The Real Reasons Behind Israel’s Arrest of Two Jordanian Nationals

هبة اللبدي.. الأسيرة التي عوقبت بتهمة الحب!

By Ramzy Baroud

Source

The release on November 6 of two Jordanian nationals, Heba al-Labadi and Abdul Rahman Mi’ri from Israeli prisons was a bittersweet moment. The pair were finally reunited with their families after harrowing experiences in Israel. Sadly, thousands of Palestinian prisoners are still denied their freedom, still subjected to all sorts of hardships at the hands of their Israeli jailers.

Despite the jubilant return of the two prisoners, celebrated in Jordan, Palestine and throughout the Arab world, several compelling questions remain unanswered: why were they held in the first place? Why were they released and what can their experience teach Palestinians under Israeli occupation?

Throughout the whole ordeal, Israel failed to produce any evidence to indict Labadi and Mi’ri for any wrongdoing. In fact, it was this lack of evidence that made Israel hold the two Jordanian nationals in Administrative Detention, without any judicial process whatsoever. 

Oddly, days before the release of the two Jordanians, an official Israeli government statement praised the special relationship between Amman and Tel Aviv, describing it as “a cornerstone of stability in the Middle East.”

The reality is that the relationship between the two countries has hit rock bottom in recent years, especially following U.S. President Donald Trump’s advent to the White House and the subsequent, systematic dismantling of the “peace process” by Trump and the Israeli government.

Not only did Washington and Tel Aviv demolish the region’s political status quo, one in which Jordan featured as a key player, top U.S. diplomats also tried to barter with King Abdullah II so that Jordan would settle millions of Palestinian refugees in the country in exchange for large sums of money.

Jordan vehemently rejected U.S. offers and attempts at isolating the Palestinian leadership in Ramallah.

On October 21, 2018, Jordan went even further, by rejecting an Israeli offer to renew a 25-year lease on two enclaves in the Jordan Valley, Al-Baqura and Al-Ghamar. The government’s decision was a response to protests by Jordanians and elected parliamentarians, who insist on Jordan’s complete sovereignty over all of its territories.

This particular issue goes back years. Jordan and Israel signed a peace treaty in 1994. An additional annex in the treaty allowed Israel to lease part of the Jordan Valley for 25 years. A quarter of a century later, the Jordan-Israel Peace Treaty failed to achieve any degree of meaningful normalization between both countries, especially as neighboring Palestine remains under Israeli occupation. The stumbling block of that coveted normalization was – and remains – the Jordanian people, who strongly rejected a renewed Israeli lease over Jordanian territories.

Israeli negotiators must have been surprised by Jordan’s refusal to accommodate Israeli interests. With the U.S. removing itself, at least publicly, from the brewing conflict, Israel resorted to its typical bullying, by holding two Jordanians hostage, hoping to force the government to reconsider its decision regarding the Jordan Valley.

Jordanian prisoners Israel

The Israeli strategy backfired. The arrest of Labadi – who started a hunger strike that lasted for over 40 days –  and Mi’ri, a cancer survivor, was a major PR disaster for Israel. Not only did the tactic fail to deliver any results, it further galvanized the Jordanian people and government regarding the decision to reclaim Al-Baqura and al-Ghamar.

Labadi and Mi’ri were released on November 6. The following day, the Jordanian government informed Israel that its farmers will be banned from entering Al-Baqura area. This way, Jordan retrieved its citizens and its territories within the course of 24 hours.

Three main reasons allowed Jordan to prevail in its confrontation with Israel. First, the steadfastness of the prisoners themselves; second, the unity and mobilization of the Jordanian street, civil society organizations and elected legislators; and third, the Jordanian government responding positively to the unified voice of the street.

This compels the question: what is the Palestinian strategy regarding the nearly 5,000 Palestinian prisoners held unlawfully in Israel?

A lesson for Palestinian leadership

While the prisoners themselves continue to serve as a model of unity and courage, the other factors fundamental to any meaningful strategy aimed at releasing all Palestinian prisoners remain absent.

Although factionalism continues to undermine the Palestinian fight for freedom, prisoners are fighting the same common enemy. The famed “National Conciliation Document,” composed by the unified leadership of Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails in 2006, is considered the most articulate vision for Palestinian unity and liberation.

For ordinary Palestinians, the prisoners remain an emotive subject, but political disunity is making it nearly impossible for the energies of the Palestinian street to be harnessed in a politically meaningful way. Despite much lip service paid to freeing the prisoners, efforts aimed at achieving this goal are hopelessly splintered and agonizingly factionalized.

As for the Palestinian leadership, the strategy championed by Palestinian Authority leader, Mahmoud Abbas, is more focused on propping up Abbas’ own image than alleviating the suffering of the prisoners and their families. Brazenly, Abbas exploits the emotional aspect of the prisoners’ tragedy to gain political capital, while punishing the families of Palestinian prisoners in order to pursue his own self-serving political agenda.

“Even if I had only one penny, I would’ve given it to the families of the martyrs, prisoners and heroes,” Abbas said in a theatrical way during his United Nations General Assembly speech last September.

Abbas, of course, has more than one penny. In fact, he has withheld badly needed funds from the families of the “martyrs, prisoners and heroes.” On April 2018, Abbas cut the salaries of government employees in Gaza, along with the money received by the families of Gaza prisoners held inside Israeli jails.

Heba al-Labadi and Abdul Rahman Mi’ri were released because of their own resolve, coupled with strong solidarity exhibited by ordinary Jordanians. These two factors allowed the Jordanian government to publicly challenge Israel, leading to the unconditional release of the two Jordanian prisoners.

Meanwhile, thousands of Palestinian prisoners, including 500 administrative detainees continue to languish in Israeli prisons. Without united and sustained popular, non-factional mobilization, along with the full backing of the Palestinian leadership, the prisoners are likely to carry on with their fight, alone and unaided.

Gulf Concessions to «Israel» Have Yielded Nothing in Return

Gulf Concessions to «Israel» Have Yielded Nothing in Return

By Kamel Hawwash, TRT

The utopia of the Middle East free from conflict is not within reach at the moment. Conflict is likely to characterize the region for years if not decades to come. The people of the region are the victims, especially the youth, who in many countries were born into conflict, and it is the only life they’ve known.

“Israel” is at the heart of several conflicts. It remains in occupation of Palestinian, Syrian and Lebanese land. In recent months, it has attacked targets in Syria, Lebanon and even Iraq. The justification this time was that it was countering Iran’s presence.

In previous decades, it attacked targets in Tunisia and Sudan. “Israel’s” planes attacked both Iraqi and Syrian nuclear facilities and its operatives killed nuclear scientists in Syria, Iran and Iraq.

It is also worth remembering that its operatives killed a Palestinian, Mahmoud Al Mabhouh, in a hotel in Dubai in 2010. In 2016, “Israel” was thought to have killed Mohammed Al Zawari, a Tunisian drone expert, who it claimed worked with Hamas’ al-Qassam brigade. In 2018, Palestinian academic Fadi Al Batsh was killed in Malaysia and “Israel” was again the prime suspect.

Its repeated attacks on the beleaguered Gaza strip have left thousands dead, tens of thousands wounded and scores of homes destroyed. It has annexed illegally occupied East Jerusalem [al-Quds] and the Syrian Golan Heights.

“Israel” has not only denied Palestinian refugees the right to return in accordance with international law, but it has also been working to remove their status as refugees and to close down UNRWA.

“Israel” claims the UNRWA, which provides jobs and relief to the Palestinian refugees, perpetuates the conflict with the Palestinians. However, this is a conflict that started when it was created through violence, resulting in the expulsion of 750,000 Palestinians to neighboring Arab states, in which they continue to languish in desperate conditions.

“Israel” also continues to settle its population illegally on occupied land in Palestine and the Golan Heights.

“Israel” is likely the most destabilizing and aggressive state in the region, which the international community needs to reign in, rather than treat it with kid-gloves. None of its aggressive actions has led to any accountability, either by individual states or the international community.

Now, the most aggressive state in the Middle East is developing a “non-aggression pact” with some Gulf States.

The claim comes from “Israel’s” so-called Foreign Minister, Israel Katz, who further claimed that he met with several foreign ministers from Arab Gulf states on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly last month, as reported by Channel 12 news recently.

The TV channel claimed that Katz presented his Gulf counterparts with a draft text of the intended pact, which was drawn up by the so-called “Israeli” Foreign Ministry.

It reportedly highlights the opportunity to advance common interests in the context of the threat posed by Iran and is drafted in accordance with the principles of international law. Yes, you read that correctly. The Middle Eastern country responsible for serial breaches of international law when it comes to conflicts with its neighbors, especially the Palestinians, suddenly sees international law as a reference point for this ‘pact’.

“Israel” currently sees an opportunity to make gains it could only have only dreamt about just a few years ago. The Trump Administration has handed it not only significant wins that it can offer but pushed the narrative to “Israel’s” neighboring states that the greatest threat they pose is not from “Israel”, but Iran.

This has all been allowed by the United States’ unilateral decisions recognizing Jerusalem [al-Quds] as “Israel’s” so-called capital and recognizing “‘Israeli’ sovereignty” over the Golan Heights. The US Special Envoy for negotiations, Jason Greenblatt presented the “Israeli” prime minister with a map showing the Golan Heights as part of “Israel”. While these recognitions were only made by the US and the rest of the world has rejected it, Netanyahu is happy to bank these for now and to push for others to follow the American lead.

Next on the list is likely to be the annexation of vast swathes of the West Bank, which one can be relatively confident in thinking would then be endorsed by US President Donald Trump. This would be an act of political aggression that will deal a fatal blow to any possibility of “peace” between the “Israelis” and the Palestinians.

In the past few years, some Gulf States have warmed relations with “Israel”, allowing sporting teams to compete on Arab soil and “Israeli” ministers, including the prime minister himself to visit these countries.

However, what has “Israel” offered in return to convince these states that further normalization and a “non-aggression pact” would help bring stability and peace nearer? The answer is a resounding nothing.

In other words, “Israel” takes and never gives. It wants to see the “Israeli” flag fly over Gulf capitals but will not recognize the Palestinian people’s rights.

Before racing to sign a “non-aggression pact” with “Israel”, Gulf States should insist it first ends its status as the most aggressive state in the region. Until then, they should pour cold water on their normalization efforts. The time for normalization and pacts is not now.

A peaceful Middle East is more out of reach now than it’s ever been in recent history.

Who Is Benny Gantz? Israel’s Butcher of Gaza — Rebel Voice

Benny Gantz is the leader of the Blue and White political party in the rogue state of Israel. At this time, he leads the largest single party group in the Knesset, (Israeli parliament). It appears to be a toss-up between Gantz and Netanyhau for who will lead the next government. Netanyahu is a war criminal, […]

via Who Is Benny Gantz? Israel’s Butcher of Gaza — Rebel Voice

Hong Kong, Kashmir, Palestine: Ruins of British empire on fire

By Hamid Dabashi

Source

The people of Hong Kong, Kashmir and Palestine have long histories of resistance to oppression.

ce05a28387054010906497c20e48419f_18.jpg

A demonstrator stands on a British flag during an anti-Israel rally in Karachi July 21, 2006 [File: Zahid Hussein/Reuters]

Continued mayhem in Palestine, increasing bloodshed in Kashmir, mass protest in Hong Kong – how do we connect these dots? Are they related?

Well, of course: The sun never set on the Union Jack! In the sunset of that empire – as is inevitable for all empires – chaos and turmoil were destined to follow.

“The world is reaping the chaos the British Empire sowed,” Amy Hawkins recently wrote in Foreign Policy, “locals are still paying for the mess the British left behind in Hong Kong and Kashmir.” The author left out Palestine, chief among places around the globe, where the British empire spread discord and enmity to ease its rule and prepare the ground for disaster after its exit.

Indeed, the anticolonial uprisings in the Indian subcontinent, China, the Arab world and elsewhere did not result in freedom or democracy for the nations ruled by the British Empire.

In Kashmir, the British left a bleeding wound amid the partition of colonial India.

In Palestine, they left a European settler colony and called it “Israel” to rule in their stead and torment Palestinians.

In Hong Kong, they left a major cosmopolis that is neither truly an independent entity, nor a part of mainland China.

They picked up their Union Jack and departed, leaving behind a ruinous legacy for decades and generations to bleed. Those consequences are not just historical and buried in the past. They are still unfolding.

When the sun finally set 

Ironically, today the United Kingdom is struggling to hold itself together, as the Brexit debacle tears it apart. One looks at the country and marvels at the poetic justice of wanton cruelty coming back to haunt the former empire.

The UK finds itself face to face with its imperial past, with the Irish and Scottish once again defying English nationalists and their schizophrenic belief in their own exceptionalism. How bizarre, how just, how amazing, how Homeric, is that fate!

We may, in fact, be witness to the final dissolution of the “United” Kingdom in our life-times. But there was a time when, from that very little island, they ruled the world from the Americas in the west to Asia and Australia in the east.

The terror of British imperialism – wreaking havoc on the world not just then but now as well – is the most historically obvious source that unites Hong Kong, Kashmir, and Palestine as well as the many other emblematic sites of colonial and postcolonial calamities we see around us today. But what precisely is the cause of today’s unrests?

In Hong Kong, Kashmir, and Palestine we have the rise of three nations, “baptised” by fire, as it were – three peoples, three collective memories, that have refused to settle for their colonial lot. The harsher they are brutalised, the mightier their collective will to resist power becomes.

Britain took possession of Hong Kong in 1842 after the First Opium War with China. It transformed it into a major trading and military outpost, and insisted on keeping it long after its empire collapsed. In 1997, Britain handed Hong Kong over to China, conceding to the idea of a “one country, two systems” formula that allows for a certain degree of economic autonomy for Hong Kong. But what both China and Britain had neglected to consider was the fact that a nation of almost eight million human beings throughout a long colonial and postcolonial history had accumulated a robust collective memory of its own, which was neither British nor mainland Chinese – it was distinct.

Kashmir came under British influence shortly after Hong Kong – in 1846, after the British East India Company defeated the Sikh Empire that ruled the region at that time. A century later, Kashmir was sucked into the bloody partition of India and Pakistan in the aftermath of the British departure from the subcontinent, with both post-colonial states having a mutually exclusive claim on its territory. Here, too, what India and Pakistan forget is the fact that almost 13 million Kashmiris have had a long history of countless troublesome colonial and postcolonial experiences, making Kashmir fundamentally different from either one of them.

The same is the case with Palestine, which fell under British rule in 1920 after the defeat of the Ottoman Empire in World War I. Before the British packed their colonial possessions and left almost three decades later, they installed a successor settler colony in the form of a Zionist garrison state. Decades of unrelenting struggle against the barbarities of the British and the Zionists have left Palestinians in possession of one of the most courageous and steadfast histories of resistance to colonial domination.

Memories of resistance

In revolting against China, India, and Israel, these three nations in Hong Kong, Kashmir, and Palestine have become three nuclei of resistance, of refusal to let go of their homelands.

They have narrated themselves into a history written by powers who have systematically tried to erase them and their collective memories. “Homeland” is not just a piece of land. It is a memorial presence of a history.

Those memories, corroborated by an entire history of resistance to imperial conquest and colonial occupation have now come back to haunt their tormentors.

China, India, and Israel have to resort to naked and brutish violence to deny the veracity of those defiant memories, now evident as facts on the ground. In doing so, these powers have picked up where the British empire left off.

They too seek to terrorise, divide and rule, but by now those they try to subdue have mastered resistance; their struggle has outlived one imperial oppressor, it can surely survive another.

In other words, no amount of imperial brutality, settler colonialism or historical revisionism can make the distinct identities, memories and histories of these people disappear.

Today people in Palestine, Kashmir, and Hong Kong see themselves as stateless nations ruled with brutish military occupation. In the postcolonial game of state formation, they have been denied their national sovereignty.

The more brutally they are repressed and denied their sovereignty, the more adamantly they will demand and exact it.

Neither China in Hong Kong, nor India in Kashmir, nor Israel in Palestine can have a day of peaceful domination until and unless the defiant nations they rule and abuse achieve and sustain their rightful place in the world.

Education In Palestine: West Bank Struggle For School Dreams — Rebel Voice

Crimes against humanity can take many forms. Ethnic cleansing is one, sexual assaults as a policy is another. Starving people is a third as is the random slaughter of civilians. Israel is guilty of all of these and more. They are also guilty of depriving Palestinian children of their right to an education. Schools are […]

via Education In Palestine: West Bank Struggle For School Dreams — Rebel Voice

All Points Alert: Israel Is the Killer State at Large

By Jeremy Salt

Source

Alaa Wahdan Abd al Rahman Yassir Shtewi 71016

The most important news coming out of occupied Palestine in the past week was not the blow delivered to Benyamin Netanyahu. Netanyahu or Gantz, it will be business as usual, now that the elections are over:  more attacks on Gaza, possibly a large-scale war on Gaza, possibly a war on Lebanon, or Iran, who would know, as Israel always has a profusion of targets.

No, the most important news was not the elections but the killing of a Palestinian woman on the west bank, only a few days after a 10-year-old boy, Abd al Rahman Yassir Shtewi, had been shot in the head by a soldier near the northern West Bank village of Kafr Qaddum during a demonstration over the closure of an access road.  He was taken to hospital in critical condition.

The woman, Alaa Wahdan, was shot with an assault rifle as she walked towards a checkpoint near the Qalandiya refugee camp, built for refugees after the massacres and ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from Lydda and Ramle in 1948.

She was walking on the road, having missed the pedestrian lane allotted to the Palestinians. That was the crime for which she had to die.  She was told to stop.  According to the five heavily armed men who blocked her way, she pulled out a knife, a small yellow-handled thing photographed lying on the road.   Alaa was five to seven meters away and the knife could have been knocked away with the butt of a gun but one of the armed men shot her instead, the bullet apparently severing an artery in her leg.

Alaa fell to the road and was left there unattended for half an hour, bleeding to death. The Palestinian Red Crescent said it was prevented from attending to her.  The soldiers watched her drag herself along the roadside on her front, the blood pouring out of her body, leaving a long, wide red stain behind her.  Not one of them made any attempt to comfort her or staunch the wound.  They watched her bleed to death.  They let her die, in line with unstated state policy.

Who Alaa was precisely, a mother, a sister, a daughter or an aunt, was of no interest to the occupiers.  She was a down-page story in the media, not even worthy of being given a name, no more than the African ‘terrorists’ of the 1940s or 50s were worthy of being given a name by the British or French occupiers of their land who tortured and murdered them.   In the words of Mickey Rosenfeld, the police gauleiter of occupied Jerusalem, she was no more than a “female terrorist” who was “injured moderately.” If this is so, Mr. Rosenfeld, why did she die?

In the background, while Alaa crawled along the road, her lifeblood draining away, the spivs, the thieves and the war criminals quarreled over who should be next to take over the occupation of Palestine. The choice was between Netanyahu and Gantz, the outcome of the elections so close that the ‘kingmaker’ will be Avigdor Lieberman, the Moldovan immigrant who arrived in Palestine when he was 20 and lives with his wife and children on Palestinian land in the settlement of Nokdim.

Like Menahim Begin in the 1970s, Lieberman was once regarded as a thug and fanatic who would never make it into the mainstream of Zionist politics but as the mainstream has shifted further right year by year it finally reached him.  He once advocated the bombing of the Aswan dam as a means of shutting up the Egyptians.  He thinks the ‘Arab’ members of the Zionist ‘parliament’ are the allies of terrorists.   He wants Muslim and Christian Palestinians to be required to swear an oath of loyalty to a state which has declared itself to be a Jewish, which has practically stripped them bare of all they possess and which plans to keep going until nothing is left.

His philosophy can be summed up in his own words: “Whoever is against us there’s nothing to do …. We have to lift up an axe and remove his head … otherwise we won’t be here.” The option of handing back part of what has been stolen as a means of making peace is not even within his realm of thinking.

As for Netanyahu, his campaigning was nakedly racist.  He warned against an ‘Arab’ party ending up in government and his Likud party stationed cameras outside polling booths to intimidate Palestinians and prevent them from voting.  It didn’t work. They turned out in higher numbers than ever.  It is the measure of this individual’s vile nature that he wanted to attack Gaza either to win or postpone the elections, riding to eventual victory over the bodies of more dead Palestinian men, women and children.  Gantz got in his way, but only for the same electoral reason, because he also is a killer of Palestinians, and currently the subject of prosecution in the Netherlands for the bombing of an apartment building in Gaza in 2014 which killed six members of the same family.

As the Palestinians well know, it makes no difference which of the parties is in power because their policies – more war, more killing, more settlements, with annexation now only a few steps away – are all the same.

The pathology of the Zionists puts them beyond reason.  They do not connect up with any laws or values except their own, and trying to reason with them on the basis of international law and universal values is a waste of time, pebbles thrown against the side of a tank.

In 2013 Mehdi Hassan interviewed Dani Dayon as the centerpiece of an Oxford Union debate. Until recently Dayon was the head of the Yesha settler council.  Sitting in the front row, Ghada Karmi, born in Al Quds to a family that owns land on the West Bank taken over by foreign settlers like Dayon, had to endure the lies and delusions that flowed from this man’s mouth.  Cutting through the arrogance and his smiling, self-assured attempts to deceive the audience, she told him what he actually was in her eyes and the eyes of the world –  a common thief.

There is no mystery about what has ‘happened’ in Palestine.  There is no ‘conflict of rights,’ ‘contested narratives’ or ‘disputed’ ownership. These are all propaganda phrases designed to conceal the indisputable reality.  From the Mediterranean to the Jordan River, Palestine has been stolen by people whose moral right to stay there can only be conferred on them by the people whose land they have stolen.  Had they ever accepted this principle, had they ever apologized for their crimes, had they agreed to share instead of wanting to take the lot, using all the brutal means at their disposal, this moral right could have been secured but they forfeited this possibility long ago, preferring endless war to the possibility of peace. There is no ‘two-state’ solution in sight.  Add it to the list of myths still being purveyed.  There is no solution in sight at all, at least not one based on rational discussion and the application of international law.

There is no statute of limitations here. The land was stolen and will remain stolen no matter how long the Zionists hold it.  There is no ‘land of Israel’.  There is no ‘Temple Mount’ and no ‘tomb of the patriarchs’ in Hebron.  These are all deceptions sitting atop a mountain of lies intended to bury the truth.  There is Palestine, there is the Haram al-Sharif, the Ibrahimi mosque in Hebron, where the settler state pogrom against the Palestinians continues without pause, and countless other sites on the map, all of them occupied and renamed.  Not a drop of water in the sea or a speck of sand on the beach belongs to the Zionists.  It has all been stolen.

As soon as the elections were over, ‘kingmaker’ Lieberman, leading the party of Russian ‘immigrants’ to an illegally occupied land, started stitching together a ‘national unity’ government. As excited or as preoccupied with the process as the Zionist population of Palestine might be, there is no prospect of change for the Palestinians except change for the worse.

Benjamin Gantz 8d09d

*(Benjamin “Benny” Gantz overseeing Operation Full Disclosure on March 5, 2014, Credit: Israel Defense Forces/ flickr

Gantz is as much a warmonger as Netanyahu or Lieberman and as the Palestinians will continue to resist occupation of their land where and when they can, as is their natural right and their right under international law, more large-scale violence is only a matter of time. In their arrogance the Zionists are ignoring all the warning signs, the cries of ‘Death to Israel’ from the Houthis, the tens of thousands of missiles in Hizbullah’s armory and the determination of Iran to defend itself and its allies.  The Zionists can kick the Palestinians around, but not these powerful enemies, who have behind them the support for Palestine of Muslims everywhere, not to speak of the numerous defenders of Palestine and Palestinian rights in Europe, the US, Canada, Australia and many other countries.

The Zionists came to the Middle East as a ‘rampart’ of ‘western civilization’ and that is where they have remained, on the ramparts, behind the palisades, the fences and the wall, fencing others out and fencing themselves in.   They wanted to be in the Middle East but not of the Middle East. It was beneath them. They hijacked those aspects of its culture that suited them but looked down with contempt on the rest and they still do.

In any case, western domination was the accurate phrase, not western civilization.  The ‘west’ has never been civilized, not in the Middle East or in any other lands against which it went to war and occupied. Rather, it has been utterly barbaric, as the word is generally understood, and Zionism has been part of that barbarism.

Not wanting to be part of the Middle East except on its own unacceptable terms, Zionism has to rely on powerful outside backers, a role currently filled by one of them, the United States.  However, will it always be there to give the Zionist state the support it demands, will it always be capable of giving it the support it demands, will it ultimately be willing to put its own life on the line for a small state far away that is held in contempt by much of the world, not for bad reasons but for perfectly understandable ones, and one that is held in contempt as well by an increasing number of Americans?

Only arrogance could be the reason for the willingness of the Zionists to stake their future on such uncertainties, when for a small price, except in their own greedy eyes, they could have secured their place in the Middle East long ago. There is one other reason for their confidence, though, and that is their possession of nuclear weapons.  At the worst, backs finally against the wall, they can take everyone down with them.

Take a serial killer out of the psychiatric ward, hand him a machine-gun and wait to see what happens.  That is the prospect ahead of the Middle East as long as the Zionist state remains a killer at large.

خمسة عناوين من دون اجتماعها… البحث في السلاح معصية Updated

 

أغسطس 23, 2019

ناصر قنديل

– يشكّك البعض في خلفيات الذين يدافعون عن سلاح المقاومة ويتمسّكون بما هو أكثر من بقائه، فيستنكرون مجرد وضعه في التداول ويستغربون أن يصدر ذلك عن أي وطني عاقل، لا تحرّكه حسابات خارجية لا علاقة لها بالمصالح الوطنية اللبنانية. ويحاول هذا البعض تشويه خلفية الموقف المتمسك بالسلاح والداعي لسحب الجدل حوله من التداول، لأنه تداول لن يكون بمنأى من الاستغلال الإسرائيلي، فيصوّرون الخلفية ذات صلة بمحاور إقليمية أو ترجيح موازين قوى محلية، بعكس ما تقول تجربة سلاح المقاومة على الأقل منذ أن اكتشف خصومه أنه أهم بكثير مما كانوا يتخيّلون، عندما كانوا يشككون بفاعليته في إجبار إسرائيل على الانسحاب من الجنوب اللبناني بعدما سقطت وصفاتهم البديلة و الجميلة تباعاً بضربات المكر الدولي والحماية المفتوحة الممنوحة لـ إسرائيل ، كما فاعليته في ردع إسرائيل عن العدوان وتوفير الحماية للبنان.

– إذا توقفنا عن تبادل الاتهامات وفكرنا بعقل بارد لبناني صرف، ونسينا التزامنا الأخلاقي والوطني والإنساني والعربي بفلسطين والقضية الفلسطينية، فإن بيننا وبين إسرائيل أربعة عناوين عالقة لا يمكن لعاقل أن يبحث في مصير سلاح المقاومة بدون اجتماعها كلها محققة ومنجزة على الطاولة، أولها الأراضي المحتلة، وثانيها تثبيت وتكريس الحق اللبناني في استثمار ثرواته المائية والنفطية والغازية، وثالثها ضمان عودة اللاجئين الفلسطينيين المقيمين في لبنان، ورابعها وقف الانتهاكات البحرية والبرية والجوية للسيادة اللبنانية، وكلها اليوم قضايا ساخنة وراهنة، يشعر الإسرائيلي والأميركي بوطأة قوة سلاح المقاومة في منعه من فرض رؤيته لها، ولا يمكن فهم تناول مستقبل السلاح المقاوم في ظل هذه المعادلات الضاغطة، إلا كامتداد لطلب أميركي هادف لتوفير شروط أكثر ملاءمة لـ إسرائيل في التفاوض على ترسيم الحدود البرية، خصوصاً في مزارع شبعا، وترسيم الحدود البحرية خصوصاً في مناطق النفط والغاز، والسير بحلول لقضية اللاجئين الفلسطينيين ليس بينها العودة تطبيقاً لمندرجات صفقة القرن التي يرفضها الفلسطينيون ويفترض أن لبنان يرفضها أيضاً. فكيف يتعرّى لبنان من أهم مصادر قوته، وبماذا يمكن له التعبير عن حضوره في معادلات الرفض والقبول؟

– بالمعيار الوطني البسيط يصير مفهوماً بعض الكلام عن السلاح المقاوم، لو كنا أمام قوى سياسية قاتلت لسنوات لمواجهة الخطر الصهيوني، وأنتجت بناء دولة قوية وقادرة وجيش مجهّز بكل أسباب القوة والسلاح والمقدرة على منع العدوان وحماية الحدود والحقوق. والتحذير من هذا الخطر موجود منذ قرن في الأدبيات اللبنانية، كما وصفه مؤسسو اليمين الكياني اللبناني، ولا نتحدث هنا عن تحذيرات الزعيم أنطون سعاده أو مفكّري اليسار والقومية العربية، او الإمام السيد موسى الصدر، بل عن شارل مالك وميشال شيحا وموريس الجميل. ولذلك فالعنوان الخامس الذي لا تستقيم وطنية دعاة نقاش مصير السلاح من دونه هو جيش مجهّز على الأقل بقدرة دفاع جوي وقدرة ردع صاروخي، والمانع أمامهما هم أصدقاء واشنطن من اللبنانيين، لأنهم يمنعون الجيش من التزوّد بسلاح روسي تزوّد به الكثير من حلفاء واشنطن وأعضاء الناتو، وها هي تركيا مثال، لكنه ممنوع على لبنان.

– أيّها السادة، حديثكم عن السلاح اليوم معصية موصوفة، وإن ارتكبتم المعاصي فاستتروا!

Related Videos

أجتماع جيد جدا”  لحلف المهزومين”

Related News

 

%d bloggers like this: