for the right of Israelis to travel freely between Israel and Kurdish-controlled areas. The following is from a report here that discusses the bill (emphasis added):

The bill, a copy of which was given to The Times of Israel, makes no explicit distinction between Kurdish-controlled areas in Iraq–known as the Kurdish Regional Government (KRG), where Israelis can travel fairly safely–and other Kurdish areas, whether in northern Syria or in Iran.

The vagueness is intentional, the bill’s author told The Times of Israel. The legislation is currently meant to refer just to Iraqi Kurdistan, though that could change in the future.

On Tuesday, November 28, one day prior to the Knessett event in Jerusalem, a number of pro-Kurdish events were held in New York as well. One of these was a screening at the UN of a documentary entitled “Peshmerga,” directed by French-Jewish “philosopher” Bernard Henri-Levy. Peshmerga is the name of the troops operating under the aegis of the Kurdish Regional Government of Northern Iraq. Sponsored by the  French and British missions to the UN, the film screening was attended by some 700 people, while François Delattre, France’s UN ambassador, spoke of the “historic rights of the people of Kurdistan.”

The Kurds, it may be remembered, held a referendum for independence back in September. Three days after the vote,  The Forward published an article under the headline “The Secret Friendship Behind Israel’s Support of Kurdish Independence.” Discussing the “deep affinity” between Israel and the Kurds, the writer notes that:

In some ways, Israel’s view is pragmatic. The Middle East could do with another secular democracy.

Yes, the Middle East could do with another secular democracy, but of course the writer, one Michael Goldfarb, omits any mention of the fact that Israel has been trying to overthrow the democratic, secular government of Syria. The piece nonetheless is somewhat revealing, for Goldfarb offers up a quote from an Israeli by the name of Eliezer Gheizi Safrir, described as “Mossad’s station chief in Kurdistan in the mid 1970s.”

“They [Kurds] called me Kak Gheizi,” he said proudly.  Kak or kaka means brother. It is a term of friendship. “These are good people, ” says Gheizi. “They share the same values as Jews.”

The fact that a former Mossad chief is a fan of the Kurds might not be all that surprising. Back in mid-to-late summer of this year, Sarah Abed published a series of articles about the Kurds that focused on, among other things, the close ties that have developed over the years with Israel. In one of the articles, here, she writes:

Documents leaked by WikiLeaks in 2010 suggested that Israeli Mossad Chief Meir Dagan wanted to use Kurds and ethnic minorities to topple the Iranian government. The Israeli spy service was aiming to create a weak and divided Iran, similar to the situation in Iraq, where the Kurds have their own autonomous government, the spy chief told a U.S. official.

The Partiya Jiyana Azad a Kurdistane (PJAK), a militant Kurdish nationalist group based in northern Iraq, has been carrying out attacks on Iranian forces in the Kurdistan Province of Iran (Eastern Kurdistan) and other Kurdish-inhabited areas. Half the members of PJAK are women. The PJAK has about 3,000 armed militiamen. They represent yet another example of the Kurds finding themselves in the middle of a conflict and being used as a pawn by the West.

The party is closely linked to the PKK. Iran has often accused PJAK and other Kurdish nationalist groups from Iran of being supported by Israel. Journalist Seymour Hersh has also claimed that the U.S. supported PJAK and other Iranian opposition groups. However, both the U.S. and Israel have denied supporting PJAK. In fact, the U.S. Treasury branded PJAK as a terrorist organization in 2009.

As Hersh noted in 2004: “The Israelis have had long-standing ties to the Talibani and Barzani clans [in] Kurdistan and there are many Kurdish Jews that emigrated to Israel and there are still a lot of connection. But at some time before the end of the year [2004], and I’m not clear exactly when, certainly I would say a good six, eight months ago, Israel began to work with some trained Kurdish commandos, ostensibly the idea was the Israelis — some of the Israeli elite commander units, counter-terror or terror units, depending on your point of view, began training — getting the Kurds up to speed.”

You’ll recall the comment of Eliezer Gheizi Safrir, the Mossad station chief, as quoted by Goldfarb in The Forward article. Recall also that Gheizi served in his post in the mid 1970s. Interestingly, a man by the name of Abd al-Aziz al-Uqayli, who was Iraq’s defense minister in the 1960s, made some rather revealing remarks concerning efforts under way at that time to create a “second Israel” in his own country. According to a report here (emphasis added):

In 1966, Iraqi defense minister Abd al-Aziz al-Uqayli blamed the Kurds of Iraq for seeking to establish “a second Israel” in the Middle East. He also claimed that “the West and the East are supporting the rebels to create [khalq] a new Israeli state in the north of the homeland as they had done in 1948 when they created Israel. It is as if history is repeating itself.”

Perhaps, on top of all his love for secular democracies, Goldfarb might delight even more at the creation of a “second Israel”–although there are plenty of people who would likely shudder at the thought. Among these are Middle East Christians who have had some nightmarish run-ins with Kurds. This is something discussed by Abed in a separate article here:

On the Nineveh plains of northern Iraq, the Kurds dwell in cities such as “Dohuk” (formerly known by the Assyrian name of Nohadra). But these cities are “theirs” only in that they have established a relatively recent presence there.

Employing the criteria of cultural identity and thousands of years of historical authenticity, these lands are, and have been, uniquely Assyrian. The Kurds were essentially “given” these lands in the early 1970s as a means of drawing their eyes away from the oil-rich lands in and around the Iraqi city of Kirkuk. To this end, there were large migrations of Kurds into Dohuk which displaced, often forcibly, Assyrians who had far greater legal and historical claims to these lands.

This is a tactic commonly employed by the Kurds when attempting to ascribe validation to their “sacred quest” of establishing a Kurdish state – something which has never existed at any point in recorded history. By defining “Kurdistan” as any place where Kurds happen to dwell at any given point, they seem to be going by the maxim “possession is nine-tenths of the law” – which may work well in determining criminal liability, but not so well in determining one’s homeland….

In 2011, imams in Dohuk encouraged Sunni Kurds to destroy Christian churches and businesses. In response, shops were attacked and clubs were besieged by mobs of people numbering in the hundreds. Hotels and restaurants were attacked with small arms fire.

In recent years, Kurds have continued acting disingenuously towards Christian minorities, including Assyrians and even Yazidis…This was also seen when they took refuge in northern Syria in the early 19th century and proceeded to drive Arabs and Armenians out of numerous towns.

In July 2014, as Daesh began its incursion into Iraqi territory, the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) began its systematic disarmament of Assyrians and several other ethnic groups so that it could use their weapons in its own struggle.

Notices were circulated threatening severe punishment for noncompliance. Assurances were given that the Peshmerga would provide some degree of protection.

But as Daesh advanced, the Peshmerga took the weapons and fled, following the same example as the Iraqi Army.

This left the Assyrians and Yazidis with no means to resist or defend themselves against Daesh. Reports even surfaced of these same Peshmerga gunning down Yazidis who tried to prevent them from fleeing with all the weapons.

Haydar Shesho, a Yazidi commander who managed to procure weapons from the Iraqi government, was then arrested by KDP authorities for organizing an “illegal” militia.

This scene was repeated elsewhere throughout the country, as 150,000 Assyrians were forced to flee the Nineveh plains, their ancestral land.

These actions can only be seen as a deliberate ploy by the Kurdish leadership to allow foreign forces to violently cleanse these areas of all non-Kurdish residents and then, with the help of their U.S. allies, retake and “liberate their lands.”

Abed also reports that Kurds “have a centuries-long history of persecuting minority groups,” and she supplies a link to a web page entitled Genocides Against the Assyrian Nation, documenting attacks against Assyrians (not all of them carried out by Kurds) dating all the way back to the fall of Ninevah in 612 BC (the title “ancient biblical people”–were one to conjure up such a laurel–would seem rather more meritoriously applied to the Assyrians than the Kurds).

Moreover, it would appear that the Kurds also participated in the genocide against the Armenians (see inset below).


New York Times–Sept. 24, 1915:

The records of the State Department are replete with detailed reports from American Consular officers in Asia Minor, which give harrowing tales of the treatement of the Armenian Christians by the Turks and the Kurds. 

__________

During the exodus of Armenians across the deserts they have been fallen upon by Kurds and slaughtered, but some of the Armenian women and girls, in considerable numbers, have been carried off into captivity by the Kurds.


One would think that, rather than making common cause with the Kurds, Jews would be at the forefront demanding Turkish and Kurdish reparations for the Armenians, but we don’t seem to hear much about that. In fact, in 2015, when the rest of the world was marking the 100th anniversary of the Armenian genocide, Israel pointedly refused to recognize that the genocide had even occurred.

“It’s important to differentiate between Kurdish people who have assimilated in the countries they now reside in and reject the idea of establishing an illegal Kurdistan and those who are power hungry and are allowing themselves to team up with the West and Israel to assist in the destabilization of the region,” says Abed–and this for sure is an important point to consider. In other words, one is wise not to paint with too broad a brush stroke.

The Feyli Kurds are cited by Abed as a prime example. She comments that this particular Kurdish faction, located in northern Iraq, opposed the September referendum, fearing that “it could lead to an escalation of the area’s ongoing crisis.” Perhaps we could think of the Feylis as the “self-hating Kurds.” But judging from the results of the referendum–with more than 90 percent voting in favor of “Kurdish independence”–they seem to be in the minority.

The establishment of a Kurdish state is consistent with the goals outlined more than 30 years ago in Israel’s Oded Yinon plan — that is to say the goals of breaking up or balkanizing Muslim countries into smaller, weaker statelets. This seems to have been the motivation behind Israel’s support of Sunni extremist forces in Syria over the past six years or so, and now, with that effort having largely been scuppered (thanks to help from Russia, Iran, and Hezbollah), the strategy seems to be shifting in the direction of an all-out drive toward formal establishment of a Kurdish state…presumably in Iraq, although “that could change in the future,” as the author of the Knesset bill seems to feel.

By the way, the bill’s author is Ksenia Svetlova, a member of the Zionist Union party who was instrumental in organizing the gala Kurdistan-in-the-Knesset affair on November 29 and who also outlined her air castle of dreams for a Kurdish state in an article that appeared in the Huffington Post on September 25–the same day of the Kurdish referendum.

Wholly ignoring the Oded Yinon plan and Israel’s regime-change schemes in Syria and elsewhere, Svetlova claims that one of the main reasons Israelis support the Kurds has to do with “morality”– informing Huff-Po readers that “many Kurds identify their own suffering with that of persecuted Jews.”

So now we have another “suffering” people, it seems.

Svetlova also asserts that if the Kurds get a state then “Iran’s dream of extending hegemony over the Kurdish region will be ruined,” and she accuses the Iranians of “imperial ambitions in the Middle East” and of endeavoring to “rule over the vast territory between Tehran and Quneitra (Syria).”

You may perhaps have heard of the “Greater Israel Project,” but Svetlova seems to be hoping to foster the notion of a “Greater Iran Project” almost.

This seems to be the hokum being sold by Benjamin Netanyahu as well in a video, here, uploaded recently by RT’s Ruptley video service and in which the Israeli prime minister can be seen comparing Iran to Nazi Germany. Of course, leaving aside the “Nazi” Doppelganger, one might do a simple comparative analysis between, say, Iran and Israel, in which case the proneness  to peaceful coexistence with neighbors seems well on the side of Iran, which has not invaded another country in more than 230 years.

An Israeli singer by the name of Hadassa Yeshurun has also taken up the Kurdish cause, this in the belief that the “Peshmerga deserves more support as they fight evil on behalf of the world,” and you can go here to see a video of her singing and waving the Kurdish and Israeli flags while dressed in combat fatigues.

Also Google supplies plenty of photos of Kurds waving Israeli flags (and to some extent vice versa), and Rubinfeld, the director of the JCFK, has a theory about all this ostentatious flag waving. In an interview with the JTA, he proffers the opinion that the Israeli flag is a second national symbol to many Kurds “because they identify with Israel and the Jews.”

And apparently Kurds, unlike Palestinians, are popular with the Israeli general public as well. According to Rubinfeld, “widespread understanding” as to the “rightfulness of the Kurdish cause” can be found throughout the Zionist state’s populace. Whether that includes West Bank settlers as well he leaves unstated.

But it definitely does seem to apply to Goldfarb, author of The Forward piece quoted above and who adds a personal note to his thesis on the matter:

“I first reported from Kurdistan in 1996 and felt this inexplicable affinity for the place. Don’t laugh when I say it felt like my ancestors must have passed through 1500 years ago on their way north to the Black Sea and into the heartlands of Ashkenaz.”

I opened this article by suggesting, somewhat half tongue-in-cheek, that we may at some point see a Zionist pop up and proclaim the Kurds to be an “ancient biblical people,” and in that regard, you may be unsurprised to learn that a study conducted by Hebrew University has purported to find a “close genetic connection between Jews and Kurds.”

Whether the same astonishing “genetic similarities” were found between Kurds and descendants of the Khazars, as presumably may exist between Kurds and Mizrahi Jews, or whether this even figured at all in the researchers’ data, is unclear from the Haaretz report on the study. But then why bother the public with details like that? The world is in dire need of a Kurdish state, and perhaps that’s all we really need to know.

Moreover, should a “Kurdistan” incubus of some sort actually be born, Israel would likely be one of the first countries to establish formal diplomatic ties with it, but this doubtless would be founded upon political considerations much more so than upon any presumed blood ties.

Propensity for acts of brutality after all have far more to do with ideology than with genetic composition. Self love and a sense of chosenness can create oceans and rivers of blood, whereas genes as a general rule do not.

***

Please Help Support this Website

It is time once again for our twice-yearly fundraising drive. If you would like to make a donation please click the button below. My purpose in maintaining this website is two-fold: I try to call people’s attention to political issues, such as the efforts under way now to create a Kurdish state, but I also endeavor to animate the teachings of Christ, and to awaken people to the dire need–particularly at this dangerous hour we’re living in–for spirituality and faith in God. The Creator of every living thing is God. In a poem I wrote some twenty years ago I referred to Him as “The Flower Maker.”

Pleases and thank-yous
Mill about his flower stand,
Green-studded DNA
Caught in the stems,
Caverns of light
Taller than the mind
Perfuming
Awakened hearts.
After they killed
The flower maker’s son
They took thirty
Pieces of silver and
Purchased a field
To be used
For a cemetery.

The poem as I say is an old one–far older than this website. (It originally appeared in a book I published in 2002 entitled American Bus Stop: Essay and Poems on Hope and Homelessness.) But in a strange way I kind of view this website as a small, modest little flower stand. And maybe, with help from the master flower maker, we–all of us together–can find a way to change things for the better…before we end up turning this world into a mass cemetery.

So if you can, please donate. You can do so through our PayPal account:

Saleh’s war was allocated against Al-Hariri and Al-Barzani حرب صالح كانت للحريري والبرزاني

Saleh’s war was allocated against Al-Hariri and Al-Barzani

ديسمبر 6, 2017

Written by Nasser Kandil,

It is not possible to imagine the abilitحرب صالح كانت للحريري والبرزانيy of the easy recognition and the smooth adaptation to the variables, as the defeat of the war of the five seas which the allies of the war have received it after they waged it against Syria, being confident of its winning as a full global war that was waged carefully by encouragement and intimation against Russia in order to alienate and to neutralize it. and waged carefully against Iran in order not to get involved in a war and to propose the policy of disassociation to it through the nuclear understanding that is free from the regional support, moreover through tightening the control on Syria and Hezbollah through Saudi- Turkish-Israeli blockade under American and European supervision and multi-intelligence war, in addition to bringing a quarter of billion of Al-Qaeda fighters and the other factions to spread the chaos of death, killing, and destruction throughout Syria, reviving deadly fanaticism among the segments of its people, and presenting the example of the Kurds in order to fragment it, if it was impossible to have control over it.

Those who lost the World War II did not absorb such a shock, so some of them got mad, and some of them tried to commit suicide, while some of them have succeeded in committing suicide. Those who planned for the World War II and waged it put in their accounts the affirmative comprehensive victory, but when they put the accounts of losses, their accounts remained in a partial scheme, they did not imagine that the ends of the war would be their end and the declaration of their overwhelming defeat. Those who persevere in reading what has happened in the region surrounded by the five seas the Mediterranean, the Gulf, the Red, the Black, and the Caspian Seas cannot deny  that there is a project for which hundreds of billions of dollars were spent is falling. Russia as a rising global country is occupying today at least a status that was occupied by America individually since the fall of Berlin Wall three decades ago. While the new Syria which is emerging from the womb of this war does not resemble what has been drawn for it, it transcended what it was before its targeting in its intentions and forces towards Saudi Arabia and Israel at least. Hezbollah which they wanted to crush in this war and to ignite it with the fire of strife which they betted on it in order to compensate their loss in the previous wars is emerging out of this war more powerful and more dangerous than it was, it was enough for this war to get rid of it as a threat.

The countries which are able to be balanced with the results of a war as what we have witnessed during seven years, are those who have the options of adaptation due to their size and what is presented to them by the alliance of winners and the size of the risks which were the outcomes of the developments of the war on their strategic security, as Turkey which found clear offers to replace its investment on a war with the investment on settlements, it faced a challenge entitled the Kurdish secession which would have threatened its unity if it has not rushed to adapt and to move to the other bank, as Europe which knows that it was one of the war-makers but it did not find any calls or opportunities to adapt, along with the threat of the displaced people which changed its priorities and imposed its presence on its internal political scene with the rise of the racial extremism, and has imposed its presence on its security scene through the change of the threat of terrorism into daily fact that cannot be postponed and the awareness that extinguishing the fire starts from extinguishing the fire of wars which it contributed in its igniting to overthrow Syria.

America which is capable to adapt with the offers through its size and its open options is unable to do so, but only in the cases where the fait accompli becomes contrary to its wishes, and that it has to wage a comprehensive war which it sought always to avoid. While accomplishing the understandings Washington remained unable to interpret them or to restrict to them because it is in a state of schism between the facts of war and the equations of the political mind on one hand, and the priority which it grants to each of Saudi Arabia and Israel on the other hand. No one needs to analyze in order to see the differences between the positions of the U.S Department of State as an expression of the considerations of the American mind and the positions of the US President and his son-in-law Jared Kouchner as an expression of restricting the financial interests with Saudi Arabia and the electoral and ideological interests with Israel.

The state of the Israeli panic is clear in every position and behavior. The political and the strategic imbalance is clearly reflected by the contradiction of the statements of the Minister of War Avigdor Lieberman, when he said once that the Iranians have become on our borders and this is an existential danger, then after days he said there is no serious Iranian presence on our borders with Syria. Practically, the most proof of the threat of war against Hezbollah was expressed by the Head of the occupation government Benjamin Netanyahu, and then the correction came after hours that the intention was what Israel can do if Hezbollah takes the initiative to go to war. The Israeli confusion is the result of the difficulty to adapt with the catastrophic consequences of a war where Israel was the first to seek, and it is no longer possible to abolish its consequences. Israel cannot resist the consequences of a war versus the growing capacities of its enemies, the expansion of their alliances, and their possession of more resolution to fight it. It is enough what the Secretary-General of Hezbollah said about hundreds of thousands of fighters from Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Yemen who are ready to fight Israel in any future war, and what was said by the Israelis themselves about the image of Hezbollah after the war as the image of the Syrian army supported by Iran and their rooted relationship with Russia, this has been noticed by the leaders of Israel in their meetings with the Russian leaders.

The state of Saudi Arabia seems the most difficult not due to the weakness of the opportunities for joining the option of adaptation, but due to the size of the dominated arrogance on the Saudi minds, which comes from an aristocrat Bedouin. It is a new surrealistic bilateral of the Political Sociology that has arose with kingdoms and emirates of oil, coil oil, and gas that were transferred to the decision-makers to wage wars through parasitic forces that resemble the new rich who do not have the traditions of the poor classes, and have not learned the traditions of the rich classes, so they became close to gangs who hire killers of mercenaries. They think that their money is able to buy everything, they did not get from the hypocrisy of the international politics but the pretention of accepting what they demand as long as they pay generously, to find themselves suddenly as gamblers who lose and lose and continue gambling with what is left, knowing that there are who encourage them to hire their loss, so they behave crazily, they fire their winning cards in extremism, as they did with the Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Al-Hariri, they continue playing in order to turn him through their foolishness from a friend into an enemy. It is enough what is broadcasted by their channel “Al Arabiya” as an accusation of losing the blood of his father to indicate to  that supernatural  stupidity.

Who can drive Saudi Arabia and Israel to the bank of rationality in order to prevent the dangers of adventures as was witnessed by the kidnapping of the Lebanese Prime Minister can return the balance to the American position. Today, this is the European equation after the success of forming a security network for the stability of Lebanon, to prevent the flow of the displaced people and the dormant cells to Europe. This experience is worth the repetition, and the test seems Yemeni as long as the Yemeni missiles do what the Kurds did to Turkey.

Translated by Lina Shehadeh,

 

 حرب صالح كانت للحريري والبرزاني

ناصر قنديل

حرب صالح كانت للحريري والبرزاني

– خلال ثلاثة شهور أحرق السعوديون والأميركيون ومَن معهم ثلاث أوراق كلّف إنتاجها، وكلفت رعايتها مالاً وزمناً ومعارك، فقد دفع السعوديون مسعود البرزاني بتشجيع أميركي لاستعمال قدرته على المشاغبة والإرباك بوجه محور المقاومة ولو علموا سلفاً أنه سيُهزم، لكنّهم راهنوا أنه سيشتري لهم وقتاً لأشهر إنْ لم يكن لسنوات.

– مضى البرزاني في الخطة، ولما اكتشف أنه سيقاتل وحدَه فضّل تجنّب الخراب على جماعته والدمار لبلده وارتضى الهزيمة بلا تكاليف، وسقطت الحلقة الأولى من الرهان الذي جمع محمد بن سلمان ومحمد بن زايد وجاريد كوشنر.

– التجأ الثلاثي إلى انتحاري آخر يرمون به في النار، فوقع الاختيار على رئيس الحكومة اللبنانية سعد الحريري، ولما تهيّب المشهد ومترتبات إعلان الحرب على حزب الله خطفوه وكتبوا له البيان وأجبروه على القراءة، فحدث ما لم يكن في الحسبان بوقفة الثلاثي رئيس الجمهورية اللبنانية ميشال عون ورئيس مجلس النواب نبيه بري والأمين العام لحزب الله السيد حسن نصرالله، وفقاً لمعادلة أعيدوا الحريري وبعدها ننظر في الاستقالة.

– قلب الأوروبيّون خطة الثلاثي عندما بلغتهم التقارير الأمنية التي تقول إنّ سقوط الحكومة في لبنان واهتزاز الاستقرار فيه سيعنيان تدفق النازحين إلى سواحل أوروبا وعواصمها، وأنّ دماء الأوروبيين ستكون وقوداً للخلايا الإرهابية النائمة المردوعة في لبنان إذا تسللت إلى أوروبا، فنجحت مساعي استنقاذ الحريري من الخطف، واستنقاذ لبنان من الحرب الانتحارية.

– لم يبقَ في الميدان إلا حديدان، توجّه الثلاثي نحو اليمن، ودرسوا ملفّ الرئيس السابق علي عبدالله صالح، وحدود مطالبه للانخراط في حربهم، واضح منذ انضمامه للوقوف مع أنصار الله، رفع العقوبات الأميركية والخليجية عن أمواله وأبنائه، وضمان موقع مستقلّ له عن منصور هادي في التسوية المقبلة، وتولى الشيخ محمد بن زايد هندسة التفاهم، وأعدّ صالح جماعته للتحرّش بحثاً عن ذريعة لتفجير الحرب وإعلان الانقلاب.

– كشف الثلاثي كوشنر وبن سلمان وبن زايد دورهم في الانقلاب بإعلان التأييد، وكشف صالح جماعاته، ولم ينتبهوا جميعاً أنّ قوة صالح التي كانت في الماضي تغيّرت معالمها، ولا حسبوا معنى أن يكون الناس والقبائل والعسكر مع صالح زعيماً لمقاومة العدوان وأن يبقوا مع صالح كاختراق للعدوان، فثلاث سنوات كانت كافية ليتفاعل قادة العشائر والقوات المسلحة التي كانت تُحتَسب لصالح مع الوضع الجديد وعنوانه مواجهة العدوان السعودي، وتاريخ علاقة أنصار الله مع صالح كانت سبباً كافياً ليتحسّبوا للحظة الانقلاب، والثلاثية التي ظهرت مراراً في صنعاء بين الجيش واللجان والشعب ليست كرتونية ولا خداعاً بصرياً، وهي تُخرج الملايين إلى الساحات والطيران السعودي يقصف العاصمة.

– استوعب أنصار الله الصدمة، وتفاعلوا مع حدودها، وخاطبوا بلغة العقل المعنيين كلهم، بمن فيهم صالح لوأد الفتنة، ولما اكتملت عناصر الحسم باشروا خطة التنظيف، وما يجري عسكرياً وسياسياً، بات واضح النهايات، والوساطات لإخلاء صالح صحيحة، والصاروخ اليمني نحو أبو ظبي صحيح أيضاً، والسيطرة على أغلب أحياء صنعاء وتطهيرها من جماعات صالح صحيحة أيضاً وأيضاً.

– تولّى صالح مهمة الحرب الانتحارية التي انسحب منها البرزاني جزئياً، فنجا إقليمه من الخراب، ونجا خَلَفُه من العزل، وتمّ تحديد الخسائر بالممكن بعد الغلطة الأولى، وهي الحرب التي انسحب الحريري منها كلياً، فكسب الكثير ونجا بلده وتولّدت بدلاً من الفتنة وحدة وطنية. وها هو صالح يقول للبرزاني وللحريري ولجمهوريهما ولأهل البلدين، ما الذي كان ينتظر الجميع، وماذا كانت تتضمّن المكرمات السعودية من خراب؟

Related Videos

السبهان رجل المخابرات… فشلت المهمة

السبهان رجل المخابرات… فشلت المهمة

ديسمبر 6, 2017

ناصر قنديل

– قد يرمز اسم ثامر السبهان للكثيرين بالاستخفاف من دون أن ينتبهوا إلى أنّ الرجل الذي يتولى منصب وزير الدولة لشؤون الخليج في السعودية، هو أعلى من مرتبة وزير وفي مهمة أهمّ من المناصب الحكومية. فالسبهان المنتمي لقبيلة شمر العربية ذات الامتداد في سورية والعراق ودول الخليج، وصولاً لمنطقة البقاع اللبنانية، هو ضابط برتبة عميد ركن منتدَب للعمل الدبلوماسي كتغطية للمهام الأمنية التي تُناط به. وهو في التصنيف العسكري أحد أبرز الحائزين على دورات وتنويهات بالمهام في صفوف زملائه الضباط السعوديين الكبار. ومن أبرز ما في سجله العلمي، نيله ماجستير القيادة والأركان من الكلية الملكية الهاشمية بالأردن التي يشرف على التدريس فيها ضباط بريطانيون وأميركيون، قبل أن يُعيّن مساعداً لقائد الشرطة العسكرية كمسؤول عن مهمة الحماية والدعم، فمساعد للملحق العسكري في لبنان قبل تعيينه ملحقاً عسكرياً في السفارة السعودية في لبنان، لينتقل بعدها سفيراً إلى بغداد، قبل أن يعود وزيراً إلى بيروت وبغداد والرقة.

– تخصّص السبهان العسكري هو الحماية للشخصيات الهامة وللمنشآت الحيوية، وخصوصاً للطائرات من مخاطر الأعمال الإرهابية، وهو تخصّص يعلم المهتمون بالعلوم الأمنية أنه يعني عكسياً في حال الحاجة الأمنية لأجهزة المخابرات، إدارة عمليات الإرهاب والاغتيال واستهداف المنشآت الحيوية وتفخيخ وخطف الطائرات. وحظي السبهان ضمن اختصاصه بالقرب من وزراء الدفاع وقادة الجيوش الأميركية، الذين تولى مسؤوليات الحماية لهم خلال زياراتهم التفقدية والعلمياتية إلى المنطقة، خصوصاً، نائب الرئيس الأميركي السابق ديك تشيني وقائد الجيوش الأميركية الجنرال كولن باول وقائدي القوات الأميركية المشتركة بالتتابع الجنرال جوزيف هور والجنرال بينفورد بي، وصار موضع ثقة المخابرات الأميركية منذ دراسته في ولاية جورجيا الأميركية ضمن دورة حماية المنشآت الحيوية عام 1996.

– شغل السبهان مهمة مساعد الملحق العسكري السعودي في لبنان ومن ثم الملحق العسكري في فترة 2013 2015، في ذروة تصاعد الحرب في سورية، تولّى خلالها إدارة الإمداد السعودي للجماعات التي ترعاها السعودية في الحرب، قبل تعيينه سفيراً للسعودية في العراق عام 2016 ليتولى إدارة ما وصفته الحكومة العراقية والبرلمان العراقي آنذاك بإدارة الفتنة، وتأمين التغطية المذهبية لتنظيم داعش. وانتهى به الأمر مطروداً من العراق، ليصير وزيراً لشؤون الخليج، كمنصب فخري يتيح له تولي المهام الخاصة الأمنية ذاتها، فحطّ رحاله في لبنان عام 2016 ليضع التوقيع السعودي على التسوية الرئاسية التي أبرمها رئيس الحكومة سعد الحريري، قبل أن يعود مجدداً في آب 2017 للاشتغال على نسفها، ومثلما غادر العراق ليعود إليه زائراً إلى أربيل في أيلول 2017 محرّضاً على الانفصال، وزائراً إلى الرقة السورية للإعلان عن التعاون مع الجماعات الكردية المسلحة هناك وتنظيم ما يمكن من عشائر العرب وفي طليعتهم من يستطيع التواصل معه من شيوخ قبيلته شمر، للتنسيق مع الأكراد في دير الزور استباقاً لبلوغ الجيش السوري وحلفائه شرق الفرات.

– تولّى السبهان إدارة خطف الرئيس الحريري وكتابة استقالته، والأهمّ أنه مثلها تولى تنسيق الانفصال الكردي الفاشل قبلها، وتولّى بعدها وفقاً للتقارير اليمنية إدارة ملف العلاقة بالرئيس السابق علي عبد الله صالح، قبل إعلانه الانقلاب، واللافت هو أنّ المواجهة مع قطر كانت ضمن مسؤوليات السبهان الذي تولى بيان الشيخ علي بن عبدالله آل ثاني باعتباره القائد المقبل للانقلاب على الحكم في الدوحة. وتختصر ملفات الفشل الأربعة سيرة السبهان، مع انعقاد مجلس التعاون الخليجي في الكويت بمشاركة قطر وإعلان نهاية الأزمة معها عملياً، وفي اليوم ذاته بالتزامن مع صدور بيان الحكومة اللبنانية المرحّب بعودة رئيسها عن استقالته، وذلك بعد يوم من سقوط انقلاب علي عبد الله صالح في صنعاء، وفيما تقدّم حكومة كردستان العراق كلّ التنازلات الممكنة لتضمن قبول بغداد بفتح الحوار معها بعدما ضحّت على مذبح النظريات السبهانية بكلّ ما راكمت من إنجازات ومكاسب لأعوام، بينما دفع علي عبد الله صالح حياته ثمناً لهذه النظريات، ونجا رئيس الحكومة اللبنانية كما نجا أمير قطر، لأنّهما أحيطا برعاية محور المقاومة، بالطريقة المناسبة، والقضية ليست ضعف مقدّرات السبهان، فهو أفضل ما لدى السعودية، والقضية ليست نهاية السبهان، بل نهاية حقبة كاملة.

– أين هو السبهان اليوم، وأين تغريداته اليومية؟

 

‘Reasonable basis’ to believe UK soldiers committed war crimes in Iraq: ICC. Actually just being in Iraq was a “war crime”

Source

Critics say the British government has been unwilling to bring soldiers and commanders who committed abuses to justice

File photo of Iraqi soldiers training with British soldiers inside UK base on the outskirts of Basra, 15 February 2006 (AFP)

The International Criminal Court’s chief prosecutor Fatou Bensouda said on Monday that there is a “reasonable basis” to believe that some British soldiers committed war crimes after the US-led invasion of Iraq.

The disclosure came in a 74-page report on preliminary inquiries as ICC member states gather in New York for an annual nine-day meeting to discuss matters relating to the tribunal.

“Following a thorough factual and legal assessment of the information available… there is reasonable basis to believe that members of the UK armed forces committed war crimes, within the jurisdiction of the Court, against persons in their custody,” Bensouda said.

The Hague-based prosecutor in 2014 reopened an initial probe into war crimes allegations relating to prisoner abuse, after rights groups and lawyers said that at least 1,071 Iraqi detainees were tortured and ill-treated between March 2003 to December 2008.

The same groups also alleged that British personnel committed 52 unlawful killings of people in their custody over the same period.

However, several lawyers who were part of those making the allegations were later found guilty on misconduct charges, including making false allegations of abuse. The lawyers’ lead counsellor was struck off.

But Bensouda’s office said individual statements received from those lawyers “could be considered credible enough if substantiated with supporting material” such as detention records, medical certificates and photographs.

Her office is now considering “complementarity and gravity” before evaluating further steps.

Set up in 2002, the Hague-based ICC is an independent court of last resort, only to intervene and prosecute those committing the world’s worst crimes if a member country is unwilling or unable to do so themselves.

“The prosecutor must be satisfied as to admissibility on both aspects before proceeding,” the report said.

Bensouda will then decide whether to ask ICC judges for permission to launch a full-blown investigation.

The world war crimes court’s previous chief prosecutor, Luis Moreno-Ocampo, said in 2006 he would not open a full probe in Iraq because he did not have enough evidence.

Earlier this year, Britain dismissed hundreds of allegations of misconduct by its soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Supporters of referring abuse cases to the ICC argue that the British government has been unwilling to bring soldiers and commanders who committed abuses to justice.

“The submission to the ICC highlights the British authorities’ failure for over a decade to investigate and prosecute these alleged war crimes, including the command responsibility of its senior military and political figures,” Clive Baldwin, a legal adviser for Human Rights Watch, wrote in 2014

U.S. Government Misusing Intelligence to Sell Conflict with Iran

Source

6236849468_86e53e2a40_b

by Paul R. Pillar

Although nobody knows exactly where Donald Trump intends to go with his campaign of seeking confrontation with Iran, his administration already has provided disconcerting parallels with the techniques an earlier U.S. administration used in selling its launching of a war against Iraq. Among these techniques is the cherry-picking of intelligence not to inform policy-making or to enlighten the public but instead to inculcate false perceptions among the public and thereby to muster support for a policy already chosen.

The parallels have become even closer as the Trump administration has tried to get people to believe there is some sort of cooperation and common purpose between Iran and al-Qaeda. The president made this insinuation in his speech on Iran in October. Then his CIA director, Mike Pompeo, ordered a tendentious re-exploitation of already exploited documents captured in the raid at Abbottabad, Pakistan that killed Osama bin Laden. This time the purpose was to find any possible connection between bin Laden’s group and Iran. Pompeo took the highly unusual step of giving an advance look at the selected documents to an advocacy organization: the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), a leader of efforts to kill the agreement that limits Iran’s nuclear program.

FDD duly did its part in the insinuation by highlighting a single document that it depicted as suggesting some sort of Iranian assistance to al-Qaeda. This was despite the fact that the thrust of the Abbottabad documents as far as Iran is concerned is that Tehran was in conflict, not cooperation, with al-Qaeda. This remains the judgment of experts who follow the terrorist group closely. Even the very document FDD highlighted did not say what those highlighting it contended it said. It held no evidence of any Iranian assistance to al-Qaeda. This entire effort to manipulate public perceptions has been remarkably similar to the efforts by promoters of the Iraq War to use whatever scraps they could find to suggest that there was, in George W. Bush’s words, an “alliance” between the Iraqi regime and al-Qaeda that in fact never existed.

Cherry-Picking the Yemeni War

Now Colum Lynch and Dan De Luce at Foreign Policy report that the White House, in the latest bit of cherry-picking, “is pressing to declassify intelligence allegedly linking Iran to short-range ballistic missile attacks by Yemeni insurgents against Saudi Arabia.” Our antennae ought to be raised very high regarding the motives and reality lying behind anything that comes out of this attempt to manipulate public perceptions.

Imagine that, in a parallel universe that Donald Trump did not inhabit, the White House was sincerely trying to help the public understand whatever was the foreign policy problem at hand. The problem in this case is the Yemeni civil war, which originated with discontent among northern tribes about how their interests were treated by the central government. The education of the public would note that large-scale intervention led by Saudi Arabia—which has a long history of conflict with, and demographic and security concerns about, Yemen—turned the civil war into bigger carnage. An aerial assault by Saudi Arabia and its ally the United Arab Emirates, together with a Saudi-imposed blockade, has further turned Yemen into a humanitarian catastrophe.

Meanwhile, some Iranian assistance reportedly has gone from Iran to the principal northern tribe, known as the Houthis. By any reasonable account, the physical impact of any such aid is minor compared to the Saudi military offensive. The lesson to the public might note that the Houthis have been among the staunchest adversaries of al-Qaeda’s branch in Yemen. It might also note that the Houthis are allied with former president Ali Abdullah Saleh, who during more than three decades in power became known as America’s man in Yemen.

The Saudi air war has devastated Yemen. Is it any surprise that those now in power in the Yemeni capital of Saana (i.e., the Houthi-led coalition) would try to get off a few shots at Saudi Arabia in response? Should we even condemn this effort to strike back given the much bigger strikes in the other direction?

The Trump administration’s efforts to highlight this one facet of a much larger war serve two of its objectives. One is to continue its overall campaign to pin on Iran all blame for any mayhem in the Middle East. The other is to distract as much attention as possible from the indefensible U.S. support (which began during the previous administration) for the Saudi offensive against Yemen. Meanwhile, the cherry-picking conveys to the public a false impression of what the Yemeni war is all about and what has caused it to take its current shape.

Lynch and De Luce report that the effort by the Trump White House to make public cherry-picked intelligence about Houthi-fired missiles is intended to influence not just a domestic audience but also opinion at the United Nations. Here is yet another parallel with the selling of the Iraq War. Specifically, it evokes the presentation to the Security Council in February 2003 by Secretary of State Colin Powell, who—against Powell’s own better judgment and contrary to the judgment of the U.S. intelligence community—laid out some scraps intended to persuade people that the non-existent alliance between Iraq and al-Qaeda really existed.

Consequences

Such misuse of intelligence means foreign policy is being made on the basis of badly mistaken premises. The public sales job makes the misunderstanding all the worse, both because misperceptions are infused into a larger audience and because salesmen who are strongly committed to their cause—as was the case with the chief promoters of the Iraq War—come to believe their own propaganda.

The misuse also represents a subversion of the proper function of the intelligence agencies. Intelligence is supposed to inform policymakers to help them in making decisions they have not yet made. The agencies do not exist to be tools to sell to the public policy that already has been made.

The Trump administration is not the first to engage in such misuse, but the misuse fits a pattern of how Trump has handled other government departments and agencies. That pattern, featuring many fox-running-the-henhouse senior appointments, has been one of subverting rather than executing the mission of agencies.

Photo: Mike Pompeo (Gage Skidmore via Flickr).

HOW WILL HEZBOLLAH FIGHT NEXT WAR WITH ISRAEL

%d bloggers like this: