Reshaping the Middle East: Why the West Should Stop Its Interventions

Syria: the project of creating a” jungle state” instead gave birth to a powerful Resistance movement

Foreign intervention has pushed many Middle Eastern populations into poverty, at the same time making them more determined to confront and reject the global domination sought by the USA. The number of Middle Eastern countries and non-state actors opposed to the US coalition is relatively small and weak by comparison with the opposite camp, but they have nevertheless shaken the richer and strongest superpower together with its oil-rich Middle Eastern allies who were the investors and the instigators of recent wars. They have coalesced as a Resistance movement attracting global support, even in the face of unprecedented propaganda warfare in the mass media.

The soft power of the US coalition has been undermined domestically and abroad from the blatant deceit intrinsic in the project of supporting jihadist takfiri gangs to terrorize, rape and kill Christian, Sunni, secular, and other civilian populations while allegedly fighting a global war on Islamic terrorism.

The small countries targeted by the US coalition are theoretically and strategically important due to their vicinity to Israel. Notwithstanding the scarcity of their resources and their relatively small number of allies in comparison with the opposite camp, they have rejected any reconciliation on the terms offered by Israel.

Israel itself is progressively revealing more overt reconciliation and ties with oil-rich Arab countries: we see Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu strolling in Warsaw, discussing and shaking hands with Arab leaders. These are obviously not first meetings: recent years have shown a progressively warming rapport and openness between Israel and many Arab leaders.

These Middle East countries have long been supportive of Israel’s aggression against Lebanon and its inhabitants. And in the last decade, this support expanded to include a plot against the Palestinians, Syria and Iraq.

The US has exerted huge pressure on Syria since 2003, following the invasion of Iraq. During Secretary of State Colin Powell’s visit to Damascus in March 2003 he offered long-lasting governance to President Bashar al-Assad in exchange for submission: Assad was asked to sell out Hamas and Hezbollah, and thus join the road map for the “new Middle East”.

When Powell’s intimidation failed, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, the US’s main Arab allies and the countries responsible for cash pay-outs to help the US establishment achieve its goals (and those of Israel), promised to inject untold gold and wealth into Syria.

Assad was not willing to comply with this US-Saudi influence and pressure. The influence belonged to the US; Saudi Arabia and Qatar stood behind, holding the moneybags. A war against the Syrian state became essential, and its objectives and prospective benefits immense.

In a few paragraphs, this is what the seven years of war in Syria were about:

The Palestinian cause was pushed to the periphery by the mushrooming of ISIS, a group that terrorised the Middle East and participated in the destruction of the region’s infrastructure, killing thousands of its people and draining its wealth. It was also responsible for numerous attacks around the globe, extending from the Middle East into Europe. ISIS didn’t attack Israel even though it was based on its borders under the name of “Jayesh Khaled Bin al-Waleed.” Nor did al-Qaeda attack Israel, although it also bordered Israel for years, enjoying Israeli intelligence support–and even medical care!

All this was done in order to destroy Syria: dividing the state into zones of influence, with Turkey taking a big chunk (Aleppo, Afrin, Idlib); the Kurds realising their dream by taking over Arab and Assyrian lands in the northeast to create a land of Rojava linked with Iraqi Kurdistan; Israel taking the Golan Heights permanently and creating a buffer zone by grabbing more territory in Quneitra; creating a failed state where jihadist and mercenary groups would fight each other endlessly for dominance; gathering all jihadists into their favourite and most sacred destination (Bilad al-Sham – The Levant) and sealing them into “Islamic Emirates”.

It also involved, strategically, stopping the flow of weapons from Iran through Damascus to Hezbollah in Lebanon; weakening the Iranian-Syrian-Iraqi-Lebanese “Axis of Resistance” by removing Syria from it; preparing for another war against Lebanon once Syria was wiped off the map; stealing Syria’s oil and gas resources on land and in the Mediterranean; building a gas pipeline from Qatar to Europe to cripple Russia’s economy; and finally removing Russia from the Levant together with its naval base on the coast.

At no point in the Syrian war was a single leader proposed to rule the country and replace Bashar al-Assad. The plan was to establish a zone of anarchy with no ruler; Syria was expected to become the jungle of the Middle East.

It was a plan bigger than Assad and much bigger than the Syrians. Hundreds of billions of dollars were invested by Middle Eastern countries – Saudi Arabia and Qatar – to kill Syrians, destroy their country and accomplish the above objectives. It was a crime against an entire population with the watchful complicity of the modern and “democratic” world.

Many pretexts were given for the Syrian war. It was not only about regime change. It was about creating a jungle state. Think tanks, journalists, academics, ambassadors all joined the fiesta by collaborating in the slaughter of Syrians. Crocodile tears were shed over “humanitarian catastrophes” in Syria even as the poorest country in the Middle East, the Yemen, was and still is being slaughtered while the same mainstream media avert their gaze and conceal the nature of the conflict from the general public.

Anyone who understood the game, or even part of it, was called “Assadist”, a designation meant as an insult. The savage irony? This epithet “Assadist” was freely wielded by the US chattering class- who themselves have evidently never publicly counted and acknowledged the millions killed by the US political establishment over the centuries.

So, what has this global intervention brought about?

Russia has returned to the Levant after a long hibernation. Its essential role has been to stand against the US world hegemony without provoking, or even trying to provoke, a war with Washington. Moscow demonstrated its new weapons, opening markets for its military industry, and showed its military competence without falling into the many traps laid in the Levant during its active presence. It created the Astana agreement to bypass UN efforts to manipulate negotiations, and it isolated the war into several regions and compartments to deal with each part separately. Putin exhibited a shrewd military mind in dealing successfully with the “mother of all wars” in Syria. He ventured skilfully into US territory against its hegemonic goals, and he has created powerful and lasting strategic alliances with Turkey (a NATO member) and Iran.

Iran found fertile ground in Syria to consolidate the “Axis of the Resistance” when the country’s inhabitants (Christian, Sunni, Druse, secular people and other minorities) realised that the survival of their families and their country were at stake. It managed to rebuild Syria’s arsenal and succeeded in supplying Hezbollah with the most sophisticated weapons needed for a classic guerrilla-style war to stop Israel from attacking Lebanon. Assad is grateful for the loyalty of these partners who took the side of Syria even as the world was conspiring to destroy it.

Iran has adopted a new ideology: it is not an Islamic or a Christian ideology but a new one that emerged in the last seven years of war. It is the “Ideology of Resistance”, an ideology that goes beyond religion. This new ideology imposed itself even on clerical Iran and on Hezbollah who have abandonned any goal of exporting an Islamic Republic: instead they support any population ready to stand against the destructive US hegemony over the world.

For Iran, it is no longer a question of spreading Shiism or converting secular people, Sunni or Christians. The goal is for all to identify the real enemy and to stand against it. That is what the West’s intervention in the Middle East is creating. It has certainly succeeded in impoverishing the region: but it has also elicited pushback from a powerful front. This new front appears stronger and more effective than the forces unleashed by the hundreds of billions spent by the opposing coalition for the purpose of spreading destruction in order to ensure US dominance.


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


“Syria’s Retaliation against Tel Aviv Airport Non-negotiable of Self-Defense”and Return of Golan Firm, Non-negotiable Right

“Syria’s Retaliation against Tel Aviv Airport Legitimate Right of Self-Defense”

January 23, 2019Bashar Jaafari

Syria’s envoy to the United Nations warned Tuesday that if the world body did not halt Israeli aggression on his country, Syria would retaliate with an attack on Ben Gurion International Airport outside Tel Aviv.

Speaking at the UN Security Council after a series of Israeli airstrikes on Sunday and Monday, Bashar Jaafari said the Zionist entity was only able to act freely in Syria because it had the backing of the US, UK and France in the Security Council.

“Syria would practice its legitimate right of self-defense and respond to the Israeli aggression on Damascus International Airport in the same way on Tel Aviv airport” if the UN Security Council didn’t adopt measures stop the Zionist entity, SANA news agency quoted Jaafari as saying.

“Isn’t time now for the UN Security council to stop the Israeli repeated aggression on the Syrian Arab republic territories,” Jaafari said.

The Syrian diplomat said meanwhile, that France, Britain and US’ stance that prevents Security Council from assuming its responsibilities will not affect Syria’s right to defend itself and work to restore the occupied Syrian Golan.

He stressed that the restoration of the Syrian Golan is a firm right for Syria which can’t be negotiable or abolished through prescription.

Jaafari noted that the Israeli occupation full withdrawal from Golan into the line of June 4th, 1967 is an issue that should be applied based on the international law principles and legitimacy resolutions including Security Council relevant resolutions No. 242, 338 and 497.


Al-Jaafari: Return of Golan to Syria’s Sovereignty Is Firm, Non-negotiable Right


Related Videos

Related Articles

Golan Resists Judization: No for “Israel”

Golan Resists Judization: No for “Israel”

Local Editor

Syria condemned the “illegal elections” being held by “Israel” for the first time in the occupied Golan Heights, as an attempt to assimilate the Druze minority, who for their part have largely refused to take part in the polls.

Members of the Druze community residing under “Israeli” occupation for over half a century took to the streets on Tuesday in an effort to interfere in the municipal elections that Tel Aviv had introduced for the first time in the Golan Heights.

Carrying Syrian and Druze rainbow flags, hundreds of members of the Muslim minority sect assembled outside the gates of polling stations, trying to prevent other Druze community members from voting.

“The Golan’s identity is Arab and Syrian,” they chanted. Amid sporadic clashes with police, religious elders wearing their distinctive white caps, symbolizing religious piety, urged the youth not to confront the security forces, who in some instances used tear gas against protesters.

The “Israeli” decision to introduce elections to the local councils in the territory, which it has held since 1967, divided the Druze community ahead of Tuesday’s vote.

“Candidates and those who come to vote will have a religious and social prohibition put upon them,”said Sheikh Khamis Khanjar. “What bigger punishment is there than this?”

Damascus slammed the “illegal elections,” noting that Syria “fully supports” the Druze resistance to “Israeli” occupation. The Syrian Foreign Ministry accused Tel Aviv of trying to legitimize their grab of the Golan, calling Tuesday’s vote a “Judaization” attempt on the Druze by “Israel.”

“Syria reiterates that the occupied Golan Heights is an integral part of its soil, and it will work to return the terrain to the motherland sooner or later by all possible means,” the Ministry said in two letters, addressed to the UN chief and the UN Security Council president.

Source: News Agencies, Edited by website team

Related Videos

Related Articles

Wikileaks: To Weaken Iran, US Undermined Democratic Elements of Syrian Opposition to Empower Radical Groups

While seven years have come and gone since the leaked document was written by USMC intelligence, little has changed when it comes to the U.S.’ long-standing goals in Syria and its callous disregard for the will of the Syrian people and Syrian democracy.

by Whitney Webb

WASHINGTON — A recently uncovered U.S. government document published by WikiLeaks has revealed that the U.S. directly advocated for undermining “democratic” elements of the so-called Syrian “revolution” of 2011 in order to ensure the dominance of authoritarian, sectarian Sunni groups within the Syrian opposition.

The document, written by the United States Marine Corps (USMC) Intelligence Department in late 2011, further asserts that empowering these radical Sunni groups over democratic and secular ones would be ideal for the United States and its regional partners, as ensuring the decline of the current Syrian government, and with it a secular Syria, would harm Iran’s regional clout.

In other words, the U.S. openly supported undermining democratic opposition forces in Syria in order to challenge Iranian influence and, with it, the influence of the Middle East’s “resistance axis” that obstructs the imperialistic agendas of the U.S. and its regional allies such as Saudi Arabia and Israel.

According to the document, which was buried in a previous WikiLeaks release and recently uncovered by journalist Dr. Nafeez Ahmed, U.S. military intelligence was well aware that the Syrian opposition movement in 2011 did not pose “a meaningful threat against the [Syrian] regime,” given that it was “extremely fractured” and “operating under enormous constraints.” It also noted that “reports of protests [against the Syrian government] are overblown,” even though “the exiled [Syrian] opposition has been quite effecting (sic) in developing a narrative on the Syrian opposition to disseminate to major media agencies.”

That narrative — which was subsequently promoted by several foreign governments, including the U.S., the U.K., Turkey and France — falsely claimed that the protests were massive and involved largely peaceful protestors “rising up” against the “autocratic” government led by Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. This document, as well as substantial evidence that has emerged over the last several years, shows that this narrative, of a “peaceful uprising” seeking to establish a secular and “democratic” Syria, has never been true, as even U.S. military intelligence knew that the reports regarding these “peaceful” protests were highly exaggerated.

U.S. calling on Turkey to do its dirty work

Given that the USMC intelligence considered the Syrian opposition movement in 2011 to be an ineffective force for effecting change in Assad’s status as Syria’s leader, the document notes that it was in the U.S.’ interest for Turkey to “manage” efforts to destabilize the Assad-led government, as Turkey “is the country with the most leverage over Syria in the long term, and has an interest in seeing this territory return to Sunni rule.”

Those Turkish-led efforts would involve gradually building up “linkages with groups inside Syria, focusing in particular on the Islamist remnants of the Muslim Brotherhood in trying to fashion a viable Islamist political force in Syria that would operate under Ankara’s umbrella.” This ultimately came to pass, as the Turkey-backed Free Syrian Army – previously promoted as the main force of the “democratic” Syrian opposition but now well known to be a radical, sectarian group – still takes its marching orders from Ankara.

Turkey-backed Syrian rebels and Turkish troops secure the Bursayah hill, which separates the Kurdish-held enclave of Afrin from the Turkey-controlled town of Azaz, Syria, Jan. 28, 2018. Photo | AP

The document advocates for these efforts to mold the “fragmented” elements of the 2011 Syrian opposition into an “Islamist” puppet force of Turkey in order to support the gradual “weakening of the Alawite [i.e., Assad] hold on power in Syria,” as well as because “Turkey, the United States, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and others have a common interest in trying to severely under[mine] Iran’s foothold in the Levant and dial back Hezbollah’s political and military influence in Lebanon.”

Also notable is the fact that USMC intelligence at the time knew that these efforts to undermine the current Syrian government would have a disastrous impact on the country and its civilian population. Indeed, the document notes this on two separate occasions, stating first that “any political transition in Syria away from the al-Assad clan will likely entail a violent, protracted civil conflict” and later adding that “the road to regime change will be a long and bloody one.”

Thus, not only was U.S. military intelligence advocating for the undermining of democratic and secular forces within the Syrian opposition, it was also aware that the U.S.-backed efforts to undermine Assad would have “bloody” consequences for civilians in Syria. These admissions dramatically undercut past and present U.S. claims to be concerned with Syrian civilians and their “call for freedom” from Assad, showing instead that the U.S. preferred the installation of a “friendly” authoritarian, sectarian government in Syria and was uninterested in the fate of Syrian civilians so long as the result “severely under[mined] Iran’s foothold in the Levant.”

For much of the last two decades, but especially since the 2006 war between Israel and Lebanon’s Hezbollah, the “resistance axis” — led by Iran — has emerged as the greatest threat to the hegemony of the United States and its allies in the Middle East. A power bloc composed of Iran, Iraq, Syria, Hezbollah, and Hamas in Palestine, the “resistance axis” as a term first emerged in 2010 to describe the alliances of countries and regional political groups opposed to continued Western intervention in the region, as well as to the imperialist agendas of U.S. allies in the region like Israel and Saudi Arabia. Iran’s role as the de factoleader of this resistance bloc makes it, along with its main allies like Syria, a prime target of U.S. Middle East policy.


Washington’s support for a future authoritarian Syria may come as a surprise to some, given that the U.S. has publicly promoted the narrative of a “democratic revolution” in Syria from 2011 to the present and has used calls for the establishment of a “new” secular democracy in Syria as the foundation for its agenda of overthrowing the current Assad-led government.

However, powerful individuals in Washington have long promoted an “authoritarian” and “Islamist” state in Syria with the goal of countering Iran, much like the plan detailed in the USMC intelligence document.

For instance, current National Security Adviser John Bolton called for the establishment of such a state in Syria back in 2015, stating on FOX News:

I think our objective should be a new Sunni state out of the western part of Iraq, the eastern part of Syria, run by moderates or at least authoritarians who are not radical Islamists.”

ABTKE3Q5AJBRPISJTBE4CGHYDU.jpgA U.S.-backed anti-government fighter mans a heavy machine gun next to a US soldier in al Tanf, a border crossing between Syria and Iraq. Hammurabi’s Justice News | AP

A few months later, Bolton – this time in a New York Times op-ed – detailed his plan to create a sectarian Sunni state out of northeastern Syria and western Iraq, which he nicknamed “Sunni-stan.” He asserted that such a country would have “economic potential” as an oil producer, would serve as a “bulwark” against the Syrian government and “Iran-allied Baghdad,” and would help ensure the defeat of Daesh (ISIS). Bolton’s mention of oil is notable, as the proposed territory for this Sunni state sits on key oil fields that U.S. oil interests, such as ExxonMobil and the Koch brothers, have sought to control if the partition of Iraq and Syria comes to pass.

Bolton also suggested that Arab Gulf States like Saudi Arabia “could provide significant financing” for the creation of this future state, adding that “the Arab monarchies like Saudi Arabia must not only fund much of the new state’s early needs, but also ensure its stability and resistance to radical forces.”

Yet Bolton fails to note that Saudi Arabia is one of the chief financiers of Daesh and largely responsible for spreading “radical” Wahhabi Islam throughout the Middle East. Thus, any future state that the Saudis would fund would undoubtedly mirror the ethos of Saudi Arabia itself – i.e., an authoritarian, radical Wahhabist state that executes nonviolent protestersoppresses minorities, and launches genocidal wars against its neighbors in an effort to control their resources.

Furthermore, the ultimate goal outlined within the USMC Intelligence document of undermining  Iran’s regional clout continues to be the guide for the U.S.’ current Syria policy, which recently changed yet again to include regime change in Damascus as part of its goal. For instance, earlier this year, Bolton – in his capacity as National Security Adviser – stated that U.S. troops would remain in Syria “as long as the Iranian menace continues throughout the Middle East.”

More recently, the Trump administration “redefined” its Syria policy to include “the exit of all Iranian military and proxy forces from Syria” as the administration’s top priority, while also calling for the installation of “a stable, non-threatening government” that would not have Assad as Syria’s leader.

Thus, while seven years have come and gone since the leaked document was written by USMC intelligence, little has changed when it comes to the U.S.’ long-standing goals in Syria and its callous disregard for the will of the Syrian people and Syrian democracy.


«خطيئة» «إسرائيل» الثانية بعد الانسحاب من الجنوب اللبناني

أغسطس 1, 2018

روزانا رمّال

كلّ شيءٍ عاد إلى المربع الأول بالنسبة للإسرائيليين الذين بات عليهم النظر إلى سورية وما يُحيطها من متغيّرات بعين أخرى. فهل تكون خطيئة «إسرائيل» الثانية بعد تحرير جنوب لبنان عام 2000 على ما اعتبر جزء كبير من الإسرائيليين محمّلاً ايهود باراك حينذاك كوزير للدفاع مسؤولية تبعات تعاظم نفوذ حزب الله بعد التحرير؟

الخبر يكمن في إعلان الإعلام الحربي المركزي أي إعلام «حزب الله» العسكري أن « الجيش السوري أمّن كامل الحدود مع الجولان السوري انطلاقاً من الحدود اللبنانية قرب منطقة شبعا وصولاً الى قرية معرية الواقعة في زاوية الحدود مع الجولان والحدود الأردنية».. هذا الكلام الدقيق واضح بالنسبة للجهة الإسرائيلية التي كانت تبذل ما بوسعها لإبعاد هذه العودة وهذا المصير الذي لم يعُد يشبه ما قبل عام 2011 كما تروّج.

يقول مصدر عربي رفيع لـ «البناء» إن بنيامين نتنياهو طالب الرئيس الروسي فلاديمير بوتين أثناء زيارته بالاستحصال على ضمانة من الرئيس السوري بشار الأسد للعودة الى خط الحدود المعمول بها سابقاً والعودة معها الى الأسس نفسها التي حكمت الجبهة لسنوات كانت فيها هادئة وناجحة، إذا صح التعبير، إلا ان الرئيس الاسد لم يعطِ أي جواب بهذا الإطار حتى الساعة، ولا يوجد أي مؤشر يفيد بأن سورية تعتبر أن ما قبل 2011 مثل ما بعدها وأن الوضع في 2018 ممكن أن يعود الى اتفاقيات العقود الماضية التي كانت تحمل ظروفاً وأسساً مغايرة لظروف اليوم وكل شيء في سورية بالنسبة لـ»إسرائيل» بات معقداً فبين هدفها إبعاد الجيش السوري كأولوية صار الهدف إبعاد إيران ومن ثمة حزب الله. ومن بعدها الموافقة على وساطة روسية مع كل العلم أن روسيا لن تخدم الموقف الإسرائيلي دولياً بمثل ما يخدمه الأميركيون مهما كانت الوساطة الروسية حاضرة ومحافظة على المصالح الإسرائيلية. وكل هذا يعني خسائر إسرائيلية حدودية بالجملة.

تمركز حزب الله على الحدود السورية مع الأراضي المحتلة وأي شيء لا يمكنه ضمان عودته، خصوصاً اذا كان الصراع يتعلّق بتحرير أراضٍ عربية او إنشاء سلسلة متصلة من نقاط الارتكاز الحدودي لمحاصرة الجنود الإسرائيليين بالمعنى النفسي والوجودي. أحد نواب «حزب الله» نواف الموسوي صرح منذ أسبوع بحديث تلفزيوني أنه إذا قررت «إسرائيل» القضاء على ترسانة حزب الله، فإن هذا لا يؤثر على الحزب بتاتاً لأن له ترسانة في «مكان آخر» هذا المكان الآخر بالنسبة لأي متابع أو مراقب هو سورية.

قبل عام 2011 كانت الخطة الإسرائيلية القضاء على العلاقة الممتازة بين سورية وحزب الله عبر التخلص من النظام السوري وأخذ سورية نحو نظام جديد يلبّي تطلعّ «إسرائيل» التقسيمي للمنطقة. وبوجود الأسد كل هذا غير وارد نظراً لمفهومه بإدارة السلطة والبلاد ونظرته لـ»إسرائيل». أما اليوم فصار الحديث عن الخطيئة الثانية وهي دعم «الثوار» في سورية والسعي لقلب النظام أشد خطورة تُضاف الى إخفاقات «إسرائيل» الكبرى.

هذه الخطيئة تتمثل بفرض سوري رسمي لوجود حلفاء دمشق على الأرض السورية، كلما شعرت بأن هناك حاجة لذلك. والخطورة الثانية هي قناعة الرئيس السوري بنجاح تجربة المقاومة في سورية التي أسهمت بتعاون قدّمه خبراء حزب الله كأوائل المقاتلين في حروب «عصابات» للجيش السوري الذي أضاف اليوم إلى كتائبه نوعاً جديداً من العناصر المدرّبة غير الموجودة في الجيوش الكلاسيكية، أما ثالثاً فاتساع دائرة انتشار حزب الله والأمر لم يعد محصوراً بالحدود مع الجولان بعد أن قاتل في أقاصي الشمال والشرق السوري على مشارف الحدود التركية وصار لزاماً على التنسيق والتعاون بعد تحرير كامل الارض السورية من التطرف الاستمرار حتى إعادة رسم شكل العلاقة من جديد. فهل هو محور متصل مشترك المصير؟ هل هي مهمة وتنتهي لحزب الله في سورية؟ كل هذه الأسئلة غير واضحة الإجابات بالنسبة لـ»إسرائيل».

نتنياهو الذي يصفه كتاب «إسرائيل» بـ «كبير الحظ» والمعروف أنه لا يتورّط كغيره من المسؤولين الإسرائيليين جزافاً بحروب خوفاً على تراجع شعبيته وخسارته في الانتخابات، ارتكب بتأييده غزو سورية الخطيئة الثانية الكبرى التي وسّعت المخاطر على أمن الكيان الإسرائيلي وجعلته محاصراً من الجنوب اللبناني حتى الجنوب السوري وصار تطويق «إسرائيل» بالنسبة لحزب الله من أثبت الأمور وأعمقها. أما المشكلة الرئيسية فهي عدم تجاوب الرئيس السوري حتى الساعة بتقديم ضمانات حول تمركز القوات الأجنبية غير الجيش السوري على الحدود والقلق الإسرائيلي لا يزال مستمراً مع استنفار كبير يحول دون الدخول بالمفاوضات الجدّية الكبرى طالما أن أمن الحدود الإسرائيلية غير محصّن وطالما ان المستقبل يحمل المجهول.

المشكلة أن روسيا بدورها غير مقتنعة بسيرورة إخراج إيران من الحدود المقصودة. وسفيرها في فلسطين المحتلة أناتولي فيكتوروف يصرّح للقناة الإسرائيلية بكل صراحة أن «طلب رئيس الحكومة الإسرائيلية بنيامين نتنياهو المتكرّر بضرورة إخراج القوات الإيرانية وحلفائها من سورية هو مطلب غير واقعي وأن الإيرانيين يقومون بدور مهم جداً جداً في إطار جهودنا المشتركة للقضاء على الإرهابيين في سورية. لذلك فإننا نعتبر في المرحلة الحالية أن الطلب الإسرائيلي بطرد القوات الأجنبية من سورية أمر غير واقعي»، مشيراً الى أن «الوجود الإيراني في سورية مشروع تماماً طبقاً لمبادئ الأمم المتحدة »… ورداً على سؤال حول إمكانية أن تقوم موسكو بطرد الإيرانيين من سورية، لفت إلى أنه «كلا. لا يمكننا أن نجبرهم على ذلك».

إنها خطيئة «إسرائيل» الثانية.. خطيئة العصر!

Related videos

Related Articles


South Front

The Syrian Arab Army (SAA), the Tiger Forces and their allies have reportedly established full control of the district of Lajat in the province of Daraa. According to pro-government sources, militants in the area have mostly surrendered to government troops.

Additionally, the SAA and its allies liberated the village of Mleha al-‘Atsh and captured the center of Busr al-Harir.

If all these reports are confirmed, government forces have liberated about 400km2 since the start of clashes in northeastern Daraa last week.

On June 25, the Russian Defense Ministry released a statement saying that Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (formerly Jabhat al-Nusra) had carried out a large attack on government positions in the province. The attack was repelled and 70 militants were killed.

This attack likely was an attempt to sabotage the SAA progress in Lajat.

On June 26, Israel reportedly carried out a new missile strike on Syria targeting the Damascus International Airport.

According to pro-government sources, at least two missiles fell in near the airport. Pro-Israeli sources claim that the strike hit an Iranian cargo plane inside the airport.

Local sources say that Syrian air defense systems were employed. However, it is unclear if some missiles were intercepted.

An alleged pro-government partisan group, the Popular Resistance in Manbij, has announced the start of preparations for an uprising against foreign occupiers – i.e. forces of the US, France and Turkey – aiming to divide Syria.

In April, a similar group, entitled “the Popular Resistance in al-Hasakah”, appeared in eastern Syria. This group also threatened the US-led coalition and its proxies with attacks. However, no notable attacks have been carried out so far.

In any case, appearance of such groups show that far from everyone in northeastern Syria like the US-led coalition.

Related News

الأيام الفاصلة بين مشروعيْنِ كبيرَيْنِ

مايو 1, 2018

ناصر قنديل

– مهما تلوّنت الصراعات وتبدّلت وجوهها وتموضعت في ضفافها قوى ملتبسة الهوية، تبدو المنطقة في مواجهة مفتوحة منذ انتصار الثورة الإسلامية في إيران ورفع إمامها لشعار اليوم إيران وغداً فلسطين، فيما كانت «إسرائيل» تفوز بإخراج أكبر دولة عربية هي مصر، من خارطة الصراع عبر بوابة كامب ديفيد، لتصير هذه المواجهة منذ عام 1979 بين مشروع عنوانه مقاومة «إسرائيل» ومشروع مقابل اسمه تشريع اغتصاب «إسرائيل» لفلسطين والتطبيع معها، ومثلما تقف إيران كقاعدة استراتيجية لمشروع المقاومة الذي يضمّ إليها سورية وقوى المقاومة في لبنان وفلسطين، تقف أميركا كقاعدة استراتيجية لمشروع تشريع «إسرائيل» والتطبيع معها، ومعها عرب تتقدّمهم علناً دول الخليج وفي طليعتها السعودية، وتقف «إسرائيل» طبعاً، ومعها دول الغرب ودول إقليمية وعربية.

– مثلما كانت الحرب التي خاضها النظام العراقي السابق على إيران بتمويل خليجي ودعم أميركي غربي حلقة من حلقات هذه المواجهة وانتهت بالفشل، كان اجتياح «إسرائيل» للبنان حلقة من حلقات هذه المواجهة، وكانت أميركا حاضرة بقواتها المتعددة الجنسيات ومعها فرنسا وبريطانيا وإيطاليا، ورعايتها لاتفاق السابع عشر من أيار، وكانت السعودية حاضرة باحتضانها الاتفاق بالقمة العربية في الدار البيضاء. وجاءت الحصيلة تباعاً من انتفاضة السادس من شباط عام 1984 وصولاً لتحرير الجنوب في العام 2000 لتتكرّس هزيمة هذه الحلقة الفاصلة المشروع الأميركي. كذلك كانت حرب العراق واحتلاله مقدمة لإخضاع سورية وإيران حلقة من حلقات هذه المواجهة. وجاءت أميركا مباشرة هذه المرة لتأديب قوى مشروع المقاومة. وجاءت الحصيلة بالفشل الأميركي في تحقيق الهدف فصمدت سورية وصمدت إيران. والأهم صار العراق نفسه مشكلة لأميركا.

– الحرب على سورية بقدر ما كانت حرباً على سورية بذاتها، كانت حرباً بين هذين المشروعين ومكانة سورية بينهما. وها هي الحرب ترسم مساراً ثابتاً للاحق تطوّراتها باتجاه لم يعُد ممكناً تغييره. وهو اتجاه خروج سورية معافاة من محنتها، وقيامة دولتها أشدّ قوة وأكثر التزاماً بثوابتها وخياراتها، وموقعها في خيار المقاومة، ومثلها الحرب على اليمن حرب بين هذين المشروعَيْن. وقد قال وزير خارجية الحكم المدعوم سعودياً في اليوم الأول للحرب أن «إسرائيل» تستطيع الاطمئنان بأن صواريخ الحديدة التي تهدّد أمن «إسرائيل» في إيلات سيتمّ تدميرها، وها هي الصواريخ تتحوّل أداة ردع تهدّد العاصمة السعودية.

– الملف النووي الإيراني مفردة من مفردات هذه المواجهة، فلو لم تكن إيران قاعدة لمشروع المقاومة لما كان امتلاكها للطاقة النووية ولا حتى لسلاح نووي أسوة بباكستان والهند مشكلة. ويوم توقفت المفاوضات حول هذا الملف في آب 2012 بعد جولة بغداد، معلوم أن واشنطن كانت قد عرضت تشريع الملف النووي الإيراني مقابل تعديل الموقف الإيراني في سورية وما يرمز إليه من تموضعها كقاعدة لمشروع المقاومة. ومثل الملف النووي الإيراني المواجهة مع روسيا تدور في قلب هذه المواجهة التي يشكل مشروع المقاومة عنوانها، فقد عرض على روسيا الكثير من المكاسب والمصالح كدولة عظمى في سورية وغير سورية مقابل إخراج إيران وقوى المقاومة، وتعرّضت روسيا لمخاطر وتهديدات وعقوبات لدفعها للتخلّي عن تموضعها مع إيران وسورية والمقاومة في المنطقة. وهي ترى في هذا التموضع تعبيراً عن تمسكها بكسر الهيمنة الأميركية وحماية خيار الاستقلال الوطني لدولتها وللدول التي تشبهها في هذا التمسك.

– نقل السفارة الأميركية إلى القدس إحدى خطوات قلب هذه المواجهة تحت عنوان التشريع والتطبيع، وصفقة القرن مثلها، والغارات الإسرائيلية والعدوان الأميركي كذلك، وما تشهده الانتخابات النيابية في لبنان والعراق مفردات إقليمية دولية بلباس محلي في قلب هذه المواجهة. فتُصرَف الأموال وتنظم الحملات الإعلامية لخدمة إنتاج موازين قوى في لبنان تحاصر المقاومة، وفي العراق موازين تشرّع بقاء الاحتلال الأميركي، وبالمقابل مواصلة الجيش السوري لحرب التحرير ومسيرات العودة الفلسطينية مفردات في هذه المواجهة، ومثلهما صمود اليمن ونجاحه في إنتاج توزان الردع والرعب رغم الآلام والجراح والحصار والمرض والجوع.

– الأيام المقبلة فاصلة في هذه المواجهة، والواضح أن واشنطن تستعدّ لملاقاتها بالابتعاد عن قلب الطاولة الذي كانت تهدّد به وتبحث عن مخارج حفظ ماء الوجه والتفرّغ للملف الكوري الشمالي، فيما تعيش «إسرائيل» والسعودية على نار القلق والخوف، وتنتظر إيران وسورية والمقاومة ملاقاة الاستحقاقات بثقة واطمئنان. وفي حزيران سيظهر المطمئن بأسه ويظهر الخائف والقلق ضعفه، وما يبدو تصعيداً واستفزازاً من جهة لقلب الطاولة قبل حزيران، سيفشل عبر ملاقاته ببرود أعصاب يخطئ مَن يقرأه ضعفاً، لأنه سيرى في حزيران وما بعده صورة القوة الحقيقية والضعف الحقيقي. فمشروع المقاومة الذي حقّق خلال أربعة عقود تراكماً من الانتصارات يعرف كيف يصونها، ويعرف أنها علامات تغييرات جوهرية في الموازين لا تحتاج الاستعراض لإثباتها بل الثبات الهادئ للحفاظ عليها.

مقالات مشابهة

%d bloggers like this: