The Palestinian people, through resisting Israeli tyranny and unlawful occupation, sent a message to the United States that it could not divide Palestine how it wished from the comfort of all accross the globe.
The occupation and Trump’s dreams of a “Deal of the Century” were dissipated by a united Palestinian people and a valiant resistance
Former US President Donald Trump followed in the colonial footsteps that saw the West, namely the United Kingdom and France, divided West Asia – and other colonies around East Asia and the entirety of Africa – among themselves from their distant lands of London and Paris. In early 2020, Trump announced a neo-colonial plan for occupied Palestine that gave his Israeli allies authority over more Palestinian land and further recognized Israeli “sovereignty” over Palestine. He dubbed this self-proclaimed “peace” plan “the Deal of the Century.”
The deal itself was designed to further strip Palestinians of their right to their land usurped from them by an occupation that has been ongoing for nearly a century now with support from the United States and the majority of the West. It was a mere extension of the neo-colonial practices that have done nothing but harmed the nations they created, with the overwhelming majority still heavily suffering until this day.
The alienation from the cultures and ethnicities whose lives will be affected by mere lines drawn on a piece of paper was a common practice among colonialists, and apparently, despite the West trying to depict it as something from the past, the same colonial powers – or the ones that inherited their influence – are still acting as they did, not even trying to hide their meddling, and even going as far as putting a bow on their interference and labeling it “a gift of peace.”
Split Palestine among you
Trump, from the comfort of his White House nearly 11,000 km away from Palestine, deemed it fit for him to decide what happens to the occupied land. The Israeli occupation would “retain” 20% of the West Bank, a land that is righteously Palestinian, while “giving up” part of Al-Naqab to Palestine.
The map chalked up by Trump not only gave the Israeli occupation a false sense of sovereignty over Palestinian land, but it sought to divide the Palestinian capital of Al-Quds, only granting part of the city to the Palestinians while declaring that it would “remain undivided as Israel’s capital.”
When it comes to the illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, “Tel Aviv” would also maintain its occupation of the Palestinian land in the Jordan Valley. However, the settlements in the West Bank would not only be defined by their “municipal borders”, but their “security parameters”, meaning the scope of Israeli occupation would encroach further on Palestinian land.
Going far and beyond, the United States would not the Palestinian state its rightful recognition, though the Americans failed to see that the Palestinians are not awaiting their recognition, for Palestine is more than a state in their mind and that of the Arab and Islamic worlds.
Trump, through his idea of “peace”, handed the Palestinians an ultimatum: they had to accept their new borders, drawn up in the United States, for the West to recognize their statehood four years after signing the malignant accord. They also had to drop their weapons and give up resisting the occupation’s tyranny.
That same resistance whose arms Trump wanted on the ground came right back and bit the United States and the Israeli occupation when, through Seif Al-Quds, it shattered any prospect of such a deal for “Tel Aviv” and Washington. If things were to go how the neocolonialists wanted them to happen, Palestine would not have only lost the land it was giving up through the deal. It would have lost more to the Israeli expansionism they could not curb without their arms.
Get your hands off Palestine
The Palestinian people have long been suffering from “Israel’s” arbitrary occupation and tyrannical expansionism, and they were not going to accept to be dealt another round of the poison forced down their throat by their colonizers for decades.
A year later, a new equation was established: Palestine is indivisible, and it would not kneel before the world powers trying to further rob it of its rights.
That equation was written using Seif Al-Quds Battle, which saw Palestinians setting out to break the Israeli hegemony over their land. Relentlessly, and in defense of their brethren in the occupied West Bank and occupied Al-Quds, whom the Israeli occupation abused and committed numerous violations and crimes against, the Palestinian resistance in Gaza crushed “Tel Aviv’s” arrogance and forced “Israel” into giving up its ambitions and dreams of undermining Palestinian unity.
The battle was launched in response to Israeli brutality against the Palestinian people of Al-Quds and the West Bank, who the occupation regime sought to rob their land and homes, displacing them once more on the country they stole from them four scores ago.
The Palestinian resistance could not stand idle and retaliated against the occupation’s aggression in an 11-day-long battle that shifted the regional balance of power and put “Israel” before a new reality: hands off Al-Quds and the West Bank, otherwise they will bear the brunt of their own doings.
In 11 long days for “Israel”, the resistance exposed the occupation’s weaknesses and curbed its expansionism so much so that any settlement expansion plans would have to be thought of thoroughly in fear of retaliation from Hamas or the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. The battle taught “Tel Aviv” many lessons, among them was Palestinian unity.
Normalizers at bay
Seif Al-Quds not only forced the Israeli occupation to tread carefully on Palestinian soil – it caused those who sought to normalize ties with it following the first wave of normalization in 2020 to stay away from the table with the Israeli occupation. Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, Sudan, and Morocco all shook hands with the Israeli occupation in a very short period of time and recognized the sovereignty of their regime over occupied Palestine.
The table of normalization has been empty since late 2020, with Khartoum being the last one to sit with the Americans and the Israelis. A year and a half later, the Israeli occupation is still unable to have another country recognize its false “statehood” that exists on tens of thousands of Palestinian graves murdered at the hands of “Tel Aviv’s” settlers terrorizing Palestinians for a land that is not theirs.
The Palestinian resistance curbed the occupation and its main backer, the United States, from being able to establish the “two-state solution” they have been dreaming of since the signing of the Oslo Accords. The “two states” in question consist of “Israel” and a state controlled by the occupation directly and labeled as “Palestine”, though it is a terraformed version of the righteous Palestine the Palestinian people are putting their blood, sweat, and tears towards liberating.
This “Palestine” drawn up by Trump and former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would not be autonomous whatsoever, and its people would not be able to fend off any aggression the Israeli occupation is known to arbitrarily perpetrate no matter the gravity. It would not be the Palestine whose freedom people all over the world champion and advocate when they chant “Free Palestine”.
The mirage of a “Deal of the Century” is gone, and it was dissipated by the united Palestinian people and the valiant resistance that showed no restrain in defending the sovereignty of occupied Palestine.
In less than two years, former President Trump’s Middle East peace agreement is in shambles and the Israel lobby is desperate to revive it, no matter the cost.
WASHINGTON — Earlier this month, Congress launched the bicameral, bipartisan Abraham Accords Caucus to support normalization between Israel and Arab states. Backed by pro-Israel groups, this new political development can be interpreted as a way for the Israel lobby to regain its power over a U.S. Congress that is increasingly critical of Israel.
Described as a “cheerleading squad” in the Jewish Insider by its co-chair, Sen. James Lankford (R-OK), the caucus’s stated goals include expanding the Abraham Accords agreements and fostering regional peace. The group’s other co-chairs are Sens. Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Joni Ernst (R-IA) and Cory Booker (D-NJ), and Reps. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), David Trone (D-MD), Ann Wagner (R-MO), and Brad Schneider (D-IL).
The Institute for Middle East Understanding (IMEU) speculated that one of the caucus’ top priorities may be passing the Israel Relations Normalization Act, a bill requiring the United States Department of State to promote normalization between Israel and Arab countries. The IMEU also outlined why the new caucus is particularly controversial, highlighting how the group could be used to crack down on criticism of the Israeli government.
IMEU said in its policy analysis:
In addition to the problematic nature of reifying Trump-administration deals with authoritarian regimes, this legislation is controversial for additional reasons, among which are: A statement of policy “to oppose efforts to delegitimize the state of Israel.” In other legislative initiatives, this vague phraseology has been used as coded language to propose the suppression and even criminalization of freedom of expression to criticize Israeli policies.
The idea that the Abraham Accords need a “cheerleading squad” is particularly fitting in this political climate in which traditional bipartisan support is waning, Zaha Hassan, a policy analyst at Palestinian think tank Al-Shabaka, explained to MintPress News, adding:
The folks that started the Abraham Accords Caucus decided to pursue this because they see that the U.S. administration isn’t being active enough in expanding and deepening the Abraham Accords.”
As Congress votes this week on expanding #AbrahamAccords & putting it on steriods, this thread is critical context for understanding why #Israel Relations #Normalization Act is more about entrenching Israel's illegal settlements than abt peacebuilding & #Palestinian prosperity. https://t.co/7e8z5oPk4L
Hassan noted that the timing of the caucus’s debut is important to note as well, as politicians — specifically Democratic members of Congress — and the public have started questioning or even condemning Israel’s actions. She explained:
We have organizations like Human Rights Watch and various Israeli legal and human rights organizations talking about an apartheid situation in Israel-Palestine.
And just at that moment when we’re having that conversation, there’s all this uptick in activity around talking about peace, prosperity, regional economic integration, and expanding the Abraham Accords, and that’s now become the focus of attention.”
With a failed peace process and congressional members calling for greater accountability for Israel, Hassan said the conversation around Palestine-Israel is shifting, and that’s where the new caucus steps in to act as a diversionary tactic:
It’s trying to find a new direction for the conversation to go in, recognizing the peace process can no longer be used as an excuse.
The idea is that since there isn’t a possibility in Israel or among Palestinians for a peace agreement, we should focus instead on bettering the economic situation of Palestinians and the region writ large.”
Deceptive praise
The announcement of the Abraham Accords Caucus was met with a flurry of enthusiasm in the press and among politicians, as noted by the founder and president of the Foundation for Middle East Peace, Lara Friedman, in the organization’s Legislative Round-Up, where she wrote:
The announcement of the new caucus was accompanied by praise and welcome from the Biden Administration, from the Bahraini government (among others), and a burst of giddy articles/op-eds/editorials promoting the Abraham Accords and/or the caucus, and pressing the Biden Administration to do more to expand normalization.
Friedman emphasized in her analysis the clear congressional hypocrisy when it came to this ecstatic round of approval for the new caucus:
This bipartisan congressional enthusiasm for expanding Arab normalization with Israel stands in stark contrast to decades of Congress’ demonstrated apathy, timidity, antipathy, and outright obstructionism with respect to anything related to trying to secure normal rights for Palestinians.
This sudden burst of enthusiasm/support/pressure around the Abraham Accords all appears aimed at pressuring the Biden Administration not only to more strongly support the Accords but to follow in the footsteps of the Trump Administration in using U.S. sweeteners to achieve normalization deals — sweeteners that under Trump meant that the accords were paid for via U.S. arms deals and by the U.S. changing policy on a critical geopolitical/legal question (i.e., recognizing Morocco’s claims to the Western Sahara).
Trump’s ‘Deal of the Century’ unraveling
In less than two years, former President Donald Trump’s Middle East peace agreement is in shambles. The deal with the United Arab Emirates — the first country to normalize relations with Israel as part of the Accords — is at an impasse. The UAE decided to buy aircraft from France instead of purchasing American F-35 jet fighters, which purportedly was the straw that broke the camel’s back.
According to the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, the Abraham Accords were a key legislative agenda item for the American Israel Public Relations Committee (AIPAC). With the F-35 sale now off the table, the Accords are proving to be a failure.
The Accords and its new caucus claim their objective is to foster regional stability, including achieving a peaceful solution for Palestine and Israel. From Hassan’s perspective, however, normalization with Israel is actually about normalizing and cementing Israeli settlements.
“Some of the first follow-on agreements [between Israel and the UAE] involved settler enterprises,” Hassan said, mentioning the established trade partnerships between businesses operating in illegal Israeli settlements and the UAE, and how delegations of settler councils visited the Gulf state following normalization. “So Israel’s incentive with the Abraham Accords is to really solidify its control over the West Bank.”
Backed by the Israel lobby
While the caucus boasted of its bipartisan representation, the groups backing it are anything but politically divided. FMEP’s Friedman wrote:
A serious investment of time and effort (and possibly funding) has clearly gone into establishing the caucus and getting its establishment/objectives maximum attention, …managing to pull together a caucus that is bipartisan and bicameral, and that enjoys support from an array of mainly center/right-wing pro-Israel groups (both Jewish and Christian), as well as one mainstream think tank.
Hadassah — The Women’s Zionist Organization of America
The US-Israel Education Association
The Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations
The Israel Policy Forum
Christians United for Israel (CUFI) Action
The Jewish Federations of North America
B’nai B’rith International
The money sources behind the group’s establishment and promotional materials are largely unknown. MintPress News reached out to the aforementioned organizations to determine if their organizational support translated to financial backing, but those requests haven’t been answered.
However, being supported by a majority of pro-Israel groups suggests the caucus’s goals may not be as peace-oriented as its PR suggests. Al-Shabaka’s Hassan explained:
The ones leading the caucus’ establishment aren’t necessarily the most actively supportive of a two-state solution. So it’s difficult to imagine this group is going to be prioritizing that as a part of their support for the Abraham Accords.”
Folks in this Abraham Accords Caucus are less interested in an Israeli-Palestinian political solution than in recognizing Israeli sovereignty. If you have organizations like CUFI backing this caucus, you get the idea of what kind of place Palestinian sovereignty or statehood is going to play in the work of the caucus.”
علّق رئيس حركة “مجتمع السلم” في الجزائر، عبد الرزاق مقري، أمس، على نتائج الانتخابات التشريعيات المغربية والتي تذيّل فيها حزب “العدالة والتنمية” الترتيب، بالقول إنّ “لعنة فلسطين أصابة العثماني وحزبه”.
وجاء في منشور لرئيس حركة مجتمع السلم عبر حسابه على “فيسبوك” أنّ “لعنة فلسطين تصيب سعد الدين العثماني والعدالة والتنمية في المغرب عبرة لمن يريد أن يعتبر”.
كما اعتبر مقري أنّ “الخسارة بالتزوير الانتخابي أفضل من الخسارة المهينة في حضن الفساد والعمالة”، قائلاً إنهم “يحاربون الإسلاميين من أجل مبادئهم، فإن دجنوهم وتركوا مبادئهم، ينهونهم بشكل أو بآخر”.
فيما دعا عبد الإله بنكيران، الأمين العام السابق لحزب “العدالة والتنمية” المغربي (قائد الائتلاف الحكومي المنتهية ولايته)، أمس، إلى استقالة أمينه العام الحالي سعد الدين العثماني، إثر “هزيمة مؤلمة” للحزب في انتخابات برلمانية أُجريت أول أمس.
وللمرة الأولى في تاريخ المملكة، ترأس “العدالة والتنمية” (مرجعية إسلامية) الحكومة منذ 2011، إثر فوزه في انتخابات ذلك العام، وما تلتها في 2016.
لكن بعد فرز 96 في المئة من أصوات انتخابات الأربعاء، حلّ الحزب في المرتبة الثامنة بحصوله على 12 مقعداً فقط (من أصل 395)، مقارنة بـ125 حصدها في انتخابات 2016 بحيث خسر 113 مقعداً.
وبلغت نسبة المشاركة في انتخابات برلمانية وبلدية متزامنة، أول أمس، 50.18 في المئة، وفق وزارة الداخلية.
يغادر حزب العدالة والتنمية الحُكم مجلَّلاً بعار التطبيع مع “إسرائيل”، بعد أن قدَّم فقهَ المصالح على فقه المبادئ.
سجَّلت نتائج الانتخابات البرلمانية المغربية سقوطاً مدوّياً، وهزيمة سياسية مؤلمة لحزب العدالة والتنمية المغربي، وأظهرت احتفاظه بــ (12) مقعداً فقط من أصل (125) مقعداً فاز فيها في آخر انتخابات جرت عام 2016. في المقابل، اكتسح حزب التجمع الوطني للأحرار، محقّقاً (97) مقعداً، يليه حزب الأصالة والمعاصرة في المرتبة الثانية، وحصل على (82) مقعداً، تلاهما حزب الاستقلال في المرتبة الثالثة، حاصداً (78) مقعداً.
لم يتوقَّع أحد أن تكون الهزيمة وَفْقَ هذه الصورة، وخصوصاً أن كلَّ التوقعات كانت تشير إلى أن العدالة والتنمية سيتراجع إلى حدّ ما، وقد لا يتمكّن من الاستمرار في تشكيل الحكومة. لكن، مع هذه النتائج، بات حزب العدالة والتنمية خارج المشهد السياسي في المغرب، بعد سنوات طويلة من سيطرته على البرلمان والحكومة، حتى إن أمينه العام لم يتمكّن من الاحتفاظ بمقعده البرلماني على الأقل.
علينا أن نتوقَّف أمام المشهد المغربي وقراءته بعمق أكثر، وتفسير النتائج التي أفرزتها الانتخابات المغربية، والعوامل التي أوصلت العدالة والتنمية إلى هذه الانتكاسة. ووفق إجماع كثيرين، فإن السبب الحقيقي في هذه النتائج لم يكن وليدّ اللحظة، بل جاء نتيجة صيغة تراكمية، بدءاً بالتقصير في ملفات داخلية ذات أهمية للمواطن المغربي، تتعلّق بالصحة والتعليم والاقتصاد، وانتهاءً بالقشّة التي قصمت ظَهر البعير، أي “خطيئة التطبيع”، والتي رعاها حزب العدالة والتنمية، أو بشكل أدق جريمة التطبيع التي ورَّطَ فيها الدولةَ العميقة في المغرب، ومباركة سعد الدين العثماني للتطبيع، ورضوخه لتوجيهات الملك المغربي محمد السادس بشأن توقيع الاتفاقية المشؤومة.
شكَّلت هذه الخطوة السياسية (أي توقيع اتفاقية التطبيع) الضربة الموجعة للعدالة والتنمية المغربي، بعد أن اتَّضحت حالة التناقض الكبيرة بين تصريحات قادته والمواقف العملية، والتي أظهرت أزمة هوية حقيقية داخل الحزب الذي ارتضى لنفسه أن يكون أداة في يد الملك، ورفع شعار التطبيع من أجل فلسطين، حتى أصبح، في نظر المغاربة، حزب “عرّاب التطبيع” الذي تنازل عن قيم قاعدته الشعبية ومكانة فلسطين في قلوب المغاربة، فاستوجب العقاب من النواة الصلبة للحزب أولاً، ثم كان خيار المغاربة خيارَ التصويت العقابي، وصولاً إلى الخسارة الفادحة.
شهد حزب العدالة والتنمية المغربي مؤخَّراً هزّات داخلية كبيرة، دفعته إلى إطلاق حوار من أجل إيجاد إجابات بشأن القرارات الأخيرة التي اتُّخِذت. وزاد توقيع رئيس الحكومة المغربية والأمين العام للحزب، سعد الدين العثماني، على اتفاق تطبيع العلاقات مع “إسرائيل”، في حدّتها على الصعيد الداخلي.
ثمة وقفات ودلالات كثيرة تُسجَّل أمام مشهد نتائج الانتخابات البرلمانية المغربية المتوقَّعة. ولا شكّ في أن الهزيمة الثقيلة، والتي لحقت بحزب العدالة والتنمية المغربي، هي انعكاس طبيعي للأسباب والدوافع الداخلية والخارجية الكثيرة. فمثل هذه الواقعة يستوجب الدراسة الواعية والمراجَعة لما بات يُعرَف بالثنائيات المتناقضة.
الأسباب كثيرة وراء انتكاسة العدالة والتنمية. وانطلاقاً من العوامل والدوافع، يسجِّل المشهد علامات كثيرة، أبرزها اتخاذ المواطن المغربي سلوكَ التصويت العقابي لأداء الحكومة على مدى عشر سنوات، وحالة الانتقادات الكبيرة للأداء الاقتصادي الحكومي داخل المغرب، واتخاذ منطلقات وقرارات أحادية داخل الحكومة لا تتَّسق مع التوجهات الأساسية للحزب، الذي يحظى بشعبية على أساسها، كالموافقة على تشريع القنّب الهندي للأغراض الطبية والصناعية، والذي ترتّبت عليه أزمة داخل الحزب، أدّت إلى استقالة رئيس الوزراء المغربي السابق عبد الإله بن كيران، وتجميد عضويته في الحزب.
يُضاف إلى ذلك أن التعديلات التي جرت مؤخَّراً على قانون الانتخابات لم تكن في مصلحة الحزب، وكذلك الرضا بسياسة الاستعمال من جانب الديوان الملكي، والرضا بسياسة التماهي بديلاً عن سياسة المبادئ والثوابت، وانتهاج سياسة التبرير للقرارات المتخَذة، وغياب الخطط والبرامج، وتقديم سياسة الاستحواذ بديلاً عن سياسة الشراكة والمشاركة مع الأطراف الأخرى. والأسباب كثيرة لا مجال لحصرها. فكل ذلك جعل المشهد الداخلي للحزب، والمشهد الشعبي المغربي، يشكّلان صورة نمطية تعكس حالة عدم رضا، ووجود توجّهات جديدة في المشهد المغربي.
وجود أي حزب سياسي داخل السلطة أصبح اليوم مرتبطاً بثلاث قضايا أساسية، أُوْلاها المحافظة على المبادئ والثوابت، ثم القدرة على الاستجابة للمطالب الاجتماعية والاقتصادية، ثم الاقتناع الشعبي بشرعية الإنجاز من عدمها. وقتها، تحسم صناديق الاقتراع إلى أي جهة ستذهب الأصوات.
غرَّرت الإدارة الأميركية السابقة، بزعامة دونالد ترامب، بحزب العدالة الحاكم في المغرب، بشأن الاعتراف بالسيادة على الصحراء المغربية، وبعض من الامتيازات، في مقابل رشوة التطبيع. والحقيقة اليوم أن ما قبل نتائج الانتخابات البرلمانية المغربية ليس كما بعدها، فلقد سقط ترامب، وسقط العدالة والتنمية، وبقيت الصحراء الغربية منطقة متنازَعاً عليها.
يغادر حزب العدالة والتنمية الحُكم مجلَّلاً بعار التطبيع مع “إسرائيل”، بعد أن قدَّم فقهَ المصالح على فقه المبادئ. وهذه هي الحقيقة الواضحة والأبرز في المشهد المغربي، على الرغم من التفاصيل الأخرى التي يجب أن يقرّ بها كل أعضاء الحزب المغربي، بعيداً عن نظرية المؤامرة، والتي يحاول البعض استحضارها لتبرير الفشل، فالسُّنن لا تحابي ولا تجامل من ارتضى أن يتنازل عن قدسية القضية الفلسطينية من أجل وعود أميركية قطعها ترامب آنذاك، كما لا يمكن تبرير جريمة كجريمة التطبيع، تحت أيّ ظرف وزمان.
سقط اليوم حزب العدالة في الانتخابات البرلمانية بعد سقوطه في وَحْل التطبيع. فهذه الخسارة حتمية لكل مَن تسوّل له نفسه أن يبيع القضية الفلسطينية، أو أن يبيع أمانة الشعوب التي ائتُمِنَ عليها، ويطبّع مع “إسرائيل”. فالشعوب لا تنسى ولا تغفر لأي قوة سياسية، مهما كان لونها، أن تبيع فلسطين ومبادئ أمتها وشعوبها. فثبات العمل يكون في القيم والمبادئ والمنطلقات، حتى تبلغ الأهداف.
يتوجب على حزب العدالة والتنمية المغربي الاعتراف بالهزيمة، واستخلاص العِبَر من النتائج، وإعادة قراءة المشهد بطريقة مغايرة. فهذه النتيجة تضع حزب العدالة والتنمية أمام مفترق طرق حقيقي: إمّا الاندثار، وإمّا الإقرار بالأخطاء السابقة، بهدف تصويب المسار، سواء على الصعيد الداخلي، أو حتى الخارجي، تجاه القضايا الثابتة. فتجربة المغرب تقول، بوضوح، إن الشعوب العربية حيّة، ولديها انتماء كبير إلى قضيتها الكبرى فلسطين، وإنها تحاسب مَن تسوّل له نفسه المَسّ بها. ففلسطين الرافعة الخافضة، ومن يلعب بالثوابت فهو المتغيّر، لا محالة.
أمّا تداعيات المشهد الجديد في المغرب، وصعود التجمع الوطني للأحرار، أو، كما يقال، الحزب الأكثر قرباً إلى ملك المغرب، بالإضافة إلى الأحزاب الأخرى التي حصدت مقاعد، كحزب الاستقلال، فستُعيد تشكيل المشهد على وجه مُغاير لما كانت عليه السنوات العشر الماضية داخلياً. ولا يجب المبالغة كثيراً أمام تحديات داخلية يعيشها المغرب بفعل أزمات اقتصادية وأزمة “كورونا” وغيرها. أمّا السياسة الخارجية للمغرب فستبقى في يد الملك، ولن تتغير كثيراً تجاه القضايا الجوهرية في المنطقة، ولاسيما تجاه قضية التطبيع مع “إسرائيل”، أو التراجع عنها، أو حتى تجاه القضية الفلسطينية بصورة أساسية.
The Israeli prime minister is first since Golda Meir to propose the racist status quo as a political platform
In March 2015, then Israeli economy minister Naftali Bennett during an election campaign gathering in Kibbutz Kfar Etzion in the Gush Etzion settlement in the West Bank (AFP)
“There is no diplomatic process with the Palestinians, nor will there be one,” said a source close to Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett last week after his defence minister, Benny Gantz, met with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas.Biden-Bennett summit a meeting of wishful thinkers who oppose NetanyahuRead More »
Thus is Bennett’s spiritual world revealed: a world in which Israel, and only Israel, exists, and where the Palestinians will never, under any circumstances, even if they change their positions, be able to attain equality with Israelis and negotiate with them as equals. There is a word for that: racism.
Nearly a decade ago, Bennett entered national politics after serving as director-general of the Yesha Council, the leading settler institution, although he himself was never a settler and doesn’t live beyond the Green Line. In a now-famous interview, he said: “The Palestinian problem is like shrapnel in the butt.”
Today, his approach has not changed, although as prime minister, he may express himself less bluntly, as he admitted just before taking office in early June.
Bennett expressed this approach in an interview he gave the New York Times ahead of his recent trip to Washington. “This government will not annex, nor establish a Palestinian state, everyone understands that,” he said. “Israel will continue the standard policy of natural growth [of West Bank settlements].”
In saying this, Bennett became the first Israeli prime minister, with the possible exception of Golda Meir in the years prior to the 1973 war, to propose what amounts to apartheid as a political platform.
Permanent status quo
It is true that the policy of “managing the occupation” is almost as old as the Israeli occupation itself. In February 1973, for example, then-Defence Minister Moshe Dayan said, “We must plan ahead for our actions in the territories [conquered by Israel in June 1967] … so that a situation of ‘no war and no peace’ will not be unbearable for us… Authority for deciding on what happens from Suez to the [Mt] Hermon is in the hands of the Israeli government. We will not idly delineate boundaries for our settlements nor be threatened by smouldering embers.”
But the philosophy Dayan articulated then still exists and every prime minister since, except perhaps Yitzhak Rabin – whose assassination makes it impossible to know whether he meant to break the mould – has adopted it with different variations: “No war, no peace” or, in other words, a continuation of the status quo. Seven months later, the “smouldering embers” that Dayan dismissed had become the firestorm of the October 1973 war, with thousands killed on both sides, forcing Israel to subsequently return the Sinai Peninsula to Egypt.
Bennett basically said that this status quo of ‘no war, no peace’ is not an interim situation, but rather the permanent situation
But Bennett has gone one step further. Even Dayan called the territories occupied by Israel a “deposit” to be returned in exchange for a peace agreement meeting Israel’s needs. Since the 1990s, Israeli prime ministers have been discussing, at least officially, support for the two-state solution, including Ariel Sharon and even Benjamin Netanyahu, who adopted the Palestinian state idea in his 2009 Bar-Ilan speech. In 2020, he also accepted former US President Donald Trump’s “deal of the century” which included the establishment of a Palestinian state, however crippled and fragmented.
In his New York Timesinterview, however, Bennett basically said that this status quo of “no war, no peace” is not an interim situation, but rather the permanent situation to which he aspires.
In this situation, Israel, on the one hand, will continue its military rule over the Palestinians in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, and continue to accord Jewish citizens in the West Bank preferential rights as compared with Palestinians.
On the other hand, Israel will not accord Palestinians civil rights equal to those of their Jewish neighbours as would be necessitated by a partial or full annexation of the West Bank. This approach also has a name – apartheid – and Bennett believes it to be the only one possible.
‘Shrink the conflict’
We don’t know precisely what was said in Bennett’s discussions with President Joe Biden and Secretary of State Antony Blinken, but publicly at least no American reservations were heard about Bennett’s positions. Nor did the Jewish centre-left parties in Israel like Labor and Meretz, which are part of Bennett’s coalition, voice any protest. This is a dangerous precedent.
But it would be overly simplistic to say that the Bennett government will be more rightist or more violent toward the Palestinians. The opposite might be true.How Beita became a model of Palestinian resistance against IsraelRead More »
First of all, Bennett came into office from a position of political weakness. He heads a small party with six Knesset seats out of 120, and most of his coalition members are more leftist than he is – at least for Israel whose Labor Party positions toward the Palestinians would be considered right in Europe.
And there’s more. Bennett himself, along with his coalition partner, Gideon Saar, who had been a senior Likud figure and a leading candidate to replace Netanyahu, has changed his attitude considerably to the Palestinian question.
As the present government was being formed or immediately thereafter, both Bennett and Saar appeared to have relinquished the idea of Greater Israel and/or annexation, partially or wholly, embracing instead the new political concept of “shrinking the conflict”. The term originated with Micah Goodman, an Israeli of American extraction living in a West Bank settlement, whose books on the conflict have become bestsellers.
Goodman argues that the left in Israel has failed to bring an end to the occupation or to establish an independent Palestinian state, whereas the right failed with its idea of Greater Israel. Therefore, instead of talking about ending the conflict or continuing with the status quo, ways should be sought to “shrink the conflict”: to enable the Palestinians to manage their own affairs as independently as possible, while leaving “security” to Israel. After the conflict has been “shrunk,” says Goodman, it will be possible to discuss a permanent solution.
For a decade, Bennett pushed for annexation, but when the UAE and Bahrain signed the Abraham Accords in 2020, he realised it was impossible.
Goodman was an adviser to Saar and is considered to be close to Bennett. His influence was perceptible in an interview Bennett gave before taking office. “My approach is to shrink the conflict,” he said. “Where it is possible to have more crossings, better quality of life, more business, more industry, we will do it.”
For Bennett, this is a considerable shift. When he entered national politics in 2013, Bennett presented a detailed plan for the annexation of Area C, which is 60 percent of the West Bank. Over the years, he criticised Netanyahu and the Israeli army for not being aggressive enough toward the Palestinians and not “decisive” enough with Hamas.
For a decade, Bennett pushed for annexation, but when the UAE and Bahrain signed the Abraham Accords in 2020, he realised it was impossible. He also understood that a “final resolution” of the conflict by achieving a victory over the Palestinian so crushing that they would relinquish their national aspirations was also impossible. Thus, his adoption of the idea of “shrinking the conflict” is coming from failure and weakness, even if he refuses to admit it.
Israeli right in crisis
Bennett, then, reflects the situation of the Israeli right. On the one hand, he sanctifies the status quo and has no desire or intention of relinquishing the occupation or ending apartheid. On the other hand, the right is gradually losing its faith in its own power to shape the Israeli-Palestinian reality as it sees fit.
The fall of Netanyahu should be viewed in this context. Under Netanyahu, the right in Israel was united in a coherent, homogeneous bloc. The internal contradictions on the right, which Bennett represents, led to the fragmentation of this bloc and the establishment of a mixed government that contains elements of both right and left, including the United Arab List, an Palestinian-Islamist party headed by Mansour Abbas.Palestinian Authority losing control of West Bank, say insiders and activistsRead More »
Outwardly, all of these changes have not affected the situation on the ground. The occupation, and the settlements, continue. The political discourse in Israel remains stuck, in the best case, or else propounds Bennett’s thesis of “no peace, no war”. Israel is so strong – militarily and economically – that something significant would have to happen in order to threaten its control of the Palestinians and its power in the Middle East as a whole.
But at the same time, one cannot ignore the cracks. The ideological right in Israel is in trouble and the question is how and whether the radical left in Israel, or even more so the Palestinians, can turn that to advantage.
“Where there’s a crack, we have to make it a fissure, and where there’s a fissure, we have to make it a chasm,” a left-wing anti-occupation activist told me. Maybe that approach really will accomplish something.
Interwiew of Sayed Hashem Safi al-Din, Head of the Executive Office of Hezbollah, May 11, 2021.
This interview was to be devoted exclusively to martyr Sayed Mustafa Badr al-Din “Zulfiqar”, Hezbollah commander killed in Syria on May 13, 2016, but the developments in Gaza were evoked at the beginning and end of the interview. We only translate these excerpts. Sayed Hashem Safi al-Din is a likely successor to Hassan Nasrallah.
Journalist: […] Before getting to the heart of the matter, we must talk about what is happening in Palestine, especially since the Palestinian cause was very important to Sayed Zulfiqar. How does Hezbollah see the violent Israeli escalation against Palestinians in Al-Quds (Jerusalem) and Gaza? What are the challenges & horizons of this escalation, and why is it happening now?
Sayed Safi al-Din: In the Name of God, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful. Let me first congratulate Muslims on the last days of the month of Ramadan, and for Eid al-Fitr, which will be celebrated in a day or two. I ask God the Most High to make these occasions a blessing for our Ummah (worldwide Muslim community), for the Resistance fighters and for the combatants. I have special thoughts for the families of the martyrs, the family of Sayed Badr al-Din, his daughters, his sons, his parents and his brothers, as well as all his loved ones, and all the families of the martyrs. I ask God the Most High to fill them with blessings in these days.
I must also extend sincere and strong greetings, from the bottom of my heart, to the soul and spirit of the Mujaheedin in Palestine, to the (Palestinian) people of Al-Quds (Jerusalem), to its men, women, young people, children, and the young people of Gaza, to all the heroic fighters of all the Palestinian (Resistance) factions. We salute them with respect and thank them for everything they do during these days and hours, in these very minutes. They defend the honor of the entire Ummah. Al-Quds represents the honor of the whole Muslim Community, the dignity of the whole Muslim Community.
What is happening in Palestine today is a sign of the end of a stage, and the start of a new stage (of the Arab-Israeli conflict). We have witnessed, in recent years, some examples of Israeli and American arrogance and hubris, and examples of the servility, betrayal and humiliation (of Arab rulers) who have vilely crept in the direction of normalization (of their relations with Israel). Some thought this was the last Act to be played, but we told them it was not the end, because the Muslim community is bigger and stronger than that. The Ummah in which there are so many Resistants, martyrs and leaders such as Sayed Mustafa Badr al-Din, for whom Palestine was in the eyes, in the heart and in all his existence… We said that this Muslim Community concealed many blessings, strength, capacity and greatness, and that it was capable of shaping (itself) the future.
The events of Al-Quds occurred, with the events that followed, until the use of rockets yesterday and today, by the hundreds, a veritable storm of rockets which shook the Zionist entity in order to say (two things): first, to tell the Israelis that the Resistance was much stronger than they imagined; and second, to tell the Zionists and Americans as well and all the normalizers, cowards and traitors (of the Arab-Muslim world) that the Palestinian people was much stronger, and that he would never abandon Palestine or Al-Quds.
These upheavals happening today will open new doors, create a new reality. A reality fraught with (huge) consequences, namely new equations. The equation of victories, the equation of the near Liberation (of Palestine territories) with the grace of God the Most High. These are equations that are based on the sacrifices of recent years. In recent years, there have been many sacrifices on the part of the Palestinian people, the Resistance, the Resistance Axis, in all directions and on all fronts and battlefields. All of these sacrifices resulted in what we see today, some of the scenes we see today. And what is yet to come is greater, much greater with the grace of God the Most High. […]
Journalist: To come back to what is happening in Palestine, what did Al-Quds and Palestine represent in the eyes of Sayed Zulfiqar? What emotional and jihadist ties linked him to the Palestinian cause?
Sayed Safi al-Din: Palestine represents jihad, and his first connection to it is (through) weapons, guns and bullets. He began his journey as a fighter in the ranks of the Palestinian Resistance (during the Fedayeen era in Lebanon). He has (strong) links, experiences, relationships, participation (with them). After that, his experience within Hezbollah was mainly focused on Al-Quds and Palestine. It’s no secret, it’s the truth. He also belongs to this culture. As far as he was concerned, Palestine was the compass, the central cause, the ultimate goal and hope. Al-Quds was for him the place where we had to make all the sacrifices to reach the stage of its Liberation, because by liberating Al-Quds (Jerusalem), we will not only liberate the holy places, but we will recover all the honor and all the dignity that have been stolen from us in all the past decades. As far as we are concerned, Al-Quds is everything we live for. And in these days (of war in Gaza), we feel more than ever the presence of such figures as Sayed Zulfiqar, Hajj Imad Moghniyeh, and the great leader Hajj Qassem Soleimani: in the end, (even if) they have found martyrdom in Syria, in Iraq or anywhere else, their essential cause, their greatest hope, what their whole being tended towards was to bring the Muslim world from one point to another, until it reaches Al-Quds and can finally liberate the Holy City.
And today, yes, as we have heard in some comments, those rockets that have been launched (against Israel) are the hope of Hajj Qassem Soleimani. They carry the hope of Hajj Imad (Moghniyeh). They carry the fiery aspiration of Sayed Zulfiqar. They carry all these (pure) souls. It is these souls who have acted and made all efforts relentlessly, (taking all the risks and) making all the sacrifices to ensure that this ballistic capability reaches the hands of the Resistance in Gaza. And thank God, today, these capabilities arrived in Gaza! These abilities grow and develop. The first credit goes to the Palestinian fighters there, of course, whatever their faction, but those who acted, supported and allowed all this, are these martyrs, these (Iranian and Lebanese) leaders, including Sayed Zulfiqar, who worked day and night for the Resistance inside Palestine to obtain great capacities, and even colossal capacities.
Journalist: So Sayed Mustapha Badr al-Din helped transfer skills and support to Resistance factions inside occupied Palestine?
Sayed Safi al-Din: He did more than contribute! He acted constantly (for the Palestinian Resistance)!
Journalist: What did this action consist of?
Sayed Safi al-Din: Transfering the experience, training, maintaining contact with all the resistant Palestinian forces, helping them to obtain the capacities and skills in all the fields, whether it has to do with obtaing weapons, the ability to manufacture them, their handling and use, all these abilities. Generally speaking, Hezbollah has played a big role in this regard, and we are very proud of it. It is our duty anyway. All of our commanders participated in that. This is neither a secret nor a shame, on the contrary, it is a matter of pride!
Journalist: Eminent Sayed, how important is the equation imposed by the Palestinian Resistance in linking the fate of Jerusalem to that of Gaza? How will this equation affect rules of engagement and the balance of power in the future?
Sayed Safi al-Din: If you remember correctly, this Gaza which just drowned the Israelis (under a deluge of rockets), the enemy considered that all Gaza could do was struggle its way through the various calamities in which it had been abandoned, struggling to cope with the problems created by the occupier and the United States, whether by the siege, pressures, (crippling) policies, etc., and therefore Israel considered it had nothing to fear from them. I am not going to recall all these well-known elements, which are part of History. But today, this Gaza is not only taking back its life, its future and everything it has in Palestine and Al-Quds, no! The very soul of Gaza now arises in Al-Quds! The soul of the Resistance that the occupier wanted to crush and suffocate in Gaza is present today in Al-Quds, in the West Bank, and will rise tomorrow in all the territories occupied in 1948 and throughout Israel!
The most important consequence of what is happening today is that the Palestinian cause is revived everywhere, at all levels, with all its weapons, all its fighters, all its rockets/missiles, all over (historical) Palestine! And that’s just the beginning!
Israel is unable to understand that the dislocation of Palestine into ≠ entities is over. Gaza stands for all Palestinians & the reverse is true
— Le Cri des Peuples (@lecridespeuples) May 14, 2021
Israel wanted to neutralize Gaza, through massacres and destruction, and then to neutralize a whole part of the (occupied) West Bank, through the separation wall. You have seen how the Separation Wall is built in a sinuous and even vicious way, with areas off-limits to Palestinians (making life impossible for them). Israel considered the territories conquered in 1948 to be safe, and part of the “historic Israeli entity” forever. The Arabs could forget (the territories of) 1948, they were irremediably absorbed! Forget Gaza, which is out of the game! (That’s what Israel thought). There were still a few besieged places in the West Bank, whether in Hebron or elsewhere. But the reality is that today, all of historic Palestine is set ablaze and embracing the Resistance! Today all of Palestine is resisting! All of Palestine is Al-Quds! This city of Al-Quds (Jerusalem) that they wanted to erase from the Palestinian cause, making forget even its (Arabic) name and its memory, whether through the Deal of the Century, the displacement of the American Embassy (from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem), and all these campaigns (to liquidate the Palestinian cause), the humiliating visits of some cowardly and enslaved Arab (regimes), unfortunately, the promises of establishing normal relations, etc. But (despite all this), Al-Quds today shines. She shines through her martyrs, she shines through the martyrs of Gaza. These Israelis today are killing children, women and men who die because they defend Al-Quds! These martyrs make Al-Quds even more resplendent, and give it even greater value in the minds of Palestinians, in the minds of Arabs and in the minds of (all) Muslims (worldwide).
What happens today will have very big, even grandiose consequences, as I told you before. Of course, now is the time for battle, not for analysis, now is the time for battle. It will be time to draw all the conclusions afterwards. In this time of battle, our common duty is to stand with the Palestinian people. We salute these efforts, these sacrifices, we salute these heroes, men, women and children, who went yesterday at dawn to the holy mosque of Al-Aqsa to enter and assert their right to be present there, at Sheikh Jarrah district, at the Damascus gate, everywhere, at every point (from where the settlers and police were trying to drive them out); we salute these men, these women, these young people, these children, all those who sacrifice themselves. We salute the fighters who, as I said, restore honor to the Ummah. We send them a thousand greetings, and with the grace of God, the whole Muslim world will be with them, the whole Arab world will be with them.
What is happening today is (the triumph of) the truth. The truth of our (Arab-Muslim) world is visible to everyone. Our Ummah is (deeply) steeped in Resistance, its inner core is Resistance. Its history, its culture, its identity are the Resistance! Such are our peoples, such is our (Arab-Muslim) Community. There may be, in this or that country, economic, political, or any other kind of problems, we can say that the Arab world is drowned in the so-called Arab Spring, whether in Egypt, in Tunisia, Syria, Iraq or anywhere else, but despite all their efforts to present these realities as preponderant to exhaust the peoples of our region, today, Palestine, Al-Quds and Gaza are reviving all these elements of strength present within our Community. And our Ummah declares to the United States, Israel and all the cowards that no, it is stronger than that, greater than that, and able to shape her future. And that’s exactly what she’ll do.
We are talking about realities and equations today, not empty slogans or hopes, not at all. As I told you at the beginning, what happened in Syria was no small thing, and what happened in Iraq was no small thing, at the level of the action of Resistance (reference to the victory against ISIS). And what is happening in Palestine now is no small thing. What happened in Yemen is no small thing. This victorious resistance of the Resistance Axis, among other consequences clearly visible today, brings the peoples of the Muslim world, little by little, to join this Resistance Axis, until it becomes the dominant choice and priority for our entire region.
And today I can say categorically and without any hesitation that yesterday and today, we had glaring proof of Trump’s failure when he targeted Hajj Qassem Soleimani, may God be pleased with him. The Al-Quds Force (Revolution Guards Corps, led by Soleimani), which spearheaded this Axis of Resistance, is now achieving very great victories. Of course, it is the Palestinian people who achieve these victories (in occupied Palestine), but at the level of vision and (common) cause, what happens there is one of the consequences of the work of the Hajj Qassem. And with the grace of God, what will come in the next battles will be even greater.
Journalist: Can you tell us, given your close proximity to Palestinian Resistance factions, to what extent we can say that Gaza still holds surprises and secret cards in its hands, which it can use if the confrontation extends?
Sayed Safi al-Din: It’s up to them to talk about this. The Palestinian Resistance, through its fighting and resistant factions, is capable of expressing itself, whether through declarations, through missiles, through actions, when it sees fit. This is their exclusive right, and we do not have to interfere with it. But what I know (and can say) in general is that the capacities of the Resistance in Palestine are very great, in terms of time (they can keep pace for weeks and months), capacities, weapons, the ability to fight (victoriously), etc. Their capacities are great, much more than what Israel can imagine.
Journalist: I am told in my earphone that Ben-Gurion Airport has just been targeted. What does this indicate? Is it a strong symbol?
Sayed Safi al-Din: To strike Tel Aviv is a very important thing, a remarkable qualitative development in terms of acts of Resistance. The same goes for the attack on Ben Gurion Airport. This is all due to the grace of God and the blessings that come with standing up for Al-Quds. The fact that Gaza has come into action in defense of Al-Quds brings great (divine) blessings. When the Islamic Community decides to defend Al-Quds, God pours out (huge) opportunities and benefits upon them.
Of course, all of this cannot happen without sacrifices. Whenever in a battle, the Islamic Resistance achieves great achievements, we must always remember that these exploits happen thanks to the grace of the blood of martyrs, the efforts of the fighters, the sacrifices, the patience and the endurance displayed by the Resistance, whether in Palestine, Lebanon or any other place. […]
Jordan’s King Abdullah II is pictured in Amman on 11 April 2021 (Yousef Allan/Jordanian Royal Palace/AFP)
David Hearst is co-founder and editor-in-chief of Middle East Eye. He is a commentator and speaker on the region and analyst on Saudi Arabia. He was The Guardian’s foreign leader writer, and was correspondent in Russia, Europe, and Belfast. He joined the Guardian from The Scotsman, where he was education correspondent.
For once, just for once, US President Joe Biden got something right in the Middle East, and I say this conscious of his abysmal record in the region.
In accepting the intelligence he was passed by the Jordanians that Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman was up to his ears in a plot to destabilise the rule of King Abdullah, Biden brought the scheme to a premature halt. Biden did well to do so.
His statement that the US was behind Abdullah had immediate consequences for the other partner in this scheme, Benjamin Netanyahu, the prime minister of Israel.
While bin Salman was starving Jordan of funds (according to former Foreign Minister Marwan Muasher, the Saudis have not provided any direct bilateral assistance since 2014), Netanyahu was starving the kingdom of water.
Without Washington’s overt support, King Abdullah would now be in serious trouble, the victim of a two-pronged offensive from Saudi Arabia and Israel
This is water that Israel siphons off the River Jordan. Under past agreements, Israel has supplied Jordan with water, and when Jordan asks for an additional amount, Israel normally agrees without delay. Not this year: Netanyahu refused, allegedly in retaliation for an incident in which his helicopter was refused Jordanian airspace. He quickly changed his mind after a call from US Secretary of State Antony Blinken to his counterpart, Gabi Ashkenazi.
Had former US President Donald Trump still been in power, it is doubtful whether any of this would have happened.
Without Washington’s overt support, King Abdullah would now be in serious trouble: the victim of a two-pronged offensive from Saudi Arabia and Israel, his population seething with discontent, and his younger half-brother counting the days until he could take over.
The problem with Abdullah
But why were bin Salman and Netanyahu keen to put the skids under an ally like Abdullah?
Abdullah, a career soldier, is not exactly an opposition figure in the region. He of all people is not a Bashar al-Assad, Recep Tayyip Erdogan or Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
Abdullah was fully signed up to the counter-revolution against the Arab Spring. Jordan joined the Saudi-led anti-Islamic State coalition, deployed aircraft to target the Houthis in Yemen, and withdrew its ambassador from Iran after the Saudi embassy in Tehran and consul in Mashhad were sacked and Saudi Arabia consequently cut diplomatic relations.Jordan arrested senior suspect over contact with Saudi crown prince Read More »
He attended the informal summit on a yacht in the Red Sea, convened to organise the fight against the influence of Turkey and Iran in the Middle East. That was in late 2015.
In January 2016, Abdullah told US congressmen in a private briefing that Turkey was exporting terrorists to Syria, a statement he denied making afterwards. But the remarks were documented in a Jordanian foreign ministry readout passed to MEE.
Jordan’s special forces trained men that Libyan general Khalifa Haftar used in his failed attempt to take Tripoli. This was the pet project of the UAE.
Why then, should this stalwart of the cause now be considered by his Arab allies, Saudi Arabia and the UAE, an inconvenience that needs to be dealt with?
Insufficiently loyal
The answer partly lies in the psychology of bin Salman. It is not good enough to be partially signed up to his agenda. As far as he is concerned, you are either in or out.
“But there is also a feeling [in Riyadh] that Jordan and others should be with us or against us. So we were not completely with them on Iran. We were not completely with them on Qatar. We were not completely with them on Syria. We did what we could and I don’t think we should have gone further, but to them, that was not enough.”
Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman welcomes Jordan’s King Abdullah II to Riyadh on 8 March 2021 (Bandar al-Jaloud/Saudi Royal Palace/AFP)
Abdullah’s equivocation certainly was not enough for the intended centrepiece of the new era, Saudi Arabia’s normalisation of relations with Israel.
Here, Jordan would have been directly involved and King Abdullah was having none of it. Had he gone along with the Trump plan, his kingdom – a careful balance between Jordanians and Palestinians – would have been in a state of insurrection.
In addition, Abdullah could not escape the fact that he was a Hashemite, whose legitimacy stems in part from Jordan’s role as custodian of Al-Aqsa Mosque and the holy sites in Jerusalem. This, too, was being threatened by the Al Sauds.
The importance of Aqaba
But the plan itself was regarded by both bin Salman and Netanyahu as too big to stop. I personalise this, because in both Saudi Arabia and Israel, there are experienced foreign policy and intelligence hands who appreciate how quickly this plan would have destabilised Jordan and Israel’s vulnerable eastern border.
The plan has been years in the preparation and the subject of clandestine meetings between the Saudi prince and the Israeli leader. At the centre of it lies Jordan’s sole access to the Red Sea, the strategic port of Aqaba.
The two cities of Aqaba and Ma’an were part of the kingdom of Hejaz from 1916 to 1925. In May 1925, Ibn Saud surrendered Aqaba and Ma’an and they became part of the British Emirate of Transjordan.
The price for turning on the tap of Saudi finance was too high for Abdullah to pay. It was total subservience to Riyadh
It would be another 40 years before the two independent countries would agree on a Jordan-Saudi border. Jordan got 19 kilometres of coastline on the Gulf of Aqaba and 6,000 square kilometres inland, while Saudi Arabia got 7,000 square kilometres of land.
For the new kid on the block, bin Salman, a prince who was always sensitive about his legitimacy, reclaiming Saudi influence over Aqaba in a big trade deal with Israel would be a big part of his claim to restoring Saudi dominance over its hinterland.
And the trade with Israel would be big. Bin Salman is spending $500bn constructing the city of Neom, which is eventually supposed to straddle Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt. Sitting at the mouth of the Gulf of Aqaba, the Jordanian port would be firmly in Saudi sights.
This is where Bassem Awadallah, the former chief of Jordan’s royal court, comes in. Two years before he definitively broke with King Abdullah, and while he was still Jordan’s envoy to Riyadh, Awadallah negotiated the launch of something called the Saudi-Jordanian Coordination Council, a vehicle that Jordanian officials at the time said would “unblock billions of dollars” for the cash-starved Hashemite kingdom.
A giant Jordanian flag is raised during a celebration in the port of Aqaba in 2016 (AFP)
Awadallah promised that the council would invest billions of Saudi dollars in Jordan’s leading economic sectors, focusing on the Aqaba Special Economic Zone.
The money, of course, never materialised. Saudi support for the kingdom diminished to a trickle, and according to an informed source, Muasher, Saudi funds stopped almost completely after 2014.Jordan: Why King Abdullah’s troubles are not over Read More »
The price for turning on the tap of Saudi finance was too high for Abdullah to pay. It was total subservience to Riyadh. Under this plan, Jordan would have become a satellite of Riyadh, much as Bahrain has become.
Netanyahu had his own sub-agenda in the huge trade that would flow from Neom once Saudi Arabia had formally recognised Israel.
A confirmed enemy of the Oslo plan to set up a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza, Netanyahu and the Israeli right have always eyed annexation of Area C and the Jordan Valley, which comprises 60 percent of the West Bank. Under this new Nakba, the Palestinians living there, denied Israeli citizenship, would be slowly forced to move to Jordan. This could only happen under a Saudi-oriented plan, in which Jordanian workers could travel freely and work in Saudi Arabia. As it is, remittances from the Jordanian workforce in Saudi Arabia are an economic lifeblood to the bankrupt kingdom.
The money pouring into Jordan, accompanied by a mobile workforce of Jordanians and stateless Palestinians, would finally put to bed grandiose visions of a Palestinian state, and with it the two-state solution. On this, Netanyahu and bin Salman are as one: treat them as a mobile workforce, not citizens of a future state.
Hussein’s favoured son
That Prince Hamzah should be seen as the means by which Jordan is enlisted to this plan represents the final irony of this bizarre tale.
If the Hashemite blood runs deep in any veins, it is surely in his. He was King Hussein’s favoured son. In a letter sent to his brother Prince Hassan in 1999, King Hussein wrote: “Hamzeh, may God give him long life, has been envied since childhood because he was close to me, and because he wanted to know all matters large and small, and all details of the history of his family. He wanted to know about the struggle of his brothers and of his countrymen. I have been touched by his devotion to his country and by his integrity and magnanimity as he stayed beside me, not moving unless I forced him from time to time to carry out some duty on occasions that did not exceed the fingers on one hand.”
Abdullah broke the agreement he made with his father on his death bed when he replaced his half-brother with his son, Hussein, as crown prince in 2004.
The new foreign policy establishment in Washington should wean itself off the notion that US allies are its friends
But if Hashemite pride in and knowledge of Jordan’s history runs deep in Hamzah, he of all princes would have soon realised the cost to Jordan of accepting bin Salman’s billions and Netanyahu’s tacit encouragement, just as his father did.
Hamzah’s friends ardently dispute they are part of this plot and downplay connections with Awadallah. Hamzah only owns up to one thing: that he is immensely concerned at how low Jordan has fallen under years of misrule. In this, Hamzah is 100 percent right.
It is clear what has to happen now. King Abdullah should finally see that he must completely overhaul the Jordanian political system, by calling for free and fair elections and abiding by their result. Only that will unite the country around him.
This is what King Hussein did when he faced challenge and revolt by Jordanian tribes in the south of the kingdom; in 1989, Hussein overhauled the political system and held the freest elections in the history of the kingdom.
The government that emerged from this process led the country safely out of one of the most difficult moments for Jordan: Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait and the subsequent Gulf War.
The real villains
Biden, meanwhile, should realise that letting bin Salman get away with the murder of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi has a cost.
Bin Salman did not learn anything from the episode and carried on in exactly the same way, reckless and swift, against an Arab neighbour and ally, with potentially disastrous consequences.
The new foreign policy establishment in Washington should wean itself off the notion that US allies are its friends. It should learn once and for all that the active destabilisers of the Middle East are not the cartoon villains of Iran and Turkey.
Rather, they are the closest US allies, where US forces and military technology are either based, or as in the case of Israel, inextricably intertwined: Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Israel.
Jordan, the classic buffer state, is a case in point.
تتميّز المملكة الأردنية الهاشمية بموقع جغرافي مميّز، فهي تشكل فاصلاً جغرافياً وحاجزاً بشرياً بين الكيان الصهيوني وبين العراق والسعودية، وبصورة ما أيضاً بين سوريا والكيان الغاصب، إذا ما أخذنا في الحسبان الحدود الأردنية السورية المشتركة، بالإضافة إلى كون الحدود بين الأردن وفلسطين المحتلة هي الأطول من بين دول الطوق.
أما سياسياً، فالمَلَكية في الأردن وأجهزة الدولة تربطهما مع المملكة المتحدة البريطانية والولايات المتحدة الأميركية علاقات وثيقة وقديمة أمنياً واستخبارياً وعسكرياً، ناهيكم بالعلاقات المميزة بين الحكم الأردني وبين الكيان الصهيوني، تتضافر كل هذه العوامل لتجعل الأردن ذا أهمية خاصة في الإستراتيجية الأميركية تُجاه العالم العربي، لذلك تُعد ديمومة الحكم في الأردن واستقراره من المسلّمات في العقيدة الأميركية، وبناءً عليه يُستبعد حصول أي تغيير أو محاولات تغيير في الحكم الأردني دون أن تكون لها ارتباطات دولية وإقليمية، أو دون أن تكون محكومة بسقف أميركي لا يسمح بانزلاق الساحة الأردنية إلى فوضى غير منضبطة، تُفضي إلى انعكاسات أمنية خطيرة على كيان العدو. إذن كيف يمكن تفسير إجهاض ما بات مرجّحاً أنه كان محاولة لاستبدال رأس الحكم الأردني عبر إحلال الأمير حمزة بن الحسين وليّ العهد السابق محل أخيه غير الشقيق الملك عبدالله الثاني؟ بدايةً نستذكر «صفقة القرن» التي طرحها الرئيس الأميركي السابق دونالد ترامب، والتي كانت ترتكز على ثلاثي ترامب وابن سلمان ونتنياهو، وكان واضحاً عدم رضى الأردن الرسمي عن تلك الصفقة بما تشكّله من تهديد مباشر للوصاية الهاشمية على المقدّسات في القدس المحتلة، ومن حيث كونها مقدمة لتنفيذ مخطط الوطن البديل في الأردن، وكان حضور الملك عبدالله الثاني لقمة القدس الاستثنائية التي عُقدت في إسطنبول في كانون الأول/ ديسمبر 2017 برغم الضغوط الإقليمية التي تعرّض لها آنذاك مع محمود عباس لثنيهما عن الحضور علامة فارقة في العلاقات السعودية الأردنية، حيث ظهرت للعلن بعدها آثار توتر العلاقات عبر وقف المساعدات السعودية للأردن وعبر ضغوط أخرى، لكن ما شهدناه في الأيام القليلة الماضية يشير إلى أن تأزّم العلاقات هو أكثر عمقاً مما كان ظاهراً، وأنه مذّاك الحين بدأت السعودية والإمارات بالتعاون مع نتنياهو بالإعداد إلى استبدال رأس الحكم في الأردن ضمن مسعى تنفيذ «صفقة القرن»، وعلى الأرجح أن ذلك كان بعلم ورضى أميركيين لما يشكّله الأردن من أهمية في الاستراتيجية الأميركية.
ما موقع الأردن من الإستراتيجية الجديدة لإدارة بايدن؟ هل تقرر تحويل المملكة الهاشميّة إلى ما يشبه قاعدة عسكرية أمريكية؟
لكن تعثر تطبيق «صفقة القرن»، وصعود الديمقراطيين إلى سدة الحكم الذين جاؤوا باستراتيجية مغايرة لتلك التي اتّبعها ترامب، يبدو أنهما فرضا تبديلاً في الأولويات الأميركية وتغييراً في طريقة التعاطي الأميركي مع ملفات المنطقة، ولقد كان لافتاً إبرام الاتفاقية العسكرية الأميركية الأردنية أخيراً، التي لاقت استياءً كبيراً في الأوساط الأردنية لما تتضمنه من تنازل عن السيادة الأردنية لمصلحة القوات العسكرية الأميركية، والتي تُحوِّل الأردن على امتداد أراضيه إلى قاعدة عسكرية أميركية، وقد تزامن توقيع هذه الاتفاقية مع الإعلان عن إحباط محاولة إطاحة العاهل الأردني عبدالله الثاني، لذلك يصير من المشروع ربط الخطوتين، إحداهما بالأخرى. إذا ما صحّت هذه القراءة، فنحن نشهد انقلاباً في الإستراتيجية الأميركية تُجاه المنطقة العربية اقتضى طيّ صفحة مشروع سابق لمصلحة مسار جديد يتم العمل به، ويصير معه البعد الداخلي الأردني للأحداث تفصيلاً، ويصبح السؤالان الأهم: ما الذي ترسمه إدارة جو بايدن للمستقبل؟ وما هو موقع الأردن في هذه الإستراتيجية الجديدة الذي يلزمه معها تحويل الأردن إلى ما يشبه القاعدة العسكرية الأميركية؟ من المبكر الإجابة عن هذين التساؤلين بشكل قطعي، فنحن في انتظار تكشُّف المزيد من المعطيات، لكن من المفروغ منه أن احتمالية الانسحاب الأميركي من العراق، ومصير التوصل إلى تفاهم في الملف النووي الإيراني من عدمه، وما يخفيه الأميركي لسوريا في قابل الأيام، هي قضايا لعبت كلها أو بعضها دوراً في الهزة غير المسبوقة التي شهدها الأردن في هذه الأيام القليلة، وفي تحويل الأردن إلى منصة عسكرية أميركية يمكن استعمالها بصورة أو بأخرى.
The Biden administration is adopting a confusing position regarding Jerusalem, signaling a possible effort to square the circle of taking the US back to the fold of international consensus on Palestine and Israel, while maintaining the gifts which former US President Donald Trump handed on a plate to Israel. As usual, Washington is being duplicitous. Also as normal, the PA is staying silent.
In a recent briefing by the US State Department, spokesman Ned Price seemed to contradict the diplomatic position taken by the US under Trump, declaring the issue of Jerusalem to be “a final status issue which will need to be resolved by the parties in the context of direct negotiations.” Such a statement puts the US in line with two-state politics and international consensus.
Meanwhile, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken stated clearly that he recognizes Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, a Trump-era move that ushered in the probability of further annexation. Even more telling was Blinken’s dithering when asked whether the US would support a Palestinian capital in East Jerusalem. Playing upon the fact that diplomatic negotiations are stalled, Blinken answered, “What we have to see is for the parties to get together directly and negotiate these so-called final status issues.”
If President Joe Biden is determined to pursue two-state diplomacy within the framework of Trump’s legacy, Palestinians are in for a worse time than they were under his predecessor.
The “deal of the century” was explicit in its determination to strip Palestinians of their political rights. A mix of two-state politics and the deal of the century constitutes a double effort to ensure that the Palestinians are the losers, which will be exacerbated with the Palestinian Authority’s brand of acquiescent politics.
In the absence of a clear policy on Palestine, the PA has given too much importance to Biden’s overtures so far. Restoring relations with the PA is, of course, a necessity, but Mahmoud Abbas has still not spoken about US-Palestinian diplomacy, while Biden has not yet formulated a policy and is still hovering between Trump’s actions and pursuing the two-state paradigm.
So far, the US has stated that it will not move the US Embassy back to Tel Aviv, thus clearly endorsing Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s “undivided” capital. The PA has preferred not to mull over this significant strategy.
The restoration of relations and the promise of humanitarian aid have instilled a resolve in Abbas to resort to the usual time-waster of an international peace conference, in which participants will overlook the fact that the US can’t possibly adhere to the two-state paradigm without recognizing that occupied East Jerusalem should serve as the capital of the Palestinian state.
Abbas and the international community are still clinging to the obsolete two-state hypothesis, while the US will abide by international consensus as long as it does not have to completely renege on what Trump achieved. When Trump declared Jerusalem to be Israel’s capital, Abbas called for protests.
What will he do if Biden does not explicitly endorse East Jerusalem as the capital of a State of Palestine? Will Abbas call out the US for its duplicity, or will he continue to stay silent as long as the PA can once again lay claim to a minor presence in the circle of America’s diplomatic relations?
– Ramona Wadi is a staff writer for Middle East Monitor, where this article was originally published. She contributed this article to the Palestine Chronicle.
Beirut – Hezbollah Secretary General His Eminence Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah warned the ‘Israeli’ enemy that the Lebanese resistance movement will strike sensitive Zionist military targets in case the enemy used a similar pretext to bomb Lebanese cities.
In a televised speech on Tuesday marking Hezbollah’s Martyr Leaders Day, Sayyed Nasrallah said that the occasion follows the 42nd anniversary of the Islamic revolution in Iran, which is an example on maintaining sovereignty and independence.
The resistance leader’s speech commemorated the martyrdom anniversaries of Sheikh Ragheb Harb, Sayyed Abbas al-Mousawi and Hajj Imad Mughniyeh.
“Forty-two years have passed on the victory of the Islamic Revolution in Iran; The Isalmic Republic resisted and developed on every level until it became a great and considerable regional power,” His Eminence stated.
Regarding the Bahraini revolution’s February 14th anniversary, Sayyed Nasrallah further hailed the Bahraini people who sacrificed a lot to obtain their freedom, atop of them is Ayatollah Sheikh Isa Qassim, adding that “the Bahraini people are struggling to return their country to its normal situation after its rulers have turned it into a base for normalization with ‘Israel’.”
Praising the common characteristics of martyr leaders enjoyed, Sayyed Nasrallah said that they were dedicated to resistance and tolerated all hard circumstances to develop the project of resistance.
“The resistance of our martyr leaders developed and became followed by the enemy before the friend because it threatens its existence,” His Eminence underscored, noting that in our time, “We need stances similar to those of Sheikh Ragheb Harb to confront normalization with ‘Israel’.”
We preserve the will of Sayyed Abbas al-Moussawi by preserving the resistance and serving the people, Sayyed Nasrallah added, stressing that “The most important service we offer to the people is to preserve their existence and defend their lands, dignity and country.”
“We carry on the will of Sayyed Abbas al-Moussawi and work within it in all fields, and when an ‘Israeli’ or a terrorist threat endangers our people we won’t hesitate in defending our honorable people.”
In the same context, the Hezbollah leader stressed that “We need the spirit of martyr Imad Mughniyeh to develop the project of resistance, and the brothers of Hajj Imad are doing this nowadays.”
Internationalizing Lebanese Affairs
Elsewhere in his remarks, His Eminence slammed any talks about an international resolution under the United Nations Charter VII regarding the formation of the Lebanese government, which he referred to as a call to war towards which we mustn’t remain silent.
“Calling for internationalization to resolve domestic issues is unacceptable regardless of who said so, and it can pave the way for undesirable consequences,” His eminence added.
“Internationalizing the Lebanese issue contradicts the country’s sovereignty and could be a cover to a new occupation. It would open the door wide to settling Palestinian refugees in Lebanon. We reject any form of internationalizing the Lebanese issue, which we find a danger that threatens Lebanon,” Sayyed Nasrallah outlined.
The anti-Hezbollah Chorus
Commenting on the electronic armies and the media outlets that grab any incident to point the blame on Hezbollah, Sayyed Nasrallah described those sides as saying “There is a chorus in Lebanon whose goal is to insult Hezbollah without any pretext. This only represents them, and all of their acts won’t affect us.”
In this respect, the resistance leader called on its audience not to be dragged to this chorus’ behavior as all the blamed accusations contradict all norms, laws and traditions.
“There is a systematic, managed and paid targeting of Hezbollah. This campaign has failed to distort the image of resistance within its people. Some reactions by some of the resistance’s audience as a result of this campaign shouldn’t be considered as an act of the entire audience, although they should be dealt with,” Sayyed Nasrallah made clear.
The Beirut Port Mystery?
In reference to the yet unannounced results of investigations regarding the Beirut Port blast which have already ended, Sayyed Nasrallah noted that he had previously called on the Lebanese Army, the Internal Security, and the Judiciary to announce the result.
“It is the duty of the concerned parties in the Lebanese Judiciary to announce the results of the investigations regarding the Beirut Port blast, and we have been told that the due amounts of insurances for the families of the martyrs and the owners of damaged properties is estimated at $1.2 billion,” His Eminence said while renewing calls for announcing the results of the investigations.
Lebanese Government Formation
“Nobody doesn’t want the formation of a Lebanese government,” the Hezbollah leader emphasized, adding that “It is in everybody’s interest to form a government, and talking about waiting the Iranian nuclear issue is baseless.”
“Waiting foreign powers is futile and pressures may push some sides to adhere to their stances. It is unjust to hold the president responsible for not forming the government.”
Pointing that Hezbollah understands other parties’ demands to hold certain portfolios, Sayyed Nasrallah noted that “We don’t understand insisting on forming an 18-minister government while some sides believe that the aim behind this is to eliminate their participation.”
The Hezbollah-FPM Understanding
On the 15th anniversary of the understanding that was made between Hezbollah and the Free Patriotic Movement, Sayyed Nasrallah pointed to that the resistance movement wanted it to be a base for wider understandings with other powers.
“The understanding has made a group of achievements that served Lebanon, Hezbollah, and the FPM. We don’t agree on some negative remarks that were made by the FPM as they serve as a material for those who are waiting such things.”
Meanwhile, Sayyed Nasrallah affirmed the solid relationship with the FPM and expressed keenness to develop it.
Lebanon As Seen Via Social Media
Sayyed Nasrallah made clear that Tel Aviv, Washington, and their allies announce that they form electronic armies to cause strife and disputes.
“There are sides that want to cause an explosion in Lebanon via what is happening on social media platforms,” Sayyed Nasrallah said before calling for strong presence on social media platforms while adhering to awareness, politeness and not harming anybody.
The post-Trump Region
Pointing to the major developments that took place in the region and the world after Trump’s departure, Sayyed Nasrallah insisted that Lebanon is a key part in the region which is affected by all the developments that take place in it.
“The Islamic Republic of Iran has shown endurance and braveness regarding its nuclear issue, and there are clear ‘Israeli’ and Saudi concerns regarding it.”
As for the revival of Daesh [the Arabic acronym for terrorist ‘ISIS/ISIL’ group], Sayyed Nasrallah said that “The Americans’ talking that their mission doesn’t include protecting the oil in Syria anymore came along with reviving Daesh,” making clear that the Americans want to remain in Syria and Iraq.
“They might mobilize Daesh in both countries, and the new US administration is using this pretext to remain there,” His Eminence noted, stressing however that “those who defeated Daesh in the past will defeat it again, and working to defeat the terrorist organization should be crushing so that it won’t be able to be revived.”
The Steadfast Yemen
In reference to the new US administration of Joe Biden, Sayyed Nasrallah said that Washington’s announcement of ending its support for the war on Yemen is a positive step that is a result of the Yemenis’ steadfastness, noting that any call for ending the war on Yemen is positive, and the brothers in Yemen are aware of the situation, which is normal and required.
“The Yemenis steadfastness and tolerance of the siege, the pain, and the bombing pushed the silent world to issue daily reports to defend the aggressive Saudi Arabia, and the Yemeni Army today is in an advanced place, and the other side is screaming in Marib due to the progress the Yemenis are making,” Sayyed Nasrallah explained.
“The honest and steadfast Yemenis will bear the fruits of their steadfastness, and the concerns are growing among Saudi Arabia and the enemy’s entity.”
The Declining ‘Deal of the Century’
Mentioning that the ‘Deal of the Century’ has majorly decreased, Sayyed Nasrallah found it as a clear explanation that it either ended or is declining. “This is a source of concern for the ‘Israelis’ and the Saudis.”
The persistence of the Palestinians and the Axis of Resistance in the face of Trump resulted in the decline of the ‘Deal of the Century’, His Eminence noted, criticizing the Zionists exaggeration regarding the Arab acceptance of normalization: “We’ve seen the stances of the Bahraini people, and before them the Egyptian and Jordanian people against the normalization.”
He then urged boycotting the ‘Israeli’ enemy and rejecting normalization as an important step that represents the religious and national sense of belonging.
“Rulers in Sudan will realize that normalization won’t solve their economic problems, which already happened with countries that normalized ties years earlier,” Sayyed Nasrallah said, noting that some people’s visits to the enemy’s entity or the actions of some electronic armies don’t express the Arab and Muslim popular mood.
It Is the Era of the ‘Axis of Resistance’
In response to hollow remarks made by ‘Israeli’ military chief Aviv Kochavi, Sayyed Nasrallah concluded with a clear and precise message.
His Eminence warned that the game of combat days is a dangerous one for the ‘Israelis’ as nobody can guarantee that such a game won’t lead to an inclusive and major war.
Kochavi claimed that the Zionist military will not hesitate to launch an attack in full force against any civilian neighborhoods, installations or even residences where unmanned missiles, rockets and aircraft are being stored or launched from.
“We will take part in any confrontation imposed on us, and I say it clearly: bombing cities for bombing cities, and bombing settlements for bombing villages.”
Using pretexts of striking military targets inside cities will be responded to by bombing military targets inside the enemy’s cities, the resistance leader insisted.
“In a case a war broke out, the ‘Israelis’ shouldn’t brag about their strength as the enemy’s internal front will face incidents that it didn’t witness since the establishment of this entity in 1948.”
“This is why I tell you to stop playing with fire,” Sayyed Nasrallah emphasized, telling the enemy that it should be aware of its limits.
“The time when the enemy threatens people and they remain silent has gone! There is a resistance from Gaza to Lebanon to the entire regional countries.”
This matter cannot be run the same way they used to in old mentalities, Sayyed Nasrallah said. “It is a different time; it is the era of the Axis of Resistance which is following all developments quietly and precisely.
“Don’t think for a moment that all the ongoing developments would affect the will of the resistance to confront or change the equations,” Sayyed Nasrallah conluded.
الأمين العام لحزب الله السيد حسن نصر الله يؤكد أن أي كلام عن قرار دولي تحت البند السابع بشأن الحكومة هو دعوة إلى الحرب، ويشدد على أن الجبهة الداخلية الإسرائيلية ستواجه في أي حرب مقبلة ما لم تعرفه منذ قيام “إسرائيل”.
كلمة الأمين العام لحزب الله السيد حسن نصر الله بمناسبة الذكرى السنوية للقادة الشهداء
قال الأمين العام لحزب الله، السيد حسن نصر الله، بمناسبة الذكرى السنوية للقادة الشهداء: “من الصفات المشتركة للقادة الشهداء هي التمحض في المقاومة، وهم تحملوا كل الظروف الصعبة من أجل تطوير مشروع المقاومة”.
وأضاف السيد نصر الله: “نحن بحاجة إلى مواقف الشيخ راغب حرب لمواجهة التطبيع، وروح الشهيد عماد مغنية من أجل تطوير مشروع المقاومة، ونحن نحفظ وصية السيد عباس الموسوي بحفظها وخدمة الناس، والخدمة الأهم للناس هي الحفاظ على وجودهم وأرضهم وكرامتهم وبلدهم”.
وبمناسبة الذكرى العاشرة للثورة البحرينية، قال: “الشعب البحريني يناضل لإعادة بلاده إلى مكانتها الطبيعية بعدما حولها حكامها إلى قاعدة للتطبيع. نحيّي شعب البحرين الذي دفع الكثير من التضحيات للحصول على حريته، وفي مقدمة قادته سماحة آية الله الشيخ عيسى قاسم”.
وحول مرور 42 سنة على انتصار الثورة الإسلامية في إيران، قال إن الأخيرة “صمدت وتطورت على كل الصعد، وباتت قوة إقليمية كبرى يحسب لها ألف حساب”.
نصر الله: تدويل ملف الحكومة اللبنانية قد يكون غطاء لاحتلال جديد
وفي الملف الداخلي اللبناني، أكد السيد نصر الله أن “أي كلام عن قرار دولي تحت البند السابع بشأن الحكومة هو دعوة إلى الحرب، والتدويل يتنافى مع السيادة، وقد يكون غطاء لاحتلال جديد، وقد يفتح الباب على مصراعيه، وقد يفرض توطين الفلسطينيين”.
وأكد رفض أي شكل من أشكال التدويل، مضيفاً: “إننا نراه خطراً على لبنان، ونشعر بأن فرض فكرة التدويل هو لاستقواء بعض اللبنانيين على بعضهم الآخر”.
وعن تشكيل الحكومة اللبنانية، قال السيد نصر الله: “لا أحد لا يريد تأليف حكومة جديدة في لبنان، في وقت من مصلحة الجميع أن تتألف حكومة، والكلام عن انتظار الملف النووي الإيراني ممجوج ولا مكان له. سابقاً، كان الكلام عن انتظار الانتحابات الأميركية وغيرها.. انتظار الخارج لن يؤدي إلى أي نتيجة، والضغوط قد تدفع البعض إلى التمسك بمواقفه”.
واعتبر أن “من غير المنصف تحميل مسؤولية عدم تأليف حكومة لرئيس الجمهورية. نحن نتفهم مطالبات بعض الجهات بحقائب معينة ووجود قلق من حصول حزب واحد على ثلث معطل”.
وتابع: “لا نتفهم الإصرار على حكومة من 18 وزيراً. هناك شرائح تعتقد أن إلغاءها هو الهدف من ذلك”.
وعن التفاهم بين التيار الوطني الحر وحزب الله في 2006، قال السيد نصر الله: “15 عاماً مرت على تفاهم مار مخايل. كنا نريده أساساً لتفاهمات أوسع مع قوى أخرى”، لافتاً إلى أن “التفاهم حقق مجموعة من المصالح للبنان ولحزب الله وللتيار”، وقال: “لا نوافق على خروج بعض الملاحظات السلبية حول التفاهم في بيان للتيار، فهي تعطي مادة للمتربصين”، مؤكداً “متانة العلاقة مع الوطني الحر والحرص على تطويرها”.
نصر الله: هناك استهداف ممنهج ومدفوع الثمن ضد حزب الله
وفي سياق آخر، قال السيد نصر الله إن “هناك جوقة هدفها السباب والشتائم لحزب الله من دون أي حجة، وهذا يعبر عن أصحابها. كل أفعال هذه الجوقة لا تؤثر فينا. أدعو جمهور المقاومة إلى عدم الانجرار لسلوكهم”.
وتابع: “هناك استهداف ممنهج ومدبر ومدفوع الثمن ضد حزب الله، وما يجري معنا من اتهامات خارج كل الأعراف والتقاليد والشرائع، وما يجري أن هناك من يتعامل مع حزب الله على أنه متهم وقاتل ومسؤول حتى تثبت براءته”.
كلام السيد نصر الله يأتي في سياق الاتهام الذي وُجّه إليه من قبل أطراف سياسية وإعلامية باغتيال الناشط السياسي لقمان سليم. وقد أكد في هذا السياق أن “إسرائيل تقتل مواطنيها من أجل خدمة مشروعها، والمجازر الصهيونية لم تقتصر على المسلمين والمسيحيين فقط، بل شملت يهوداً رفضوا الهجرة إليها”.
وشدد على أن “هناك استهدافاً ممنهجاً ومدبراً ومدفوع الثمن ضد حزب الله. وقد فشل في تشويه صورة المقاومة لدى بيئتها وجمهورها”، مشيراً إلى أن “انفعال بعض جمهور المقاومة نتيجة الحملة يجب ألا يحسب على كل الجمهور، وإن كان يجب أن يعالج”.
وفي سياق الحديث عن الحملات الممنهجة في مواقع التواصل، شدد السيد نصر الله على أن “تل أبيب وواشنطن وحلفاءهما يعلنون أنهم يشكلون جيوشاً إلكترونية لإثارة الفتن والخلافات، وهناك من يريد أن يأخذ البلد إلى الانفجار من خلال ما يجري في وسائل التواصل الاجتماعي”، داعياً إلى “الحضور القوي في وسائل التواصل الاجتماعي مع الالتزام بالوعي والأدب وعدم الإساءة”.
وفي ملف انفجار مرفأ بيروت، قال السيد نصر الله إن “التحقيق في التفجير انتهى. طالبت سابقاً الجيش والأمن الداخلي والقضاء بإعلان نتيجته، ومن واجب الجهة المعنية الإعلان عن نتائج التحقيق”.
نصر الله: هناك قلق إسرائيلي وسعودي واضح حيال الملف النووي واليمن
إقليمياً، قال أمين عام حزب الله إن “تطورات كبيرة تحصل في المنطقة والعالم بعد رحيل الرئيس الأميركي دونالد ترامب غير مأسوف عليه، ووصول إدارة أميركية جديدة، ولبنان جزء أساسي في المنطقة، وهو يتأثر بكل ما يجري فيها”.
وأضاف أن هناك “قلقاً إسرائيلياً وسعودياً واضحاً حيال الملف النووي الإيراني”.
وعن إعلان واشنطن وقف دعمها للحرب على اليمن، اعتبر السيد نصر الله أنها “خطوة إيجابية. وقد جاءت نتيجة صمود اليمنيين. الجيش اليمني واللجان الشعبية في موقع متقدم في كل الجبهات. أيضاً، نجد أن القلِق هو السعودي والإسرائيلي”.
وعن الملف السوري، قال: “حديث الأميركيين عن أن مهمتهم لم تعد تشمل حماية النفط في سوريا ترافق مع إعادة إحياء داعش”، مؤكداً أن “من هزم داعش سابقاً سيلحق الهزيمة به مجدداً، وأي عمل بمواجهته يجب أن يكون هجومياً لا دفاعياً”.
وحيال “صفقة القرن”، قال السيد نصر الله: “لا أحد يتحدث اليوم عن الصفقة التي يبدو أنها انتهت أو باتت في حالة تراجع وتلفظ أنفاسها، نتيجة صمود الشعب الفلسطيني والقيادات الفلسطينية ومحور المقاومة”.
وحول تطبيع الدول العربية مع الاحتلال الإسرائيلي، أكد أن “موقف الشعبين المصري والأردني نموذج واضح لرفض التطبيع، وهو ينسحب إلى باقي الشعوب. ثمة دول عربية وإسلامية، كالجزائر وتونس وباكستان وغيرها، ما زالت صامدة ومتمسكة برفضها للتطبيع”.
وأكد أن “أصحاب الأوهام، كحكام السودان، سيكتشفون أن التطبيع مع إسرائيل لن يحل مشاكلهم الاقتصادية”، لافتاً إلى أن “الإسرائيليين يعطون موضوع التطبيع أكثر من حجمه، والجيوش الإلكترونية لا تعبر عن مزاج الأمة والشعوب”.
ولفت السيد نصر الله إلى أن “إسرائيل لم تلتزم يوماً بالقانون الدولي، ودمرت مدناً، وقتلت المدنيين في كل حروبها”، وأضاف: “أقول لرئيس الأركان الإسرائيلي إننا لا نبحث عن مواجهة وعن حرب، ولكن إن فرضتم حرباً فسنخوضها. وإذا ضربتم مدننا، فسنرد بالمثل. وإذا استهدفتم قرانا، فسنقصف مستعمراتكم. وفي أي حرب مقبلة، ستواجه الجبهة الداخلية الإسرائيلية ما لم تعرفه منذ قيام إسرائيل”، مشيراً إلى أن “لا أحد يضمن ألا تتدحرج “الأيام القتالية” إلى حرب واسعة”.
On February 6, 2021, Black Lives Matter co-founder Alicia Garza announced that she was pulling out of a World Values Network online gala with Rabbi Shmuley Boteach, a prominent American Zionist.
“They approached me about having a conversation about the importance of solidarity between black communities and Jewish communities,” she explained, then thanked Palestinian American activist Linda Sarsour for amplifying the larger picture.
According to journalist Michael Brown, Garza has a history of denouncing other public figures who joined propaganda trips to Israel. Boteach’s gala, Brown continued, appears just as egregious, for it “follow[s] Boteach’s years of backing the racist Donald Trump, thereby making a mockery of the efforts promoted by Black leaders and the wider Black community to advance racial justice and decolonization.”
Placed within a larger context, Boteach’s move comes at a time when Zionists are increasingly fearful of the Boycott, Divestment Sanctions Movement (BDS)’s success. Coupled with the International Criminal Court (ICC)’s decision to investigate Israel for War Crimes, any support for Palestinian rights will undoubtedly come under attack.
There is a long history of Pan-African support for Palestine which has resulted in Zionists denouncing that alignment. In a lecture series “Palestine and Us: Black and Palestinian Solidarity,” Ahmad Abuznaid traced the history of Black support for Palestine as well as the fall-out from it. Referring to Malcolm X’s Zionist Logic (1964), Abuznaid explained that this statement drew from Malcolm X’s shift from Black Nationalist to a more Pan-Africanist position, particularly after he saw connections between Pan-Arabists, represented by Egypt’s Gamal Abdel Nasser, and Pan-Africanists that he was beginning to support.
After the 1967 war, Black Radicals began to move away from seeing Zionism as a liberation movement to viewing it as a colonialist venture, much like the colonialism that was oppressing Africans around the world. Following in this direction, Ethel Minor, a leader in the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC), wrote a piece in their newsletter entitled “Third World Round-up: The Palestine Problem: Test Your Knowledge,” leading to a split between those, like Kwame Ture (Stokely Carmichael) who would continue to support Palestine on principle, and others who feared that without taking a more “balanced position,” one that included mention of the Holocaust, there would be loss of funding.
Indeed, as Ture made clear, “immediately after the statement, phone calls rang in and the checks stopped coming.” Today, organizations, politicians and others who depend on funding are leery of taking a principled stance on Palestine, because, much like what happened with SNCC, Zionist supporters will use whatever means necessary to launch a targeted smear campaign of anyone who is critical of the Israeli state.
For example, in the aftermath of the Black Lives Matter movement’s 2014 platform that denounced the US government’s military aid to Israel, there were claims of “one-sided” and “unfair” from pro-Israel commentators who rejected the coalition’s critique. Several years before B’tselem’s quite similar statement, which was either ignored completely or applauded for its courage, BLM charged the following:
“The US justifies and advances the global war on terror via its alliance with Israel and is complicit in the genocide taking place against the Palestinian people. Israel is an apartheid state with over 50 laws on the books that sanction discrimination against the Palestinian people.”
The BLM platform also drew ire for its support of BDS. Fear of its success continues to motivate Zionists into the present time. In a piece for Haaretz, Rabbi Dan Dorsch of Atlanta declared that the mainstream Jewish community, and also Palestinian Government officials, have rejected BDS.
He continued that connecting the Black struggle in American to that of Palestinians is “unquestionably shortsighted and will only undermine the credibility of the movement and the important cause of civil rights in America”.
Like several years before, when pro-Israel donors withdrew their funds from SNCC, Rabbi Dorsch was warning that the pattern would continue as long as BLM lent its support to Palestine. Returning to the question of whether Zionists can be anti-racist, the short answer is an emphatic “no.” Quoting a message from Jewish Voice for Peace: “If you oppose racism, you should oppose Zionism too.”
As BDS successes grow and the ICC moves closer to investigate Israel for war crimes, pro-Israel groups will increasingly try to sever anti-racist movements in the US from their ties to Palestinians. Nevertheless, given several factors—the historic connections between Palestine and anti-colonial movements around the world, coupled with the waning acceptance of Progressive Except Palestine–Israel will not succeed.
For example, in a recent article Ramzy Baroud noted that
“Israeli efforts at co-opting Africa countries received a major setback on Saturday, February, 6 when the African Union issued a strong statement of solidarity with Palestine, condemning Israel’s illegal settlement activities and the US’s so-called ‘Deal of the Century’.”
In return, Palestinians have supported movements against injustice around the globe. Documenting a new round of Palestinian uprisings within the Zionist entity, Gaza-based journalist Wafaa Al-Udaini chose to use a photo from another protest against the Israeli regime.
Dating back a year to the shooting of Iyad al-Halak, an unarmed autistic Palestinian man, Palestinians in the picture also hold signs calling attention to the killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis the previous week, an extralegal murder that they link with al-Halak.
While Palestinians understand the connections between their struggles and anti-colonial movements in other countries, many liberals in the U.S. do not. Nevertheless, as Marc Lamont Hill and Mitchell Plitnick outline in their new book, Except for Palestine: The Limits of Progressive Politics, the days are over when so-called progressive public figures can join the anti-racist struggle at home while accepting gifts from Zionist organizations who fully support the Israeli apartheid state.
As Sarah Doyel notes in her review of Hill and Plitnick’s book, the authors observe that
“Democrats will take to the global stage to champion victims of other humanitarian crises, but Palestinians in Gaza living in what is commonly described as ‘the world’s largest open-air prison’ somehow merit little succor in the liberal worldview.”
Their work, Doyel concludes, is “a crucial and ultimately hopeful tool that better equips progressives to combat injustices within their own political circles.” Combined with the work of members of anti-colonial coalitions, some of whom convinced Alicia Garza to withdraw from Shmuley’s gala, perhaps anti-Zionists in the future will be strong enough to resist what will surely be increasing attacks on their political alignment with Palestinians.
– Benay Blend earned her doctorate in American Studies from the University of New Mexico. Her scholarly works include Douglas Vakoch and Sam Mickey, Eds. (2017), “’Neither Homeland Nor Exile are Words’: ‘Situated Knowledge’ in the Works of Palestinian and Native American Writers”. She contributed this article to The Palestine Chronicle.
I salute Jeremy Corbyn’s Peace & Justice initiative which could not be more timely, and I am proud to be part of it.
We live in troubled times: the raging pandemic, rise of neo-fascist forces; the rapacious neoliberal global system.
For so many, survival against war, police brutality, starvation, disease, collapsing economies, refugee camps, is the stark reality.
All of this is compounded by the climate crisis; environmental pollution; collapse of food and water security.
The pandemic has exposed to the light of day too often hidden or denied chasms of inequality both within and between nations and peoples around the world — both in the disproportionate impact on the poorest, most vulnerable, people of color, in getting the virus, and especially in the inequities of access to the vaccine.
The rich grow obscenely richer, the poor grow poorer. Less than one percent owning more than half the world’s population.
Yet “the times are a changing”; Bob Dylan sang at the time of the civil rights and anti-colonial liberation struggles; and the melody continues to rhyme with history – reflected to this day by the pressure of billions across the planet demanding a better life.
Two centuries ago the poet Shelley wrote in the wake of the Peterloo massacre “you are the many they are the few”.
Not long after, Marx and Engels pointed to the consequences of the increasing concentration of the means of production and wealth in fewer and fewer hands. Then, as now, the challenge was to understand the world in order to change it.
To do that we must not ignore the repercussions of colonial conquest as a prelude to the rise of the capitalist era.
The hangover of that colonial past exists: in power relations between peoples and nations; between global north and south; in the neo-colonial masquerade of the Bolsonaro’s, Modi’s and El Sisi’s trying to subvert progress.
Progress such as the Black Lives Matter movement, which is energized not only by revolt against police crimes but to overturn the weight and consequence of centuries of slavery, white supremacy and inequality.
Struggle for change, as ever, requires an understanding of the material conditions of political and economic life, to avoid reductionism into identity politics and racial or gender essentialism, at the expense of class-conscious clarity.
Likewise, loser Trump’s rage and the mob that attacked the Capitol building are a consequence of America’s past, and symptomatic of the frustration of white supremacists whose psychosis, as in the 1930s, is stoked by demagogues.
Enormous irony is seen in the double standards of the “Free World”. On the one hand: unbelievable shock that the USA’s seat of democracy has been assaulted. On the other: the sanguine promotion of military intervention, neo-colonial coups, punitive sanctions abroad in the name of that democracy.
To control the Middle East, Israel – a colonizing project – receives massive US military and financial aid. Disregard for Palestinian rights is reflected in Trump’s Deal of the Century and the so-called “normalization” between Israel and corrupt Arab fiefdoms.
If Biden is to commit to democracy, he must quit the double standards of previous administrations and apply the visions of a Franklin D Roosevelt and Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.
Biden needs to apply and significantly extend a “New Deal” project which in FDR’s day cut black Americans short; he must commit to world peace in recognition of the national and human rights of all peoples; uphold international law under the writ of the United Nations – an institution whose authority the US has systematically undermined.
And as King’s birthday is commemorated this weekend, Biden needs to note King’s most important speech – “Beyond Vietnam” which described the US government as the “greatest purveyor of violence in the world”, and crucially identified the three interlocking evils that must be challenged – systemic racism, poverty, and militarism.
For the Corbyn Project to succeed it must become an international champion, furthering both FDR and King’s visions – and connect with movements for peace and justice throughout the world.
From the multitude that filled the streets opposing the invasion of Iraq, to the Arab Spring and BLM rebellion; waves of protest are signaling a new dawn. In India alone, over 250 million participated in strikes and protests last year. We must spare no effort in making this rising tsunami unstoppable.
And if we wish to talk about courage under fire, note the men, women and children of Palestine, facing the bombs and bullets of the Israeli Defense Force in their peaceful protests, refusing to submit.
Like others around the world, we South Africans have developed a vibrant civil society, with grassroots movements, encouraging our and all governments to act decisively in tackling the fault lines of the 21st Century, as we did in the struggle against Apartheid in the previous century:
For people’s involvement in the roll-out of the COVID-19 vaccine and global vaccine equality;
For the protection of the eco-system and food security through a Climate Justice Charter and Global Food Sovereignty Agenda;
For a global anti-racist, anti-war, pro-peace platform. Together we must defeat a second coming of fascism – for in Berthold Brecht’s words (referring a system, not the gender) – “The beast is on heat again.”
No Pasaran! They shall not pass. This is a time when, in Seamus Heaney’s words, “hope and history rhyme.” Through people’s power, in unity, action, and international solidarity, we will win. For people and the planet. For the many, not the few!
– Ronnie Kasrils, veteran of the anti-apartheid struggle, and South Africa’s former Minister for Intelligence Services, activist and author. He contributed this article to The Palestine Chronicle.
Interview with Hezbollah Secretary General, Sayed Hassan Nasrallah, on May 26, 2020, on the occasion of the commemoration of the 20th anniversary of the Liberation of South Lebanon, followed by his December 27, 2020 annual interview.
US-Israel play poker, Resistance Axis plays chess.
« The Resistance Axis is very vigilant and watchful during this period (of transition between Trump & Biden), and must scrupulously take care not to be drawn into an escalation, in the slightest point of this Axis. We must not allow ourselves to be dragged to an unmeasured (large-scale) confrontation, to a (total) war whose timing would be the one chosen by our enemies. Of course, (open) war (against the United States and Israel) will (inevitably) happen one day or another, but we are talking about this current timing (we will choose the time and place of the Great War, not them). »
Hassan Nasrallah: […] When (in February 2014) Israel hit us in Janta, on the Syrian-Lebanese border, they were hoping to change the rules of engagement, thinking that if they hit us in a border area, we wouldn’t feel obliged to retaliate. We retaliated (hitting an Israeli patrol the following month) in the Shebaa farms (occupied Lebanese territory). When there was the (failed) Israeli drones attack in the southern suburbs of Beirut (in August 2019), I said that we would retaliate outside the Shebaa farms, which did not mean strictly speaking that we forbade ourselves to retaliate there, but it was a clear indication that from now on, no point on the border between Lebanon and occupied Palestine would be immune from our retaliation, and that we could strike anywhere. Previously, Israel was used to always expects our attacks in the Shebaa farms, while all the rest of the border, all the settlements were safe. But I wanted to send this clear message: when you attack us, no point on your (usurped) border will be safe. Israel has been vigilant ever since, and that is why there has been no attacks in Lebanon. Nobody asks why? All those who are eager to get rid of the weapons of the Resistance, can they explain to us why Israel used to attack Lebanon whenever they felt like it from 1948 to 2000, then suddenly stopped, except for the war of 2006? This is thanks to the deterrence equations imposed by the Resistance. Israel knows full well that a retaliation would be inevitable. This is one of the rules of engagement.
So Israel is looking for another way (to attack us). What happened with the drones in the southern suburbs of Beirut was an Israeli attempt to carry out an attack without leaving any fingerprints. They were unmasked because the operation failed, but the goal was to strike without leaving any fingerprints. Because Israel knows very well that if it leaves its mark, it must certainly expect a response from the Resistance, and it knows well what that implies. Even when the tunnels (between Lebanon and occupied Palestine) were discovered, Israel sent to Lebanon through three different channels —Egypt, Cyprus and UNIFIL, i.e. three channels— a message saying that they just wanted to uncover the tunnels, and that they would do nothing more, so that we would stay calm and not fight back. Israel understands that Lebanon is a very sensitive front, and this (deterrence) equation is still valid. This is what protects Lebanon: it is the Resistance.
When it comes to Syria, it must be remembered that at the beginning Israel did not strike anyone —not us, not the Syrians, not the Iranians, or any of the other Resistance movements. Israel let the events unfold in Syria, and was only supporting the armed (terrorist) groups. I’m not saying that the entire Syrian opposition was working with Israel, but there is no doubt that many armed groups linked and coordinated directly with Israel on logistics, security, intelligence, right up to supply and funding, etc. Israel hoped that the regime would collapse and the Syrian army would be dislocated, and that Iran, finding itself unable to do anything, would leave Syria, along with Hezbollah, because the situation would be irretrievably lost. This is what happened during the first few years.
When did Israel start to intervene directly inside Syria? I always say that you have to look at situations from a large point of view, and not be satisfied with the Israeli point of view. You also have to see the other side. The Israeli intervention in Syria is a proof of the victory of Syria and of the victory of the Resistance Axis in Syria. For if Israel had still had any hope that the armed groups & takfiris it was supporting, funding and covering had any chance of winning the war in Syria, they would not have needed to enter the scene.
Journalist: But hasn’t that resulted in an imbalance of deterrence (in favor of Israel, as it strikes Syria with impunity)?
Hassan Nasrallah: I’m coming to it, I’m explaining things step by step. When you read the latest statements by Israeli leaders, when asked why they intervened in Syria, they say it is because they realized that (the terrorist groups) would not win. Israel understood that we were going to win in Syria, that the Syrian army was recovering its health and strength, that the presence of Iran and Resistance factions in Syria was taking root. The takfiri groups that occupied the Syrian part of the Golan have been evacuated, and the Golan is a very sensitive subject for Israel… It can’t even bear anyone taking pictures there! This clearly indicates their weakness. The fact that Israel does not tolerate anyone taking photos of positions in the Golan, [not even the inhabitants of the occupied Golan], is a sign of weakness and not of strength. Seeing that Syria was triumphing and recovering, and that there was no longer any hope of victory for the armed groups, Israel resolved to strike positions here and there, to try to hinder the transfer of Syria’s weapons in Lebanon —everyone knows that our missiles do not fall from the sky, and that Syria’s historic role has been to arm the Lebanese and Palestinian Resistance.
Even in Israel’s recent operation, when they hit one of our cars on the Syrian-Lebanese border…
Journalist: And you retaliated (with an incursion into Israeli territory).
Even though Israel’s “apologies” are pitiful and will in no way prevent a deadly response to the deaths of two Hezbollah fighters in an Israeli strike last August (see War of nerves: Israel begs Hezbollah to retaliate), it should be noted that the Zionist entity is doing everything it can to avoid touching Hezbollah members in Syria, going so far as warning them before they target a vehicle, as seen in this video from last April.
Hassan Nasrallah: I’m not saying we retaliated, and I’m not saying we didn’t hit back. Israel was quite capable of killing our fighters, this is not a mistake on its part. They fired a warning shot, or gave a warning, for the fighters to get out of the vehicle, and then they hit it. Why didn’t they want to kill these young (fighters)? Because there is a clear equation: if Israel kills one of our fighters, whether in Lebanon or Syria, we will retaliate. This equation has been proven in practice (time and time again). This is why when, at the same time as the Israeli drone incident in the southern suburbs of Beirut, two of our fighters were killed (by Israel) in Syria, the Israelis evacuated the border for 7 kilometers, on the whole border. They stayed like that, standing on one leg and a half (ready to run for their lives), for 7 days, and if we hadn’t hit that vehicle, they could have stayed like that for 14 days, a month or two whole months. It’s part of the rules of engagement. So far, when Israel strikes (in Syria), it strives not to kill anyone at all, for it fears it will come to a point where the Syrian leadership, or the leaders of the Resistance, will no longer be able to withstand these strikes. Even in this battle, Israel does not have a free hand (and knows the situation can explode at any moment).https://www.dailymotion.com/embed/video/x7v64pq
Maybe someone will retort that Israel (often) strikes (Syria) and the Resistance Axis is not responding, and that we should impose a balance of deterrence in Syria. I will be very frank. This issue is continuously discussed and debated. The Syrian leadership is the one who has the last word, because the decision is theirs, even though the battle concerns us all, and we are all targeted. Sometimes there is the impression that Israel’s goal is escalation, and that they want to push the situation into open war against Syria. Syria is (caught) between two priorities: on the one hand, the battle inside is not over, the terrorist and takfiri groups are still present and are on the lookout for the slightest opportunity to gain strength; on the other hand, escalating into a war between Syria and Israel would run counter to the primary objective (of ending the terrorists). Syria still needs time. Let me explain this point well, because there are a lot of people criticizing us, saying that Israel is hitting Syria and Syria is doing nothing. I don’t know how far the Syrian leadership can tolerate these strikes, and there is a threshold that, once crossed, would result in an (inevitable) retaliation (without fear of escalation), but so far they consider that Israel intervenes to protect armed groups and change the equations in their favor, and lead Syria to a regional war; and it is not in the interest of Syria, which is waging a global war on terrorism, to be drawn into a war against Israel, so what it takes is patiently enduring it. This is what we call strategic patience. But within the framework of this (policy of) patience and endurance, there are certain rules which remain valid and which are respected by Israel and by us, and in any case, Israel does not achieve any objective by its strikes: they did not interrupt the transfer (of missiles), and they recognize it themselves; they failed to expel the Iranians from Syria, and they never will, and the same goes for Hezbollah; and they have failed to weaken the Syrian army, which continues to strengthen. We can defeat the objectives of these Israeli attacks without going to a (devastating) regional war, which would not be in Syria’s interest, at least not at this stage.
Let us recall that in addition to having shot down an Israeli plane in February 2018, in May 2018, Syria retaliated by launching several volleys of missiles against Israel, which hastened to demand a truce: see Syria Imposes New Rules of Engagement on Israel
The danger, and I always warn Israel about this, is that patience has limits. Endurance capacity has limits. The Syrian leadership, and the situation in Syria in general, can absorb some aggression and remedy it within the framework of this vision (of strategic patience), but perhaps Israel will make a mistake or blunder that will exhaust this patience. Israel (isn’t acting rationally, it is) sheer adventurism. Israel has no interest in entering a regional war, and it is very vigilant in this regard.
Journalist: But some analysts say Israel has opted for hit-and-run attacks even if it will lead to war.
Hassan Nasrallah: It’s more psychological warfare than an (accurate) description of reality.
Journalist: Regarding your operation (a triple infiltration into Israeli territory following the destruction of Hezbollah’s vehicle in Syria), Hezbollah did not announce that it had retaliated. But why did you retaliate when there had been no martyrs of the Resistance? Doesn’t the equation say that you only retaliate if your fighters are hit? What was your target?
Hassan Nasrallah: Hezbollah did issue issue a statement on this, so I’ll refrain from commenting. [Hezbollah’s policy is to claim the great majority of its operations, but to leave doubt for some; remember that Israel hardly ever claims its own operations, which is an admission of weakness.] […]
***
Annual interview with Hezbollah Secretary General Sayed Hassan Nasrallah on December 27, 2020, by the Lebanese pan-Arab channel Al-Mayadeen. This interview lasted almost 4 hours.
Hassan Nasrallah: […] Nobody has precise data, sure and reliable information according to which Trump or the Israeli enemy are about to launch some operation in the days which separate us from January 20, if the guy [Trump] ends up submitting to the election result [Laughter] and leaves the White House. But there are analyzes in this direction, especially with a personality of this caliber, affected by so much follies: arrogance, recklessness, effrontery… Especially since this madman is now in a great anger: he is an angry madman. Everyone expects such an act (of madness) and such an eventuality, whether it is actors outside the United States like Iran, Lebanon or Palestine, or elsewhere: even inside the United States, top leaders from both Democratic and Republican parties are worried about what this angry and mad President might do in the next few days, (fearing the worst). So we cannot deny this possibility. But I consider that everything that has been said (on this subject) is only analysis, and is not based on clear and proven information. Even the reports about an an Israeli nuclear warship or submarine sent to the Persian Gulf, via the Suez Canal, are not true, (Israel would never dare to do such a thing). Are the US or Israel going to do something (stupid) or not? Is it a psychological warfare to deter possible armed actions against American troops & interests with the approach of the first anniversary of the assassination of Soleimani and al-Muhandis? All these hypotheses are possible.
The Resistance Axis is very vigilant and watchful during this period (of transition between Trump & Biden), and must scrupulously take care not to be drawn into an escalation, in the slightest point of this Axis. We must not allow ourselves to be dragged to an unmeasured (large-scale) confrontation, to a (total) war whose timing would be the one chosen by our enemies. Of course, (open) war (against the United States and Israel) will (inevitably) happen one day or another, but we are talking about this current timing (we will choose the time and place of the Great War, not them).
Journalist: But don’t you think the threats are particularly pressing? Netyanyahu threatens, the Israeli Chief of Staff threatens…
Hassan Nasrallah: When the Israelis openly threaten and raise their voices publicly, know that these threats do not hide anything material. This is how I understand it: (the more Israel threatens, the less risk of war). We remain vigilant and ready for anything, 24 hours a day, on all battlefields, but this is our analysis: the enormous media hype is a clue that there is nothing serious to fear, it is only psychological warfare, they are only trying to dissuade members of the Resistance Axis from doing anything against them (this is a defensive posture).
Journalist: What do you think of the visit of US Chief of Staff Mark Milley to Israel? In what framework did it happen?
Hassan Nasrallah: Our analysis on this, and it is analysis and not information, is that it has to do with the months and years to come. The Trump administration is about to leave, and a new administration will take its place. It is said that Biden will have a different approach to the Palestinian question, to the resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian and Israeli-Arab conflict: for example, maybe he will support the two-state solution, rejected by Trump & Netanyahu; they have a different take on the details of the Deal of the Century that Trump wanted to impose. With Iran, there is talk of a return of the Biden administration to the nuclear deal, which greatly worries the Israelis and others (Gulf countries), etc. Thus, the Israeli government is worried about the new US administration. Note that it is not the Secretary of State for Defense or the Secretary of State who came: these personalities will no longer be in their posts with the new administration. But as regards the Chiefs of Staff, as a rule, they do not change fundamentally when a new administration takes over, except in some (rare) cases. I think it was not Trump who sent Mark Milley, but the Biden administration, with a message to reassure Israel about what will happe next. […]
Over the past half a century, presidents of the United States have regularly assured American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) at annual meetings of Washington’s commitment to the Zionist regime’s values. To that effect, efforts to help the Zionist regime reach sustainable security constitute a principled policy of Washington.
Nonetheless, under President Donald Trump, these efforts were significantly different. By signing the “Deal of the Century” before cameras, Trump pretended to be a pragmatic president with regard to the security of Israel through mediating peace between Israel and Muslim nations. He had from the very beginning focused specifically on a handful of Muslim nations.
Shortly after signing the Deal of the Century, Trump delivered on his pledge. He officially gave the go-ahead to the process of normalizing ties between Muslim nations and the Zionist regime.
From the day the Deal of the Century was signed until normalization agreements between the Zionist regime and several Muslim nations, an opportunity might have been provided to assess the public opinion in these countries and of course the firm determination of their governments for normalizing ties in view of the materialization of the “Deal of the Century” project initiated by the U.S.
Currently, despite sporadic oppositions across the Muslim world, the Deal of the Century project has taken some steps forward. The United Arab Emirates (UAE), Bahrain, and Morocco are the three Muslim nations that have normalized relations with the Quds occupying regime. However, we have to look into the future of the Deal of the Century.
The Republic of Indonesia is the largest Muslim world and the third biggest democracy in the world. After living for centuries under occupation, colocalization, and exploitation by the Dutch, the Japanese, and the Americans, Indonesia is close to marking the 75th anniversary of its independence.
Living under colonialism, the Indonesian youth sacrificed their lives to achieve independence in 1945. That taught Indonesian Muslims helpful lessons which are symbolized in the country’s Constitution and more importantly in Indonesia’s five major principles. Now we intend to test the waters for Indonesia to see if it can join the Deal of the Century and sign normalization or peace deals with the Zionist regime.
Colonialism yoke
A flashback to the black period of colonialism in Indonesia can serve as the first clue to this enigma. The history of the Kingdom of Srivijaya in Indonesia was millennia-old. Alas, it was seized in the 15th century by the Portuguese. Two centuries later, Britain and the Netherlands dominated Indonesia, leaving tragic disasters behind. That was when Indonesia was renamed the East Indian Company.
History witnesses that the Dutch spilled too much blood in Indonesia to establish their own regime there. Badung, Bali, and Java still remember the horrible Dutch massacre of Indonesians with no mercy for women and children. After the Netherlands, Japan occupied Indonesia while World War II was underway. Then, it was the Americans’ turn to run Indonesian affairs following their victory in the war.
Although the U.S. dominance of Indonesia was short-lived and the country braced for independence, the U.S. maintained its secret clout with Indonesia’s policy, which resulted in the mass deaths of three million Indonesians under the pretext of a Communist coup. Recently declassified CIA documents show that the intelligence agency was, directly and indirectly, involved in the coup and the subsequent carnage of Indonesians.
It may be said that Indonesia is a large country in the world to have felt the life under occupation and suffered massive deaths committed by colonialist powers.
That is exactly why from the very outset of the Indonesian National Revolution, independence leaders pursued the five basic principles of Indonesia’s independence as the most significant independence document and future strategy for the country, calling for just life for all human communities.
Pancasila, political philosophy of Indonesia
As soon as Indonesia declared independence, the country faced serious political tumults. In 1998 Indonesians had to adopt fundamental reforms, known as reformasi. The reformasi brought once more Pancasila to the fore and resulted in a more forceful implementation of Indonesia’s Constitution.
In fact, reformasi laid emphasis on major and principled policy lines of Indonesia and their implementation by people, a policy line whose main focal point was administration of justice in all human communities and clear dismissal of colonialism and exploitation all across the globe.
Indonesian governments have since remained faithful to Pancasila and the Constitution. Wherever people have seen any non-compliance with laws they have taken action against their governments.
Independent foreign policy
“Independence is the right of every nation. Occupation must be abolished in the world because it does not comply with humanity and justice.” That is how Indonesia’s Constitution begins. Therefore, Indonesia has always pursued an independent line vis-à-vis colonial issues in the world because it is a founding nation of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) and has always adopted a principled and anti-occupation position vis-à-vis the Zionists’ occupation of Palestine.
This political line is symbolized in the Indonesian governments’ treatment of the Quds occupying regime. Prior to adoption of reformasi and several years after, the Indonesian government maintained low-level political ties with the Zionist regime without recognizing it. The Indonesian government’s stance against the Zionist regime’s inhumane behaviors came to the limelight after it organized its domestic policy and embraced action on the global scale.
The administration of Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono (SBY) from 2004 to 2014 adopted very tough stance against the Zionists. That is while Indonesia has always faced harsh criticism from the U.S. because of its anti-Zionist stance. On the other hand, Indonesia’s anti-colonialist policy has not been limited to condemnations and political statements. Indonesia has largely helped residents of Gaza and the West Bank. Construction of several hospitals in Palestine, funded by Indonesian government and charities, is a case in point. Under President Joko Widodo, Indonesia has pushed ahead with its anti-colonialist policy – as stipulated in the Constitution – since 2014.
Countering Israeli aggression in return for strained ties
Indonesia has hitherto paid a heavy price because of its faithfulness to the Palestinian cause and its efforts to resolve the issue of the Israeli occupation of Palestine. At political forums and the UN General Assembly, it openly opposed the U.S.’s declaration of al-Quds as the capital of the Zionist regime.
Indonesia’s adoption of an independent policy and support for Palestinian people has not pleased some nations, particularly Australia, leading to a verbal row between the two nations. Indonesia even threatened to sever ties with Australia, saying supporting the Palestinian cause was a principled policy of Indonesia and objecting to Indonesia’s pro-Palestine policy amounted to interference with its domestic affairs.
Will the Deal of Century reach Indonesia?
In light of the Indonesian Muslims’ support for the Palestinian cause and objection to the Zionist regime’s occupation as well as crimes committed by the regime in Gaza and the West Bank, the issue of normalization of ties between Indonesia and the Zionist regime seems to have no real standing and is just mere speculation. Economically known as the Tiger of Southeast Asia, Indonesia does not depend on the so-called American-Zionist aid. Furthermore, the Indonesian government has shown that it would not shy away from paying any price to support Palestine in line with its Constitution. To that effect, Indonesia’s Foreign Ministry spokesman recently dismissed any plan for resumption of ties with the Zionist regime or any proposal for the recognition of Israel.
No one seemed as excited about the election of Joe Biden being the next President of the United States as Palestinian Authority President, Mahmoud Abbas. When all hope seemed lost, where Abbas found himself desperate for political validation and funds, Biden arrived like a conquering knight on a white horse and swept the Palestinian leader away to safety.
Abbas was one of the first world leaders to congratulate the Democratic President-elect on his victory. While Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, delayed his congratulatory statement in the hope that Donald Trump would eventually be able to reverse the results, Abbas suffered no such illusions. Considering the humiliation that the Palestinian Authority experienced at the hands of the Trump Administration, Abbas had nothing to lose. For him, Biden, despite his long love affair with Israel, still represented a ray of hope.
But can the wheel of history be turned back? Despite the fact that the Biden Administration has made it clear that it will not be reversing any of the pro-Israel steps taken by the departing Trump Administration, Abbas remains confident that, at least, the ‘peace process’ can be restored.
This may seem to be an impossible dichotomy, for how can a ‘peace process’ deliver peace if all the components of a just peace have already been eradicated?
It is obvious that there can be no real peace if the US government insists on recognizing all of Jerusalem as Israel’s ‘eternal’ capital. There can be no peace if the US continues to fund illegal Jewish settlements, bankroll Israeli apartheid, deny the rights of Palestinian refugees, turn a blind eye to de facto annexation underway in Occupied Palestine and recognize the illegally-occupied Syrian Golan Heights as part of Israel, all of which is likely to remain the same, even under the Biden Administration.
The ‘peace process’ is unlikely to deliver any kind of a just, sustainable peace in the future, when it has already failed to do so in the past 30 years.
Yet, despite the ample lessons of the past, Abbas has decided, again, to gamble with the fate of his people and jeopardize their struggle for freedom and a just peace. Not only is Abbas building a campaign involving Arab countries, namely Jordan and Egypt, to revive the ‘peace process’, he is also walking back on all his promises and decisions to cancel the Oslo Accords, and end ‘security coordination’ with Israel. By doing so, Abbas has betrayed national unity talks between his party, Fatah, and Hamas.
Unity talks between rival Palestinian groups seemed to take a serious turn last July, when Palestine’s main political parties issued a joint statement declaring their intent to defeat Trump’s ‘Deal of the Century’. The language used in that statement was reminiscent of the revolutionary discourse used by these groups during the First and Second Intifadas (uprisings), itself a message that Fatah was finally re-orienting itself around national priorities and away from the ‘moderate’ political discourse wrought by the US-sponsored ‘peace process’.
Even those who grew tired and cynical about the shenanigans of Abbas and Palestinian groups wondered if this time would be different; that Palestinians would finally agree on a set of principles through which they could express and channel their struggle for freedom.
Oddly, Trump’s four-year term in the White House was the best thing that happened to the Palestinian national struggle. His administration was a jarring and indisputable reminder that the US is not – and has never been – ‘an honest peace broker’ and that Palestinians cannot steer their political agenda to satisfy US-Israeli demands in order for them to obtain political validation and financial support.
By cutting off US funding of the Palestinian Authority in August 2018, followed by the shutting down of the Palestinian mission in Washington DC, Trump has liberated Palestinians from the throes of an impossible political equation. Without the proverbial American carrot, the Palestinian leadership has had the rare opportunity to rearrange the Palestinian home for the benefit of the Palestinian people.
Alas, those efforts were short-lived. After multiple meetings and video conferences between Fatah, Hamas and other delegations representing Palestinian groups, Abbas declared, on November 17, the resumption of ‘security coordination’ between his Authority and Israel. This was followed by the Israeli announcement on December 2 to release over a billion dollars of Palestinian funds that were unlawfully held by Israel as a form of political pressure.
This takes Palestinian unity back to square one. At this point, Abbas finds unity talks with his Palestinian rivals quite useless. Since Fatah dominates the Palestinian Authority, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and the Palestine National Council (PNC), conceding any ground or sharing leadership with other Palestinian factions seems self-defeating. Now that Abbas is reassured that the Biden Administration will bequeath him, once again, with the title of ‘peace partner’, a US ally and a moderate, the Palestinian leader no longer finds it necessary to seek approval from the Palestinians. Since there can be no middle ground between catering to a US-Israeli agenda and elevating a Palestinian national agenda, the Palestinian leader opted for the former and, without hesitation, ditched the latter.
While it is true that Biden will neither satisfy any of the Palestinian people’s demands or reverse any of his predecessor’s missteps, Abbas can still benefit from what he sees as a seismic shift in US foreign policy – not in favor of the Palestinian cause but of Abbas personally, an unelected leader whose biggest accomplishment has been sustaining the US-imposed status quo and keeping the Palestinian people pacified for as long as possible.
Although the ‘peace process’ has been declared ‘dead’ on multiple occasions, Abbas is now desperately trying to revive it, not because he – or any rational Palestinian – believes that peace is at hand, but because of the existential relationship between the PA and this US-sponsored political scheme. While most Palestinians gained nothing from all of this, a few Palestinians accumulated massive wealth, power and prestige. For this clique, that alone is a cause worth fighting for.
– Ramzy Baroud is a journalist and the Editor of The Palestine Chronicle. He is the author of five books. His latest is “These Chains Will Be Broken: Palestinian Stories of Struggle and Defiance in Israeli Prisons” (Clarity Press). Dr. Baroud is a Non-resident Senior Research Fellow at the Center for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA) and also at the Afro-Middle East Center (AMEC). His website is www.ramzybaroud.net
مفهوم الإيمان بأحقية القضية فعل مقاوم وأيدي الأطفال الممسكة بالحجارة تضرب فيها المحتلّ وجه آخر للكلمة والفكر والتربية.
تحيي الأمم المتحدة في 29 تشرين الثاني من كلّ عام يوم التضامن العالمي مع الشعب الفلسطيني رغم انّ هذا التاريخ لا ينصف فلسطين كونه يتزامن مع اليوم الذي اتخذت فيه الجمعية العامة قرار التقسيم رقم 181 وإقامة دولتين واحدة منهم لا حق لها في الوجود كونها معتدية ومغتصبة لأرض ليست لها أساساً.
يتضامن العالم في هذا اليوم مع الشعب الفلسطيني ولو في إطار معنوي، وما يختلف هذا العام هو الترحيب بالتطبيع من قبل الأنظمة الخليجية جهاراً وبحجج فارغة من أيّ منطق بعد تمرير «صفقة القرن» من قبل الإدارة الأميركية السابقة بقيادة ترامب دون أي تعويل على تغيير محتمل في الاداء من قبل الادارة الجديدة حين يتصل الأمر باطماعهم ومشاريعهم في المنطقة للاستيلاء أكثر على خيرات بلادنا.
ولأنّ الكلمة تخترق العقول تنظم الحملة الأكاديمية الدولية لمناهضة الاحتلال ومخطط الضمّ بإحياء اليوم العالمي مع الشعب الفلسطيني بالتعاون مع العديد من الشركاء العرب والمناصرين للقضية الفلسطينية لقاء حواري على مستوى العالم قوامه تفكيك خطاب التطبيع وتقويم البوصلة من خلال مشاركات بحثية مقترنة بالوقائع التاريخية.
«البناء» سألت مجموعة من المشاركين في هذا النشاط عن الأهداف المتوخاة منه وكيفية مخاطبة الأجيال وتوعيتهم على ضرورة مواجهة التسويق الإعلامي المنظم لفكرة التطبيع.
عودة: تنشئة وطنية مقاومة للاحتلال والتطبيع ومعززة للهوية الوطنية والقومية
اعتبر الدكتور رمزي عودة مدير وحدة الأبحاث في معهد فلسطين لأبحاث الأمن القومي ومنسق الحملة الأكاديمية الدولية لمناهضة الاحتلال والضمّ أنّ الأكاديميين يمكنهم مواجهة التطبيع من خلال تفكيك الخطاب الذي يروّج له، وقال: «تطلق الحملة الأكاديمية الدولية لمناهضة الاحتلال ومخطط الضمّ شعارات أساسية وهي لا للاحتلال ولا للضم ولا للتطبيع، هذه الأهداف الأساسية التي تسعى الحملة إليها من خلال تعزيز دور الأكاديميين والنُخب المثقفة والخبراء من أجل تقويض صفقة القرن وتقويض سياسة التوسع الاستعماري الاستيطاني الاحتلالي، وأيضاً تقويض عملية التطبيع التي انتشرت على إثر «صفقة القرن» وضغط ترامب على العديد من الدول العربية من أجل المضيّ قدُماً بتطبيع علاقاتها مع الكيان الصهيوني ونقصد هنا الإمارات والسودان والبحرين وربما غيرها من الدول العربية، ونحن نأمل ان ينتهي مسلسل التطبيع مع رحيل ترامب ولكن لا أحد يعرف او يتوقع ما هو آت».
وأضاف: «نحن نرى انّ الأكاديميين بإمكانهم مواجهة التطبيع من خلال تفكيك الخطاب التطبيعي، بدورهم الفكري والعقلي وانتاج المعرفة، من هنا فإنّ الحملة الأكاديمية تأخذ على عاتقها تفكيك خطاب التطبيع من اجل إعادة إنتاج فكر مضاد له يقوم أولاً على أساس الهوية العربية وثانياً جذرية الصراع مع المحتلّ، الذي هو صراع وجود، وثالثاً حتمية الانتصار بالرغم من الضعف العربي في الوقت الراهن، لكن في النهاية «إسرائيل» ليست جزءاً طبيعياً من المنطقة وبالضرورة سينتصر الفلسطينيون والعرب على هذا الجسم الغريب ويتخلص من الاحتلال والجسم الكولونيالي الصهيوني.
أما كيف يمكن أن نفكك خطاب التطبيع؟ هنا نطرح في الحملة الأكاديمية انّ خطاب التطبيع يحتوي على خمسة خرافات أساسية أيّ قضايا أسطورية لا يمكن تصديقها ويتمّ الترويج لها، لذلك يجب ان نوضح للجمهور والطلبة والعلماء وللسياسيين انّ مفهوم التطبيع يقوم على أساس خرافي، أولها أنه أوقف الضمّ وللمزيد من الإيضاح فإنّ التطبيع علق عملية الضمّ لفترة مؤقتة ومحدودة وهو بهذا الإيقاف، وهنا أقصد اتفاقية الإمارات العربية الإسرائيلية، اعترف ضمناً انّ عملية الضمّ يمكن ان تحدث وممكن تقبلها أيّ أنّ عملية التطبيع تشرّع الضمّ ولكنها تؤجّله لفترة مقبلة بمعنى انه ليس وقته اليوم وفق المنطق «الإسرائيلي»، والخرافة الثانية انّ التطبيع يؤدّي الى السلام في المنطقة مع العلم انّ الدول التي تطبّع مع الكيان المحتلّ لم تحاربه يوماً وهي بعيدة عن حدوده وليست منخرطة في أيّ علاقات عدائية معه ولا نعلم عن أيّ سلام تتحدث، الخرافة الثالثة انّ التطبيع يؤدّي الى الأمن وهنا يرتكز هذا الفكر على انّ أمن دول الخليج يتعرّض لابتزاز وعوامل عدم الاستقرار من قبل كيانات معادية، والمقصود هنا إيران كما تحاول الإدارة الأميركية أن تبتز العديد من الدول العربية بالبعبع الإيراني الذي يتطلب تحالفها مع «الإسرائيلي» لمواجهة هذا المدّ الإيراني، بعيداً عن الفكرة الطائفية وما يمثلها هذا البعد ونحن لسنا بصدد الحديث عنه، لكن النقطة المحورية هنا انّ تحالف دول الخليج مع «إسرائيل» لن يؤدّي الى استقرار المنطقة بل بالعكس سيخلق محاور متصارعة مما يجعل فكرة الحرب قائمة في كلّ لحظة وتبعاً للمتغيّرات والظروف، أما الخرافة الرابعة فهي تقوم على فكرة انّ التطبيع يؤدّي الى التنمية الاقتصادية وتطوير الاقتصاد ونحن هنا بصدد الحديث عن الأموال الخليجية التي يمكن ان تُستثمر في الكيان المحتلّ وتؤدّي الى نتائج إيجابية وهذا أمر غير منطقي على الإطلاق حيث انه يمكن اسثتمار هذه الأموال في دول أقوى اقتصادياً وبالتالي لن تؤدّي التنمية المتوقعة جراء فكرة التطبيع مع الكيان والاستثمار لديه بالعكس انّ التنمية المشتركة بين الدول العربية و»إسرائيل» لن تكون لصالح الأولى على الإطلاق بل ستقوّي الكيان على حساب توازنات القوى في المنطقة، أما الخرافة الخامسة فهي انّ التطبيع هو شأن داخلي لكلّ دولة عربية وهذا يتعلق بالسيادة ونحن كحملة أكاديمية نحترم سيادة كلّ دولة حقها في اتخاذ قراراتها ولكن التطبيع ليس شأناً مرتبطاً بالسيادة لأنّ الاقليم العربي كله مرتبط بتوفير الأمن والاستقرار وهذا الإقليم مهدّد بوجود «إسرائيل» منذ نشأة هذا الكيان الصهيوني تعتبر الدول العربية، وحتى تلك التي وقعت اتفاق سلام مع العدو مثل مصر، تعتبر انّ «إسرائيل» عدو ولها مطامع في هذه المنطقة، وبالتالي فإنّ التطبيع شأن لكلّ الإقليم العربي، وإذا قبلنا أنه شأن لكلّ دولة على حدة فنسأل هنا أين المبادرة العربية التي وافق عليها كلّ العرب، وإذا كان شأناً داخلياً فلن يتحقق أيّ سلام وهذا يعني انّ كلّ من يراه كذلك من الدول العربية قد تخلى عن فلسطين».
وتابع: «يجب توعية هذا الجيل الذي يتعرّض لكلّ أنواع التشويش المنظم من قبل الكثير من وسائل الإعلام والروايات المزيّفة للتاريخ والواقع وتعمل على الترويج لفكرة التطبيع، هنا أرى أنّ الحملة يمكن لها النجاح بالقيام بالعديد من الأنشطة ولكن ذلك يتوقف على عدة عوامل، الأول قدرتها على خلق قيادة نخبوية مشكّلة من الأكاديميين والخبراء ومراكز صناعة الفكر والسياسات وإذا استطاعت الحملة الأكاديمية تشكيل نواة من هذه القيادة بالتأكيد ستؤثر على جمهورها من الطلبة والأهالي ومتتبّعي وسائل الإعلام وهذا سيخلق فرصة أكبر لمحاربة عملية التطبيع، أما العامل الآخر فهو القدرة على تحويل خطاب التطبيع كخطاب للتخوين وهذا مهمّ، فالتطبيع خيانة واستخدام هذه العبارة والترويج لها يؤدّي الى نجاح كبير، والعامل الثالث فهو إبراز انّ خطاب التطبيع هو مساس بالمقدسات بمعنى في اتفاقية الإمارات يتحدثون انّ الصلاة تسمح لجميع الأديان في المجسد الأقصى فهل هذا هو المطلوب ان نصلي جميعنا في الأقصى في ظلّ الاحتلال؟ بالتأكيد ليس هذا هو الذي نريده وهنا يجب ان نوضح للعالم جميعاً انّ الأقصى لا يحتاج الى مصلين بل هو بحاجة لمن يحرّره… وفي ما يتصل بالعامل الرابع فيتمثل بمدى القدرة على استنهاض الفكر القومي المضاد للتطبيع وهذه نقطة مهمة تتعلق بايديولوجيا التحرير وايديولوجيا القومية وكلّ هذه الأمور يجب ان تكون موجهة او طاردة لعملية التطبيع».
وختم: «في النهاية يجب ان نتحدث عن كيفية مخاطبة هذه الأجيال من خلال تعزيز الرواية العربية بشكل عام ومن ثم تعزيز الرواية الفلسطينية بشكل خاص والمقصود هنا هو الرواية التاريخية والحديثة والمعاصرة، وأيضاً تفنيد الرواية الصهيونية التي تتحدث عن أنّ فلسطين هي أرض المعياد التي وعدهم بها الله والكثير من المقولات الأسطورية التي يروّج لها المحتلّ، إضافة الى ذلك المفروض تطوير البرامج التربوية والتعليمية في المدارس والجامعات وان يكون هناك تنشئة وطنية مقاومة للاحتلال والتطبيع ومعززة للهوية الوطنية والقومية، كما يجب استخدام الفن سواء الموسيقى او الغناء لمخاطبة الشباب حول خطورة التطبيع، ولا ننسى الاستفادة من وسائل التواصل الاجتماعي في إطار ايصال الفكر المفكك للخطاب التطبيعي للاجيال.»
شكر: رفع الصوت عالياً في مواجهة التطبيع
أكدت الدكتور رنا شكر أستاذة العلاقات الدولية في الجامعة اللبنانية أنّ اللقاء الأكاديمي هدفه رفع الصوت عالياً في مواجهة التطبيع، وقالت: «الهدف من العمل الذي نقوم به هو مناصرة الشعب الفلسطيني في كافة القضايا المتعلقة بهذا الشعب، والتشبيك بين الأكاديميين يهدف ايضاً الى تعزيز التعاون في ما بينهم من خلال القيام بأبحاث علمية هدفها التركيز على خطورة الاحتلال الإسرائيلي وأطماعه في المنطقة، وإعادة التذكير بممارسات هذا العدو الذي يقوم بكلّ الانتهاكات الدموية بحق الفلسطينيين وكلّ شعوب المنطقة واغتصاب الأرض.
هذا اللقاء هو لرفع الصوت عالياً في مواجهة التطبيع وذلك بإعلاء صوت الأكاديميين بالللاءات الثلاث… لا للاعتراف بالعدو ولا للصلح معه ولا للتفاوض، لا شك انّ هناك توجهاً إعلامياً منظماً يعمد الى تسويق التطبيع من خلال إعطاء الصورة الاقتصادية والحضارية له، ونحن من خلال نشاطنا في اليوم العالمي للتضامن مع شعب فلسطين نريد دحض هذه الفكرة من خلال وقائع تاريخية ثابتة لتصويب الأمور في نصابها الصحيح كي لا يؤخذ هذا الجيل الى حدّ الخضوع للحرب الناعمة المتمثلة بغسل العقول».
وأضافت: «نحن بصدد التركيز على تداعيات هذا التطبيع على منطقة الشرق الأوسط وشمال أفريقيا بالتوعية الى ما يريده هذا العدو وداعمته الولايات المتحدة الأميركية من خلال رسم خريطة جديدة للمنطقة العربية، وهدفنا التوعية من خطر اتفاقيات السلام التي قامت بين الدول العربية والكيان المحتلّ والى ماذا أدّت وقد تؤدي، بحيث لا يجب الاستهانة بهذه الاتفاقيات وما قد تشكله من تهديد لكلّ المنطقة، فهذه الاتفاقيات التي بدأت من دول الخليج قد تمتدّ الى باقي الدول العربية، لذلك نحن نؤكد على ضرورة التذكير بكيفية نشوء هذا الكيان ودمويته وضرورة إحياء الهوية القومية التي تحارب وجوده وتمدّده من خلال الفكر المقاوم الذي يرفض كلّ أشكال التعاون مع كيان يغتصب الأرض التي سقط في سبيلها الشهداء».
وختمت: «نحن نعتقد انّ الأكاديميين من أساتذة ومثقفين هم السباقون في الاتحاد مع بعضهم البعض ضدّ كلّ ما يسمّى خطوات التوسع المقنعة التي يقوم بها العدو الإسرائيلي داخل العالم العربي، وذلك من خلال التوعية بالقلم والكلمة والتوجه الى عقول الأجيال الحديثة لتبيان حقيقة ما جرى من اغتصاب لهذه الأرض وقتل شعبها والتركيز على القضية الأمّ التي هي قضية فلسطين.
مخاطبة هذا الجيل تكون بإحياء القوى العربية الناعمة المتمثلة بالعقول وطريقة التربية والتدريس والتعليم وتعزيز مفهوم وثقافة المواطنة والهوية القومية وتعزيز اللغة التي تلاشت مع سرعة العصر، وعودة مراكز الأبحاث والحدّ من هجرة العقول لتقوية الوعي القومي في عالمنا العربي كي لا يكون التطبيع القائم مدخل الى تكريس فكرة القبول بالمحتلّ وتمدّده في كافة العالم العربي».
حمدو: خطابنا للأجيال هو ضرورة التقدّموالتطوّر والنهضة
من جهته رأى الدكتور محمود عزو حمدو أستاذ محاضر في جامعة الموصل «انّ التطبيع مع الكيان الصهيوني يأتي نتيجة النكسات التي مرّت على الأمة العربية وغياب فكرة الأمة بشكل كبير جداً عن المدلولات الإعلامية والسياسية في التداول اليومي في العالم العربي، وأيضاً نتيجة الانتكاسات الكبيرة التي تعرّضت لها بلدان المحور العربي وهي العراق ومصر وسورية كون هذه البلدان كانت تشكل محور الحراك السياسي في المنطقة على مستوى التنسيق لمجابهة العدو الصهيوني، بالإضافة الى ذلك هناك مسألة جداً مهمة وتتمثل في تصاعد الدول الهامشية على مستوى قيادة العالم العربي مثل قطر والبحرين وغيرها وأصبحت تقود كلّ الحراك السياسي المتعلق بعلاقات العرب مع الآخرين وتنتج لوبيات في الدول تعمل ضدّ القضايا العربية.
المسألة الثانية تتعلق بتسويق فكرة انّ هذه المنطقة هي خاصة لليهود دون غيرهم على أساس ديني، ومن ناحية ثانية قامت الدول الكبرى ووكلاؤها بالتسويق لصراع مذهبي (سني ـ شيعي) يتمثل بالدول الخليجية من جهة وإيران من جهة أخرى، وطبعاً لا ننسى الدور التركي الذي يريد التموضع في المنطقة وفق مصالحه».
أضاف: «التدوال الإعلامي العربي يؤثر بشكل سلبي على الشباب لجهة تزوير الوقائع وتحويل العدو الى صديق وبالعكس وهذا أمر واضح بشكل كبير، وانعكس من خلال التطبيع والصور التي نراها على وسائل التواصل وطبعاً استضافة إسرائيليين يتمّ وصفهم بالمحايدين على قنوات تلفزيونية عربية كما فعلت الجزيرة تحت شعار الرأي والرأي الآخر ساهم في تشويش العقول.
والخشية الأساسية ان تتحوّل هذه الأجيال الى أجيال لا تعرف من هو العدو أو ان تتحوّل الى وقود لتصفية الصراعات المذهبية تحت عناوين جديدة، داعش هو صورة من صور الصراع المذهبي في المنطقة، وهناك نماذج كثيرة غيرها.
اهمية هذه التكتلات العلمية انها تعطي روحاً جديدة للعمل العربي والقومي باتجاه مناهضة الكيان الصهيوني ورفض التطبيع معه بأيّ شكل من الأشكال، وعملية التدجين التي تعرّض لها الشباب العربي منذ عام 1990 حتى اليوم لا سيما منذ مرحلة انهيار العراق بعد غزوه عام 2003 ادّت نتائجها بشكل كبير جداً».
وختم: «الصراع الأساسي يتوجب ان يكون في اتجاه كلّ دعاة التطبيع المنبطحين أمام الكيان الصهيوني، الخطاب الذي يجب التوجه به الى الأجيال هو ضرورة التقدّم والتطوّر والنهضة، لا سيما النهضة العلمية لمواجهة كلّ الأعداء المتربصين بالشعوب العربية، كما يجب إعادة إنتاج الرؤية التاريخية للصراع العربي الصهيوني من خلال اعتباره صراعاً بين محتلّ انتهك حقوق الإنسان وصاحب حقّ هو ضحية حقوقه منتهكة.
ويجب التركيز على حالة التفتيت التي مرّت المجتمعات العربية التي أثرت بشكل سلبي، وأيضاً دور وسائل التواصل الاجتماعي في الترويج للإسرائيلي ومواجهتها».
ترجمان: التضامن لا يكون بالشعاراتوالخطب الرنانة
أما باسل ترجمان (كاتب صحافي وباحث سياسي) فقال: «من الأساسي اليوم ان يكون هدف إحياء اليوم الدولي للتضامن مع الشعب الفلسطيني مناسبة للتأكيد على هذا التضامن مع الشعب الفلسطيني وقضيته العادلة وان يتمّ الفصل بين التضامن مع الشعب وبين التضامن وتأييد الحال السياسي الفلسطيني لأنّ الحال السياسي متغيّر بحسب الواقع والظروف، فعند الإعلان عن هذا اليوم عام 1977 كان الحال السياسي الفلسطيني في المستويين العربي والدولي مختلفاً تماماً عن واقع الحال بعد ذلك وصولاً لإقامة السلطة الوطنية الفلسطينية وما تبع ذلك من واقع متغيّر لم يفض لإقامة سلام عادل يعيد الحقوق الشرعية للشعب الفلسطيني».
أضاف: «طوال السنوات الماضية كان هنالك حالة استكانة سياسية أفقدت هذا اليوم معناه النضالي وتحوّل لمناسبة بروتوكولية يتمّ فيها تبادل رسائل ومواقف سياسية تعبّر عن أساسيات مواقف الدول تجاه فلسطين وتناسى كثيرون هذا اليوم.
في ظلّ صفقة القرن وانطلاق قطار التطبيع عاد الحديث عن ضرورة إحياء هذا اليوم وإبعاده عن المستوى السياسي التقليدي ليكون مناسبة تضامنية دائمة وثابتة مع الشعب الفلسطيني المحروم من نيل حقوقه التي يعتبرها مناسبة لإنهاء الظلم والتشرّد ورفع آثار العدوان الذي تعرّض له منذ أكثر من سبعين عاماً، وهذا يقتضي ان يتمّ الفصل بين الحال السياسي مهما كانت طبيعة الظروف وبين الواقع النضالي للشعب الفلسطيني لأنّ هذا سيعيد لإحياء هذه الذكرى رونقها ويبعدها عن التوظيف السياسي الآني ويبقيه موعداً ثابتاً لكلّ الشعوب والقوى المحبة للعدل والسلام لتعلن تضامنها بالفعل وليس بالبيانات والخطب مع نضال الشعب الفلسطيني».
وتابع: «السؤال المهمّ ايّ تضامن نريد هل نبحث عن تضامن يرضي الذات ويشبعها فخراً وحديث عن البطولات والأمجاد من الجانبين، الفلسطيني يتحدث عن بطولاته في مقارعة الاحتلال، والأشقاء والأصدقاء يتحدثون عن حبّهم ودعمهم ومناصرتهم لفلسطين وينتهي الحال بإشباع عاطفي لا يغني ولا يسمن عن جوع.
من المهمّ ان تكون المناسبة بعيدة عن الشعاراتية والخطب الرنانة، وان تكون مناسبة حقيقية لتحويل التضامن لفعل نضالي سياسي لدعم الحق الفلسطيني بكلّ الوسائل المتاحة وهي ممكنة وكبيرة وقادرة ان تصنع الفعل المؤثر عربياً ودولياً، وهذا في حدّ ذاته أكبر رسالة نصوغها لمواجهة إعلام الواقع الحالي وتوجهاته بذكاء ودون ان ننجرّ للصدام مع ايّ طرف مهما كان الظرف لأنّ التناقض الرئيسي مع العدو وليس مع اي طرف آخر.
من المهمّ اليوم ان نختار آليات وصيغ جديدة مبتكرة للتخاطب مع أجيال جديدة تحول العالم بالنسبة لها إلى فضاء افتراضي صغير وصار التواصل عبره أحد أشكال وآليات العمل الإعلامي والسياسي والنضالي».
وختم: «هذه الأجيال لديها ميزات التفاعل السريع بحكم سرعة التواصل وانتقال المعلومات، وبالتالي لا يمكن للخطاب التقليدي المعتمد على البيانات والمواقف والخطب الرنانة ان يؤدي المعنى بل يجب التواصل معها وإيصال الرسائل الذكية القصيرة والمتحركة عبر وسائل التواصل الاجتماعي، أيضاً الأجيال الجديدة ليست من أصحاب القراءات المعمّقة او الطويلة وهذا يجعلها بعيدة عن الاستيعاب والتعاطي الإيجابي مع الدراسات المعمّقة او الشروحات المطوّلة ويظهر انّ التأثير عليها ممكن وسهل أكثر بكثير من الأجيال السابقة التي كان للفكر والكتاب والمقال المعمّق تأثير عليها، فيديو ثلاثين ثانية قد يخلق لك ملايين المتعاطفين والمؤيدين بينما دراسة او بحث جدي حقيقي قد لا يقرأه احد، وهذا لا يعني اطلاقاً أن لا يتمّ العمل بالجهد العلمي الحقيقي والبحث الأكاديمي ولكن ضمن أطره الحقيقة واستغلال المساحات الاتصالية الجديدة لإيصال الأفكار الذكية والتفاعل معها لخدمة النضال العادل للشعب الفلسطيني».
غوسطان: دور محوري للاعلام والفضاء الافتراضي
اما ليزا ابراهيم غوسطان (ممرّضة في الصليب الاحمر) الناشطة في منصة طوارئ فلسطين الموجودة في لوزان التي تنقل أخبار الشعب الفلسطيني والتي لا يتمّ تداولها عبر وسائل الإعلام فقالت: «للأسف أصبحنا في زمن حين يسألوننا من أين أنتم ونقول إننا فلسطينيون يجب ان تقترن إجابتنا بالتأكيد أننا لسنا إرهابيين كما يتمّ التسويق في الكثير من الوسائل الإعلامية وبشكل ممنهج لتحويل الضحية الى جلاد. وقد أصبحنا معتادين على هذا الأمر حيث أننا نجيب بطريقة مريحة ومقنعة ونتمكن من تصويب الأمور في إطارها الصحيح وبالتالي يعترف كلّ من يسأل بأحقية قضيتنا الواضحة.
اما في ما يتصل بضرورة مخاطبة الأجيال الشابة فمن البديهي أن نرشدهم الى المصدر الفعلي للمعلومة والذي ينقل الوقائع التاريخية والحديثة دون أيّ تحريف او تزييف من هنا ممكن للإعلام ووسائل التواصل الاجتماعي لعب الدور المحوري في مواجهة الأخبار المغلوطة شرط ان يتمّ استخدامها بوعي».
عساف: نعوّل على الإعلام الحر لإيصال الصوت
اما الدكتور نظام عساف مدير مركز عمان لدراسات حقوق الانسان فقال: «هدف هذه الحملة توجيه رسائل تضامنية مع الشعب الفلسطيني، تعكس مواقف المشاركين فيها من خلال المقالات أو الأبحاث حول مخاطر التطبيع والضمّ، أو تسجيل مقطع فيديو أو رسائل صوتية قصيرة، لتوضيح خطورة الضمّ والتطبيع على الأمن القومي الفلسطيني والعربي من جهة؛ والتأكيد على الثوابت الفلسطينية والعربية في مقاومة الاحتلال وتحرير الأرض الفلسطينية من جهة ثانية؛ والدعوة إلى وقف التطبيع من قبل بعض الحكومات العربية باعتباره يعزز عملية الضمّ الذي تقوم به سلطات الاحتلال الصهيوني في الأغوار الفلسطينية»ز
وأضاف: «أنّ هذه الأنشطة وغيرها ستساهم في الكشف عن زيف الادّعاء بأنّ فكرة التطبيع المطروحة ستمنع الكيان الغاصب من ضمّ هذه الأراضي الفلسطينية، لأنّ هذا التطبيع يتمّ وفقاً لمنطق المحتلّ الذي يعلن مراراً وتكراراً أنه يسعى إلى إقامة «سلام» مع الدول العربية من موقع القوة.
من الطبيعي أن لا تحقق هذه الحملة هدفها بسهولة، لأنّ الإعلام كما ذكرتم في سؤالكم هو إعلام منظم في تسويق فكرة التطبيع، ونحن نعوّل على الإعلام الحر والمنحاز لحقوق الشعب الفلسطيني لإيصال الصوت، و»البناء» نعتبرها نموذجاً، كما تستطيع أن تفنّد صحة هذا الادّعاء من خلال الإشارة إلى حقيقة أنّ معاهدات واتفاقيات السلام التي وقعت سابقاً بين الكيان الغاصب وكلّ من مصر والأردن لم تجلب لهما الازدهار الاقتصادي بل مزيد من المديونية والفقر والبطالة ناهيك عن حقيقة عدم تطبيع الشعبين المصري والأردني معه».
وختم: «مخاطبة الجيل الذي سيطرت عليه سرعة العصر في ظلّ أخبار مغلوطة مع تغييب الوقائع التاريخية يمثل تحدي كبير للحملة، ولذلك طرحت هذه المبادرة على جميع المتضامنين والمناصرين لحقوق الشعب الفلسطيني وسائل وأدوات يتمّ من خلالها توجه رسائل تغذي الجيل الجديد بالحقائق والمعلومات التي تؤكد الرواية الفلسطينية وتفند الرواية الصهيونية حول «أرض بلا شعب لشعب بلا أرض». وفي هذا المجال يفضل استخدام كافة ألوان التعبير الجذابة من مثل الرسم والمسرح والسينما والأغاني والفيديوات القصيرة والرسائل الصوتية وغيرها.
من الطبيعي أن لا يقتصر العمل لاسترجاع حقوق الشعب الفلسطيني على العمل الإعلامي وانما يكون مسنوداً بالعمل الكفاحي والنضالي على كافة المستويات وفي كافة الميادين وبكلّ أشكال النضال التي تحدث انقلابا في موازين القوى تسهم في استرداد الحقوق كاملة غير منقوصة.
رغم المكابرة يبدو أنّ دونالد ترامب سيجد نفسه ملزماً في 20 كانون الثاني/ يناير 2021 بالخروج من البيت الأبيض بعد أن خذلته صناديق الاقتراع. وبذلك يكون ظنّه قد خاب وخسر التجديد، أما الخيبة الأكبر والشعور بالخسارة الأعظم فقد كان من نصيب الضلعين الآخرين معه في مثلث «صفقة القرن» أيّ نتنياهو ومحمد بن سلمان اللذين عملا معه في تلك الجريمة التي بات واضحاّ أنّ أهدافها تتعدّى تثبيت «إسرائيل» بشكل نهائيّ على كامل أرض فلسطين التاريخيّة مع بعض جزر تعطى للفلسطينيّين ظرفيّاً لتذويبها لاحقاً بالكيان العنصري اليهودي، تتعدّى ذلك الى تهويد المنطقة بكاملها وإخراج كلّ من يرفض الاستسلام لـ «إسرائيل» منها، وما القرار الذي اتخذته الإمارات العربية بعد استسلامها لـ «إسرائيل» في إطار ما سُمّي «تطبيع» وفتح أبوابها لليهود من دون تأشيرة دخول، مترافقاً مع منع دخول مواطني 13 دولة عربية وإسلامية إليها إلا أول الغيث وصورة نموذجيّة لما سيكون عليه وجه المنطقة إذا نجح الثالوث غير المقدّس في فرض «صفقة القرن» نموذج يقول فيه الصهاينة وعملاؤهم «لا يدخل علينا شريف يرفض الاستسلام لإسرائيل».
بيد أنّ خسارة ترامب جعلت الثالوث يقلق على «صفقة القرن» هذه، قلق يفاقمه الظنّ بأنّ جو بايدن سيراجع معظم سياسات ترامب في المنطقة ويصحّح ما أفسده، وفي طليعة ذلك الملف النووي الإيراني، ما سيُعقد من أوضاع ضلعَي الصفقة ويثير خشيتهما من المستقبل. لذلك وكما يبدو اتجهت أفكار المثلث الشيطانيّة الى إنتاج واقع في المنطقة ينشر ظلاله على جو بايدن الرئيس الجديد ويلقي بثقله عليه ويمنعه من نقض ما حبكه ترامب، ولأجل ذلك يخطط الثالوث لحرب على إيران بخاصة وعلى محور المقاومة عامة تكون على وجه من اثنين أولهما أن تهاجم أميركا المنشآت النووية الإيرانية بشكل تدميري وتردّ إيران عليها وتندلع الحرب، والثاني أن تبدأ بهجوم «إسرائيلي» على إيران فتستدرج رداً من المقاومة على «إسرائيل» فتتدخل أميركا لحمايتها وفي الحالين سيرسم مشهد ميداني يصبح الحديث معه عن مفاوضات حول إحياء التوقيع الأميركي على الاتفاق النووي الإيراني مع الدول 5+1 حديث من غير مضمون ولا فائدة فيفرض ترامب بذلك قراره على بايدن بعد أن يكون قد خرج من البيت الأبيض.
إنه التخطيط للعمل العسكري ضدّ محور المقاومة إذن، تخطيط وإعداد نفذ في سياقه حتى الآن أكثر من عمل وأتمّ أكثر من سلوك بدءاً بإعادة الانتشار الأميركي في أفغانستان والعراق (حول إيران) مروراً بتحرك بعض قطع الأسطول البحري الأميركي في الخليج وإبعادها عن متناول الصواريخ الإيرانية، ثم نشر طائرات B-52 القاذفات الاستراتيجية الأميركية في قواعد جوية في الشرق الأوسط، وما أعقبها من اجتماع ثلاثي في «نيوم» السعودية بمشاركة بومبيو ونتنياهو ومحمد بن سلمان، وصولاً الى التعميم العسكري «الإسرائيلي» الصادر عن وزير حرب العدو والموجّه الى جيشه يأمره فيه بالاستعداد لمواجهة ظرف تقوم فيه أميركا بقصف إيران قريباً.
إنّ تحليلاً لكلّ ما تقدّم من معطيات يحمل المقدّر العسكري والاستراتيجي الى وضع احتمال شنّ حرب من قبل المثلث العدواني ذاك كأمر لا بدّ من وضعه في الحساب، ولكن لا يمكن اعتباره الاحتمال الممكن الوحيد لأكثر من اعتبار. ويجب الوقوف على الوجه الآخر من الصورة ربطاً بقدرات الطرف الذي سيُعتدى عليه وعلى إمكاناته وعلى اتقاء الضربة وإفشالها أولاً وعلى قدرته على الردّ وقلب مسار الأحداث عكس رغبات المعتدين.
وفي هذا السياق نتوقف عند مواقف وأحداث لا يمكن تجاوزها في معرض تقدير الموقف هذا، أوّلها كلام السيد علي الخامنئي منذ أيام لجهة قوله بأنّ إيران «جرّبت المفاوضات من أجل رفع العقوبات ووقف التدابير الكيديّة، لكنها لم تحصل على نتيجة وبات عليها ان تجرّب غيرها»، وأضاف «رغم أنّ الحلّ الآخر سيكون مؤلماً في البدء إلا أنه سيأتي بنتائج سعيدة»، كلام ترافق مع القصف اليمنيّ لمحطات «أرامكو» لتوزيع المحروقات قرب جدة، وهو قصف له دلالات استراتيجيّة وسياسية وعسكرية كبرى في مكانه وزمانه غداة الاجتماع الثلاثيّ التحضيريّ للحرب وعلى بعد بضع عشرات الكيلومترات من جدة، ثم إعادة الانتشار التركيّ وتنظيم مسرح العمليات في الشمال والشمال الغربي السوري حول إدلب، بما قد يُنبئ بقرب عمل عسكري قريب في المنطقة، وأخيراً ما يتمّ تسريبه من رفع درجة جهوزيّة المقاومة في لبنان وبكلّ أسلحتها استعداداً لأيّ طارئ ومن أيّ نوع.
على ضوء ما تقدّم نقول انّ مثلث العدوان قد يذهب الى الحرب، لكن محور المقاومة ليس في الوضع الذي يخشى من هذه الحرب، صحيح أنه لا يسعى إليها لكنه لا يخشاها، لا يخشاها بذاتها كما لا يخشى تداعياتها، فإذا تسبّبت الحرب بإقفال باب التفاوض ومنعت العودة إلى إحياء التوقيع الأميركي على الملف النووي الإيراني، فلن تكون المسألة بالنسبة لإيران نهاية الكون، وإذا تسبّبت الحرب بتدمير منشآت إيرانية فإنها ستؤدي حتماً الى تدمير الكثير في «إسرائيل» والسعودية وستؤدي حتماً الى إفساد فرحة «إسرائيل» مما تحقق حتى الآن من «صفقة القرن» وعمليات التطبيع.
نعم الحرب ستكون مؤلمة، كما يشير السيد الخامنئي، أو كما يوحي كلامه ضمناً وستكون طويلة أيضاً، لكن نتائجها ستكون سعيدة وستغيّر الكثير مما نخشاه ويقلقنا في المنطقة.
نقول بهذا من دون أن نتصوّر لحظة انّ «إسرائيل» لا تدرك كلّ ذلك، أو أنّ الدولة العميقة في أميركا لا تحيط به علماً، فإذا كانت رعونة المثلث العدواني قد تدفعه الى الحرب فإنّ مصالح الكيان الصهيوني والدولة الأميركية ستضغط لمنعها، والسؤال لمن ستكون الغلبة للمتهوّر أم للمتوازن؟
احتمال تقدّم المتهوّر في تهوّره لا يمكن نفيه رغم نسبته الضئيلة التي لا تتعدّى الـ 15%، أما احتمال تقدّم المتوازن فهي الأرجح، وهنا قد يتقدّم التصرف العسكري المحدود المتمثل ببنك أهداف أمنية أو عسكرية يستهدفها ترامب قبل رحيله بعد أن يكون قد قبض الثمن الباهظ مقابلها من السعودية، وهنا سيكون بنك الأهداف عبارة عن قيادات هامة تستهدف بالاغتيال على غرار عملية اغتيال الشهيد قاسم سليماني، كما تشمل مراكز عسكرية عملانية لفصائل المقاومة والحشد الشعبي في العراق وسورية، عمليات تتناغم وتنفذ بالموازاة مع ما يجري الآن من إحياء وتنشيط لخلايا داعش في موجة إرهاب جديدة تضرب العراق وسورية برعاية أميركية…
The goal of the US ‘peace process’ has long been – and will continue to be under Biden – the obliteration of Palestinian resistance to Israeli colonisation
People denounce the ‘deal of the century’ in the occupied West Bank on 28 February 2020 (AFP)
Since the election of Joe Biden as the next US president, reports of the death of the “deal of the century” have been greatly exaggerated. The Palestinian Authority (PA) has felt a sense of relief that its love affair with Israel and Israel’s allies could finally resume.
The PA had cut off official security coordination with Israel in May, and cooled relations with Bahrain and the UAE after they opened diplomatic relations with Israel this summer. The PA used the pretext that President Donald Trump’s “deal” was detrimental to Palestinian interests.
In the wake of Biden’s election, the PA declared the deal and annexation plans to be “no longer on the table”. It officially resumed security coordination with Israel, citing assurances from Israel that it would comply with prior agreements it had signed with the PA.
This came just days after Israel opened bidding on the construction of a new Jewish colonial settlement intended to cut off occupied East Jerusalem from the West Bank. The PA has also restored its ambassadors to Bahrain and the UAE.
Palestinian prisoners
These PA moves seek to appeal to Biden, who is expected to be more sympathetic to their cause than Trump. And so, instead of announcing that the PA was looking forward to being welcomed back into the US capital, the adamantly anti-Palestinian New York Times, the US “newspaper of record”, announced that “in a bold move to refurbish their sullied image in Washington, the Palestinians are laying the groundwork for an overhaul to one of their most cherished but controversial practices, officials say: compensating those who serve time in Israeli prisons, including for violent attacks.”
Israel has been demanding for decades that the PA not support the families of Palestinians killed by Israel, let alone the families of Palestinian prisoners of war. The US Congress “repeatedly passed legislation to reduce aid to the Palestinians by the amount of those payments”, which were also cited by Trump when he cut funding to the PA in 2018.
Biden will be little different from Trump who, in fact, was little different from Obama or previous presidents
The New York Times added that “Palestinian officials eager to make a fresh start … are heeding the advice of sympathetic Democrats who have repeatedly warned that without an end to the payments, it would be impossible for the new administration to do any heavy lifting on their behalf”.
This is an important example of how Biden will be little different from Trump who, in fact, was little different from Obama or previous presidents. Biden has vowed not to move the US embassy back to Tel Aviv, nor to rescind US recognition of Israel’s illegal annexation of that city. Perhaps the only difference is that Biden may restore aid to the PA, while curtailing support to families of Palestinian prisoners – details of which are “being hammered out in Ramallah”, according to the Times.
Security coordination
But as the “deal of the century” is predicated on the premise that the US and Palestinians must give Israel everything it wants, it remains unclear why the PA thinks the deal is no longer on the table. After all, the PA has acted in accordance with that very premise by resuming security coordination with Israel, returning its ambassadors to the Gulf states, and negotiating cuts to support for prisoners’ families – all without getting anything in return.
The issue of financial support to Palestinian prisoners’ families is, in fact, a central feature of how the US “peace process” has always been premised on coercing Palestinians and other Arabs to join the US in legitimising Israeli colonial conquests and delegitimising any resistance to them.
An Israeli border guard fires tear gas towards Palestinians in Bethlehem in 2017 (AFP)
Since the 1993 Oslo I Accord, the PA has committed to stamping out all Palestinian resistance to Israeli colonisation of Palestinian lands, collaborating with Israel either by informing on or handing over resistors to Israeli security forces, or by having its own security agencies imprison or kill them. Why, then, Israel and the US complain, would the PA support their families?
This is to be contrasted with the fact that Israel and the US have always rewarded Israeli Jews who massacre Palestinians. A minuscule number of Israeli soldiers who kill Palestinians have ever been prosecuted, and even fewer found guilty, as has been documented by Israeli human rights groups and others.
Israeli impunity
Last year, an Israeli soldier who fatally shot an unarmed 14-year-old Palestinian boy was sentenced to a month in military prison. The boy’s father told the New York Times: “This is unjust.” He said he feared that the soldier’s sentence would “encourage his colleagues to kill in cold blood”.
Also last year, the Israeli army exonerated its soldiers in the killing of a Palestinian double-amputee protesting at the Gaza fence who was shot in the chest. The army said it could not ascertain that its soldiers were the ones who killed him. Another Israeli border police officer who killed yet another Palestinian teenager in 2014 was sentenced two years ago to nine months in prison, having been praised by the judge as “excellent” and “conscientious”. Biden victory means the end of an era for Netanyahu
As for the Israeli military medic who shot dead an already injured Palestinian lying on the ground in 2016, he was sentenced to 18 months in prison, a year of probation and a demotion. His sentence was later decreased to 14 months, of which he served only nine before being released.
These are neither aberrant nor new examples; they harken back to the establishment of Israel. Late Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, who expelled the Palestinian population of the city of Lydda in 1948 and devised the “break-their-bones” policy against Palestinians during the First Intifada, is celebrated in Israel and the US as a “hero” for peace. He never went to jail for his crimes.
Nor did former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, who, dressed in drag, headed a commando unit that assassinated several Palestinian leaders in their homes in Beirut in 1973. He, like Rabin, is hailed as a hero.
In October 1956, the Israeli army committed a horrific massacre against its own Israeli-Palestinian citizens in the village of Kafr Qasim, when its soldiers shot dead 49 men, women and children coming home from their fields after a day of work, and injured dozens more.
Despite an initial government cover-up, a trial took place and prison sentences were handed down in October 1958 to eight officers ranging from eight to 17 years. Appeals were filed, and all the sentences were reduced with all the convicted killers released by 1960, having spent their sentence in a sanatorium in Jerusalem, and not in a prison cell.
Officer Gabriel Dahan, convicted of killing 43 Palestinians, was appointed as officer responsible for Arab affairs in the city of Ramle in September 1960. The brigadier most responsible for giving the orders for the massacre, Yshishkar Shadmi, had a separate trial, and was found guilty of a “technical error” and fined one cent.
Better deal next time?
What Biden and his friends are demanding of the PA today is precisely what Israel and Trump also demanded: namely, that it consider Israeli conquest, colonisation and occupation of Palestinian land – including the killing of Palestinians who resist (or do not resist) Israel – as heroic acts.
Since the PA did right by Israel and the US when it agreed in Oslo to quash any resistance to these Israeli heroic acts, it must continue to do so by not supporting the families of Palestinian prisoners or martyrs.
It has always been the same deal, which is what Trump tried valiantly to impress upon the world
The goal of the PA, as envisaged by the Oslo Accords, is not only to obliterate any remaining resistance to Israel, but also to quash the Palestinian people’s will to resist their insidious coloniser once and for all. That was the essence of the US “peace process” in the 1970s and 1980s, of the Oslo deal, of former US President Bill Clinton’s Camp David offer in 2000, and of Trump’s “deal of the century“.
It has always been the same deal, which is what Trump tried valiantly to impress upon the world. The much-awaited Biden, however, will be sure to indulge the PA. He will pretend, alongside the PA, that Palestinians will get a new and better deal next time.
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.
Joseph Massad is Professor of Modern Arab Politics and Intellectual History at Columbia University in New York. He is the author of many books and academic and journalistic articles. His books include Colonial Effects: The Making of National Identity in Jordan, Desiring Arabs, The Persistence of the Palestinian Question: Essays on Zionism and the Palestinians, and most recently Islam in Liberalism. His books and articles have been translated to a dozen languages.
تتشكّل خريطة جيوسياسية جديدة وتعيد رسم المشهد الشرق الأوسطي (أ ف ب )
كتب الأمير تركي الفيصل، رئيس الاستخبارات العامة السعودية سابقاً والسفير السعودي السابق في لندن وواشنطن، رسالة في 7 تموز/ يوليو 2014، موجّهة إلى “مؤتمر إسرائيل للسلام” في تل أبيب، جاء فيها: “تخيّلوا أني أستطيع ركوب الطائرة من الرياض وأطير مباشرة إلى القدس.. يا لها من لذة ألّا أدعو الفلسطينيين فقط، بل الإسرائيليين الذين سألقاهم أيضاً، ليأتوا لزيارتي في الرياض، حيث يستطيعون التجوّل في بيت آبائي في الدرعية التي تشبه معاناتها التي نالتها من قهر إبراهيم باشا معاناة القدس على يد نبوخذ نصر والرومان”.
لم تكن تلك من تنبّؤات نوستراداموس، بل هو قرار مضمر منذ عقود، وضعه بن غوريون، أحد مؤسّسي الكيان، نصب أهدافه قائلاً: “إن المصالحة التاريخية بين اليهود والعرب لن تتمّ إلا على يد آل سعود”. في المقابل، آمن الملوك السعوديون بأن شرط وجود كيانهم واستقراره ليس في تعزيز ثقة الشعب، وإنما في بناء تحالف مع الدولة العبرية برعاية أميركية.
زيارة رئيس الوزراء الإسرائيلي، بنيامين نتنياهو، لجدّة، ومدينة “نيوم” السياحية على وجه التحديد، يوم الأحد الماضي، ولقاؤه ولي العهد السعودي، محمد بن سلمان، سوف تبقى شأناً إعلامياً إسرائيلياً لبعض الوقت، قبل أن تتلقّفه وسائل الإعلام الغربية والأميركية، مع تمنّع سعودي خجول قبل أن يصبح واقعاً، ويتولّى الإعلام السعودي نفسه الدفاع عنه والتطبيل له. وهكذا هي قصة التطبيع السعودي ــــ الإسرائيلي، يبدأ بتسريب خبر في الإعلام العبري، ثمّ يكتسب صدقية بنسبة الخبر إلى مسؤول إسرائيلي يكشف عن هويته لاحقاً، ثم ينتشر فيصبح واقعاً لا يقاوَم. ما يلفت في خبر الزيارة ليس أصل حصولها، بل ردّ الفعل عليها؛ إذ إنها كانت واردة على الدوام، في ظلّ التسريبات المتلاحقة منذ شهور حول قرب توقيع “اتفاقية سلام” بين الرياض وتل أبيب، والمصمّمة لغرض تأهيل الأجواء لبلوغ التطبيع حيّز الإعلان. السؤال هنا: هل الهرولة السعودية نحو التطبيع تأتي وفق حسابات محلية، كما هي الحال بالنسبة إلى نتنياهو المأزوم داخلياً، أم هي مؤسَّسة على حسابات وطنية وقومية ودينية؟ الجواب كلا، ببساطة لأن شعب الجزيرة العربية في غالبيته الساحقة لا يتمنى اليوم الذي تطأ فيه أقدام الصهاينة جزيرة العرب.
اضطلاع الرياض بدور الموجّه الخفيّ لمسيرة التطبيع في صيغتها الأخيرة، كما ظهرت في تدشين علاقات طبيعية بين الكيان الإسرائيلي وكلّ من الإمارات والبحرين والسودان، ليس منفصلاً عن أدوار سابقة طبعت مسيرة تطبيع تعود إلى عام 1981، حين تَقدّم وليّ العهد حينذاك، فهد بن عبد العزيز، الملك لاحقاً، بأوّل “مبادرة سلام” تتضمّن، من بين بنودها الثمانية، اعترافاً جماعياً بالكيان الإسرائيلي. أريد للمبادرة حينذاك أن تكون “مشروعاً عربياً”، كما أراده فهد في قمّة فاس، ولكن اعتراض عدد من الأنظمة العربية إلى جانب قيادة “منظمة التحرير الفلسطينية”، أفضى إلى سحب المشروع من التداول، وأسبغ عليه صفة “المشروع السعودي”.
نحن أمام معادلة جديدة ربح فيها الإسرائيلي المعركة، وأَخرج السعودية من سوق المزيدات
أثارت المبادرة السعودية أسئلة مشروعة عن الدوافع والغايات، بالنظر إلى قرب عهد العرب بصدمة توقيع الرئيس المصري الأسبق، أنور السادات، اتفاقية سلام مع الكيان الإسرائيلي. كانت الإجابة تَتطلّب قراءة مختلفة لسياق الوقائع الإقليمية والدولية. إذ إن المنطقة كانت تشهد حينذاك تحوّلاً كونياً على وقع الثورة الإسلامية الإيرانية وتداعياتها داخلياً (انتفاضة الحرم بقيادة جهيمان العتيبي في تشرين الثاني/ نوفمبر 1979، وانتفاضة المحرّم في المنطقة الشرقية في كانون الأول/ ديسمبر من العام نفسه)، وخليجياً (انتفاضة شعبية في البحرين في كانون الأول/ ديسمبر 1979، وتالياً محاولة قلب نظام الحكم في 1981)، إلى جانب التداعيات العربية والدولية. أدركت السعودية، في وقت مبكر، أن سقوط أحد العمودين المتساندين، أي إيران، يتطلّب إجراءً عاجلاً للحيلولة دون سقوط العمود الآخر. كما أدركت الرياض، حينذاك، أن الوصول إلى قلب البيت الأبيض يمرّ عبر تل أبيب، وهذا ما ظهر جليّاً في كلّ الأزمات التي واجهت الرياض على مدى أربعة عقود. في آذار/ مارس 2002، تقدّم ولي العهد، عبد الله بن عبد العزيز، الملك لاحقاً، بـ”مبادرة سلام” أخرى معدّلة، تضمن حق الكيان الإسرائيلي في الوجود، ولا تتمسّك بحق العودة كثابت غير قابل للنقاش.
كانت السعودية في أسوأ حالاتها، ولأول مرة يتمّ تصنيفها بـ”بؤرة الشر” من قِبَل الحليف الأميركي، على خلفية اتهامات لها بالضلوع في هجمات الحادي عشر من أيلول/ سبتمبر. مَثّلت المبادرة السعودية، التي أُعلن عنها في “قمة بيروت” محاولة لفكّ العزلة الدولية وتلميع صورة النظام السعودي، بصفته الراعي الرسمي لأيديولوجية الكراهية العابرة للقارات. لم تحظ المبادرة بتوافق رسمي عربي، على الرغم من الجهود الكثيفة التي بذلتها الرياض لسنوات طويلة، وتخلّلتها نشاطات تطبيعية، من بينها لقاءات الأمير تركي الفيصل، وعادل الجبير، السفير السعودي ووزير الخارجية سابقاً ووزير الدولة للشؤون الخارجية حالياً، مع مسؤولين إسرائيليين مثل تسيبي ليفني، وزيرة خارجية الكيان سابقاً، ورئيس الحكومة الإسرائيلية الأسبق إيهود باراك في تموز/ يوليو 2013 وآخرين، إضافة إلى مشاركات مكثّفة في ندوات أمنية وسياسية برعاية إسرائيلية، ولقاءات مع مسؤولين إسرائيليين في الخليج وفي عواصم أوروبية وأميركية.
تلزيم “صفقة القرن” لوليّ العهد، محمد بن سلمان، شرطُ تتويج. وقد أمضى الرجل عامَي 2018 و2019 من أجل إقناع الأردن والسلطة الفلسطينية على نحو الخصوص بمتطلّبات الصفقة، وعلى رأسها التخلّي عن القدس الشرقية وحق العودة. كان سقف المطلب السعودي، ومِن خلفه الأميركي والإسرائيلي، عالياً إلى القدر الذي مسّ بصميم السيادة الفلسطينية والشرعية الدينية والتاريخية للعائلة الهاشمية، ناهيك عن رفض كثير من الدول العربية مشروع سلام لا يقوم على حلّ الدولتين ولا تكون القدس الشرقية فيه عاصمة للدولة الفلسطينية.
في النتائج، لم يكن الخروج على المبادرة العربية بنسختها السعودية قراراً إماراتياً أو بحرانياً أو حتى سودانياً، بل كان قراراً سعودياً بالدرجة الأولى. سِجلّ التطبيع منذ مطلع الألفية حتى الآن كان يحمل البصمة السعودية، وقد تكفّلت الإمبراطورية الإعلامية التي يديرها الملك سلمان وأبناؤه والوليد بن طلال وخالد بن سلطان بمهمّة التطبيع النفسي والثقافي والإعلامي. لقد عبث الإعلام السعودي بسيكولوجية الرأي العام الخليجي، وإلى حدّ ما العربي، حتى باتت فكرة التطبيع وحضور المسؤول الإسرائيلي في المنتديات الخليجية بدرجة أساسية أمراً مألوفاً. وللقارئ تخيُّل ردود الفعل، إن وُجدت، على زيارة نتنياهو لبلاد الحرمين، ولقائه وليّ العهد السعودي في مكان لا يبعد سوى أقلّ من مئة كيلومتر عن مكة المكرمة.
لا فائدة مرجوّة من النفي السعودي أو من الصمت الرسمي الإسرائيلي، طالما أن ركب التطبيع يسير كما تَقرّر سعودياً وإسرائيلياً وأميركياً. فنحن أمام خريطة جيوسياسية جديدة تتشكّل وتعيد رسم المشهد الشرق الأوسطي، على وقع انقسامات في النظام الرسمي العربي، واختلال موازين قوى إقليمية ودولية.
خطورة زيارة نتنياهو ليست في الأجندة المباشرة المعلَن عنها، لأن في ذلك تبسيطاً للمستور من أصل العلاقة، بل وأصل الشراكة الاستراتيجية التي سوف تفرض نفسها في العلاقات البينية العربية والإقليمية والدولية. نحن أمام معادلة جديدة ربح فيها الإسرائيلي المعركة، وأَخرج السعودية، شريكه الاستراتيجي، من سوق المزيدات. إذ لم تعد فلسطين بالنسبة إلى الرياض قضية، فضلاً عن كونها القضية، بل باتت العبء الذي تريد الخلاص منه، وهذه المرّة تفعل ذلك بنحر “مبادرة السلام” التي تبنّتها سابقاً، على علّاتها.
زيارة نتنياهو لجزيرة العرب هي تدشين لتاريخ جديد، يضع شعب الجزيرة العربية أمام خيارين: إما القبول بأن يكتب نتنياهو وابن سلمان هذا التاريخ بحبر الخيانة، أو أن يكتبه الشعب بدم التحرير من عار يرتكبه آل سعود بحق شعب يأبى إلا أن يكون مع فلسطين بلا شروط.
Although some of Donald Trump’s advisers still believe in his possible victory and support his attempts to fight, their number is gradually decreasing. Trump himself also is gradually realising the fact that the election results will not be canceled, and he has lost these elections…
The increasing reality of the failure of Trump’s four-year political activity is forcing politicians in many countries who have orientated towards him to look for a way to resolve their current situation, making adjustments to their rhetoric and actions. A certain group, imitating Trump himself, who has repeatedly abandoned former allies in the name of “his own political game”, are rapidly seeking to reorient themselves to the expected new master of the White House, sending flattering congratulations on “victory” instead of the previous criticism for the recent opponent of Trump in the elections.
As the Swiss newspaper Neue Zürcher Zeitung emphasised, “Europe collectively breathed a sigh of relief. The warm reaction of Brussels and representatives of the EU member states has once again confirmed: more than the election of Joe Biden, Europe is happy about the impending departure of President Donald Trump.”
And this is not only a typical reaction for Europe!
Almost all commentary states the obvious fact: the time after Trump will not be the same as the time before Trump. And therefore, the shifting of the “weather vane of political change” is very clearly traced not only in the list of those who have already congratulated Joe Biden “on victory” – even before the official announcement of the highly scandalous and controversial recent presidential elections in the United States – but also in the choice of the words themselves to express servility and plebeian devotion.
Thus, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu congratulated Joe Biden, calling him “a great friend of Israel.” However most recently, Channel 7 of Israeli television published the results of a national poll, according to which 68% of Israelis expressed their devotion to Trump. Moreover, on November 2, according to Reuters, Israel even held a prayer service for the re-election of Donald Trump. And this is not surprising, since Trump suits Tel Aviv much more. Indeed, it was Trump who on December 6, 2017 recognised Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and moved the US embassy there. In May 2018, Trump pulled Washington out of the “nuclear pact” with Tehran. On March 25, 2019, Trump officially recognized Israel’s sovereignty over the Golan Heights. On October 15, 2020, Trump held a ceremony to normalize relations between Israel, Bahrain and the UAE in front of the White House in Washington. It was Trump who signed the Justice for Unpaid Survivors Act, which provides for the return of property lost during the Holocaust and other events of the 20th century. He signed a decree on the fight against anti-Semitism on American campuses.
But, in addition to Netanyahu, the leaders of Hamas and the extremist group “Muslim Brotherhood Politics” (banned in Russia – ed.) Sent their congratulations to Biden, calling on the new White House administration to abandon the old Trump policies in the Middle East and “Look towards Palestine.”
According to comments published in recent days by various media outlets, with the arrival of Biden in the White House, one can really expect a significant adjustment to the previous US Middle Eastern policy. In particular, it is believed that Joe Biden will return to the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action) Agreement on Iran’s nuclear program, while changing some of the terms of the treaty.
In addition to countering Iran, the next US president will certainly face the need to resolve a number of other crises in the Middle East. As The Jerusalem Post believes, this is first of all, the growing extremism of Turkey, the settlement of the Palestinian problem, the issues in Libya and the Eastern Mediterranean, as well as the great catastrophe in the Sahel and the potential destabilization of Iraq.
According to former US Ambassador to Israel Daniel B. Shapiro, Biden’s undisputed foreign policy initiative related to the Middle East will be the question of creating a Palestinian state. Also, the new head of the White House may cancel the “deal of the century” – the Trump administrations deal to settle the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, which was indignantly rejected by the Palestinian authorities and a number of Muslim countries.
A possible adjustment of Trump’s Middle East policy by Biden is already, belligerently expected in Tel Aviv. On November 5, 2020, Israeli Settlement Minister Tsakhi has already voiced threats that the Israeli elite is ready to start a war with the Islamic Republic in response to Washington’s return to the “nuclear pact.”
In Riyadh, Biden’s arrival at the White House is expected with heightened vigilance.
As we are reminded from the November 8, edition of “Al-Arabia”, Biden promised to reconsider relations with Saudi Arabia in connection with the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi. Hence, even a number of Saudi experts do not exclude that Biden “poses a threat to the crown prince, since he will order the CIA to reveal all the details of the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, and also force the prince to lift the blockade from Qatar, stop arming Riyadh with weapons and ammunition for the war in Yemen and compel him to release the detained activists and members of the royal family.” There is even a belief regarding the possible removal of bin Salman from his posts, in connection with which there are unequivocal hints that in this situation the crown prince has only one “weapon to withstand these dangers – rapprochement with Israel.”
Developing on this idea, the head of the ‘Mossad’, Yossi Cohen, bluntly stated that “normalization of relations with Israel will be a gift from Riyadh to the new US president – regardless of whether Donald Trump or Joe Biden wins,” and that this decision could soften ‘Biden the Democrat’s’ stance on the KSA (Kingdom of Saudi Arabia).
Be that as it may (and obviously not without taking into account these points) on the evening of November 8, King Salman of Saudi Arabia and his heir Prince Muhammad finally congratulated Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris on their election victory.
It will also be difficult time for Turkey starting when the real possibility of a new president of USA comes to power, as they reacted very sharply to the statements of Joe Biden, who, in an interview with The New York Times, spoke negatively about Recep Erdogan, calling him an “autocrat”, criticised his policy towards the Kurds and supported the Turkish opposition. Although Joe Biden did this interview back in December 2019, the video of him appeared only on August 15. Now Ankara is preparing for the imposition of a number of sanctions against it on several issues at once, in particular, for Operation Peace Spring against the Syrian Kurds, since Biden may recognise them as their main ally in Syria. Ankara also takes into account Biden’s recent calls to increase pressure on the Turkish authorities in order to push them to reduce tensions in relations with Athens: “it is necessary to put pressure on Turkey so that it abandons provocative actions in the region against Greece, as well as threats to use force.”
They also recall how recently Joe Biden demanded that Donald Trump put pressure on Turkey to abandon the decision on the Hagia Sophia issue, saying that Ankara “should open this temple to all confessions.”
Hence how the recent resignation of both the head of the Central Bank Murat Uysal, and the Minister of Finance and Treasury of Turkey Berat Albayrak (who was Erdogan’s son-in-law) gave rise to active discussions of the processes that have begun in the highest echelons of power against the background of the expected change of the US presidential administration. After all, the previous head of the Central Bank worked at Halkbank, the investigation around which may enter an active phase under the new administration, and Albayrak may be connected with the “Halkbank case”. Recall that in January 2018, a court in New York found Halkbank Deputy Chairman Hakan Atilla guilty of the fact that he and the bank itself provided intermediary services in the transfer of funds received by the Iranian leadership from the sale of oil and gas.
The Middle East has always been an issue for US presidents, many administrations come to power wanting to “do something” about the region, but the problems and conflicts are not diminishing. Therefore, today many are asking the question: will Biden become the president who is really ready to make this region better and not just another inhabitant of the Oval Office?
Vladimir Odintsov, political observer, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook“.
شكّل الإعلان الصادر عن السلطة الفلسطينية بالعودة للتنسيق مع كيان الاحتلال بداعي تلقّيها تأكيداً من سلطات الكيان باعتبار الاتفاقات قائمة من طرفها، صدمة لكل الفلسطينيين والمعنيين بالقضية الفلسطينية. فالسياق الذي قرّرت فيه السلطة وقف التنسيق المشين أصلاً كان من تداعيات التبني الأميركي لصفقة القرن ومن ضمنه إعلان كيان الاحتلال بدعم أميركي للقدس عاصمة للكيان، ولا شيء تغيّر في الأسباب. ومن نتائج قرار السلطة الفلسطينية بوقف التنسيق مع الكيان مناخات وحدة فلسطينية ستسقط مع العودة للتنسيق، فبأي ميزان وضعت السلطة قرارها وما هي عائداته؟
–
يجب ألا يُخفى على أحد أن المصلحة المحرّكة للعودة للتنسيق هي “إسرائيلية” صرفة، والعائد الوحيد للسلطة هو عائد ماليّ من الأموال المجمدة من قبل سلطات الكيان ومن أموال خليجيّة تموّل العودة للتنسيق، والسبب يتصل مباشرة بالحاجة لعبور شاحنات البضائع المحملة من مرفأ حيفا نحو الخليج بعد التطبيع، في الضفة الغربية، والحاجة لحارس يضمن أمن التطبيع. وهو الدور الذي ستتولاه السلطة وأجهزتها لقاء ما ستتلقاه من أموال.
–
التطورات الناجمة عن قرار العودة للتنسيق خطيرة جداً. ففيها التنسيق الأمنيّ الذي يلزم السلطة بالتجسّس على المقاومين ومطاردتهم وتسليمهم، وفيه جديد حارس التطبيع، وفيه الانسحاب من التفاهمات الفلسطينية الفلسطينية التي ولدت في أعقاب صفقة القرن وما يعنيه من تعريض للوحدة الفلسطينية من مخاطر قد تترتب عليها انفجارات تصادميّة في أكثر من مكان بين الفصائل.
–
السلطة ترتضي لعب دور جيش لحد في جنوب لبنان إبان الاحتلال وتُجبر الشعب الفلسطيني على دخول تجربة الانقسام والمخاطرة بأمن مقاومته وتحمّل تبعات حراسة التطبيع، بينما الكيان وجماعات التطبيع في الخليج ومن خلفهما الأميركي لم يقدّموا شيئاً يقول بالتراجع عن سياسات تصفية القضية الفلسطينية.
UPROOTED PALESTINIANS: SALAM ALQUDS ALAYKUM 
