How to Undermine a Diplomatic Triumph

About me

26 July 2021

by Lawrence Davidson

Part I—The Backstory

The true status of current negotiations to reinstate the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with Iran is unknown to the American public—most of whom are tragically indifferent to the outcome. This is so even though the successful negotiation of this deal with Iran back in 2015 represents one of the greatest triumphs of diplomacy in the last hundred years. What we do know is this triumph was followed by tragedy—a premeditated tragedy—the sort of tragedy only fools can produce. But very few Americans care. That is the way it is with foreign policy. On the one hand, you can start wars to great public acclaim, and on the other, you can destroy hard-won diplomatic achievements almost without public notice. 

At the end of President Obama’s term of office (January 2017) the JCPOA was complete and in force. In exchange for a lifting of “nuclear-related sanctions,” Iran undertook not to pursue research that might allow her to develop nuclear weapons. Up until May of 2018 “Iran’s compliance has been repeatedly verified by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which oversees the most intrusive inspections regime ever negotiated.” It was in May of 2018 that Donald Trump, perhaps the most despicable human being to hold the presidency since Andrew Jackson, withdrew from the JCPOA, apparently for two reasons: (1) was the treaty was completed by Obama and Trump wanted to destroy the achievements of his non-white predecessor, and (2) Trump thought he could bully the Iranians into a “better deal.” It is important to note that the other signatories to the treaty did not initially follow Trump’s lead. “The leaders of France, the United Kingdom, and Germany issued a joint statement on behalf of their countries that reemphasized their support for the deal and its importance to the nonproliferation regime.” The United Nations expressed “deep concern” over Trump’s decision and released a statement in support of the JCPOA. Russia’s Foreign Ministry also reiterated its support for the JCPOA, and further stated that “U.S. actions compromise international trust in the IAEA.”

How did the Iranians react to Trump’s withdrawal from the treaty and reimposition of harsh sanctions? At first, Tehran suggested that if the other signatories to the agreement would remain loyal to their obligations, Iran too would keep to the treaty. Unfortunately, most of the European nations involved would soon succumb to U.S. economic pressure and cease to hold to their obligations. Nonetheless, it was not until a year following Trump’s irresponsible act that Iran announced that “The Islamic Republic of Iran in reaction to the exit of America from the nuclear deal and the bad promises of European countries in carrying out their obligations will restart a part of the nuclear activities which were stopped under the framework of the nuclear deal.” Even while the Iranian government took this position, it insisted that if at any time the United States returned to the treaty and removed all nuclear-related sanctions, Iran too would return to its obligations. Tehran even suggested a process whereby the U.S. and Iran would take simultaneous steps to that end. 

Everyone but Trump devotees, Israel and its supporters, and those Iranian exiles who would like to see the return of the country’s monarchy recognized that the U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA had been a mistake. Accordingly, in the campaign run-up to the 2020 presidential election in the U.S., the Democratic candidate, Joe Biden, promised that upon election he would rejoin the treaty if Iran returned to compliance as well. 

Biden did win, but he has not yet fulfilled his promise. Instead, he entered an extended period of negotiations that is still ongoing. At first it was said that these were about “who goes first” when it comes to returning to requirements of the treaty. Was Iran to give up the small steps in nuclear enrichment since the Trump withdrawal, or was the U.S. going to go first in removing the draconian sanctions placed on Iran by the Trump administration? It was Iran who realized the childish nature of this question and offered a simultaneous return to the compliance mentioned above. While the Biden administration rejected this offer, it has been reported that now both sides are working toward “simultaneous, sequential steps” back to requirements of the treaty. 


Part II—Misleading the American Public


In the meantime, the Biden administration has been releasing misinformation to the public. For instance, Biden has insisted that sanctions relief depends on Iran “returning to compliance.” But, of course, for anyone familiar with the relevant events, it was Washington that broke the treaty and needed to return to compliance. Any subsequent Iranian actions following Trump’s folly were, and still are, perfectly legal under the terms of the JCPOA. Joe Biden can continue to justify draconian economic sanctions in this way—sanctions that are ruining the lives of millions—only because he is addressing an ignorant American audience. 

When Iran failed to be bullied, Biden’s diplomats adopted a “shift the blame” tactic. In May 2021, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said “Iran, I think, knows what it needs to do to come back into compliance on the nuclear side, and what we haven’t yet seen is whether Iran is ready and willing to make a decision to do what it has to do. That’s the test and we don’t yet have an answer.” Translation: the American people should know that we, the Biden administration, are trying, but those Iranians seem to be too thick-headed to do what is necessary. So if the whole thing fails, it is their fault and not ours. 

Blinken went on, “If both sides can return to the original deal, then we can use that as a foundation both to look at how to make the deal itself potentially longer and stronger—and also [to] engage on these other issues, whether it’s Iran’s support for terrorism [or] its destabilizing support for different proxies throughout the Middle East.”

That scenario will not encourage the Iranians. They have repeatedly stated that the JCPOA, and the present negotiations, are about two things: sanctions and the scope of nuclear development. It is not about Iranian foreign policy, which has been so blandly assumed to be “terrorism” by both Trump and Biden. If Mr. Blinken keeps tagging on these extras, we will still be running in circles come Christmas.   

What is the diplomatic aim of the Biden administration? Is it to pursue the Democrats’ traditional, and bankrupt, aim of sounding as tough on foreign policy as the Republicans? That irrelevant goal (remember most Americans don’t care about foreign policy) would not be surprising coming from a professional Democratic politician of Joe Biden’s generation. However, after all the work that has gone into the JCPOA and all the suffering endured by the Iranian population due to brutal U.S. sanctions, such a petty motive reflects the mentality of a street gang competing with rivals, rather than the peaceful ends of an alleged civilized society. 

With statements like this, Secretary of State Blinken transforms himself into someone we might mistake for a

Fox News TV anchor. It would seem that many who pride themselves on eschewing Fox’s lies are ready to swallow whole Mr. Blinken’s bunk. 

Part III—An Israeli Connection?

We know that ex-Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and ex-President Trump were in agreement on Iran policy. In this regard, all the yelling and screaming about Iran’s nuclear program carried on by both men hid their real goal. Particularly for Netanyahu, the hyperbole was aimed at creating a “credible reason” to force regime change in Iran, even if it meant a U.S. invasion. Essentially, the model here was Iraq. Netanyahu was ready to pursue this end till the last dying American soldier. Obviously, the JCPOA was a major obstacle in that path. So was Barack Obama, who thought he was helping Israel and the world in general by negotiating the treaty. 

Now Netanyahu and Trump are gone from office. However, why should we believe that the new Israeli government has changed the ultimate goal? And why should we believe that Joe Biden—who is, as he never fails to remind us, an “ironclad” Zionist—will really follow in Obama’s footsteps?

In June, Israel sent some of its highest-ranking leaders to see Biden. These included Israeli President Reuven Rivlin and Defense Minister Benny Gantz. Both meetings were basically about Iran. “Iran will never get a nuclear weapon on my watch,” Biden told Rivlin. This was billed as a “stark warning” to Iran—a country which has, for religious as well as other reasons, disavowed the desire for such a weapon. How many Americans know this? Does President Biden know this?

Many scholars and other experts in Middle East policy believe that “Mr. Biden’s calculations are rooted in a different era of American-Israeli relations—when Israel’s security concerns commanded far more attention than Palestinian grievances.” This is true. But there is a more personal connection. Biden personally identifies with Israel like no other U.S. president since Lyndon Johnson. He collects yarmulkes and is reported to have knelt down in an impromptu “show of respect” after learning that Rivka Ravitz, President Rivlin’s Orthodox chief of staff, was the mother of 12 children. The Israeli Orthodox Jews often have such large families out of fear of a “demographic holocaust”—that is, the consequences of the Palestinians’ much higher birth rate than that of most Israeli Jews. Finally, Biden has completely accepted the highly debatable notion that world Jewry, many of whom are not Zionists, cannot be safe apart from the existence of Israel. 

Those same experts also believe that, when it comes to Israel, President Biden’s approach has much to do with domestic politics. Thus, getting back to the JCPOA is less important than catering to the desires of the Israel Lobby. This only makes sense for a politician born and bred to the power of that lobby.

Part IV—Conclusion


The U.S. and Israeli leaders are suffering from a group-think environment and tunnel vision, all shaped in good part by political pressure generated by dominant special interests.  At least in this instance, one cannot say the same for the Iranians who, though led by a rigid religious elite, broke through their tunnel vision and joined the JCPOA treaty. The present stalemate is the work of American ideologues tied hand and foot to a major U.S. lobby. 

Outside the tunnel one can see the obvious answer to the present stalemate. Having been polite and empathetic toward Rivlin and Gantz, Joe Biden should ask over to the Oval Office an outsider, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres. At the end of June Guterres said, “I appeal to the United States to lift or waive its sanctions outlined in the plan.” He also appealed to Iran to return to full implementation of the deal. Right from the beginning of Biden’s election, the Iranians have been willing to follow Guterres’s lead. It is Biden who has temporized while being encouraged by his confidants from Jerusalem. 

Putin: We Can Carry Out Unpreventable Strikes Against Any Enemy

Jul 25, 2021

Source: Al Mayadeen Net

By Al Mayadeen Net

On the Russian Navy Day, Russian President Vladimir Putin stresses that his country is capable of discovering and striking any naval target.

Visual search query image
Putin participates in inspecting the course of the military parade (Sputnik)

Russian President Vladimir Putin has declared that the Russian Navy can detect any enemy and, if necessary, carry out an unpreventable strike against it.

On the occasion of the Navy Day, Putin said at a grand naval parade in St. Petersburg on the Baltic Sea, “Today, the Russian Navy has everything it needs to guarantee the protection of our Motherland and our national interests. We can detect any underwater, surface, or airborne enemy and carry out an unpreventable strike against it, if necessary.”

Noting that the Russian Navy possesses now powerful ships in the global oceans, and nuclear-powered missile submarines, he stressed: “We have effective long-range and short-range naval aviation, reliable coastal defense systems, the latest hypersonic high-precision weapons systems that still have no analogs in the world, which we are constantly and successfully improving.”

Putin added that “The naval presence of Russia is ensured in almost all regions of the World Ocean, and the watch in the northern and southern latitudes is carried out by the faithful heirs of the naval military glory.”

325th Anniversary of #Russian Navy.#INS Tabar is part of the mobile column being reviewed by President of the Russian Federation, Vladimir Putin. #RussianNavy #IndianNavy pic.twitter.com/9Ce6Nzysci— Shivani Sharma (@shivanipost) July 25, 2021

On the Russian Navy Day on July 25 of each year, the Commander of the Armed Forces, President Vladimir Putin, participates in the main naval parade in the waters of the Neva River in Saint Petersburg.

Around 4,000 sailors, more than 50 ships, boats, and submarines, as well as 48 combat aircraft and helicopters from naval aviation will participate in the parade.

Also partaking in the naval military parade are naval vessels from several European and Asian countries, including India, France, Iran, and Pakistan.

Before the start of the main part of the parade, the head of state inspected the course of the warships’ parade in the waters of the Gulf of Finland and on the Kronstadt waterway on the coast guard boat. Putin also congratulated the crew on the day of the Russian Navy, which celebrates its 325th anniversary today. 

Cleric politician calls on Raisi to follow long-term strategic ties with neighbors

24 July 2021 

Visual search query image


Cleric politician calls on Raisi to follow long-term strategic ties with neighbors. A member of the Expediency Council has called on the incoming administration of Ebrahim Raisi to establish long-term strategic ties with neighbors and countries which are not influenced by the United States’ anti-Iran position.

TEHRAN (Iran News) – Cleric politician calls on Raisi to follow long-term strategic ties with neighbors. A member of the Expediency Council has called on the incoming administration of Ebrahim Raisi to establish long-term strategic ties with neighbors and countries which are not influenced by the United States’ anti-Iran position.

Gholamreza Mesbahi Moqaddam also said “the foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran is set by the Supreme National Security Council” and the president is chairman of the council and a change in government will not lead to a shift in foreign policy.

“Of Course,” the cleric politician remarked, “approaches are different. Certain approaches are resistant in the face of global arrogance and some are flexible.”

On his prediction of the foreign policy of the Raisi government, he told IRNA,  “My prediction of the approach of the government of Seyyed Ebrahim Raisi is resistance against global arrogance.”

Noting that a “balanced approach” and not a cut of ties with countries is favorable, Mesbahi Moqaddam said such an approach has presented Iran to the world as an independent country which acts based on its interests.

The Expediency Council member also said his prediction is that the United States will not lift all sanctions against Iran even if the 2015 nuclear deal is revived.

The Americans will not lift all sanctions because they consider sanctions as a “pressure tool” to follow their policies against Iran, noted the cleric politician.

Iran and the remaining parties to the nuclear deal, officially called the JCPOA, have been holding sixth round of talks. The last round ended on June 20.

The U.S. is participating in the talks indirectly. Iran has said it will not talk directly to the U.S. until Washington rejoins the agreement and recommit itself to the legally binding agreement.

Iran’s chief negotiator Abbas Araqchi has said the next Iranian government will continue the talks.

“It is clear that the Vienna talks must wait for a new administration in Iran. This is a requirement of any democracy,” Araqchi tweeted on July 17.

He added, “We are in a period of transition and a democratic transfer of power is taking place in Tehran.”

Raisi will be sworn in as president on August 5.

There is still no official word about Raisi’s choice for the post of foreign minister and his foreign policy team.

Related

Does Resisting “Israel” and the US Benefit People of the Region?

22 Jul 21

Source: Al Mayadeen

Nassim Mansour

To address this issue, we need to breakdown a few key concepts to understand the interests of both the people and the governments in the region.

Does Resisting
Does Resisting “Israel” and the US Benefit People of the Region?

The answer to this question is the core focus in the ongoing media war between the Resistance Axis and the American-led Axis in the region.  All the countries that are within the Resistance Axis are facing dire economic difficulties, social divisions, and security issues (Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Iran, and Yemen). At a first glance, without digging too deep, one might ask that indeed, why not just make peace with “Israel” and the US and end all the chaos? Wouldn’t making peace end all the sanctions and economic pressure and make everyone’s lives easier? These are valid questions that young people in particular ask. To address this issue, we need to breakdown a few key concepts to understand the interests of both the people and the governments in the region.

Relationship between the West and the region

Let’s go back 100 years ago. The Ottoman empire that ruled the region for around 500 years was crumbling. This took place during the second industrial revolution in Europe. Cars, airplanes, ships, electricity, gas, oil, and communication systems were being created. The end of the Ottoman Empire led to the split of the region between France and Britain with the Sykes-Picot agreement. These events prevented various countries in the Middle East from engaging in the industrial revolution as their own independent nations. The owners of the technologies and the infrastructure builders were mainly France and Britain. They viewed the region as an investment for their own projects and a market for their industries. They built most of the region and became the main providers of various technological products. After World War 2, the Israeli entity was created by Western powers to be used as a foothold to project their power and protect their interests. Fast forward to the cold war, the leadership of the region was transferred from Britain and France to the United States of America. This was ratified in the 50’s with the creation of ARAMCO (Arabian-American Oil Company) and the Mutual Defense Assistance Agreement with Saudi Arabia, the Consortium Agreement of 1954 with Iran, which gives American, British, and French oil companies 40% ownership of the nationalized oil industry after overthrowing Mohammed Mosaddegh that nationalized the Britain-owned Anglo-Persian Oil Company, and other similar type of deals across the region. The US became the main weapons provider for the armies in the region, including “Israel”. This was in exchange for natural resources and compliance with American national security interests. Because of “Israel’s” usurper nature and its history of instigating friction, the USA had to make sure that “Israel” always had the upper hand over the rest of its regional allies. As a result, “Israel” became the policeman of the region. As Joe Biden has said before; “If there were not an Israel, we would have to invent one to make sure our interests were preserved”. By that time, the first world was engaging in the third industrial revolution (electronics, telecommunications, and computers).

Our region never took part in these industrial revolutions, as it relied on importing products and technologies from abroad rather than producing them. The capital required to import products and technologies coming from the sale of natural resources. With all this in mind, we can conclude that the relationship between the Middle East and the West is a relationship of “the buyer and supplier”. The West supplies technology, products, and armament while the region provides natural resources in return. This relationship exposes the region to extortion as it is unable to survive without foreign technology and products because it doesn’t have the industries or the knowledge. The Middle East region completely depends on the Americans and their allies to function. 

The Iranian revolution and independence

A major change came into the region with the Iranian Islamic revolution coming into play. Iran became the first country to break free from the “buyer and supplier” relationship by engaging in a local industrial revolution across many sectors, with the military sector being the most important one. Having an indigenous military industry is the key to true independence. It allows countries to truly rely on themselves for their security instead of relying on foreign powers that always impose conditions which limits sovereignty. 

Iran today creates its own vehicles, weapons, medicine, robots, satellites, food, energy, along with various other resources. Iran reverse-engineered what it could, sent students abroad to study technology and return to Iran with full knowledge and capability. The entire nation is engaged in being self-built. Iran is in the process of creating its own civilization, just like the US, China, and Russia are also doing. Any nation that breaks free from its client-status and elevates itself to self-sufficiency is seen as a threat to the United States’ dominance over markets across the globe. It is the reason why the US views China and Russia as enemies. 

The regional resistance

Regional resistance groups such as Hamas, Hezbollah and the Iraqi Popular Mobilization Forces were created by locals in response to the foreign Israeli and American invaders. Naturally, the only country that could supply them with weapons is Iran since its weapons are locally produced and not under the jurisdiction of the US like the rest of region. They also have the same interests as Iran, which is to break free from the American-Israeli hegemony. The initial stage in these resistance groups is always “The Armed-Struggle” which is necessary to their survival. 

The next stage of the resistance is working towards a revolutionary approach to gain independence from the foreign imposed buyer and supplier system. This quest for independence directly clashes with American security and economic interests in the region and the world. Given the buyer and supplier relationship between the US and the countries in the region, it automatically puts those countries in a collision course with Iran and any group or country that is seeking independence. Syria was one of the very few Arab countries that had local civilian industries – and they got intentionally dismantled by the NATO-backed mercenaries during the war; especially in Aleppo where thousands of factories were lost. 

The interest of the people

With the previous concepts in mind, we understand that the ultimate interest of any nation should be working towards as much self-sufficiency as its capability (utilizing the available resources it has, and working with other nations that are seeking the same goals). This is how nations contribute to humanity, share their cultures, and limit foreign powers from deciding their fate. 

Seeking these goals however comes at a great cost: the people must be ready to face sanctions and possible military actions. To limit the effect of sanctions, all the nations of the region that decide to take this path would have to fully co-operate with each other; to share resources and support each other. The region has enough natural and human resources to become independent from foreigners. A lot of sacrifices have to be made, but this is the key to long-term development, security, and prosperity. 

Role of the media

The media plays a large part in influencing and educating people about their own interests, which people are often unaware of. To achieve this revolution for independence, the people need to understand why they’re resisting “Israel” and the United States. Apart from the humanitarian and religious reasons, the ultimate goal of this resistance is to start the process of civilization and nation-building. The goal of the American hegemony is to prevent the rise of nations that will become future competitors in the international arena. There is still a big lack of awareness on such important subjects because the region is engulfed in religious, tribal, and ethnic wars. 

A lot of work needs to be done to raise awareness and to unite people towards these goals, which are way beyond religious, humanitarian, and justice considerations. These are goals that can unite the multi ethnic and multi religious region. It is definitely in the best interest of the people of the region to resist “Israel” and the United States. Although the revolution will take a long time, and although it comes at a great cost; if the revolution is achieved, the final outcome will be the rise of the Middle East and North Africa as global competitors.   The opinions mentioned in this article do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Al mayadeen, but rather express the opinion of its writer exclusively.

بكين وصلت إلى دمشق.. ماذا بعد؟

22 تموز2021

المصدر: الميادين

أحمد الدرزي

حملت زيارة الصين إلى دمشق 3 أبعاد، فقد تم فيها دعوة دمشق إلى الدخول في مشروعها الكبير وبدأ العمل فيها على البنى التحتية الضرورية.

Visual search query image
كان واضحاً الحرص الصيني على الوصول إلى دمشق في تاريخ القسم الرئاسي نفسه، للدلالة على الدعم الكبير لها.

تعاطى السوريون مع قدوم وزير الخارجية الصيني في يوم القسم الرئاسي إلى سوريا، والذي حمل دلالات رمزية عميقة، بمشاعر متباينة بين التفاؤل والتشاؤم، وخصوصاً أن الوضع الاقتصادي ضاغط بشدة على القاعدة الأكبر منهم، التي تجاوزت 90% من مجموع السكان، فأي مسارات ستسلكها العلاقات بين البلدين؟ وما انعكاسها على الوضع السوري الداخلي والخارجي؟

لا يعدّ اهتمام قادة بكين بسوريا وليد اللحظة، إذ إنه يمتد إلى نهايات الألفية الثانية، مع صعود الصين التي بدأت نهضتها الحقيقية في العام 1978، بمجيء دينغ هسياو بينغ. وكان من المفترض أن تحصل قفزة كبيرة في العلاقة بين البلدين بعد زيارة الرئيس الأسد لبكين في العام 2004، ولكن المشاريع الاقتصادية التي كان من المفترض أن تقوم بها الأخيرة في مدينة عدرا العمالية تم إيقافها لأسباب غير معروفة.

مع مجيء تشي جينبينغ في العام 2013 إلى موقع الرئاسة في الصين، تم الإعلان عن مبادرة “الحزام والطريق” التي قُدّرت كلفتها بحدود 4 تريليون دولار. وكان اللافت للنظر هو استبعاد سوريا والعراق من المشروع، واعتبار شمال غرب إيران وجنوب شرق تركيا الممرَّ البري نحو أوروبا، واعتبار مرفأ حيفا في فلسطين المحتلة المرفأ المعتمد في شرق البحر الأبيض المتوسط. 

أخذت السياسات الصينية تُظهر نفسها على المستوى السياسي بعد إدراك قادة بكين أن القدرات الاقتصادية الهائلة التي أتاحت لهم بناء قدرة عسكرية دفاعية، تتيح لهم ترجمة ذلك، لتحويل الصين إلى قطب دولي موازٍ للقطب الأميركي الأوحد، ما دفع الرئيس جينبينغ إلى الإعلان عن اعتباره أن العالم أصبح متعدد الأقطاب، ولا عودة عن ذلك، وذلك من منبر الأمم المتحدة في العام 2015.

ارتفعت نبرة التحدي الصيني بعد مجيء الإدارة الأميركية الجديدة بقيادة بايدن، واعتبارها كلاً من الصين وروسيا تهديدين استراتيجيين للولايات المتحدة، ما دفع الرئيس الصيني إلى الإعلان عن أنَّ “زمن التنمّر على الصين ولَّى بلا رجعة”.

كما أحدث الانسحاب الأميركي غير المشروط من أفغانستان، وتركه الفوضى والاضطرابات من خلال سيطرة حركة “طالبان”، قلقاً لدى دول الجوار، ما دفع 40 دولة إلى عقد مؤتمر آسيا الوسطى والجنوبية في مدينة طشقند في أوزباكستان بتاريخ 15 تموز/يوليو الماضي، بعنوان لافت للنظر هو “الترابط الإقليمي، تحديات وفرص”.

وكان من الواضح من خلال طبيعة تحركات وزير الخارجية الصيني أنَّ القرار اتخذ بضرورة تأمين منطقة غرب آسيا، التي تشمل المنطقة الممتدة من أفغانستان إلى شرق البحر الأبيض المتوسط، وهو ما يقتضي بطبيعة الحال إخراج سوريا من منطقة الصراعات الدولية والإقليمية، فالتقى القوى الدولية والإقليمية المؤثرة في الملف السوري، ممثّلة بكل من وزيري خارجية روسيا سيرغي لافروف والمملكة العربية السعودية سعود الفرحان في اليوم الأول. وفِي اليوم الثاني، التقى وزير خارجية تركيا مولود جاويش أوغلو قبل التوجّه إلى دمشق.

كان واضحاً الحرص الصيني على الوصول إلى دمشق في تاريخ القسم الرئاسي، للدلالة على الدعم الكبير لها، وعلى أنّ بقاء الرئيس الأسد في سدة الحكم لم يكن سوى مظهر لنتائج الصراع الدولي والإقليمي وتحولاته الكبرى، وتأكيداً على دور الصين في المرحلة القادمة في تأمين الجغرافيا السورية كمنطقة آمنة، بالتعاون والتنسيق بشكل أساسي مع موسكو وطهران، وإشراك المملكة العربية السعودية التي تعتبر قاطرة دول الخليج، إضافة إلى مصر التي زارها في اليوم التالي، والتقى فيها الرئيس المصري عبد الفتاح السيسي، ومعالجة الدور التركي السلبي الذي لم يفِ بتعهداته لبكين بتسليم القيادات الإرهابية التركستانية، رغم الدعم الاقتصادي الصيني لها.

وكان لاتصال وزير الخارجية وانغ يي بوزير الخارجية الإيراني محمد جواد ظريف في اليوم الذي زار فيه دمشق دلالة كبيرة، وخصوصاً أن بيان وزارة الخارجية الصيني أعلن استعداد الصين للعمل مع إيران على مواجهة السياسات الأحادية والهيمنة، وهو ما يعني بالضرورة التوافق مع استراتيجيتها بإخراج الأميركيين من غرب آسيا بأكملها، وخصوصاً سوريا والعراق، ما يمهّد الطريق لدخول مبادرة “الحزام والطريق” إلى كل من العراق وسوريا ولبنان.

حملت الزيارة الصينية إلى دمشق 3 أبعاد، فقد تم فيها دعوة دمشق إلى الدخول في مشروعها الكبير، أسوةً ببقية الدول التي وافقت عليه، وبدأ العمل فيها على البنى التحتية الضرورية. 

وللتأكيد على ذلك، وقعت على اتفاقيات الاستثمار في كل مدينة عدرا الصناعية واللاذقية، وعلى إنشاء خط بري من الشمال إلى الجنوب، يربط دول الخليج العربي وشمال أفريقيا بتركيا وأوروبا، وبناء خط لسكك الحديد يربط مرفأ طرطوس بالعراق وإيران وباكستان والصين، إضافةً إلى الاستثمار في قطاع النفط والغاز، والجانب الآخر يتعلق بالمساعدات التي يمكن أن تقدمها إلى سوريا.

وقد توج ذلك بمبادرة للحل السياسي وفق قرارات الأمم المتحدة، مع الدعم الكبير لتصورات دمشق في أكثر القضايا، وخصوصاً ما يتعلق بالإدارة الذاتية والاحتلال التركي، عندما لمّحت المبادرة إلى “رفض جميع المخططات المحفزة على الانقسامات العرقية تحت ذريعة مكافحة الإرهاب”، إضافةً إلى شرط أساسي: “ينبغي دعم حل سياسي شامل وتصالحي للقضية السورية” بقيادة السوريين.

من الواضح أنَّ المساهمة الصينية في مساعدة سوريا اقتصادياً وسياسياً مرتبطة بتحقيق متطلبات أساسية، تتعلق بتغيير بيئة العمل الاقتصادي وتغيير التشريعات الاقتصادية، وهو ما تعهّد به الرئيس الأسد في خطاب القسم، عندما أكّد أن العمل في المرحلة القادمة سيكون على مكافحة الفساد وإصدار تشريعات اقتصادية جديدة.

أما الحلّ السياسي، فقد يذهب نحو مسار تشكيل منصّة للمعارضة السورية الداخلية بعنوان منصة دمشق، تكون مهمّتها الأساس إيجاد أرضية للحوار والتفاوض بين الطرفين في دمشق، وليس جنيف، وإنهاء دور المنصات التي تشكل امتدادات دولية وإقليمية.

بعد أن اختارت دمشق قرار التوجّه شرقاً، تطلَّب منها ذلك الشروع في تحقيق المتطلبات الثلاثة الآنفة الذكر، وهو ما ينتظره أغلب السوريين الذين طحنتهم الحرب، والذين يبحثون عن مخرج لاسترداد حياتهم السابقة واستعادة المناطق المحتلة في الشمال السوري وجنوبه، والبدء بإعادة إعمار ما تهدم على الصعيد الاجتماعي والاقتصادي، والّذي تعجز عنه الدولة السورية وحدها.  

Today’s Taliban May Be Truly ‘New’, and the Shift Could Transform the Middle East

Today 20/07/2021

Source: Al Mayadeen

Most significantly, rather than having a tunnel vision limited to the narrow territory of Kandahar, the new young Taliban leaders want to play the strategic ‘Great Game’.

There is a subtle breeze blowing; it is too soon to call it ‘a wind’.  But a striking change has – and is – occurring.  Is it enough?  We should be rightly cautious; yet the Taliban that I knew, as it first coalesced – the brainchild of General Hamid Gul of Pakistan’s Intelligence service – is not the Taliban of today.  Perhaps we need, too, to avoid being locked into stale narratives. Suhail Shaheen, their spokesman, made this point when he lamented the “propaganda launched against us”, and by which he implied that the world should admit that the Taliban has indeed changed.

Several of these shifts are breathtaking: The Taliban were a narrow Pashtun revanchist movement, wholly Gulliverised by rigid tribal law, and influenced by intolerant Saudi Salafism and Pakistani Islamism.

What do we see today? The Taliban is engaging in extensive diplomacy with Iran. Tehran, it seems, is no longer apostate, no longer an ideological and theological foe.  The Taliban now seek to mesh Iran into their wider strategic interests. And more extraordinary, the Afghan Shi’i Hazaras – originally slaughtered and fearfully repressed by the Taliban – are now a component of the Taliban!  Then there is now also a ‘Tajik Taliban’, whereas before, the Taliban were a sworn enemy to the northern (mostly Tajik) forces of Ahmad Shah Massoud. Today’s Taliban is no longer a simple instrument of Pashtun hegemony – maybe up to 30% are Tajik, Uzbek, or Hazara. In other words, the kernel of inclusion is already in the soil.

Most significantly, rather than having a tunnel vision limited to the narrow territory of Kandahar, the new young Taliban leaders want to play the strategic ‘Great Game’. Their vision has broadened. They are saying as such, very forcibly to Moscow and Tehran: They will be inclusive; they will try to avoid major bloodshed, and they look to Moscow and Tehran as mediators for a new Afghan dispensation.  And there is something more: Saudi and Pakistan formerly controlled the money spigot. Now it is China.  For several years now, the Taliban has cultivated China – and China has cultivated the Taliban.

But we must keep our feet on the ground.  The Taliban is not autonomous. Both India and Pakistan wield weight in it, and the narco-gangs (the legacy of the CIA’s ill-considered earlier attempts to buy prominent Afghan warlords) may act as spoilers.

But the point here – aside from the caveats above – is, is this enough?  Enough for what? Enough to see the US out of the region, that is. There is here, a marked and unusual, constellation of interests.  All the principal actors want the US gone from the region.

It is not geo-strategic high science to understand that America’s withdrawal from Iraq and Syria will be contingent on what now happens in Afghanistan. If there is an unholy mess after August 31st, further US withdrawals from the region will become hugely more problematic in terms of domestic US opposition.  It is in the interest of the Taliban – as much as of Russia, Iran, and China – that Afghanistan does not now humiliate Biden through a descent into (very possible) bloody civil war.

A tough ‘ask’, but as Pepe Escobar points out, the SCO heavyweights, China and Russia, will be joined on July 14 in Dushanbe, by four Central Asian ‘stans’, plus India and Pakistan (Afghanistan and Iran attend as observers).

Wang Yi and Lavrov likely will tell Ghani’s FM, “in no uncertain terms, that there’s got to be a national reconciliation deal, with no American interference, and that the deal must include the end of the opium-heroin ratline”.  (Russia already has pocketed a firm promise from the Taliban that jihadism won’t be allowed to fester.  The endgame: loads of productive investment, Afghanistan is incorporated to Belt and Road and – later on – to the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU).

Why should the Taliban agree?  Well, they can be the facilitators of an American wider withdrawal (or, its’ spoiler). But, if they are patient – and agree to wait until US attention has moved on – they can allow Ghani to fall some months later – all in good time.  The Taliban might claim then to be the vanguard to a new more sophisticated, more inclusive Sunni Islamism that is aligned with a major Belt and Road infrastructure project.

How did this happen?  Professor Rabbani just might be smiling from his grave.  It seems the ‘new’ Taliban may have taken the Tajik leader’s political clothing.The opinions mentioned in this article do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Al mayadeen, but rather express the opinion of its writer exclusively.

President Bashar Assad Takes the Oath for a New Presidential Term

 ARABI SOURI 

Syrian President Bashar Assad taking the oath

President Bashar Assad took the constitutional oath for a new presidential term yesterday, 17 July 2021, at the Syrian People’s Palace – the Presidential Palace in a highly ceremonial style and delivered one of his most direct speeches yet leaving no room for ambiguity in regards to the complete liberation of the country from NATO powers, Israel, and their proxies of Al Qaeda and the Kurdish SDF terrorists.

Syrian President Bashar Assad took the oath in attendance of dignitaries of the Syrian people, top state officials, army officers, members of the parliament, tribal notables, prominent artists of all arts, and intellectuals.

The ceremony started with the arrival of the president’s humble motorcade to the Presidential Palace to be received by the Guards of Honor walking him to the gates of the palace where he was received by the Syrian orchestra and then into the large hall with attendees jumping on their feet cheering their leader of victory over the most vicious and longest war of terror and war of attrition spearheaded by the world’s superpowers and super-rich countries resorting to all sorts of unthinkable massacres, genocide, displacement, and terrorism carried out directly by tens of thousands of terrorists on the ground and both directly and indirectly by the sponsors of the terror, the NATO member states.

For the full speech in Arabic visit SANA page.

Syrian President Bashar Assad taking the oath

President Assad was received at the podium by the Speaker of the Parliament who invited him to take the oath and declared the beginning of the new presidential term, the Syrian presidential term is for 7 years, after which, President Assad delivered his inaugural speech.

In his one hour speech, which was interrupted several times by the enthusiastic audiences delivering short poems, praises, and blessings to their leader, President Bashar Assad outlined his new term’s strategy in all fields starting with continuing to liberate all of Syria and maintain its unity, sovereignty, and territorial integrity, the liberation of all of the recognized Syrian territories including Idlib province, the last stronghold of Al Qaeda in Syria, Hasakah, Deir Ezzor, and Raqqa provinces where US troops and their Kurdish SDF separatist terrorists occupy parts of those provinces, and of course, the Golan.

President Assad emphasized on the unity of the Syrian people of their rich ethnicities, religions, sects, and cultures, he stated that Arabism does not eliminate other cultures rather unites them under the leading culture on the one united land of Syria, in the oath itself, the President swore to work for the unity of all the Arab nation, that means all the Arab world who share the same language, lifestyle, culture, tradition, history, and have shared aspirations and future.

The Syrian President stressed on economic challenges due to the regions that remain under occupation especially in the northeast of the country where Syria’s main food and oil comes from, the western blockade against the country, and the inaccessibility of the foreign currencies held by the Lebanese banks with an estimate of 40 to 60 billion dollars owned by Syrian businessmen who moved most of it into the neighboring country during the early days of the war on Syria for protection and to facilitate trade with the world.

President Assad highlighted the achievements of the Syrian industrialists who remained in the country during the difficult years of the war and continued to work, those who resumed working after their cities were liberated from the terrorists, and those who founded new businesses with thousands of new factories and tens of thousands of workshops all over the country. The need to solve the electrical power shortages was also mentioned by the Syrian president where he called on more investments in alternative energy sources even when the main Syrian oil and gas fields are liberated and restored, he mentioned a recent solar power project that was started in the past week in the Industrial City of Adra as a PPP (public-private partnership) with the initiative from the state and with the contribution of several private investors, the project will be generating 100 Megawatts enough to cover the industrial city’s needs which will allow the now used electrical power to be available back to the grid in order to lessen the hours of the power rationing.

The Syrian president called on those who chose to fight against their own state to drop their weapons and join the reconciliation and return to their normal lives and help rebuild their country offering amnesty and reminding that the most generous were the families of the martyrs who forgave the killers of their loved ones in order to turn a page on this ruthless war, there’s no future for those fighting the state except more bloodshed and inevitable victory of the people over terrorism and the international sponsors of terrorism. He called on the displaced abroad to return to their country which needs them and they need it.

President Bashar Assad thanked Russia, China, Iran, and other countries and parties who stood beside Syria politically, militarily, and economically which helped the Syrian people in their fight and victory.

To help us continue please visit the Donate page to donate or learn how you can help us with no cost to you.
Follow us on Telegram: http://t.me/syupdates link will open the Telegram app.

New Great Game gets back to basics

New Great Game gets back to basics

July 13, 2021

Russia-China-Iran alliance is taking Afghanistan’s bull by the horns

By Pepe Escobar with permission and first posted at Asia Times

The Great Game: This lithograph by British Lieutenant James Rattray shows Shah Shuja in 1839 after his enthronement as Emir of Afghanistan in the Bala Hissar (fort) of Kabul. Rattray wrote: ‘A year later the sanctity of the scene was bloodily violated: Shah Shuja was murdered.’ Photo: Wikipedia

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi is on a Central Asian loop all through the week. He’s visiting Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan. The last two are full members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, founded 20 years ago.

The SCO heavyweights are of course China and Russia. They are joined by four Central Asian “stans” (all but Turkmenistan), India and Pakistan. Crucially, Afghanistan and Iran are observers, alongside Belarus and Mongolia.

And that leads us to what’s happening this Wednesday in Dushanbe, the Tajik capital. The SCO will hold a 3 in 1: meetings of the Council of Foreign Ministers, the SCO-Afghanistan Contact Group, and a conference titled “Central and South Asia: Regional Connectivity, Challenges and Opportunities.”

At the same table, then, we will have Wang Yi, his very close strategic partner Sergey Lavrov and, most importantly, Afghan Foreign Minister Mohammad Haneef Atmar. They’ll be debating trials and tribulations after the hegemon’s withdrawal and the miserable collapse of the myth of NATO “stabilizing” Afghanistan.

Let’s game a possible scenario: Wang Yi and Lavrov tell Atmar, in no uncertain terms, that there’s got to be a national reconciliation deal with the Taliban, brokered by Russia-China, with no American interference, including the end of the opium-heroin ratline.

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi chats with guests after the opening ceremony of the Lanting Forum in Beijing on June 25. Photo: AFP / Jade Gao

Russia-China extract from the Taliban a firm promise that jihadism won’t be allowed to fester. The endgame: loads of productive investment, Afghanistan is incorporated to Belt and Road and – later on – to the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU).

The SCO’s joint statement on Wednesday will be particularly enlightening, perhaps detailing how the organization plans to coordinate a de facto Afghan peace process farther down the road.

In this scenario, the SCO now has the chance to implement what it has been actively discussing for years: that only an Asian solution to the Afghan drama applies.

Sun Zhuangzhi, executive director of the Chinese Research Center of the SCO, sums it all up: the organization is capable of coming up with a plan mixing political stability, economic and security development and a road map for infrastructure development projects.

The Taliban agree. Spokesman Suhail Shaheen has stressed, “China is a friendly country that we welcome for reconstruction and developing Afghanistan.”

On the Silk Road again


After economic connectivity, another SCO motto encouraged by Beijing since the early 2000s is the necessity to fight the “three evils”: terrorism, separatism and extremism. All SCO members are very much aware of jihadi metastases threatening Central Asia – from ISIS-Khorasan to shady Uighur factions currently fighting in Idlib in Syria, as well as the (fading) Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU).

The Taliban is a way more complex case. It’s still branded as a terrorist organization by Moscow. Yet on the new, fast-evolving chessboard, both Moscow and Beijing know the importance of engaging the Taliban in high-stakes diplomacy.

Taliban fighters have taken large swathes of Afghanistan in the past two weeks. Photo: AFP / Aref Karimi

Wang Yi has already impressed upon Islamabad – Pakistan is a SCO member – the need to set up a trilateral mechanism, with Beijing and Kabul, to advance a feasible political solution to Afghanistan while managing the security front.

Building blocks include the deal struck between China Telecom and Afghan Telecom already in 2017 to build a Kashgar-Faizabad fiber optic cable system and then expand it toward a China-Kyrgyzstan-Tajikistan-Afghanistan Silk Road system.

Directly connected is the deal signed in February among Islamabad, Kabul and Tashkent to build a railway that in fact may establish Afghanistan as a key crossroads between Central and South Asia. Call it the SCO corridor.

Here, from China’s point of view, it’s all about the multi-layered China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), to which Beijing plans to incorporate Kabul. Here is a detailed CPEC progress update.

All of the above was solidified by a crucial trilateral meeting last month among China-Pakistan-Afghanistan Foreign Ministers. Team Ghani in Kabul renewed its interest in being connected to Belt and Road – which translates in practice into an expanded CPEC. The Taliban said exactly the same thing last week.

Afghanistan in trade connectivity with CPEC and a key node of the New Silk Roads could not make more sense – even historically, as Afghanistan was always embedded in the ancient Silk Roads. Crossroads Afghanistan is the missing link in the connectivity equation between China and Central Asia. The devil, of course, will be in the details.

Wang Yi knows very well that jihadism is bound to target CPEC. Not Afghanistan’s Taliban, though. And not the Pakistani Taliban (TTP), as quite a few CPEC projects (fiber optics, for instance) will improve infrastructure in Peshawar and environs.

The Iranian equation


Then, to the West, there’s the Iranian equation. The recently solidified Iran-China strategic partnership may eventually lead to closer integration, with CPEC expanded to Afghanistan. The Taliban are keenly aware of it. As part of their current diplomatic offensive, they have been to Tehran and made all the right noises towards a political solution.

Their joint statement with Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif privileges negotiations with Kabul. The Taliban commit to refrain from attacking civilians, schools, mosques, hospitals and NGOs.

Tehran – an observer at the SCO and on the way to becoming a full member – is actively talking to all Afghan actors. No fewer than four delegations were visiting last week. The head of Kabul’s team was former Afghan Vice President Yunus Qanooni (a former warlord, as well), while the Taliban were led by Sher Mohammad Abbas Stanikzai, who commands their political office in Doha. This all implies serious business.

There are already 780,000 registered Afghan refugees in Iran, living in refugee villages along the border and not allowed to settle in major cities. But there are also at least 2.5 million illegals. No wonder Tehran needs to pay attention. Zarif once again is in total synch with Lavrov – and with Wang Yi, for that matter: a non-stop war of attrition between the Kabul government and the Taliban could lead only to “unfavorable” consequences.

The question, for Tehran, revolves around the ideal framework for negotiations. That would point to the SCO. After all, Iran has not participated in the snail-paced Doha mechanism for over two years now.

Aerial view of Mashhad. Photo: Wikipedia

A debate is raging in Tehran on how to deal practically with the new Afghan equation. As I saw for myself in Mashhad less than three years ago, migration from Afghanistan – this time from skilled workers fleeing the Taliban advance – may actually help the Iranian economy.

The director general of the West Asia desk at Iran’s Foreign Ministry, Rasoul Mousavi, goes straight to the point: “The Taliban yield” to the Afghan people. “They are not separated from Afghanistan’s traditional society, and they have always been part of it. Moreover, they have military power.”

On the ground in western Afghanistan, in Herat – linked by a very busy highway corridor across the border to Mashhad – things are more complicated. The Taliban now control most of Herat province, apart from two districts.

Yet the Taliban have already vowed, in diplomatic talks with China, Russia and Iran, that they are not planning to “invade” anyone – be it Iran or the Central Asian “stans.” Taliban spokesman Suhail Shaheen has been adamant that cross-border trade in different latitudes, from Islam Quilla (in Iran) to Torghundi (in Turkmenistan) and across northern Tajikistan will “remain open and functional.”

Legendary local warlord Ismail Khan, now in his mid-70s, and carrying an overloaded history of fighting the Taliban, has deployed militias to guard the city, the airport and its outskirts.

That non-withdrawal withdrawal


In a fast-evolving situation, the Taliban now control at least half of Afghanistan’s 400 districts and are “contesting” dozens of others. They are policing some key highways (you can’t go on the road from Kabul to Kandahar, for instance, and avoid Taliban checkpoints). They do not hold any major city, yet. At least 15 of 34 regional capitals – including strategic Mazar-i-Sharif – are encircled.

Afghan news media, always very lively, have started to ask some tough questions. Such as: ISIS/Daesh did not exist in Iraq before the 2003 US invasion and occupation. So how come ISIS-Khorasan emerged right under NATO’s noses?

Within the SCO, as diplomats told me, there’s ample suspicion that the US deep state agenda is to fuel the flames of imminent civil war in Afghanistan and then extend it to the Central Asian “stans,” complete with shady jihadi commandos mixed with Uighurs also destabilizing Xinjiang.

This being the case, the non-withdrawal withdrawal – what with all those remaining 18,000 Pentagon contractors/mercenaries, plus special forces and CIA black op types – would be a cover, allowing Washington a new narrative spin: the Kabul government has invited us to fight a “terrorist” re-emergence and prevent a spiral towards civil war.

The protracted endgame would read like win-win hybrid war for the deep state and its NATO arm.

Well, not so fast. The Taliban have warned all the “stans” in no uncertain terms about hosting US military bases. And even Hamid Karzai is on the record: enough with American interference.

All these scenarios will be discussed in detail this Wednesday in Dushanbe. As well as the bright part: the – now very feasible – future incorporation of Afghanistan to the New Silk Roads.

Back to the basics: Afghanistan returns, in style, to the heart of the 21st Century New Great Game.

Why did Saudi Arabia wage a war on Yemen?

12 July 2021

Visual search query image

To say the war on Yemen was a major development in the history of West Asia might be an understand. It will certainly go down In history, perhaps not in favor of the Saudis though.

TEHRAN (Iran News) –  Why did Saudi Arabia wage a war on Yemen? To say the war on Yemen was a major development in the history of West Asia might be an understand. It will certainly go down In history, perhaps not in favor of the Saudis though.

In March 2015, Saudi Arabia declared that it and some allies had formed a coalition led by Riyadh and began a military operation. At the time, this was something unheard of, especially in the Arab world; that the Arabs had formed a military alliance for the first time in many decades and were conducting wide-scale bombing campaigns with such energy and such enthusiasm. The military campaign was dubbed Operation Decisive Storm. Many in the region had jokingly highlighted what exactly happened that we are suddenly witnessing this courageous will and heroic leadership among a handful of Arab states.

The Storm of the Arabs! In fact it was quite unfortunate. For decades, since 1948, the Palestinians had witnessed one massacre after the other and we never got to see an Arab storm. Not even a breeze of this storm on Yemen. The Palestinians and the Lebanese who also suffered from Israeli occupation had dreamt to only smell an Arab storm of this magnitude. The reasons or excuses at the time, Saudi Arabia offered to wage a war to this extent on another country were THREE. Firstly, the Saudis claimed that the former government of Yemen led by former President Abdrabbuh Mansour Hadi had requested the military intervention. By the way, the Palestinians had also requested such an intervention and is still requesting such an intervention today but to date, their appeals have fallen on death ears. Instead the Saudis and their allies are accused of conspiring against the Palestinians and sold the third holiest site in Islam in occupied Jerusalem al-Quds to the Israelis.

The Saudis claimed they sensed a threat from Yemen, where peace talks between the former Saudi backed government in Sana’a and the new National Salvation Government broke down and clashes ensued between the two sides. Here it’s important to note, former President Hadi allied with Riyadh, naturally took sides with Riyadh. Whereas the new National Salvation Government backed by a popular public revolution on the ground expressed opposition to Saudi Arabia’s decades old control on Yemen and was seeking independence from the Kingdom.

As Hadi lost grip on the country, so did the Saudis and Hadi quite naturally fled to Riyadh. For arguments sake, even if Hadi’s term had not expired and he was overthrown by a popular  revolution, was this enough to wage such a devastating war? even if Riyadh had claimed it wanted to reinstate what it considers or claims to be the legitimate President of Yemen. Here, again important to note, many other Saudi allies like former Tunisian President, Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, who was toppled during the Islamic Awakening in 2011 by the Tunisian Revolution also fled to Saudi Arabia. Where was the Saudi war on Tunisia to reinstate Ben Ali? Likewise Saudi Arabia’s neighbor, Egypt with Hosni Mubarak which Saudi Arabia tried its best to reinstate but not to the extent that it waged a war or militarily intervened. Not only does this prove the Saudi reasoning is false in nature but also puts the spotlight on Yemen. Why only a war on Yemen? Why this quick decisive action to wage war on Yemen, why no talks first, no dialogue or other non-lethal attempts?

The second reason Riyadh stated for this very surprising yet very unfortunate war on its southern neighbor is that the new situation on the ground (the popular revolution spearheaded by Ansarullah alongside the Yemeni army and many legal and popular institutions and committees) poses a threat to Saudi Arabia, the Persian Gulf as well as the security of the Red Sea. Was this accurate? Did Saudi Arabia present any evidence (even a verbal statement by a Saudi official) to back this accusation to the region or the world. Was the presentation of evidence to back up this claim not necessary to wage a deadly devastating war? It is well known that Yemen is the poorest nation in the region. It was also well known that Yemen had many challenges ahead from legal issues to public issues to security issues for example writing a new constitution, bringing back basic services to its people, fighting Takfiri terrorist cells operating on its land such as al-Qaeda. This needed time for the new Yemeni government. Can a new born country in this state pose a threat to Saudi Arabia, the richest Kingdom in the region or the Persian Gulf or the Red Sea. This also proved to be false. The third and most important reason that was circulating on Saudi media and all Saudi sponsored media in the region and the world at the time, perhaps the most serious allegation by the Saudis is that Yemen has become ‘occupied’ by Iran, ‘controlled‘ by Iran and military intervention is required to return Yemen back to an ‘Arab state’.

In other words, Yemen became Iranian overnight. When you study Yemeni history, literature, culture and recent pride, dignity, resistance and willpower and steadfastness against the Saudis; If the Yemenis are not Arabs, then who are the Arabs?

However, as this was a major accusation, it needs to be documented and examined carefully and with logic. When the Saudis said occupation, let’s tackle the simple aspects first. Where is the evidence that Iran ‘occupies’ Yemen? An occupation tends to have a presence, as with every occupation in the world. Was Iran’s army or Iranian forces occupying Yemen or parts of Yemen. Were there any Iranian military bases on Yemeni territory? The accusation was so absurd it was actually laughable. Let’s assume the Saudis actually didn’t mean a military occupation but some form of Iranian control over Yemen. This also needs to be addressed to understand the misconception not just in Yemen but the entire region.

Here, one has to understand the mentality of the tribal ruling monarchy of Saudi Arabia that is backed by the United States and widely believed to be backed by Israel. This ruling monarchy has an issue with something called independent democratic states in West Asia. An independent Tunisian state or Syrian state or for arguments sake an independent Egyptian state or independent Persian Gulf States or even an independent Saudi Arabian state with democratic institutions. The monarchies in West Asia where one tribe rules an entire population with an iron fist views any form of independence as a form of resistance to its rule of power.

That’s in a nutshell.

The facts and reality on the ground is that this logic by these ruling tribes leads to regular foreign policy miscalculations, losses and diplomatic blunders. It’s difficult to find the last time Saudi Arabia made a real foreign policy achievement. More than six years of Saudi Arabia’s war on Yemen, which Riyadh predicted would end in a couple of weeks has been a failure, a defeat and a quagmire for the Kingdom.

These are the same statements that we hear again and again and again from regional states like Iraq, like Syria, like Palestine, like Lebanon and others. The lack of a strong Saudi leadership in the region despite all its rich resources and home to the two holiest sites in Islam, this lack of leadership or failed policies is what leads nations to request help from an independent nation in West Asia such as the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Here is where Riyadh needs to change its mentality and be a source of inspiration for West Asia. For example, Lebanon 1982, when Israeli forces invaded and reached Beirut. All the Arab monarchies and dictatorships ignored Lebanon. The only two states that supported Lebanon during its darkest era was Iran and Syria. Both countries under blockade and siege or war and terrorism. Despite that, Lebanon requested help from Iran, a country that itself was facing a war from Saddam’s regime but Iran fulfilled its duty to another oppressed nation by sending a team of military advisors.

However, it’s very important to highlight, despite western and regional propaganda, that the Lebanese resistance that was formed against Israeli occupation was a Lebanese resistance; made up of Lebanese men; commanders and soldiers not Iranian. Until today, the Saudis describe the Lebanese resistance in its media as Iranian without a shred of evidence while there are thousands of shreds of evidence proving otherwise. The same again with Palestine, if Saudi Arabia supported the Palestinians against the Israeli occupation with the same willpower and money and hundreds of billions of dollars worth of weapons it spent on the war on Yemen, the Palestinians may not have turned to Iran for support. The same goes for Iraq and Syria during the era of Daesh’s occupation. Where were the Arab monarchies? had it not been Iranian military advisors, Daesh would have taken over both countries. More important than this, to make the picture clearer (and counter American/Israeli/Saudi propaganda) never once have these nations stated in their history, that Iran ordered us to do something in return for Tehran’s support.

This reality, where independent states, or those still looking to liberate their lands from occupation, can form an alliance and be free or independent at the same time poses a danger to Saudi Arabia and its allies. Elections in Iran, Iraq, Syria or Lebanon or Palestine or Yemen poses a threat to monarchical rule. Saudis nationals are asking (quite rightly) why don’t we have elections, but analysts argue this is why American support for these monarchies (whether Saudi Arabia knows it or not) allows it to maintain its hegemonic presence in West Asia and serve Israeli interests.

Returning to Yemen, prior to March 2015, Saudi Arabia had been interfering in Yemen for decades and in literally every aspect; controlling its governance, policies, army, economy and even faiths and sects. What has Saudi Arabia offered to Yemen after all those years? Where was the infrastructure in Yemen? where was the state of the economy? where was the security? Did Saudi Arabia include Yemen in the Persian Gulf Security Council, considering its alleged staunch support for the country? Saudi Arabia kept Yemen as the region’s poorest nation. The Yemeni people are the ones that reached the conclusion based on their will and took a decision to part ways with Riyadh and reclaim their country, borders, sovereignty, independence and most importantly dignity.

We’re integrating entire Resistance Axis to prepare for war with Israel: Nasrallah

July 12, 2021

Visual search query image

Description:

Hezbollah’s leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah speaks about the tireless efforts today to integrate the entire ‘Axis of Resistance’ such that it be prepared to collectively enter a regional war with Israel if it ‘threatens al-Quds’.

The ‘Resistance Axis’ broadly refers to a strategic anti-Israel/anti-US imperialist alliance composed of, but not limited to, Iran, Syria, Hezbollah, Iraq’s Hashed al-Shaabi, Yemen’s Ansarullah, and various Palestinian armed factions.

Source: Spot Shot (You Tube Channel)

Date: July 5, 2021

(Note: Please help us keep producing independent translations by contributing a small monthly amount here )

Transcript:

Hezbollah’s Secretary General, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah:

I want to personally request from you (to exert) special efforts to help consolidate the new regional equation which we are proposing i.e. the regional equation to protect the Holy City (i.e. al-Quds/Jerusalem). The resistance in Gaza wanted to (establish the equation of) the resistance of Gaza (fighting) for the sake of al-Quds. We wish to (establish the equation of) the entire region (ready to enter a conflict for) the sake of al-Quds, and for protecting al-Quds.

These words are neither for media consumption, nor for scoring points. We have never done this in the past, nor are we doing this now. (This new equation) is a serious and real project which one can take as fact. Today it can be taken as fact (i.e. as in effect, applicable), even if nothing has translated on the ground yet. When the Zionists become convinced – and they are now convinced – that threatening the Holy City and threatening the Muslim and Christian sanctities in the Holy City will lead to a regional war, they will reconsider (the situation) and count to one million before taking any such steps. The mere launching (i.e. announcing) of this equation is capable of imposing (certain) rules of deterrence. What would then be the case if we worked to consolidate this equation, or rather, to translate it (into reality) in the near or not-too-distant future?

For this equation, we are (currently) working on integrating the elements of power of the Axis of Resistance, (that of its) states, governments, movements, and peoples. We are spending the nights in meetings to coordinate, communicate, study, set forth plans, drawing up the various possible scenarios and plans, (scenario) A, B, etc…This, however, also requires the shaping of a new (form of) public opinion, as we exit the difficult phase of the past ten years. We need a new (form of) public opinion.

Had we been talking about an equation to protect any other geographic region in Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, or Yemen, the idea of a regional equation may not be very much accepted by many of our peoples. However, when we talk about the Holy City which concerns everyone, when we talk about the City of the sanctities that concerns all peoples of the (Arab and Muslim) nation, and all states and governments of this nation, and all the free people of the world, and all followers of the divine religions throughout the world, then this idea (of setting forth this new regional equation) ought to be accepted and appreciated (by the peoples of this nation), and (the idea) must have a solid ground which we (ourselves) must work seriously (to establish). This requires an intense effort in the coming stage.

“الإنذار الأحمر” وفشل الرهان الأميركي

11/07/2021

عمرو علان

المصدر: الميادين نت

لا يأتي التصعيد العسكري ضد القوات الأميركية في العراق وسوريا مفاجئاً لبعض متتبّعي السياسة الأميركية في المنطقة.

قالت مجلة “فورين بوليسي”، في “تقرير الوضع” ليوم الخميس، 8 تموز/يوليو 2021، إن العراق دخل في حالة “الإنذار الأحمر”. وأضاف التقرير أنه ربما يكون الرئيس جو بايدن على وشك التخلص من أعباء الانخراط العسكري الأميركي في أفغانستان، والذي امتد إلى قرابة عقدين من الزمن، إلاّ أن هناك ساحة حربٍ أخرى توجد فيها قواتٌ أميركيةٌ، وتُنذر بأن تتحوّل إلى شوكةٍ في خاصرة “البيت الأبيض”، في إشارةٍ إلى الساحة العراقية. 

Visual search query image

يأتي إعلان “الإنذار الأحمر” بعد تصاعد العمليات العسكرية ضد القوات الأميركية في الساحة العراقية، وتوأمها الساحة السورية، بحيث قامت قوى المقاومة المسلَّحة، خلال الأسبوعين الأخيرين، باستهداف عدة مواقع في العراق وسوريا توجد فيها قواتٌ أميركيةٌ، كان بينها – على سبيل المثال لا الحصر – استهداف “قاعدة الأسد” الجوية في العراق بأربعة عشر صاروخاً، أدَّت إلى وقوع إصابات في صفوف الأميركيين. وتمّ أيضاً استهداف مطار أربيل، الذي تتمركز في داخله قوات أميركية – والذي يقع بالقرب منه مبنى القنصلية الأميركية – بعدة مُسَيَّرات مفخَّخ.، وبالإضافة إلى تلك الهجمات، تعرَّضت عدة قوافل دعمٍ لوجستيٍّ للقوات الأميركية لهجماتٍ عبر عبواتٍ ناسفةٍ في أكثر من مدينةٍ عراقيةٍ.

أمّا الساحة السورية فشهدت، في الأيام القليلة الماضية، عدةَ هجمات بالمُسَيَّرات المفخَّخة على مواقع لقوات الاحتلال الأميركي الموجودة في حقل العمر النفطي.

لا يأتي هذا التصعيد العسكري ضد القوات الأميركية في العراق وسوريا مفاجئاً لبعض متتبّعي السياسة الأميركية في المنطقة. لعلّ القراءة الأدقّ تضع هذه الهجمات في سياق المعركة المستمرة من أجل إنهاء الوجود العسكري الأميركي في منطقة الهلال الخصيب، لا لمجرد كونها ردّاً ظرفياً على العدوان الجوي الأميركي الأخير في 27 حزيران/يونيو، والذي استهدف مواقع الحشد الشعبي العراقي المرابطة عند الحدود العراقية السورية. 

من خلال متابعة أداء إدارة الرئيس الأميركي جو بايدن لبضعة شهور، منذ تولّيه دفّة الحكم، يبدو أنها جاءت، وفي مخيِّلتها مقارَبة لوضع المنطقة، تقوم في جزءٍ من جوانبها على أساس الاستثمار في سياسات إدارة الرئيس دونالد ترامب السابقة، والمتعارَف عليها بـ”سياسة الضغوط القصوى” تجاه إيران، بحيث بات واضحاً في السياسة الأميركية الخارجية الميل إلى محاولة التَّخفُّف من أعباء منطقة غربي آسيا العسكرية قدر المستطاع، بهدف التركيز على منافسة صعود جمهورية الصين الشعبية في الساحة الدولية. ويبدو أن رؤية التخفُّف هذه كانت تقوم على تصوُّرين اثنين:

– التصور الأول يقوم على الانسحاب العسكري من أفغانستان، كما يجري الآن فعلاً، في محاولةٍ لإقفال باب الاستنزاف في هذه الساحة، ولاسيما أن الانسحاب الأميركي مِن أفغانستان لا يؤدّي إلى زيادة التهديدات على أمن الكيان الصهيوني. 

– أمّا التصور الثاني فيقوم على العودة السريعة إلى الاتفاق النووي الإيراني، على أساس قراءةٍ تقول بوصول إيران إلى مرحلة الإنهاك التامّ، بفعل “سياسة الضغوط القصوى”. وعليه، صارت اليوم إيران جاهزةً لتقديم التنازلات المطلوبة أميركياً في سياساتها الخارجية في الحد الأدنى، ولاسيما تلك التي تتعلق بمنطقة غربيّ آسيا ودعم حركات المقاومة في الإقليم، الامر الذي يجعل استمرار الوجود العسكري الأميركي – ولو في حدوده الدنيا – في العراق وسوريا، غير ذي تكلفةٍ تذكر. وكذلك، من الممكن إجبار إيران على تقديم تنازلاتٍ في برنامجها الصاروخي الساعي لتطوير الصواريخ الباليستية في الحد الأقصى، بحسب الفهم الأميركي.

إلاّ أن التصور الثاني اصطدم بمعطيين، أحدهما قديمٌ والآخرُ مستجدّ. أمّا المعطى القديم، فيتمثّل بأن إيران كانت قد رفضت، على نحو حاسمٍ، مناقشة برنامجها الصاروخي في أثناء جولات التفاوض التي أفضت إلى توقيع الاتفاق النووي مع إدارة الرئيس الأميركي الأسبق باراك أوباما في عام 2015، ناهيك برفض إيران القاطع المساومةَ خلال جولات التفاوض تلك على سياساتها الخارجية ودعم حركات المقاومة في الإقليم. فدعم حركات قوى المقاومة، ضمن السياسة الخارجية الإيرانية، مبنيٌّ على رؤيةٍ استراتيجيةٍ، تندرج ضمن مشروعها الأشمل في الإقليم الذي يقضي بمجابهة القوى الإمبريالية العالمية، بالإضافة إلى التأصيل الشرعي لهذا الالتزام الأخلاقي بدعم المستضعَفين ضمن نظام حكم الجمهورية الإسلامية.

ويضاف إلى هذا وذاك أمرٌ رئيسٌ، يتمثّل بأنَّ حركة قوى المقاومة في الإقليم تنطلق من إرادةٍ ذاتيةٍ لطرد المحتل عن أراضيها، وهي لا تأتمر بإرادة أيّ قوى إقليميةٍ، بل إن المسألة تكمن في تكامل أهداف قوى المقاومة ومصالحها مع المشروع الإيراني الأشمل في المنطقة، والذي يرمي إلى التخلص من هيمنة القوى الإمبريالية العالمية على عموم منطقتنا.

بعد الخروج الأميركي الأحادي الجانب من الاتفاق النووي، عبر قرارٍ من إدارة الرئيس الأميركي السابق دونالد ترامب، أكّد المرشد الإيراني السيد علي خامنئي في عدة تصريحاتٍ، أنه في حال العودة إلى الاتفاق النووي، يجب على الحكومة الإيرانية التزام هذه الضوابط التي تمنع التفاوض على كلٍّ مِن برنامج إيران الصاروخي وسياساتها الخارجية. وعلى ما يبدو، فإن إدارة الرئيس جو بايدن أخطأت عند تصنيف هذه التصريحات على أنها تصريحاتٌ تفاوضيةٌ، ليتبيّن لها بعد ذلك، في محادثات جنيف، أنها كانت مواقف مبدئية لا يمكن لأيّ حكومةٍ إيرانيةٍ تجاوزها، فخاب رهان إدارة جو بايدن على لجم حركات المقاومة في كلٍّ مِن العراق وسوريا، من خلال محاولة الضغط على إيران.

أمّا المعطى المستجدّ، فكان معركة “سيف القدس” التي كشفت فيها فصائل المقاومة الفلسطينية المسلّحة في غزة هشاشةَ الكيان الصهيوني، وأظهرت بوضوحٍ مدى التهديد الذي تمثّله حركات المقاومة المسلّحة في فلسطين وفي الإقليم على أمن الكيان الصهيوني ومستقبله، ولاسيّما في ظلّ فشَل الرهان الأميركي على انتزاع ضماناتٍ من إيران وسائر أركان محور المقاومة، ترتبط بحفظ أمن الكيان الصهيوني في مقابل العودة إلى الاتفاق النووي، بحيث كان رهاناً مبنياً في الأصل على قراءةٍ خاطئةٍ لحقيقة موقفَي حركات المقاومة وإيران كما أسلفنا.

لهذا، نجد الأميركي اليوم كمن “بلع المنجل”، فلا هو قادرٌ على الانسحاب من سوريا وتخفيف حضوره العسكري في العراق، ليتفرّغ لمواجهة الصين قبل تأمين ضمانات لأمن الكيان الصهيوني ومستقبله، ولا هو قادرٌ على البقاء أبداً بالزَّخَم نفسه في المنطقة لحماية أمن الكيان الصهيوني، بسبب ما لهذا من آثار سلبية فيما بات يعدّها معركته الرئيسة ضدّ الصين، وتِباعاً روسيا.

يمكن التنبّؤ بكون محور المقاومة يقرأ هذا المأزق الأميركي. فإن صحّت هذه النبوءة، وأظنها صحيحة، فعندها يمكن فهم سياق التصعيد العسكري في وجه القوات الأميركية في الأسبوعين الأخيرين. وهذا يُبشِّر باستمرار هذا التصعيد، وبصيفٍ ساخنٍ نسبياً للقوات الأميركية، لإفهام الأميركي أن استحقاق الانسحاب من المنطقة هو استحقاقٌ جديٌّ، وأن عملية التفاوض على سحب قواته لن تستمر إلى ما لا نهاية.

Lebanon’s Economic Crisis: Hezbollah’s New Challenge

July 10, 2021 

Lebanon’s Economic Crisis: Hezbollah’s New Challenge 

By Mohammad Yousef

Lebanon is on the verge of collapse; thanks to chronic corruption and US siege and sanctions. The economy is deteriorating, the central bank is almost bankrupt. No hard currency is available to provide the basics from food to medications and fuel.

In many times in the past, still true now, Washington refused to help or let others help Lebanon to defend its territories and protect its people from the continuous “Israeli” aggressions; even when the Takfiri groups like Daesh [Arabic Acronym for the terrorist “ISIS/”ISIL”] and Al-nusra started their aggressions we have never seen any support or help from the US who claims to be Lebanon’s and the Lebanese friend. The US arrogant logic supposes they can fool governments and people alike; they overlook the sheer fact that they themselves invented Daesh has admitted by their officials and pretend they can convince others they want to help fighting it.

Washington and its allies would resort to any measure with no restrictions, political or moral to make their plots a reality.

On the “Israeli” level, Washington supports and protects the Zionist entity by all means. The US has given hundreds of billions of dollars of financial aid to its ally; supplied it with the most advanced high tech weaponry to guarantee its military supremacy over “Israel’s” enemies’ altogether. The veto power has always been ready to exempt “Israel” from any condemnation by the international community.

All “Israeli” invasions, occupations, aggressions, incursions and massacres have been approved and supported by Washington.

When the resistance in Lebanon, namely Hezbollah has successfully been able to liberate considerable parts of the occupied country, Washington was very concerned and it did everything possible to reverse the tide, but luckily to no avail.

Hezbollah, not only liberated the Lebanese occupied territories and defended the people, but it also has built a remarkable military force that established a new formula between Lebanon and “Israel”, a formula of deterrence that stretched to protect other regional areas as well.

More important, Hezbollah activities did not limit itself to military actions as a resistance, rather it has established a huge network of social and humanitarian work; schools, hospitals, water plants etc.in an effort to build a society of solidarity and steadfastness.

Nowadays, as the US administration tightens its sanctions and siege against Lebanon to the maximum; Hezbollah finds itself again in a challenge to meet the mounting needs of the Lebanese people, and here, we are talking about basic needs like electricity, water, fuel, medication and food supplies. It is worth mentioning that this task is the government responsibility par excellence, but with the absence of any serious effort from the official authorities and the governments departments the party offered help and promised to bring fuel from Iran with huge facilities on many levels.

Hezbollah has also launched a series of vital projects to maintain people’s steadfastness. The party urged the government to take a bold step and consider resorting to China and Russia to receive supplies and help.

With the Lebanese struggling and suffering and barely making their ends meet, the official authorities are still hesitant, father reluctant to take such a step. Lebanon has no other choices, but those options are enough to start a salvation campaign to pit things back on track.

Hezbollah efforts are praised and blessed but they are not enough because they cannot be a replacement for the government. The latter should assume its responsibilities and take a courageous decision or at least expresses a serious intent to open up for China, Russia and Iran, this might prompt the US administration and its allies to reconsider their policies towards Lebanon.

The well-researched and presumably accurate calculations Washington thought it did over Lebanon might prove again how mistaken it is.

We are in a race between contradictory antagonistic conflicting strategies over Lebanon, however the country’s survival, safety and prosperity should definitely be always the priority. It is for us, because it is our country and our people, but not for America because it’s priorities have always been to support and protect our enemies!

This is another challenge that we meet, a real tough difficult one, but hopefully we will surmount it, with another success and victory again!

إنزالات الأطلسيّ لفكّ التحالف الروسيّ الصينيّ الإيرانيّ

10 July 2021

 محمد صادق الحسينيّ

لا بدّ لأيّ محلل سياسيّ، ينتهج أسلوب البحث العلمي الموضوعي والمستند الى المنطق، ان يعود قليلاً بالذاكرة الى الوراء، كي يتمكن من تقديم تحليل موضوعيّ وتقدير موقف دقيق للمناورات البحرية الواسعة النطاق، التي تجريها القوات البحرية لدول حلف شمال الأطلسي، الى جانب قوات بحرية إسرائيلية ومن أربع دول عربية هي: مصر، المغرب، الإمارات وتونس! منذ 28/6/2021 وتُختتم اليوم 10/7/2021، خاصة أنّ المهمة، التي تتدرب هذه القوات البحرية على تنفيذها، تتمثل أساساً في:

أولا: عمليات إنزال بحرية على ارض العدو.

ثانيا: تنفيذ عمليات برية على أرض العدو. وهذا يعني في العلم العسكري القيام بعمليات الإنزال البحري لإقامة رؤوس جسور للقوات المدرّعة والمشاة الميكانيكية، التي سيتم إبرارها من سفن الإنزال، بعد نجاح تثبيت رؤوس الجسور على أرض العدو (وهي في هذه الحالة روسيا بلا أدنى شك لأنها البلد الوحيد في حوض البحر الأسود، التي تتعامل معها الولايات المتحدة وحلف الأطلسي كبلد عدو).

ثالثا: عمليات بحرية تنفذها وحدات من الضفادع البشرية، التابعة لدول حلف الأطلسي (وهي بالتأكيد عمليات زراعة ألغام بحرية في طرق تحرّكات الأساطيل الروسية المدنية والحربية في البحر الاسود، إضافة الى القيام بعمليات تخريب لمنشآت عسكرية بحرية روسية في موانئ البحر الأسود.

رابعا: التدرّب على حرب الغواصات.

خامسا: التدرّب على عمليات الدفاع الجوي وعمليات القوات الخاصة. (وهذا يعني، من الناحية العسكرية، إنزال قوات خاصة تابعة لحلفخامس الأطلسي خلف خطوط العدو وتقديم الغطاء الجوي لها لتمكينها من تنفيذ العمليات المكلفة بها من دون أن تتعرّض لنيران المقاتلات الروسية في ارض المعركة. بالاضافة الى تأمين الغطاء الجوي لعمليات الانزال البحري وللسفن الحربية الاطلسية المشاركة في العمليات ايضاً، وذلك حسب ما أعلن على الصفحة الرسمية لسلاح البحرية الأميركي، قبيل بدء المناورات.

 إذن فإن الهدف من هذه المناورات هو التدرب، وعلى مقربة شديدة من الأهداف الروسية، على عمليات عسكرية اطلسية تُشنُ على أراضي جمهورية روسيا الاتحادية، بحراً وجواً.

علماً أن خطة المناورات، التي تجري حالياً في البحر الأسود، هي نسخة طبق الأصل عن خطة عسكرية بريطانية فرنسية، جرى البدء بالتخطيط لها في شهر 12/1939 وأنجزت في شهر 1/1940، وأطلق عليها اسم: عملية الرمح – Operation Pike – وتمثلت أهداف الخطة آنذاك في:

أ) قصف كافة آبار النفط السوفياتية، في منطقة القوقاز الشمالي، خاصة في باكو وغروزني، وتدميرها تدميراً كاملاً.

ب) أسندت قيادة العمليّة لجنرال سلاح الجو البريطاني، سيدني كوتون، والذي بدأ بإعداد أول الصور الجوية لمناطق الحقول المستهدفة في شهري آذار ونيسان 3 و4/1940.

ج) بعد استكمال عمليات الاستطلاع الأخيرة للأهداف بدأت قيادة العملية، تحت إشراف وزارتي الحرب البريطانية والفرنسية، بنقل ثلاثة أسراب من الطائرات المقاتلة البريطانيّة الى الموصل، في العراق، وستة أسراب جوية فرنسيّة الى سورية. وقد ضمّت هذه الأسراب طائرات من طراز: فامرمان / ف 221 / طائرات مارتن ميري لاند ، وطائرات فيكرز . بحيث أصبح العدد الإجمالي، لطائرات القوة الجوية البريطانية الفرنسية، المكلفة بتدمير آبار النفط السوفياتية، هو 117 طائرة.

د) وفي الوقت نفسة تابعت القيادة العامة للعملية استكمال بعض التفاصيل الميدانية على أن يبدأ تنفيذ عمليات القصف الجوي لموانئ كل من: باكو / باتومي / باتو / على البحر الأسود، إضافة الى مدينة غروزني في جمهورية الشيشان، في نهاية شهر حزيران 1940.

ه) لكن قيام الجيش الألماني الهتلري بشن هجومه على فرنسا، بتاريخ 20/5/1940 واحتلالها بسرعة قياسية، وعثور فرقة الدبابات التاسعة الألمانية، بتاريخ 16/6/1940، على خطة العملية البريطانية الفرنسية، في هيئة أركان الجيش الفرنسي في ناحية La Charité – sur Loire، قد كشف العملية.

و) ومن الجدير بالذكر أن الماريشال هيرمان غويرينغ ، وهو وزير الطيران الحربي الألماني الهتلريّ، قد أكد في محكمة نورينبيرغ، التي حوكم فيها من بقي على قيد الحياة من القادة النازيين، أن قيادة الاستطلاع الاستراتيجي الألمانية كانت قد سجلت تحشيداً جوياً، بريطانياً فرنسياً، استعداداً لتنفيذ عملية السهم.

كان الهدف المعلن في خطط هيئة الأركان، من قبل لندن وباريس، لهذه العملية هو حرمان ألمانيا النازية من الموارد النفطية السوفياتية، خاصة بعد توقيع اتفاقية التعاون الاقتصادي السوفياتية الألمانية، في صيف 1939، حسب الوثائق السرية المتعلقة بهذا الموضوع والتي رفعت عنها السرية قبل فترة وجيزة.

لكن الأهداف الحقيقية من وراء ذلك كانت مختلفةً عما تضمنتة وثائق هيئة الأركان الفرنسية والبريطانية. إذ إنهما كانتا تهدفان الى البدء بتدمير موارد النفط السوفياتية تمهيداً للبدء بعمليات هجوميّة بحرية وجوية ضد أراضي الاتحاد السوفياتي، تحت حجة التعاون السوفياتي الألماني. أي ابتزاز الاتحاد السوفياتي تحت تهديد العدوان العسكري بهدف إلغاء اتفاقياته مع ألمانيا.

 وفي هذا الإطار قام السفير البريطاني في موسكو ريتشارد ستافورد كريبس ، في شهر 10/1940، بتقديم عرض لوزير الخارجية السوفياتي، مولوتوف ينص على تخلي بريطانيا عن عمليات تدمير حقول النفط السوفياتية مقابل أن يتخذ الاتحاد السوفياتي موقفاً محايداً في الحرب الألمانية البريطانية.

وهذه هي السياسة نفسها، التي تمارسها الولايات المتحدة الأميركية مستخدمة حلف الاطلسي ومجموعة من الدول العميلة لها، في ابتزاز القيادة الروسية الآن لتقديم تنازلات سياسية، سواء على الصعيد الاستراتيجي الدولي او في مواضيع إقليمية تهم الأمن القومي الروسي، كموضوع العلاقة مع إيران وسورية وغيرها من المواضيع والملفات.

إلا أن هدف واشنطن الاستراتيجي الاول، من وراء مواصلة الضغط العسكري على روسيا، من خلال التحركات العسكرية الاستفزازية، لواشنطن وحلف الاطلسي على حدود روسيا الشمالية الغربية وفي البحر الأسود، انما هو محاولة لوقف التعاون الصيني الروسي، على الصعيد الاستراتيجي الدولي، خاصة في مجال الدفاع المشترك، او ما تسميه واشنطن منع تشكل وتعمق الحلف العسكري الروسي الصيني المتنامي، الذي “يهدّد” الأمن القومي الأميركي.

وهو ما يؤكد أن سياسة الدول الاستعمارية الغربية هي السياسة العدوانية التوسعية نفسها، القائمة على الابتزاز وفرض الهيمنة، وتهديد السلم الدولي. ولكن موازين القوى الدولية الحاليّة ومنطق حركية (ديناميكية) العلاقات الدولية الحاليّة، بما في ذلك وجود محور مقاومة معادٍ للسياسة التوسعية الأميركية، ومستنداً الى دعم سياسي ودبلوماسي، وعسكري في بعض المواقع، من كل من جمهورية الصين الشعبية وروسيا الاتحادية، نقول إن كل ذلك سيفشل النسخة الجديدة من السياسة الاستعمارية الغربية، التي تجمع بين التهديد العسكري والعدوان الاقتصادي المباشر، عبر فرض العقوبات الاقتصادية والمالية على العديد من الدول وعلى رأسها الصين وروسيا وكوريا الشمالية وإيران وسورية وفنزويلا.

بعدنا طيبين قولوا الله…

Turkey and Russia.. Central Asia after Afghanistan?

 ARABI SOURI 

Turkey and Russia Central Asia after Afghanistan

Ankara sees the American withdrawal from Afghanistan as its valuable opportunity to gain several footholds in this country neighboring the Central Asian republics of Turkish origin.

The following is the English translation from Arabic of the latest article by Turkish career journalist Husni Mahali he published in the Lebanese Al-Mayadeen news site Al-Mayadeen Net:

With the approach of the complete American withdrawal from Afghanistan, the competition intensified between Turkey and each of Russia, Iran, and other countries, with the aim of gaining more positions, not only in this country but through it in Central Asia in general as well. With the “Taliban” movement controlling more areas, and the Afghan forces fleeing en masse, Russian President Vladimir Putin called the President of Tajikistan, Emomali Rahman, and assured him of his country’s support for him in the face of possible developments in the Afghan crisis, after thousands of Afghan soldiers sought refuge in this neighboring country.

Last Tuesday, the Russian army announced the readiness of the S-300 anti-aircraft missile systems at the Russian base in Tajikistan, which in turn does not hide its concern about the possibility of an explosion in the security situation in Afghanistan, which may be exploited by the various jihadist groups, which some of them are present in Idlib and other areas of Syria, under the protection of Turkey, which prevents President Putin from any action that directly targets these groups.

President Putin also made a second phone call to his Uzbek counterpart Shaukat Mir Daif and discussed with him the details of coordination and joint cooperation to confront possible developments in Afghanistan.

In turn, Foreign Minister Lavrov said, “The main problem is the growing threat of terrorist attacks because the Taliban is behaving more aggressively. Also, the terrorist organization ISIS is strengthening its presence in the northern parts of Afghanistan near the border with Russia’s allies.”

And the Russian security announced the thwarting of many terrorist attacks planned by the militants of the Islamist “Tahrir Party”, which is mainly active in the autonomous republics within the borders of the Russian Federation, whose population is mostly Muslims, and their number exceeds 20 million.

Iran – which has a common border with Afghanistan with a length of 936 km, Pakistan with a length of 909 km, and Turkmenistan with a length of 992 km – are closely watching the Afghan developments, given the direct relationship of the matter to Iran’s national security. Last Tuesday, Tehran hosted a meeting between representatives of the “Taliban” and the Afghan government, in an attempt to achieve peaceful reconciliation between the two parties after the US withdrawal at the end of next month.

In turn, Ankara sees this withdrawal as its valuable opportunity to gain several footholds in this country neighboring the Central Asian republics of Turkish origin, namely Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Uzbekistan. Defense Minister Hulusi Akar visited Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan at the end of last month, in a new attempt by Ankara to develop military relations with these two countries, and later with Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Kazakhstan, all of which constitute the backyard of Russia, which President Erdogan has previously challenged in Ukraine, Azerbaijan, and Lithuania.

He also challenged it by lighting the green light for Atlantic maneuvers which included the British and Dutch provocations in the Black Sea, which Washington, with the support of Ankara, wants to turn into an Atlantic basin after the annexation of Georgia and Ukraine to the alliance. NATO membership mainly includes Turkey, Romania, and Bulgaria, which overlook the Black Sea, while Turkey controls the Bosphorus and Dardanelles straits, which connect the Black Sea to both the Sea of Marmara and the Aegean.

Ankara signed several military cooperation agreements with Bulgaria and Romania and then sold its drones to Lithuania, Ukraine, Albania, and Azerbaijan, which achieved quick victories in their war with the Armenians in the Nagorno-Karabakh region thanks to Turkish support.

The information then spoke of Turkey’s efforts to establish several military bases in Azerbaijan, including a base near the Caspian Sea (also overlooked by Iran), which is rich in oil and gas. This may constitute a new and dangerous crisis between Ankara and Moscow, which previously expressed its dismay and rejection of Turkish bases in Azerbaijan in general, which President Erdogan will not care about, who did not care about Russian threats in Syria and Libya, and continued to implement what he had previously planned on the road back to the dreams of the Ottoman Empire.

This (Ottoman) empire had many reasons for entering into 16 fierce wars with the Russian Empire, of which it was defeated in 11. Many see President Putin as the heir of this empire, as Erdogan sees himself as the heir to the Ottoman Empire and its Islamist caliphate, which may make the possible Turkish dialogue, coordination, and cooperation with Kabul after the Taliban control it much easier, even if Turkey is the only Muslim country within NATO that has occupied Afghanistan under the leadership of the United States in 2001. After his meeting with President Biden, on the 14th of last month in Brussels, Erdogan announced that Turkey is ready to send additional forces to Afghanistan to protect the security of Kabul Airport and international facilities, which will be contributed by his ally, Sheikh Tamim, Emir of Qatar, who played and still is, an important role in the American reconciliation with the “Taliban”.

Al-Jazeera was the mouthpiece of the Taliban during its war with the “Great Satan” America, at a time when Osama bin Laden sent his tapes exclusively to the aforementioned channel before and after the American occupation and until his death in May 2011, that is, after the emergence of ISIS, and “Al-Nusra” in Syria and Iraq, which are the arenas for America and its new allies to settle scores with the resistance countries and for “Israel”.

All this explains the new US military position in Jordan, adjacent to Syria, Iraq, and “Israel”, after Washington transferred some of its forces from Qatar, where the Al-Udeid base is still located, which is the most important US base in the region. This base was and will remain, the headquarters of the Central Command of the US Air Force in the Middle East, and it houses 100 warplanes used by US forces against Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria.

In all cases, and whatever the result of the Turkish moves in Afghanistan, through it in the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea and all the countries that overlook them or close to them, it has become clear that the Turkish President was, and will remain, a source of concern for President Putin, especially if Ankara succeeds in its relationship with the Taliban. Everyone was surprised by its (Taliban) agreement with President Erdogan, who declared himself “the protector of Islam and Muslims.”

In turn, the Taliban leaders, with Qatari mediation, might consider cooperating with him, especially if he proves his authority in the Central Asian republics of Turkish origin, an authority that the late President Turgut Ozal sought after fall and disintegration of the Soviet Union. Erdogan sees himself as Ozal’s successor and before him Adnan Menderes, who made Turkey “a fish on American hook” for the period 1950-1960.

Erdogan and others did not ignore the strategic location of Afghanistan, which is rich in gold, iron, cobalt, copper, uranium, and rare minerals, including niobium and molybdenum, which are invested by Chinese companies that control the extraction and export of most of the world’s rare minerals everyone needs in sensitive industries, including warplanes and missiles.

In the end, the bet remains on the possible policies of the Taliban. If they remain on their approach as they were 20 years ago, history will repeat itself, and everyone will return to their interests in the extremist Islamist movements that have become more famous for their brutality after the so-called “Arab Spring,” especially in Syria. Libya, Iraq, Somalia, Yemen, and the extension of these countries in Africa, the Middle East, Bahrain, the Red Sea and the Mediterranean, and the Gulf region.

Erdogan has proven that he has a long experience in all of them after he succeeded in establishing and developing distinguished relations with all Islamist movements, both political and armed, many of whose leaders had previously been present and fought in Afghanistan. These leaders had a relationship with “Al-Qaeda”, and later “Taliban”, which seems clear that, with its next actions, it will decide the fate and future of Afghanistan, and all its neighboring countries as well, most of which are within the borders of Russia’s backyard.

This may be the “hidden satanic” reason for Washington’s decision to withdraw, which wants Russia to afflict Afghanistan again as it afflicted it during the Soviet occupation, and Turkey was at the time on the neutral, but this time it will be a direct party, as is the case on many fronts, which it proved with the transfer of mercenaries from Syria to Libya and Nagorno-Karabakh. Now, some expect it to transfer their likes to Afghanistan, which is what America might do by transferring what it has of ISIS detainees in Syria and Iraq to Afghanistan!

To help us continue please visit the Donate page to donate or learn how you can help us with no cost to you.
Follow us on Telegram: http://t.me/syupdates link will open the Telegram app.

Syria Sitrep: Joint Statement by the Representatives of Iran, Russia and Turkey

Syria Sitrep:  Joint Statement by the Representatives of Iran, Russia and Turkey

JULY 08, 2021

Joint Statement by the Representatives of Iran, Russia and Turkey on the 16th International Meeting on Syria in the Astana Format, Nur-Sultan, 7-8 July 2021
https://www.mid.ru/en/foreign_policy/news/-/asset_publisher/cKNonkJE02Bw/content/id/4809709

The representatives of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Russian Federation and the Republic of Turkey as guarantors of the Astana format:

Reaffirmed their strong commitment to the sovereignty, independence, unity and territorial integrity of the Syrian Arab Republic as well as to the purposes and principles of the UN Charter and highlighted that these principles should be universally respected and complied with;

Expressed their determination to continue working together to combat terrorism in all forms and manifestations and stand against separatist agendas aimed at undermining the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Syria as well as threatening the national security of neighboring countries. Condemned the increasing terrorist activities in various parts of Syria which result in loss of innocent lives including the attacks targeting civilian facilities. Agreed to continue their cooperation in order to ultimately eliminate DAESH/ISIL, Al-Nusra Front and all other individuals, groups, undertakings and entities associated with Al-Qaeda or DAESH/ISIL, and other terrorist groups, as designated by the UN Security Council, while ensuring the protection of civilians and civilian infrastructure in accordance with international humanitarian law. Expressed serious concern with the increased presence and terrorist activity of “Hayat Tahrir al‑Sham” and other affiliated terrorist groups as designated by the UN Security Council that pose threat to civilians inside and outside the Idlib de-escalation area;

Reviewed in detail the situation in the Idlib de-escalation area and highlighted the necessity to maintain calm on the ground by fully implementing all agreements on Idlib;

Discussed the situation in the northeast of Syria and agreed that long-term security and stability in this region can only be achieved on the basis of preservation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the country. Rejected all attempts to create new realities on the ground, including illegitimate self-rule initiatives under the pretext of combating terrorism. Reaffirmed their determination to stand against separatist agendas in the east of the Euphrates aimed at undermining the unity of Syria as well as threatening the national security of neighboring countries. Expressed concern, in this regard, with the increasing hostilities against civilians. Reiterated their opposition to the illegal seizure and transfer of oil revenues that should belong to the Syrian Arab Republic;

Condemned continuing Israeli military attacks in Syria which violate the international law, international humanitarian law, the sovereignty of Syria and neighboring countries, endanger the stability and security in the region and called for cessation of them;

Expressed their conviction that there could be no military solution to the Syrian conflict and reaffirmed their commitment to advance viable and lasting Syrian-led and Syrian-owned, UN-facilitated political process in line with the UN Security Council Resolution 2254;

Emphasized the important role of the Constitutional Committee in Geneva, created as a result of the decisive contribution of the Astana guarantors and in furtherance of the decisions of the Syrian National Dialogue Congress in Sochi;

Expressed the need for the early holding of the 6th round of the Drafting Commission of the Syrian Constitutional Committee in Geneva. In this regard, reaffirmed their determination to support the Committee’s work through continuous interaction with the Syrian parties to the Constitutional Committee and the UN Secretary-General’s Special Envoy for Syria Geir O. Pedersen, as facilitator, in order to ensure its sustainable and effective functioning;

Expressed the conviction that the Committee in its work should respect the Terms of Reference and Core Rules of Procedure to enable the Committee to implement its mandate of preparing and drafting for popular approval a constitutional reform as well as achieving progress in its work and be governed by a sense of compromise and constructive engagement without foreign interference and externally imposed timelines aimed at reaching general agreement of its members;

Reiterated grave concern at the humanitarian situation in Syria and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, which presents a profound challenge to all Syria’s health system, socio-economic and humanitarian situations. Rejected all unilateral sanctions, which are in contravention of international law, international humanitarian law and the UN Charter, particularly in the face of the pandemic.

Emphasized the need to increase humanitarian assistance to all Syrians throughout the country without discrimination, politicization and preconditions. In order to support the improvement of the humanitarian situation in Syria and the progress in the process of the political settlement, called upon the international community, the United Nations and its humanitarian agencies, to enhance the assistance to Syria, inter alia by developing early recovery projects, including the restoration of basic infrastructure assets – water and power supply facilities, schools and hospitals as well as the humanitarian mine action in accordance with the international humanitarian law;

Highlighted the need to facilitate safe and voluntary return of refugees and internally displaced persons (IDPs) to their original places of residence in Syria, ensuring their right to return and right to be supported. In this regard, called upon the international community to provide the necessary assistance to Syrian refugees and IDPs and reaffirmed their readiness to continue interaction with all relevant parties, including the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and other specialized international agencies;

Welcomed the successful operation on mutual release of detainees on 2 July within the framework of the Working Group on the Release of Detainees / Abductees, Handover of Bodies and Identification of Missing Persons. The operation confirmed the willingness of Syrian parties to strengthen the mutual trust with the assistance of the Astana guarantors. It also reaffirmed the determination of the Astana guarantors to increase and expand their cooperation within the Working Group.

Took note with appreciation the participation of delegations of Jordan, Iraq and Lebanon as observers of the Astana format as well as representatives of the United Nations and the ICRC;

Expressed their sincere gratitude to the Kazakh authorities for hosting in Nur-Sultan the 16th International Meeting on Syria in the Astana format;

Decided to convene the 17th International Meeting on Syria in the Astana format in Nur-Sultan before the end of 2021 taking into consideration the pandemic situation. Also recalled the Joint Statement of 1 July 2020 to hold the next Tripartite Summit in the Islamic Republic of Iran as soon as conditions permit.

أحمد جبريل… المُقاتل العنيد

مقالة ماهر الطاهر

الجمعة 9 تموز 2021

أحمد جبريل... المُقاتل العنيد
آمن جبريل بعمق بمحمور المقاومة وبقدرته على تعديل موازين القوى في المنطقة (أ ف ب )

في يوم حزين، هو السابع من تموز 2021، رحل عن عالمنا القائد الفلسطيني الكبير، أحمد جبريل، «أبو جهاد»، أحد مؤسّسي الثورة الفلسطينية المعاصرة، و«منظمة التحرير الفلسطينية». وبرحيله، فقدت الحركة الوطنية الفلسطينية والشعب الفلسطيني، كما الأمّة العربية والإسلامية وأحرار العالم، مقاتلاً عنيداً لا يعرف اليأس والخنوع.

وجد جبريل نفسه مع عائلته وأهله لاجئاً في سوريا بعد نكبة عام 1948. ومنذ أواسط خمسينيات القرن الماضي، بدأ يفكّر بتأسيس حركة يكون هدفها تحرير فلسطين. فانخرط، لتلك الغاية، في الكلية العسكرية، ودرس في مصر وتخرّج ضابطاً همُّه أن يعود إلى وطنه ويردّ على الجريمة الكبرى، جريمة اقتلاع الشعب العربي الفلسطيني من أرضه وتشريده في كل أصقاع الأرض. وعلى مدى أكثر من 65 عاماً، ناضل «أبو جهاد» وكافح وخاض كل معارك الثورة الفلسطينية المعاصرة مقاتلاً شجاعاً حتى آخر لحظة من حياته.

تميَّزت تجربة القائد أحمد جبريل، على مدى العقود الستة الماضية، بإيمانه بمجموعةٍ من الثوابت والمبادئ التي لم يحِدْ عنها قيْد أنملة، على رغم كل التحوّلات والعواصف التي مرّت على المنطقة العربية والعالم؛ وأهمّ هذه الثوابت والمبادئ:

أولاً: آمن «أبو جهاد» بعمق، بأن الصراع مع المشروع الصهيوني هو صراع وجود بكل ما للكلمة من معنى؛ فرفض بشكل قاطع نهج التسويات والتنازلات والحلول السياسية التي تؤدّي إلى الاعتراف بالكيان الإسرائيلي. ولذلك، كان أحد مؤسّسي «جبهة الرفْض الفلسطينية» التي تمّ تشكيلها بعد «حرب أكتوبر» عام 1973، عندما تمّ طرْح مسألة التسوية السياسية ومؤتمر جنيف. إذ كان يرى أن الانخراط في التسويات السياسية، هدفه تكريس الوجود الصهيوني والكيان الإسرائيلي على أرض فلسطين، فبقي ثابتاً على مواقفه، على رغم كل ما شهدته الساحة الفلسطينية والعربية من تحولات في المفاهيم والمواقف.

تميَّزت تجربة جبريل بإيمانه بمجموعةٍ من الثوابت والمبادئ التي لم يحِدْ عنها


ثانياً: آمن بأن قضيّة فلسطين هي قضيّة عربية، ورفَض كل محاولات عزلها عن عمقها العربي، لإيمانه بأن تحرير فلسطين مهمّة عربية، وليست مهمّة فلسطينية فحسب، لأن الخطر الصهيوني لا يهدِّد الشعب الفلسطيني وحده، بل الأمّة العربية بأسرها.
كذلك، كان يرى أن للقضيّة الفلسطينية بُعدها الإسلامي، وخاصّة بعد انتصار الثورة الإسلامية في إيران، ووقوف طهران الكامل إلى جانب الشعب الفلسطيني، فضلاً عن تقديمها كلّ أشكال الدعم للثورة الفلسطينية والمقاومة الفلسطينية. كما كان يؤمن بالبُعد التحرّري العالمي للقضيّة الفلسطينية.

ثالثاً: آمن المناضل أحمد جبريل بعمق بمحور المقاومة وبقدرته على تعديل موازين القوى في المنطقة. ولذلك، ربطته علاقات وثيقة بهذا المحور: سوريا، الجمهورية الإسلامية الإيرانية، المقاومة اللبنانية بقيادة «حزب الله»، المقاومة العراقية، والمقاومة في اليمن. وكان يحظى باحترام وتقدير جميع أطراف هذا المحور.

رابعاً: كان الراحل الكبير «أبو جهاد» يؤمن بعمْق بالمقاومة المسلَّحة كخيار استراتيجي في مواجهة الكيان الصهيوني، وأنَّ ما أُخذ بالقوّة لا يستردّ بغير القوّة. وقد جاءت الأحداث والوقائع لتؤكد صحّة ما سبق، بعدما ثبُت فشل خيار ما سُمّي بعملية السلام المزيّفة، والتي كان هدفها الوحيد ضرب المشروع التحرّري للشعب الفلسطيني.

في الوقت الذي نتقدم فيه بأحرّ التعازي إلى شعبنا الفلسطيني وأمّتنا العربية والإسلامية وإلى رفاق الدرب في «الجبهة الشعبية لتحرير فلسطين – القيادة العامة»، وإلى الرفيق المناضل الدكتور طلال ناجي وأعضاء المكتب السياسي واللجنة المركزية، فنحن على ثقة بأن رفاق القائد الكبير أحمد جبريل في «القيادة العامة» سيواصلون درب الكفاح والنضال حتى تحرير كل ذرّة من تراب فلسطين. وفي الختام نتوجّه بأحرّ التعازي إلى عائلة وأبناء القائد «أبو جهاد»، الأخ أبو العمرين، والأخ بدر، وجميع أفراد عائلته.

* عضو المكتب السياسي
لـ«الجبهة الشعبية لتحرير فلسطين
»

Hezbollah Officially Announces Providing Palestinian Resistance with Decisive Intelligence Reports during Al-Quds Sword Battle

July 8, 2021

Hezbollah Deputy Secretary General Sheikh Naim Qassem
Hezbollah Deputy Secretary General Sheikh Naim Qassem

Hezbollah Deputy Secretary General Sheikh Naim Qassem stated that the Resistance in Lebanon provided the Palestinian resistance factions with decisive intelligence reports during “Al-Quds Sword” battle, adding that this informational coordination changed the course of the confrontation with the Israeli enemy.

Sheikh Qassem told Al-Mayadeen TV Channel that the intelligence reports Hezbollah provided the Palestinian resistance with exposed the Zionist tricky announcement about launching a ground offensive.

It is worth noting that this is the first time Hezbollah officially announces this coordination with the Palestinian resistance during “Al-Quds Sword” battle.

The editor-in-chief of the Lebanese daily Al-Akhbar, Ibrahim Al-Amin, said during an interview with Al-Manar TV Channel on May 28 that Hezbollah, IRGC, and Hamas established a chamber of military operations in Beirut during the recent Israeli aggression on Gaza.

Al-Amin added that officers from Hezbollah, IRGC, and Hamas coordinated the military confrontation in Gaza, adding that the Commander of IRGC’s Al-Quds Force, General Esmail Qaani, visited Lebanon twice to attend the chamber meetings.

Hezbollah transmitted weaponry and ammunition to Gaza and moved a number of Palestinian Resistance officers out of the Strip during the aggression, according to Al-Amin.

Al-Amin noted that the Islamic Resistance also provided the Palestinian factions with the needed data about the movements of the Israeli occupation military, which frustrated the enemy’s plot to ambush the Palestinian fighters near Gaza border, adding that drones were employed to reach this goal.

On May 10, 2021, the Palestinian resistance waged its battle against the Israeli enemy in response to the Zionist attacks on Al-Aqsa Mosue and plots to expel the Palestinians from Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood in occupied Al-Quds, firing thousands of missiles at the Zionist settlements in most of the Palestinian cities and inflicting heavy losses upon the Zionists. The Zionist enemy insisted on its violations and launched an aggression on Gaza, killing 232 of its civilians and injuring around 1900 others. After an 11-day confrontation, the Palestinian resistance managed to defeat the Zionist aggression and provide Al-Quds City and its sanctities with a considerable protection from the Israeli attacks and violations.

Source: Al-Manar English Website

Related

Khamenei on Demise of Jebril: He Spent his Life Fighting for His People

July 8, 2021

Source: Al Mayadeen

Iranian Leader Sayyed Ali Khamenei offers his condolences on the demise of Palestinian freedom fighter Ahmad Jebril.

Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Khamenei and Ahmad Jibril
Iranian Leader Sayyed Ali Khamenei and Ahmad Jibril

Iranian Leader Sayyed Ali Khamenei has offered his condolences on the demise of Palestinian freedom fighter Ahmad Jebril.

He called the leader of the Popular Front of the Liberation of Palestine – General Command (PFLP-GC) a “brave person”, “who spent his life fighting for his occupied homeland and his oppressed people.”

The Secretary General of the PFLP-GC passed away on Tuesday, in a hospital in the Syrian capital of Damascus.

I offer my condolences on the demise of the untiring fighter Mr. Ahmad Jebril, Secretary-General of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, to the Palestinians, all those active in the Palestinians’ struggles, all members of the Resistance in W Asia, & his survivors. pic.twitter.com/FmcGD3Ph1f— Khamenei.ir (@khamenei_ir) July 8, 2021

Mr. Ahmad Jebril was a brave, hardworking person, who spent his life fighting for his occupied homeland and his oppressed people. I ask God to bestow great reward upon him, and I ask for God’s mercy and forgiveness for him.— Khamenei.ir (@khamenei_ir) July 8, 2021

Qaani on Jibril: He was Part of the Axis of Resistance

Source: Al Mayadeen

Quds Force Leader Esmail Qaani offered his condolences in the death of Palestinian leader Ahmad Jibril, calling him “one of the founders of the Axis of Resistance, who always believed that the Resistance’s rifle would bring back Palestine.”

IRGC's Quds Force Leader Esmail Qaani
IRGC’s Quds Force Leader Esmail Qaani

General Esmail Qaani said that the late Ahmad Jibril “formed through his personality and march a complete model in building the ‘resistant’ character.”

He added: Al-Quds, and the liberation of all of Palestine were always Abou Jihad’s compass, from whose direction he never veered.”

Commenting on his struggle and the difficulties he had to endure for the Resistance, he said that “despite all the temptations and intimidations he faced, he always believed that the Resistance’s rifle would bring back Palestine.”

Qaani spoke highly of Jibril, declaring that “he was one of the founders of the Axis of Resistance, placing all of his energy in its service, staying true to the blood of the martyrs.”

The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine – General Command, had eulogized its Secretary General, Ahmad Jibril (Abou Jihad), who passed away on Wednesday in a hospital in the Syrian capital of Damascus.

المقاومة في سورية والعراق إلى التصعيد

July 08 2021

ناصر قنديل

كما في كل مرة يقع الأميركيون وجماعاتهم في المنطقة بوهم نابع من طريقة تفكيرهم، فيظنون أن مجرد الدخول في التفاوض مع إيران سيعني تجميد ساحات الصراع التي تقاتل فيها قوى المقاومة بوجه الاحتلال، فيتوهّمون أن إيران ستضغط في فلسطين كي لا تقوم مقاومة شعبية أو عسكرية بوجه الاحتلال، لأن الحكومة الجديدة في الكيان في الحضن الأميركي وتحتاج الى انتصارات تظهرها أمام المستوطنين بمظهر قوة، ويتوقعون أن تجمّد قوى المقاومة في اليمن قتالها لمجرد أن واشنطن قالت إنها تؤيد وقف الحرب، وينتظرون التهدئة مع القوات الأميركية في سورية والعراق وعدم معاملتها كقوات احتلال، لأن واشنطن تنظر لهذا الوجود كورقة مساومة لاحقة عندما تنتهي من الاتفاق مع إيران.

حدث ذلك من قبل، ففي عام 2015 عندما قام جيش الاحتلال بقرار من رئيس حكومة الكيان يومها بنيامين نتنياهو بالإعلان عن العزم على فرض قواعد اشتباك على المقاومة، رداً على معادلات أعلنها الأمين العام لحزب الله السيد حسن نصرالله، وكان اغتيال الشهيد جهاد مغنية، وتوقع نتنياهو وردّد خلفه كل جماعة أميركا في المنطقة، أن حزب الله لن يردّ، وأن إيران المنخرطة في التفاوض ستضغط على المقاومة لمنع الرد لأنه يخرب المسار التفاوضيّ، ولكن الواقع كان أن المقاومة ردّت وبقسوة، وفرضت معادلاتها، والذي ضغط على حليفه لعدم الرد كان الأميركي، الذي قال بلسان الرئيس الأميركي باراك أوباما لنتنياهو تعليقاً على ردّ المقاومة، إن الضربة موجعة لكنها لا تستحق حرباً، فأعلن نتنياهو العضّ على الجراح، كما قال.

في سورية والعراق احتلال أميركي والحق الطبيعي لقوى المقاومة هو خوض المواجهة حتى انسحاب هذه القوات. وهذا حق وطني منفصل عما يدور في المفاوضات الأميركية مع إيران، وإيران تفكر بهذه الطريقة. وهذا ما يعلمه الأميركي من تجاربه السابقة مع إيران، قبل توقيع الاتفاق النووي عام 2015، ففي كل مرة كان الأميركي يرغب بفتح التفاوض حول الملفات الإقليمية كانت تردّ إيران بأن التفاوض محصور بالملف النووي، وبعد توقيع الاتفاق في كل مرة كان الأميركي يحاول عبر الوسطاء طلب التدخل الإيراني مع فريق من قوى المقاومة، كان الجواب الإيراني أن قوى المقاومة هي قوى مستقلة بقرارها وإيران لا تقبل بمطالبتها بالضغط على هذه القوى، وأنه عندما يكون هناك لدى الخصوم المحليين لهذه القوى شيء يستحق التحدث مع هذه القوى فإن إيران يمكن أن تسهل اللقاء، لا أكثر ولا أقل، وليس أدل على ذلك من تجربة أنصار الله في اليمن، قبل تفاهم استوكهولم حول الحديدة وبعده.

مقياس قوى المقاومة في سورية والعراق، ينطلق من حسابات سورية وعراقية. ففي العراق هناك قرار من البرلمان العراقي بانسحاب القوات الأميركية تقابله واشنطن بالمراوغة، والاستهداف الأميركي الأخير لقوى المقاومة على الحدود العراقية السورية إعلان حرب يجب أن تدفع قوات الاحتلال الأميركي ثمنه، وأن تدرك أن قوى المقاومة جاهزة للمواجهة المفتوحة حتى رحيل الاحتلال، وفي سورية عدا عن عملية الاستهداف، يصرّح الأميركيّون بنهبهم لنفط سورية، ويقومون بحماية مجموعات انفصاليّة تشاركهم نهب القمح والنفط، ويعلن الأميركيون ربط بقائهم بمصير الحدود بين بلدين شقيقين سيدين هما سورية والعراق، بهدف قطع التواصل بينهما، بينما تتحرّك القوات الأميركية عبر الحدود مستبيحة كل مقوّمات سيادة البلدين، وتنقل ثرواتهما المنهوبة عبر الحدود، وتتخذ من المناطق الكردية قواعد للعبث بوحدة البلدين، ما يجعل عمليات المقاومة في سورية، كما في العراق، رداً مشروعاً وطبيعياً.

الذي يجب أن يكون مستغرباً هو البقاء الأميركي في العراق وسورية، بينما يحزم الأميركي حقائبه في أفغانستان للرحيل، رافضاً تسلم قوى قاتلت الإرهاب أرض بلادها، مخلفاً وراءه في أفغانستان تشكيلات اتهمها بالإرهاب بعد عشرين عاماً من الفشل في الحرب التي شنها على أفغانستان. وبالمناسبة كان الرئيس باراك أوباما يقول إنه سينسحب من العراق لأن لا مبرر للبقاء، ويبقى في أفغانستان لأن الحرب هناك جزء من الحرب العالمية على الإرهاب، ويأتي الرئيس جو بايدن ويقلب الأولويات، ويتوقع أن لا يكون درس الانسحاب الأميركي من أفغانستان هو أن الأميركي لا تحكمه قواعد ولا مبادئ ولا استراتيجيات، فهو يبقى حيث لا ينزف ويرحل حيث ينزف، لذلك عليه أن يتوقع أنه سينزف حتى يقرّر الرحيل، من دون أن يغيب عن تفكير قوى المقاومة أن الأميركي لا يمانع الانسحاب من أفغانستان رغم توصيفاته للحرب بحرب على الإرهاب طالما لا تداعيات للانسحاب على أمن كيان الاحتلال، بينما يتمسك ببقائه في سورية والعراق لفرض معادلات تتصل بالحدود بين البلدين وبحدود سورية مع الجولان المحتل، طلباً لأمن كيان الاحتلال، فتصير حرب المقاومة مع الاحتلال الأميركي امتداداً طبيعياً لالتزام قوى المقاومة بمعركتها مع كيان الاحتلال.

Khatibzadeh: Iran’s Stance on JCPOA Not to Change with Administration Change

 July 6, 2021

Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh
Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh

Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh stressed that the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) and lifting sanctions are among Iran’s principled stances, saying they will not alter with government change.

Speaking to reporters on Tuesday, Khatibzadeh said if any agreement is made, the next Iranian government will abide by it.

Unlike the approach taken by other parties, compliance with commitments has always been considered as a principle for Iran, he said.

Despite the fact that some topics still need decisions, progress in Vienna talks is a reality accepted by all parties, he added.

In fact, the finalization of the agreement to revive the JCPOA depends on other parties’ political will, Khatibzadeh reiterated. adding that Iranian delegation is trying to conclude negotiations and to lift cruel sanctions against Iran.

He went on to say that no deadline will be set and negotiations will be underway until the agreement is achieved to meet Iranians’ interests.

He also said that as always mentioned, Iran is not in hurry to reach agreement but will not let erosive talks.

Elsewhere in his remarks, Khatibzadeh said 13 prisoners were recently released from Japan’s and Afghanistan’s prisons and have returned home.

Reacting to Western media claims regarding the US message through diplomatic channels to Iran on recent attacks again Syria and Iraq, he said Iran has always stressed that the language of threat and force will not help establish security in the region.

He advised the US to be aware of the fact that bullying approach not only will bring no result but will deteriorate conditions in West Asia.

ُStressing that Iran has never intended and does not intend to interfere in internal affairs of Iraq, the spokesman said that the US continuous attacks against Iraq and Syria forces’ positions on common borders were only in line with hurting those who stand against the ISIS and reinforcing this terrorist organization.

The Iranian diplomat emphasized that Iran’s opposes the Zionist regime’s membership in the African Union as an observer.

He urged members of the African Union to respect approvals of the international bodies like the organization of the Islamic Cooperation (OIC) on opposing granting membership to Israeli regime in regional and international organizations to show their political determination regarding commitment to Palestinian cause.

He noted that OIC Secretary-General Yousef al-Othaimeen in a letter to Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif had appreciated Iran’s commitments to the OIC principles and Iran’s participation in supporting the Islamic states’ joint efforts on issues related to Muslim Ummah.

He added that granting the observer position to the Zionist regime by the African Union would encourage the regime to continue its colonial and racist policies and to conduct military strikes and commit more crimes against the Palestinians.

Hailing truce In Ethiopia after eight-month war, Khatibzadeh congratulated the Ethiopia Government and nation for holding the 6th round of parliamentary election in a peaceful atmosphere.

Iran urges all sides to support the ceasefire to help establish peace and security in the region.

Elsewhere in his remarks, Khatibzadeh said that Saudi officials should know that based on its principled positions, Iran has always been after preserving peace and security in the Persian Gulf by the regional states.

This approach has contributed ending existence of the ISIS and other terrorist groups in Syria and Iraq and preventing infiltration of Takfiri groups’ in the Persian Gulf littoral states.

Iran has always welcomed negotiations to achieve results and has had positive view toward talking to Saudi Arabia.

He also reacted to claims made by some Western media on Iran’s sports and its participation in Olympic Games, saying such claims are incompatible with the spirit of Olympic Charter and sports objectives.

Iran, with all its cultural considerations, is among pioneers of gender equality, and this year, the Iranian girls will have an effective presence in track-and-field category after 57 years.

Khatibzadeh went on to say that Iran’s consulate in Mazar-i-Sharif will resume activities after the situation calms down.

Regarding Azerbaijan initiative in line with creating a regional 3+3 cooperation context, he said that after liberating Azeri lands, grounds have been prepared for Caucasian states as well as Iran, Russia, and Turkey based on respect of territorial integrity of all regional states.

Thanks to its close ties with Caucasian states, Russia, and Turkey, Iran can take important strides in this regard, he noted.

SourceIranian Agencies

%d bloggers like this: