When Gamal Abdel Nasser Screamed: We will Never Surrender!

22 Dec 2021

Source: Al Mayadeen Net

When Gamal Abdel Nasser Screamed: We will Never Surrender!

Hussam AbdelKareem

Faced with the danger and gravity of the situation, Gamal Abdel Nasser did not collapse and stood steadfast. He did not lose faith in his people and in the justice of his cause.

The circumstances were very difficult and the situation could hardly be graver. Gamal Abdel Nasser headed to Al-Azhar Mosque in Cairo, the historic base of Islam in Egypt, ascended its pulpit and addressed his people passionately from his heart and said  “We will fight to the last drop of blood! We will never surrender”. 

That was the way in which the young leader, 38 years old, responded to the developments of the crisis that escalated to the point of brutal military invasion which Egypt was facing. Eighty thousand was the number of British and French troops attacking Egypt, in addition to the army of “Israel”. All that was a result of Nasser’s decision to nationalize the Suez Canal a few months earlier.

The Invaders Have Arrived

At the time when Nasser was delivering his speech in Al-Azhar, the huge British Royal Navy fleet consisting of aircraft carriers, battleships, destroyers and speedboats, together with the French Navy ally, were already at the shores of northern Egypt attacking and targeting the cities of Port Said and Port Fouad and their surroundings. The forces of aggression paved the way for their attack on the Suez Canal area with concentrated air raids on Cairo and Alexandria that targeted many places, including the Egyptian radio station.

The situation was frightening. It was no less than a comprehensive attack on Egypt, whose army has not yet recovered from the effects of defeat in the 1948 Palestine War. On the other hand “Great Britain”, the lead attacker, had emerged victorious a few years ago from World War II.

Faced with the danger and gravity of the situation, Gamal Abdel Nasser did not collapse and stood steadfast. He did not lose faith in his people and in the justice of his cause. He decided that the best response to the challenge was to revert back to his people for whose sake he led the revolution in 1952. Nasser addressed the Egyptians urging them to be strong, united with no despair, and assuring them of the inevitability of victory over the forces of aggression.

In light of the disparity in military power, Nasser called on his people to engage in paramilitary resistance and guerrilla war to confront the British-French enemy forces that began landing in Port Said. The President decided to open the Egyptian army’s storehouses for the people to obtain weapons that would enable them to confront the invaders, and began organizing the activity of the resistance brigades.

Nasser’s belief in his people and his resort to them was not surprising. All the actions that he had taken since the success of the July Revolution (1952) were directed towards his quest to advance Egypt and promote its proper place in the world away from colonialism and subordination. That includes his decision in June 1956 to nationalize the Suez Canal and transfer its ownership and management to the Egyptian people after it had been owned by Britain for 70 years since Ismail, Egypt’s ruler from the Mohammad Ali dynasty, “sold” it to the British at cheap when he went through some financial hardship and needed cash!

Nasser’s Decision: A Risk Worth Taking

Gamal Abdel Nasser knew he was taking a great risk because he’s depriving “Great Britain” of controlling the sea route to its colonies and interests in the east, and in this case, the British wouldn’t let Nasser’s decision pass. Nasser acted intelligently and thoughtfully when nationalizing the canal, declaring Egypt’s willingness to pay for Britain’s share in the Suez Canal Company, using at the same time Egypt’s sovereign right to nationalize a water canal that is part of its territory, thus depriving Britain of the legal justification for launching aggression or even rejecting the decision. 

In fact, the nationalization of Suez Canal was Gamal Abdel Nasser’s last arrow in his encounter with Britain and Western powers. Since the first day of the success of the July Revolution (1952) and the overthrow of King Farouk, the British position was hostile towards Nasser’s Free Officers regime and the renaissance measures they took in Egypt, their determination to achieve independence and get rid of British hegemony, and their insistence on the withdrawal of all British forces from Egypt (which finally took place in 1956).

When Britain along with the rising power, the US,  failed to “contain” the Free Officers movement led by Nasser, and to take Egypt back to their camp, they showed their true colonial face and began working to thwart all of Nasser’s ambitious development projects; the most important of which were two: modernization and arming of the Egyptian army, and building the “Aswan High Dam” in Southern Egypt to generate electricity for the country and control the flooding of the Nile.

Despite lengthy negotiations and requests, Britain and the US did not agree to supply Egypt with modern weapons that would enable it to defend its borders against Israeli attacks and threats. They wanted Egypt to remain weak with outdated and obsolete weapons, but Nasser succeeded in making an important breakthrough and a major achievement when he managed, for the first time in the Arab region, to obtain Russian weapons through Czechoslovakia. Britain and the US felt the seriousness of what happened and that the Soviet communist opponent had gained a foothold in their area of influence! They looked at Nasser as an enemy who must be punished and brought down.

As for the vital project for Egypt, the Aswan High Dam, on which all of Nasser’s development plans were based (it became a matter of life or death to him), it reached a deadlock when the US Secretary of State, John Foster Dulles, informed the Egyptian ambassador to the US of Washington’s final decision: We will not finance the High Dam and we will not support you to build it because the project is “bigger than Egypt’s capabilities!” All the efforts made by Egypt to obtain funding from Western countries to build the dam were suddenly gone with the wind! Even worse; the US and Britain used their influence in the World Bank to obstruct Egypt’s funding request!

That’s how Britain and the US dealt with Egypt very arrogantly. They did not agree to sell advanced weapons to Egypt, and they did not want Egypt to obtain them from any other source! They did not agree to fund the High Dam, and did not allow the World Bank to do that! In conclusion, Egypt, in the eyes of Britain, France and the US, must remain a weak, dependent and backward country in order be satisfied! Of course, this situation cannot be accepted by a young and devoted national leader like Gamal Abdel Nasser, who decided to respond in a way that hurts them: the nationalization of Suez Canal.

The Israeli Element 

And here appeared “Israel”! It decided to show its usefulness as an advanced base for the British Empire (Britain originally established it for this purpose). Although the Suez Canal problem has nothing to do with it, “Israel” quickly conveyed to London and Paris its full readiness to participate in any Anglo-French aggression against Egypt.

A secret meeting was held in Paris (France was very interested in bringing down Nasser because of his support for the Algerian revolution) that included British Prime Minister Anthony Eden, French President Guy Mollet, and Prime Minister of “Israel” Ben Gurion, during which the war scenario on Egypt was agreed upon; “Israel” will launch an invasion against Egypt through the Sinai under the pretext of stopping the attacks of the Palestinian guerrillas in Gaza supported by Egypt. On the next day, Britain and France have issued an ultimatum to the Egyptian and Israeli sides to stop the fighting for the purpose of protecting the Suez Canal and the international navigation. Then, if the fighting wouldn’t stop, the British-French military intervention will begin and the reoccupation of all the Suez Canal area will be justified and “legal”! The assessment of the three parties was that this military action would lead to the humiliation of Nasser and his downfall into hostile hands inside Egypt, and perhaps the return of the old monarchy.

The plan was actually executed according to the secret agreement. “Israel” attacked Egypt on October 29. On the following day, a joint British-French ultimatum was issued to the two sides demanding ceasefire and allowing British-French forces to control the canal from Port Said in the north to Suez in the south. As expected, Nasser rejected the ultimatum and request. They attacked on October 31, and the tripartite Israeli-British-French aggression against Egypt was in its full might.

Back to Nasser’s “resistance speech” at Al-Azhar Mosque, the Egyptians responded to the call of their leader and declared their rejection of the return of colonialism. In Port Said, a national epic began to resist the occupation forces that  faced relentless street wars and guerrillas from house to house.

The Conflicting Interests of World’s Super Powers

Despite the intensity of the bombing and the extent of destruction caused by the aggression forces in Port Said, the tripartite alliance faced great difficulty in controlling the city, in which fighting continued for several days, and that hindered the march of the invading forces to the south to reach the city of Suez (as planned), so they were only able to advance for a distance of only 17 kilometers south of Port Said. During those days, large-scale political movements took place in the world, the most important of which were two:

The first was the (rare) US-British rift. The United States, which had already ascended to the leadership of Western world as heir to Great Britain, did not like Britain’s unilateralism in dealing with the Suez problem and its war- inclined approach, which could lead to the “loss of Egypt” and push indirectly Nasser to throw completely himself into the arms the Soviets. US President Eisenhower took a tough stance and asked Britain to stop its offensive and ordered “Israel” to withdraw from Sinai.

The second was the Soviet Union’s intrusion into the crisis and its strong support for Egypt, which amounted to the Soviet leader Khrushchev’s threat to use nuclear weapons against Western countries!

The result of all this was the issuance of a United Nations resolution to stop the war and ordered the withdrawal of the attacking forces. Indeed, by the end of December 22, the last invading Anglo-French forces withdrew from Port Said. As for the Israeli forces, they stayed for another three months before withdrawing from Sinai and Gaza as well.

“Great Britain” Humiliated 

What happened was a political earthquake in every sense of the word, from which Egypt emerged victorious with its head held high. It succeeded in consolidating the decision to nationalize the canal, which became an important source of income to help Egypt in its renaissance projects. Removing the huge statue of De Lesseps at the entrance to the Suez Canal was a symbolic blow to the old colonial powers.

The invaders’ forces withdrew after they failed to achieve any goal. Gamal Abdel Nasser appeared as a rising national leader and turned into a symbol of the Arab and international liberation movement from Western colonialism. The biggest disappointment was for British Prime Minister Anthony Eden, who was forced to resign in the wake of the failure and humiliation suffered by Britain (which was no longer great!) at the hands of Nasser.

The old lion realized that he became old, and could do nothing of real value, so he contented himself with action-less roaring and babbling. Britain’s media and major newspapers launched a terrible smear campaign against “Colonel Nasser” that amounted to comparing him to Hitler! And that was the most they could do after 1956. 

The opinions mentioned in this article do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Al mayadeen, but rather express the opinion of its writer exclusively.

Hamas sends strong message to Egypt on female Palestinian prisoners

Dec 20 2021

Net Source: Al Mayadeen Net

By Al Mayadeen

Hamas conveyed a message to Egypt regarding the Palestinian prisoners, Gaza reconstruction efforts, and de-escalation.

Female Palestinian prisoners, many of whom are mothers, are victims of occupation brutality.

Today, Sunday, private sources told Al Mayadeen that Hamas conveyed a strongly-worded message to the Egyptian delegation in Gaza about the occupation’s assault on female prisoners in the occupation’s prisons.

The sources added that “The Egyptians conveyed the occupation’s response to the exchange deal and “Tel Aviv”‘s continued evasion of it,” adding that “the Egyptian delegation will return to “Tel Aviv” on Monday evening to deliver Hamas’ opinion.”

As for the issue of reconstruction efforts, the sources indicated that the movement expressed its objection to Egypt’s delay in reconstructing Gaza and justified it by the occupation’s rejection of the steps, in an attempt to coerce Hamas into settling for fewer demands regarding the prisoners’ exchange deal.

Earlier today, an Egyptian security delegation arrived in Gaza to hold talks with Hamas’ leadership and the Palestinian factions on the issues of de-escalation and reconstruction.

Al Mayadeen‘s correspondent reported that the Egyptian delegation arrived in the Gaza Strip through the Beit Hanoun Crossing. 

Egypt delays commitment to Gaza 

Sources told Al Mayadeen on December 6, 2021, that the Egyptians did not respond to the comprehensive document recently submitted by Hamas to Cairo, and that there was a deliberate delay in the implementation of the reconstruction process of the Gaza Strip.

The sources confirmed to Al Mayadeen that the Egyptians are deliberately procrastinating implementing their commitments towards the Gaza Strip and that Hamas and other factions have set a deadline until the end of the year for implementation of the reconstruction process.

An agreement took place between the Palestinian factions on gradual pressure and escalation against the Israeli occupation to expedite the reconstruction process, the sources mentioned.

According to the sources, Egypt refused the travel of a large Hamas delegation that was scheduled to visit Cairo last November.

حماس تنقل “رسالة ساخنة” إلى المصريين بخصوص الأسيرات في سجون الاحتلال

الأحد 19 كانون الأول 2021

المصدر: الميادين نت

مصادر خاصة للميادين تشير إلى أنّ “المصريين نقلوا ردّ الاحتلال بشان صفقة تبادل الأسرى واستمرار تهرب تل أبيب منها”، وتضيف أنّ “الوفد المصري سيعود لتل أبيب مساء غد الإثنين لينقل رأي حماس”.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is 6f7a04d6-d03e-4066-b1ae-3afdc0beec2b.jpg

إحدى الأسيرات الفلسطينيات في سجون الاحتلال (أرشيف)

أفادت مصادر خاصة للميادين، اليوم الأحد، بأنّ “حركة حماس نقلت رسالة ساخنة إلى الوفد المصري في غزة بشأن الأسيرات في سجون الاحتلال“.

وأضافت المصادر أنّ “المصريين نقلوا ردّ الاحتلال بشأن صفقة التبادل واستمرار تهرّب تل أبيب منها”، مضيفةً أنّ “الوفد المصري سيعود إلى تل أبيب مساء غد الإثنين لينقل رأي حماس”.

أمّا بخصوص الإعمار، فقد أشارت المصادر إلى أنّ الحركة أبدت “اعتراضها على تأخر الإجراءات المصرية، وأنّ المصريين جددوا وعودهم تجاه غزة وتذرعوا برفض الاحتلال للخطوات وربطه لها بتخفيض سقف حماس في صفقة التبادل”.

وفي وقت سابق اليوم، وصل وفد أمني مصري إلى قطاع غزة لإجراء محادثات مع قيادة حركة “حماس” والفصائل الفلسطينية، بشأن قضيتي التهدئة والإعمار.

وأفاد مراسل الميادين بأن الوفد المصري وصل إلى قطاع غزة عبر معبر بيت حانون-إيرز.

Al-Masry: We warn “Israel” of the consequences of betting on the continued imposition of the noose and restrictions on the Palestinian people

Erdogan’s Reconciliations: ‘Israel’ is a Friend, Assad Remains an Enemy! مصالحات إردوغان.. “إسرائيل” صديق والأسد يبقى عدواً!

 ARABI SOURI 

Turkey Erdogan – Syria President Bashar Assad

Erdogan knows that reconciliation with Assad will not be easy for him as long as he believes that such reconciliation will mean the final defeat of his regional and international project.

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

A week after the “Turkish reconciliation with the UAE”, which was achieved by Mohammed bin Zayed’s visit to Ankara (11/24) at the invitation of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the latter announced his “efforts to achieve similar reconciliations with Egypt, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Bahrain,” speaking about his upcoming visit to Abu Dhabi in the first half of next February after he called Bin Zayed and congratulated him on the UAE National Day (December 1).

Erdogan, who, along with his ministers, forgot everything he said about Mohammed bin Zayed politically, and the loyal Turkish media insulted him, describing him with the worst epithets, it seems that he also forgot everything he personally said about Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi and “Israel” in whole and in detail, which proves the success of the Emirati mediation on the path of Trump’s “deal of the century”, Bin Zayed declared himself its godfather.

As the betting continues on the results of the seventh round (and subsequent rounds) of the Iranian nuclear file negotiations in Vienna, the information talks about the recent visits of Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu to Cairo, Riyadh, Manama, and “Tel Aviv”. The visit of Israeli President Isaac Herzog (with Azerbaijani and Ukrainian mediation as well) to Ankara may soon follow, at a time when ambiguity persists about Cairo’s position, which seems to not rush reconciliation with Ankara until it secures a practical and final position from President Erdogan against the Egyptian and Arab Muslim Brotherhood, it is a request that he may agree to the Egyptian part (and indeed the Israeli one with regard to the “Hamas” movement), and postpone the Arab part, especially the Libyan and the Syrian, with the continuation of regional and international bargaining in these two files, including the visit that President Emmanuel Macron will pay (4-3). (December) Qatar, the UAE, and Saudi Arabia, yesterday’s enemies and today’s allies in the American play which still have Syria as its main target, along with Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, and Yemen.

This explains the Saudi-Emirati escalation in Yemen, the continued Saudi conspiracy against Lebanon, the Moroccan persistence (the king and his entourage) in alliance with “Israel” against Algeria (to obstruct and thwart the Arab summit) and North Africa in general, and finally, the continuation of the Turkish and American position in Syria.

Washington prevents its Kurdish allies from any agreement with Damascus, to continue its covert and overt projects with various parties in Iraq, to ​​ensure its interests in the region in general, at a time when the Turkish position in Syria remains the most important and influential element in the overall developments of the latter, with its repercussions on all regional projects and plans. and international (the West’s provocations against Russia in Ukraine), which is the calculation that makes President Erdogan a key party in the “deal of the century” in its updated form, which Washington, along with Paris, London, and even Berlin, wants with its new government (the leader of the Green Party and Foreign Minister Annalina Birbock is a friend of “Israel” and an enemy of Russia and China), to succeed in arranging the affairs of the region, while guaranteeing the future of “Zionist” Israel forever.

This will require weakening the Arab position more than it is now, by blowing up the concept of resistance in all its forms and military, political, social, cultural, and humanitarian content, which has so far succeeded in obstructing all imperialist and colonial projects and schemes with its Arab and Islamist tools.

As usual, the bet remains on President Erdogan’s stance regarding all these facts and their future possibilities that he wants to support his position in Syria as long as the Arab and Western parties do not want a solution soon. Erdogan, who abandoned all his previous statements and policies, and reconciled with the Emirates, and declared his readiness to reconcile with the “archenemy” Egypt (Sisi) and “Israel”, everyone knows that he will not reconcile with President Assad as long as he knows that the Arab and Western regimes will never force him to do so.

He also knows that reconciliation with al-Assad will not be easy for him personally, as long as he believes that such reconciliation will mean the final defeat of his regional and international (Muslim) Brotherhood project, reconciliation with President al-Assad will require him to withdraw the Turkish forces and authorities from the areas they control (about 9% of the area of Syria) in northern Syria, and stop all kinds of military and financial support for tens of thousands of armed opposition factions (operating under the orders of the Turkish army) that are fighting the Syrian state, And to stop protecting Idlib and the “Al-Nusra” (Al Qaeda Levant) and its ilk in it, and finally to return the Syrian refugees from Turkey to their country, within the framework of a plan to be agreed upon with Damascus. This is, of course, with coordination and cooperation with it to address the situation east of the Euphrates, where the Kurdish militias that Ankara considers the Syrian branch of the Turkish Kurdistan Workers Party, which has been fighting the Turkish state for 40 years.

Such possibilities require more than a miracle for President Erdogan to call or meet with President Assad, who was his only friend when everyone was against him because of his former Brotherhood origins. The Turkish withdrawal from Syria, with all its secret and overt elements, would mean at the same time its withdrawal from Libya and Iraq, and its abandonment of its ideological projects, not only in the region but in the whole world as well.

This probability is very weak, at a ratio of 1 out of 10, if not 1 out of 100, given Ankara’s intertwined and complicated relationship externally and the most complex at home, especially after he became the absolute ruler of the country after the change of the constitution in April 2017. He sees in the details of his ideological and nationalist foreign policies important elements to influence his supporters and followers, to ensure the continuity of their support for him, despite the catastrophes of serious economic and financial crises, the most important of its causes are the costs of foreign policy. Otherwise, the issue does not need such tidal changes in Erdogan’s positions, who can return Turkey to pre-2011 with one phone call with President al-Assad, and without resorting to any Gulf, Russian or Iranian mediation. Who would reconcile with Sisi (he said that he is a criminal) And “Israel” (he described it more than once as a criminal gang), and seeking reconciliation with Ibn Salman after he said what he said about him (after the killing of Jamal Khashoggi), he can reconcile his former friend Assad simply, especially since Syria has not undertaken any hostile action against Turkey, despite all that Ankara has done to it over the past ten years.

This comes at a time when everyone knows that reconciliation with Syria will open the gates of the region to him again, as long as he will return to be a friend of “Israel” (to win the favor of the Jewish lobbies and to distance “Israel” from Cyprus, Greece, and France), and to ensure that the Gulf regimes support him financially, to help him achieve huge economic gains from development and reconstruction projects in Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Lebanon, and the rest of the countries in the region, and Turkey is the most fortunate in it, because of its capabilities and proximity to it, which requires a new stage of reconciliation and forgiveness between Erdogan and all the leaders of the region.

The return of coordination and cooperation between them will mean nothing unless it starts with President Assad. This is, of course, if the new coordination and cooperation are not aimed at another bloody spring targeting Syria, as was the case 10 years ago, otherwise, how can “Israel” turn into a friend of Erdogan, and Assad remains more than an enemy!

Donate

مصالحات إردوغان.. “إسرائيل” صديق والأسد يبقى عدواً!

الخميس 2 كانون الأول 2021

حسني محلي

يعرف إردوغان أنَّ المصالحة مع الأسد لن تكون سهلة بالنسبة إليه ما دام يعتقد أن مثل هذه المصالحة ستعني هزيمة مشروعه الإقليمي والدولي نهائياً.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is turkey-erdogan-syria-president-bashar-assad.jpg
كيف تتحول “إسرائيل” إلى صديق لإردوغان، ويبقى الأسد أكثر من عدو!؟

بعد أسبوع من “المصالحة التركية مع الإمارات”، والتي تحققت بزيارة محمد بن زايد إلى أنقرة (24/11) بدعوة من الرئيس رجب طيب إردوغان، أعلن الأخير “مساعيه لتحقيق مصالحات مماثلة مع كل من مصر وإسرائيل والسعودية والبحرين”، متحدثاً عن زيارته القادمة لأبو ظبي في النصف الأول من شباط/فبراير المقبل بعد أن اتصل بابن زايد هاتفياً وهنأه بالعيد الوطني للإمارات (1 كانون الاول/ديسمبر).

فإردوغان الذي نسي، ومعه وزراؤه، كل ما قاله عن محمد بن زايد سياسياً، وأهانه الإعلام التركي الموالي، واصفاً إياه بأسوأ النعوت، يبدو أنه نسي أيضاً كل ما قاله شخصياً عن عبدالفتاح السيسي و”إسرائيل” جملةً وتفصيلاً، وهو ما يثبت نجاح الوساطة الإماراتية على طريق “صفقة القرن” التي أطلقها ترامب، وأعلن ابن زايد نفسه عراباً لها.

ومع استمرار الرهان على نتائج الجولة السابعة (والجولات اللاحقة) من مفاوضات الملف النووي الإيراني في فيينا، تتحدث المعلومات عن زيارات قريبة لوزير الخارجية مولود جاويش أوغلو إلى القاهرة والرياض والمنامة و”تل أبيب”. وقد تلحق بها زيارة الرئيس الإسرائيلي إسحاق هرتسوغ (بوساطة أذربيجانية وأوكرانية أيضاً) إلى أنقرة قريباً، في الوقت الذي يستمر الغموض حول موقف القاهرة، التي يبدو أنها لن تستعجل المصالحة مع أنقرة حتى تضمن موقفاً عملياً ونهائياً من الرئيس إردوغان ضد الإخوان المسلمين مصرياً وعربياً، وهو الطلب الذي قد يوافق على شقه المصري (بل والإسرائيلي في ما يتعلق بحركة “حماس”)، ويؤجل شقه العربي، وخصوصاً الليبي والسوري، وذلك مع استمرار المساومات الإقليمية والدولية في هذين الملفين، ومنها الزيارة التي سيقوم بها الرئيس إيمانويل ماكرون (3-4 كانون الأول/ديسمبر) لكلٍّ من قطر والإمارات والسعودية، أعداء الأمس وحلفاء اليوم في المسرحية الأميركية التي ما زالت سوريا هدفها الرئيسي، ومعها إيران والعراق ولبنان واليمن.

ويفسّر ذلك التّصعيد السّعودي – الإماراتي في اليمن، واستمرار التآمر السعودي ضد لبنان، والتمادي المغربي (الملك وحاشيته) في التحالف مع “إسرائيل” ضد الجزائر (لعرقلة القمة العربية وإفشالها) والشمال الأفريقي عموماً، وأخيراً استمرار الموقف التركي والأميركي في سوريا.

وتمنع واشنطن حلفاءها الكرد من أيّ اتفاق مع دمشق، لتستمر في مشاريعها السرية والعلنية مع أطراف مختلفة في العراق، لضمان مصالحها في المنطقة عموماً، في الوقت الذي يبقى الموقف التركي في سوريا العنصر الأهم والأكثر تأثيراً في مجمل تطورات الأخيرة، بانعكاساتها على مجمل المشاريع والمخططات الإقليمية والدولية (استفزازات الغرب ضد روسيا في أوكرانيا)، وهو الحساب الذي يجعل الرئيس إردوغان طرفاً أساسياً في “صفقة القرن” بصيغتها المحدثة، التي تريد لها واشنطن، ومعها باريس ولندن، وحتى برلين، بحكومتها الجديدة (زعيمة حزب الخضر ووزيرة الخارجية أنالينا بيربوك صديقة لـ”إسرائيل” وعدوة لروسيا والصين)، أن تنجح في ترتيب أمور المنطقة، مع ضمان مستقبل “إسرائيل” الصهيونية إلى الأبد. 

وسيتطلَّب ذلك إضعاف الموقف العربي أكثر مما هو عليه الآن، من خلال نسف مفهوم المقاومة بكلِّ أشكالها ومضامينها العسكرية والسياسية والاجتماعية والثقافية والإنسانية، وهي التي نجحت حتى الآن في عرقلة كل المشاريع والمخططات الإمبريالية والاستعمارية بأدواتها العربية والإسلامية. 

وكالعادة، يبقى الرهان على موقف الرئيس إردوغان حيال كلّ هذه المعطيات واحتمالاتها المستقبلية التي يريد لها أن تدعم موقفه في سوريا ما دامت الأطراف العربية والغربية لا تريد لها حلاً قريباً، فإردوغان الّذي تخلّى عن كل مقولاته وسياسته السابقة، وصالح الإمارات، وأعلن استعداده للمصالحة مع “العدوين اللدودين” مصر (السيسي) و”إسرائيل”، يعرف الجميع أنه لن يصالح الرئيس الأسد ما دام يعرف أن الأنظمة العربية والغربية لن تجبره على ذلك أبداً.

كما أنه يعرف أنَّ المصالحة مع الأسد لن تكون سهلة بالنسبة إليه شخصياً، ما دام يعتقد أن مثل هذه المصالحة ستعني هزيمة مشروعه الإخواني الإقليمي والدولي نهائياً، فالمصالحة مع الرئيس الأسد ستتطلَّب منه سحب القوات والسلطات التركية من المناطق التي تسيطر عليها (حوالى 9% من مساحة سوريا) في الشمال السوري، وإيقاف كل أنواع الدعم العسكري والمالي لعشرات الآلاف من مسلحي الفصائل المعارضة (تأتمر بأوامر الجيش التركي) التي تقاتل الدولة السورية، والكفّ عن حماية إدلب ومن فيها من “النصرة” وأمثالها، وأخيراً إعادة اللاجئين السوريين من تركيا إلى بلادهم، في إطار خطة يتم الاتفاق عليها مع دمشق. هذا بالطبع مع التنسيق والتعاون معها لمعالجة الوضع شرق الفرات، حيث الميليشيات الكردية التي تعتبرها أنقرة الفرع السوري لحزب العمال الكردستاني التركي الذي يقاتل الدولة التركية منذ 40 عاماً. 

وتتطلّب مثل هذه الاحتمالات أكثر من معجزة بالنسبة إلى الرئيس إردوغان حتى يتصل بالرئيس الأسد أو يلتقيه، وهو الذي كان صديقه الوحيد عندما كان الجميع ضده بسبب أصوله الإخوانية السابقة، فالانسحاب التركي من سوريا بكل عناصره السرية والعلنية سيعني في الوقت نفسه انسحابه من ليبيا والعراق، وتخليه عن مشاريعه العقائدية، ليس في المنطقة فحسب، بل في العالم أجمع أيضاً.

هذا الاحتمال ضعيف جداً بنسبة 1 على 10، إن لم نقل 1 على 100، نظراً إلى علاقة أنقرة المتشابكة والمعقدة خارجياً والأكثر تعقيداً في الداخل، وخصوصاً بعد أن أصبح الحاكم المطلق للبلاد بعد تغيير الدستور في نيسان/أبريل 2017، فهو يرى في تفاصيل سياساته العقائدية والقومية الخارجية عناصر مهمة للتأثير في أنصاره وأتباعه، لضمان استمرارية دعمهم له، على الرغم من كوارث الأزمات الاقتصادية والمالية الخطرة، وأهم أسبابها تكاليف السياسة الخارجية، وإلا فالموضوع لا يحتاج إلى مثل هذا المد والجزر في مواقف إردوغان الذي يستطيع أن يعود بتركيا إلى ما قبل العام 2011 باتصال هاتفي واحد مع الرئيس الأسد، ومن دون اللجوء إلى أي وساطة خليجية أو روسية أو إيرانية، فمن يصالح السيسي (قال عنه إنه مجرم)، و”إسرائيل” (وصفها أكثر من مرة بأنها عصابة إجرامية)، ويسعى للمصالحة مع ابن سلمان بعد أن قال عنه ما قال (بعد مقتل جمال خاشقجي)، يستطيع أن يصالح صديقه السابق الأسد بكل بساطة، وخصوصاً أنَّ سوريا لم تقم بأي عمل معادٍ ضد تركيا، على الرغم من كل ما فعلته أنقرة بها خلال السنوات العشر الماضية.

يأتي ذلك في الوقت الذي يعرف الجميع أن المصالحة مع سوريا ستفتح له أبواب المنطقة من جديد، ما دام سيعود صديقاً لـ”إسرائيل” (ليكسب ود اللوبيات اليهودية، ويبعد “إسرائيل” عن قبرص واليونان وفرنسا)، ويضمن دعم أنظمة الخليج له مادياً، ليساعده ذلك على تحقيق مكاسب اقتصادية ضخمة من مشاريع التنمية وإعادة الإعمار في سوريا والعراق وليبيا واليمن ولبنان وباقي دول المنطقة، وتركيا هي الأكثر حظاً فيها، بسبب إمكانياتها وقربها منها، وهو ما يحتاج إلى مرحلة جديدة من المصالحة والمسامحة بين إردوغان وكل زعماء المنطقة، وعودة التنسيق والتعاون في ما بينهم لن تعني أي شيء ما لم تبدأ بالرئيس الأسد. هذا بالطبع إن لم يكن التنسيق والتعاون الجديد لا يهدف إلى ربيع دموي آخر يستهدف سوريا، كما هو الحال منذ 10 سنوات، وإلا كيف تتحول “إسرائيل” إلى صديق لإردوغان، ويبقى الأسد أكثر من عدو!

الفيلم الوثائقي “جمال عبد الناصر- الأسطورة والزعيم

Erdogan and Macron, between Competition and Hostility, there’s One Understanding! إردوغان وماكرون.. بين المنافسة والعداء تفاهم واحد!

ARABI SOURI 

Erdogan and Macron, between Competition and Hostility, there’s One Understanding!

France Macron and Turkey Erdogan

Macron’s visit to the region comes to obstruct what Erdogan is striving for regionally and internationally.

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

A week after the visit of the “biggest enemy” Mohammed bin Zayed to Ankara and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s talk of his desire to achieve similar reconciliations with Egypt, “Israel”, Saudi Arabia, and Bahrain, French President Emmanuel Macron came to the region to obstruct what Erdogan is striving for, regionally and internationally.

Abu Dhabi was Macron’s main station, where he persuaded bin Zayed to buy 80 Rafale planes and 12 helicopters, and he agreed with him to coordinate and joint cooperation on all the issues discussed. This is what Macron reached during his talks with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, after winning his affection, because he is the first Western president to visit Saudi Arabia after the crime that targeted Jamal Khashoggi in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul in October 2018, which everyone blamed bin Salman for it. The duo’s contact with Lebanese Prime Minister Najib Mikati was the first fruit of this coordination and cooperation, and it was translated into practice through Saudi-French projects and plans backed by the United States, which will target Hezb Allah and through it Syria and then Iran.

As for Qatar (Erdogan will visit it on Sunday), which is Macron’s third station, Prince Tamim welcomed him warmly, perhaps as a response to the hospitality with which his ally Erdogan received his enemy Mohammed bin Zayed in Ankara, especially since Macron’s visit came two days after the agreement signed by Cyprus with Qatar National Petroleum Company and the American ExxonMobil Company for gas exploration in the vicinity of the island, this was strongly denounced by Ankara and pushed Erdogan to visit Doha (Sunday), especially since this signing came on the day the Turkish Parliament’s Foreign Relations Committee ratified an agreement with Doha under which Ankara would allow 36 Qatari warplanes to come and stay in Turkish bases and fly in the Turkish air, in conjunction with the visit of Pope Francis to Cyprus and Greece.

This is in the narrow context of the competition between Erdogan and Macron, and it seems clear that it has acquired the character of direct hostility over the past few years. This explains the violent attack which was launched and is being launched by President Erdogan from time to time on Macron personally, and the latter responds to him with two strikes, without preventing them from reconciliation and warm hugs on various occasions, the most recent of which was the G20 summit in Rome at the end of last October, at a time when Paris was confronting President Erdogan’s plans and projects in many arenas, the most important of which are Libya, Somalia, and Karabakh, and after Ankara mobilized all its capabilities to compete, if not confront, the traditional French role in its former African colonies that Erdogan visits from time to time, and hosts their leaders In Turkey constantly, and without Erdogan neglecting the interest in the Turkish community in France, which numbers about 600,000, in an attempt to incite it and incite the Arab Islamists (Morocco, Algeria, and Tunisia) and those residing in France and Europe in general against Macron.

The latter had previously accused the Turkish intelligence of adopting sabotage acts in his country and Europe in general, at a time when many see the position of Paris, which recognized the Ottoman genocide against the Armenians in 1915 and President Macron (in February 2019) announced the 24th of April of each year a day of national mourning in remembrance of this genocide, as one of the main causes of hostility between the two sides. While recalling the other reason, which has historical roots, as France and Britain occupied the land of Anatolia after the fall of the Ottoman Empire in 1918. France and Britain were a major party to the Sèvres Agreement (August 1920) and its goal was to establish a Kurdish state in the region.

With Ataturk’s rejection of this agreement and its failure after the establishment of the Turkish Republic in 1923, and Paris’s efforts to win Ankara’s friendship again, and through cooperation with it in the issue of the Alexandretta Strip (Liwa Iskandaron 1938 – 1939), the French interest in the Kurds remained one of the most important causes of apathy and tension between the two parties and still is. Paris has supported and continues to support the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, directly or indirectly, which is what it is doing with the Kurdish People’s Protection Units in Syria. Macron (last July) and Hollande (February 2015) received some of its military and political leaders at the Elysee.

As for the traditional support of France (along with the UAE, Egypt, “Israel” and sometimes Saudi Arabia) for Greece and the Greek Cypriots, it was also and still is one of the most important causes of apathy and tension between Ankara and Paris which is in solidarity with Nicosia and Athens in their differences with Ankara on many issues, The most important of these are the problems of territorial waters in the Aegean Sea, and the search and exploration for gas in the vicinity of Cyprus, which Ankara, on behalf of the Turkish Cypriots, objects to, and refuses to talk about the Armenian genocide.

While awaiting the results of the eighth round of the Iranian nuclear talks (and the visit of Faisal Miqdad and Tahnoon bin Zayed to Tehran on Sunday and Monday) and most importantly, the meeting of Presidents Biden and Putin (December 7), President Macron will continue his regional moves that he wants to achieve for Paris political, military, and economic gains on the eve of the upcoming presidential elections, and after he lost the submarine deal with Australia, with Britain and America plotting against him. The timing of these elections acquires another meaning for Turkey because its second round will be on April 24, the anniversary of the Armenian Genocide.

Macron seeks to get out of these elections victorious, after achieving his goals in Lebanon in coordination with Riyadh which Mohammed bin Salman wants to return to a major party in the region’s equations in the face of other parties who took advantage of Saudi Arabia’s isolation after the Khashoggi’s crime and wanted to convince Washington that they are the most important. This explains the alliance of the Emirates and Qatar separately with Egypt and Turkey, the two regionally important and historically competing countries and ideological enemies who indirectly agree to confront the Iranian role in the region in general.

It also explains the alliance of everyone against Damascus at the beginning of the crisis in 2012 when Paris, London, Berlin, and Washington were in constant contact with Ankara to get rid of President Assad, and Erdogan predicted his downfall within months, saying in September 2012 that he would pray soon in the Umayyad Mosque. The calculations of everyone, led by Turkey and France, met in Syria and through it in Lebanon as if they were and are still saying all, including Macron and Erdogan, “My brother and I are against my cousin, and my cousin and I are against the stranger,” but without it being clear who the brother is and who the cousin is, and why ‘Lebanon the Resistance’ is the strange thing in the play of the West, in which everyone has his role according to the place and time determined by the author of the saying “I” who does not want anyone else to say “Me too”!

If you want us to remain online, please consider a small donation, or see how you can help at no cost.
Follow us on Telegram: https://t.me/syupdates link will open the Telegram app.

إردوغان وماكرون.. بين المنافسة والعداء تفاهم واحد!

كانون الأول 5 2021

في انتظار مكالمة بايدن.. كيف يستعدّ إردوغان؟ | الصحيفة السياسية

المصدر: الميادين نت

حسني محلي

زيارة ماكرون إلى المنطقة تأتي لعرقلة ما يسعى من أجله إردوغان إقليمياً ودولياً. 

سبق لماكرون أن اتهم الاستخبارات التركية بتبنّي أعمال تخريبية في بلاده.

بعد أسبوع من زيارة “العدو الأكبر” محمد بن زايد لأنقرة وحديث الرئيس التركي رجب طيب إردوغان عن رغبته في تحقيق مصالحات مماثلة مع مصر و”إسرائيل” والسعودية والبحرين، جاء الرئيس الفرنسي إيمانويل ماكرون إلى المنطقة ليعرقل ما يسعى من أجله إردوغان إقليمياً ودولياً. 

كانت أبو ظبي محطة ماكرون الرئيسية، حيث أقنع ابن زايد بشراء 80 طائرة رافال و12 مروحية، واتفق وإياه على التنسيق والتعاون المشترك حول مجمل القضايا التي تمت مناقشتها. وهو ما توصّل إليه ماكرون خلال مباحثاته مع ولي العهد السعودي محمد بن سلمان، بعد أن كسب ودّه، لأنه أول رئيس غربي يزور السعودية بعد الجريمة التي استهدفت جمال خاشقجي في القنصلية السعودية في اسطنبول في تشرين الأول/أكتوبر 2018 وحمّل الجميع ابن سلمان مسؤوليتها. وكان اتصال الثنائي برئيس الوزراء اللبناني نجيب ميقاتي أولى ثمار هذا التنسيق والتعاون، وتمّت ترجمته عملياً عبر المشاريع والمخططات السعودية-الفرنسية المدعومة أميركياً، والتي ستستهدف حزب الله وعبرها سوريا ثم إيران.

وأما في قطر (يزورها إردوغان غداً الاثنين) وهي محطة ماكرون الثالثة، فقد رحّب الأمير تميم به ترحيباً حاراً، وربما كردّ على الحفاوة التي استقبل بها حليفه إردوغان عدوّه محمد بن زايد في أنقرة، وخاصة أن زيارة ماكرون جاءت بعد يومين من الاتفاقية التي وقّعتها قبرص مع الشركة الوطنية للبترول القطرية وشركة أكسون موبيل الأميركية للبحث والتنقيب عن الغاز في جوار الجزيرة، وهو ما استنكرته أنقرة بشدة ودفعت إردوغان إلى زيارة الدوحة (الأحد)، وخاصة أن هذا التوقيع جاء في اليوم الذي صادقت فيه لجنة العلاقات الخارجية في البرلمان التركي على اتفاقية مع الدوحة تسمح بموجبها أنقرة لـ 36 طائرة حربية قطرية بالمجيء والبقاء في القواعد التركية والتحليق في الأجواء التركية، بالتزامن مع زيارة بابا الفاتيكان فرنسيس لقبرص واليونان.

هذا في الإطار الضيّق من المنافسة بين إردوغان وماكرون، ويبدو واضحاً أنها قد اكتسبت طابع العداء المباشر خلال السنوات القليلة الماضية. ويفسّر ذلك الهجوم العنيف الذي شنّه ويشنّه الرئيس إردوغان بين الحين والحين على ماكرون شخصياً، فيردّ عليه الثاني الصاع صاعين، ومن دون أن يمنعهما ذلك من المصالحة والعناق الحار في المناسبات المختلفة، وآخرها قمة العشرين في روما نهاية تشرين الأول/أكتوبر الماضي، في الوقت الذي كانت فيه باريس تتصدى لمخططات الرئيس إردوغان ومشاريعه في العديد من الساحات، وأهمها ليبيا والصومال وكاراباخ، وبعد أن استنفرت أنقرة كل إمكانياتها لمنافسة، إن لم نقل مواجهة، الدور الفرنسي التقليدي في مستعمراتها الأفريقية السابقة التي يزورها إردوغان بين الحين والحين، ويستضيف زعماءها في تركيا باستمرار، ومن دون أن يهمل إردوغان الاهتمام بالجالية التركية في فرنسا وقوامها نحو 600 ألف، في محاولة منه لتحريضها وتحريض الإسلاميين العرب (المغرب والجزائر وتونس) والمقيمين في فرنسا وأوروبا عموماً ضد ماكرون.

 وسبق للأخير أن اتهم الاستخبارات التركية بتبنّي أعمال تخريبية في بلاده وأوروبا عموماً، في الوقت الذي يرى فيه الكثيرون في موقف باريس، التي اعترفت بالإبادة العثمانية ضد الأرمن عام  1915 وإعلان الرئيس ماكرون (في شباط/فبراير 2019) 24 نيسان/أبريل من كل عام، يوم حداد وطني إحياءً لذكرى هذه الإبادة، من أهم أسباب العداء بين الطرفين. مع التذكير بالسبب الآخر، وهو ذو جذور تاريخية، حيث كانت فرنسا ومعها بريطانيا تحتلان أرض الأناضول بعد سقوط الدولة العثمانية 1918. كما كانت فرنسا ومعها بريطانيا طرفاً أساسياً في اتفاقية سيفر (آب/أغسطس 1920) وهدفها إقامة دولة كردية في المنطقة. 

ومع تصدّي أتاتورك لهذه الاتفاقية وإفشالها بعد قيام الجمهورية التركية عام 1923 ومساعي باريس لكسب ودّ أنقرة من جديد، ومن خلال التعاون معها في قضية لواء اسكندرون (1938 – 1939) فقد بقي الاهتمام الفرنسي بالكرد من أهم أسباب الفتور والتوتر بين الطرفين وما زال. فقد دعمت باريس وما زالت تدعم حزب العمال الكردستاني بنحو مباشر أو غير مباشر، وهو ما تفعله مع وحدات حماية الشعب الكردية في سوريا، واستقبل ماكرون (تموز/يوليو الماضي) ومن قبله هولاند (شباط/فبراير 2015) البعض من قياداتها العسكرية والسياسية في الإليزيه. 

وأما دعم فرنسا (ومعها الإمارات ومصر و”إسرائيل” وأحيانا السعودية) التقليدي لليونان والقبارصة اليونانيين، فقد كان هو الآخر وما زال من أهم أسباب الفتور والتوتر بين أنقرة وباريس التي تتضامن مع نيقوسيا وأثينا في خلافاتهما مع أنقرة حول العديد من القضايا، وأهمها مشاكل المياه الإقليمية في بحر إيجة، والبحث والتنقيب عن الغاز في جوار قبرص، وهو ما تعترض عليه أنقرة، وباسم القبارصة الأتراك، كما ترفض الحديث عن إبادة الأرمن. 

ومع انتظار نتائج الجولة الثامنة من مباحثات النووي الإيراني (وزيارة فيصل المقداد وطحنون بن زايد لطهران الأحد والإثنين) والأهم من ذلك، لقاء الرئيسين بايدن وبوتين (7 كانون الأول/ديسمبر) سيستمر الرئيس ماكرون في تحركاته الإقليمية التي يريد لها أن تحقق لباريس مكاسب سياسية وعسكرية واقتصادية، عشيّة انتخابات الرئاسة المقبلة، وبعد أن خسر صفقة الغواصات مع أستراليا بتآمر من بريطانيا وأميركا ضده. ويكتسب التوقيت الزمني لهذه الانتخابات معنى آخر بالنسبة إلى تركيا، لأن جولتها الثانية ستكون في 24 نيسان/أبريل، ذكرى الإبادة الأرمنية.

ويسعى ماكرون للخروج من هذه الانتخابات منتصراً، بعد أن يحقق أهدافه في لبنان بالتنسيق مع الرياض، التي يريد لها محمد بن سلمان أن تعود طرفاً رئيسياً في معادلات المنطقة، في مواجهة الأطراف الآخرين الذين استغلوا عزلة السعودية بعد جريمة خاشقجي، وأرادوا أن يقنعوا واشنطن بأنهم الأهم. ويفسّر ذلك تحالف الإمارات وقطر على حدة مع مصر وتركيا الدولتين المهمتين إقليميا والمتنافستين تاريخياً والعدوتين عقائدياً والمتفقتين بنحو غير مباشر على مواجهة الدور الإيراني في المنطقة عموماً.

ويفسّر أيضاً تحالف الجميع ضد دمشق في بداية الأزمة عام 2012 عندما كانت باريس ولندن وبرلين وواشنطن على اتصال دائم مع أنقرة للتخلص من الرئيس الأسد، وتوقّع إردوغان سقوطه خلال أشهر، ليقول في أيلول/سبتمبر 2012 “إنه سيصلّي قريباً في الجامع الأموي”. فالتقت حسابات الجميع، وفي مقدمتهم تركيا وفرنسا، في سوريا وعبرها في لبنان، وكأنهم كانوا وما زالوا يقولون جميعاً، بمن فيهم ماكرون وإردوغان، “أنا وأخي على ابن عمي وأنا وابن عمي عالغريب”، ولكن من دون أن يكون واضحاً من هو الأخ ومن هو ابن العم، ولماذا لبنان المقاومة هو الغريب في مسرحية الغرب التي لكلٍ فيها دوره بحسب المكان والزمان اللذين يحدّدهما صاحب مقولة “أنا” ولا يريد لأحد غيره أن يقول “وأنا أيضاً”! 

Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Hamas Warn ‘Israel’: Detainees’ Lives Redline

Nov 3, 2021

Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Hamas Warn ‘Israel’: Detainees’ Lives Redline

By Staff

Palestinian ‘Islamic Jihad’ and ‘Hamas’ resistance movements threatened to escalate once again hadn’t the detainees’ sufferings in the ‘Israeli’ occupation prisons been finished, especially amid the news circulating that the hunger strike might lead to the martyrdom of some of them.

The resistance movements renewed in the past days, through an Egyptian mediation, warnings that the issue of the detainees would affect the calmness along the Gaza border.

They also warned about the danger caused by the enemy’s continuation of renewing the prisoners’ administrative detention, especially those on hunger strike, adding that the lives of detainees are a redline, which once violated, will push the resistance factions to annul all understandings reached earlier with the enemy.

In the same context, Islamic Jihad leader Mohammad Shallah cautioned that any martyrdom caused among the detainees on hunger strike will further escalate the situation, adding that the resistance will wreak havoc on the occupation in case any detainee was martyred.

For his part, Hamas politburo member Zaher Jabbarin stressed that the resistance leadership is following up the issue of the detainees and has many options that are ready, in which the enemy “should expect any development amid its aggression and tyranny against our detainees and their legitimate rights.”

Al-Manar, Al-Masirah Channels Launch Friday Extensive Documentation of Saudi-led Aggression Massacres on Yemen: Video

October 28, 2021

Al-Manar and Al-Masirah TV Channels are scheduled to launch an extensive documentation project which records all the massacres committed by the US-Saudi-led forces and mercenaries in Yemen.

An interactive map will come-to-light on the official websites of the two TV channels at 8 p.m. and reveal in an innovative way the massacres committed by the aggression with all the available data and figures.

The interactive map is aimed at preserving and perpetuating the sacrifices of the Yemeni civilians before the Saudi-led aggression.

“So as Rights Remain Preserved,” was the motto of the documentation that represents a reference for right activists, academicals, media outlets and public opinion, using photos, videos and demonstration tools.

Al-Manar English Website is also part of the project and will display the interactive map with data translated in English. Click here.

Yemen has been since March 25, 2015 under aggression by the Saudi-led coalition in a bid to restore power to fugitive president Abd Rabbu Mansour Hadi, who is Riyadh’s ally.

Tens of thousands of Yemenis have been killed or injured by US-Saudi-led airstrikes.

The Arab impoverished country has been also under harsh blockade by the coalition which includes in addition to the Kingdom, the UAE, Jordan, Bahrain, Kuwait, Egypt, Morocco and Sudan.

Source: Al-Manar English Website

Documentation Project of Yemen Massacres

Saturday – October 29, 2021

Massacres Map of the Saudi-American aggression on Yemen

Introduction:

This work is one of the largest documentation projects that records massacres committed since the start of the Saudi-US aggression on Yemen, on March 26, 2015, based on information released by well-known sources.

We assure, through this project, that the blood of Yemen’s oppressed martyrs and injured will persist in the conscience of the free people. This blood will also constitute a mark of disgrace for all who contributed to the bloodshed in Yemen.

Objective:

Documentation of widespread massacres perpetrated by the Saudi-US aggression across Yemen through an interactive and innovated map that can be considered a reference to rights activists, media outlets and journalists as well as to specialists and public opinion.

Definition of a Massacre:

A killing is considered a massacre in this project when at least one civilian gets martyred by Saudi-led aggression fire.

Map Characteristics:

  • Every dot on the map represents a massacre
  • Dots are classified by colors, every color refers to a year
  • The color of dots gets bolder as per the number of martyrs
  • Every massacre is recorded according to:
    • Date of the massacre
    • Place of the massacre
    • News summary
    • Link of the news story
    • Number of martyrs
    • Number of injured
    • Related photos and video (if available)
  • The map allows the search feature according to:
    • Place of the massacre (mainly provinces)
    • Date of the massacre
    • Keywords
  • Yemeni Center for Human Rights was considered the main source regarding the number of victims. Hence, there would be an overlap between the toll which appears on the map and the news summary
  • Areas where the massacre occurred are approximate

Characteristics of the Interactive Frontpage:

  • Represents statistical reference to massacres
  • The map is the source for figures on the frontpage

Notes:

We don’t claim that this project has covered all massacres committed by the US-Saudi aggression on Yemen. Therefore, we are glad to receive any addition, either on the level of massacres or the visual material at: yemen-map@almanar.com.lb

Thanks to all who contributed to this work.

Che Guevara’s 54th Martyrdom Commemoration: The Revolution Continues

October 8, 2021

See the source image

Source: Al Mayadeen

By Ahmad Karakira

54 years after his martyrdom, Guevara’s historic visit to the Palestinian Gaza in 1959 continues to stand as a token of resilience for liberation and resistance movements in Palestine and the world.

Visual search query image
Che’s visit to Palestine came in support of Palestinian national liberation and revolutionary movements against imperialism and colonization

Mohammed was 13 years old when Marxist revolutionary Ernesto Che Guevara paid his first visit to the Gaza Strip that was, at the time, administered by Egypt.

Little did he know that he will become a resistance icon and nicknamed “Gaza’s Guevara” for his tremendous role in the resistance against the Israeli occupation in Gaza and his continuous revolt against injustice and colonialism, as well as his ability to hide and confuse the enemy.

Originally, Mohammed al-Aswad, or “Gaza’s Guevara” was born in the coastal city of Haifa in 1946. Later, the boy and his family sought refuge after they were displaced from their city as a result of the 1948 Nakba and eventually ended up in a refugee camp in Gaza.

Al-Aswad grew up to become a resistance activist against “Israel,” and was jailed for two years. After his release in 1970, he joined the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and gradually got promoted to commander of the PFLP military wing in the Gaza Strip.

During that time, he focused on training and educating resistance forces, as well as organizing demonstrations and strikes against the occupation, applying Martyr Bassel al-Araj’s doctrine: “If you don’t want to be engaged (in fighting oppression), your intellect is pointless.”

His integrity made Moshe Dayan, former Israeli occupation Minister of Security, say, “We run Gaza by day, and Guevara and his comrades run it at night.”

Three years later, “Gaza’s Guevara” was martyred during a heroic battle in the Strip.

Ernesto Che Guevara’s visit to Gaza

Martyr Mohammed al-Aswad’s story is vivid proof of the significant and strong relationship between Che Guevara and the Palestinian cause, which Gaza has become the symbol of.

In fact, Che Guevara’s visit to the Strip on June 18, 1959, at the invitation of the late Egyptian President and leader Gamal Abdel-Nasser, came to establish a state of solidarity and harmony between Cuba and the Palestinian cause.

His visit to Gaza transformed the cause from regional to global and reflected his famous phrase: “Solidarity is a condition that must always be practiced.”

The Israeli occupation of Palestine and the systematic ethnic cleansing against its population triggered the establishment of Palestinian Resistance forces and the emergence of freedom fighters, legitimized by Abdel-Nasser, who was considered a leader against colonialism and imperialism.

To break the determination and resilience of the Resistance, Israeli occupation forces, led by Ariel Sharon, Prime Minister from 2001 till 2006, continuously attacked the Gaza Strip and its refugee camps, committing horrible massacres against many Palestinians and Egyptian soldiers, with no reaction from the international community that simply turned a blind eye to the Israeli atrocities.

A historic visit by all means

Che’s visit came in support of Palestinian national liberation and revolutionary movements against imperialism and colonization.

It was an exceptional visit that was met enthusiastically by resistance leaders and Palestinians.

He was accompanied to al-Bureij Camp, where Israelis committed some of the most horrible massacres, and saw the poverty and hardship that Palestinians were living in, advised Palestinian leaders to pursue the path of resistance, which they tread through their people’s resilience and steadfastness.  

During the visit, he addressed the camp leader Mustafa Abu Midyan, saying, “You should show me what you have done to liberate your country. Where are the training camps? Where are the arms manufacturing factories? Where are the people’s mobilization centers?” With these words, Guevara was trying to lay out the foundations necessary for any resistance movement. 

At the same time, he urged Palestinian refugees to continue their struggle in order to liberate their land from the occupation, offering to supply the Palestinian resistance with arms and training.

In an interview for Al Mayadeen, his daughter, Dr. Aleida Guevara, quoted her father as saying, “The Middle East is considered, with all of its contradictions, a region that is boiling, and it is not possible to predict how far the war between Israel – which is supported by imperialists – and progressive countries in the region will go.”

And the impact still echoes

Following the historic visit, Cuba offered scholarships, granted citizenships, and organized many conferences all in support of Palestine and the Palestinian people.

In addition, the island of Cuba was one of the first countries to recognize the Palestine Liberation Organization when it was founded in 1964.

Soon after his visit, the Marxist doctor became an icon for the Palestinian resistance and fighters and a symbol of revolution, especially for leftist movements.

Hasta Siempre

On this occasion, on the 54th anniversary of his martyrdom, it goes without saying that Che’s resistance, integrity, and solidarity is what we are in need of to liberate the oppressed nations, such as Palestine, Yemen, and any country in the world from Western imperialism, colonialism, and military occupation. His memory still brings forth devoted revolutionary resistance figures such “Gaza’s Guevara”, Mohammed al-Aswad. 

Armed with his forwardness and valor, he would have been on the frontlines in Gaza fighting the Israeli siege. He would have been digging, using a tool as simple as a spoon, alongside the other six, the freedom tunnel that liberates the whole of Palestine from the operators of the Gilboa Prison. 

Aleida Guevara to Al Mayadeen: “We Must Fight Alongside the Palestinians, as Che Believed”

The revolutionary commander’s daughter spoke about a multitude of subjects on her father’s 54th assassination anniversary, notably the Palestinian cause and the dangers of Arab division.

The revolutionary commander’s daughter spoke about a multitude of subjects on her father’s 54th assassination anniversary, notably the Palestinian cause and the dangers of Arab division.

Visual search query image
Aleida Guevara, daughter of Che

“My father would have always stood on the side of oppressed nations,” said Elaida Guevara, daughter of famed revolutionary Che Guevara on the 54th anniversary of his assassination.

In an interview with Al Mayadeen, Aleida revealed her belief that had her father remained alive, things would have been different in Bolivia and Argentina, as he most assuredly would not have surrendered due to his belief of “fight for the oppressed or die fighting.”

Che’s visit to the Middle-East was also recalled, with Aleida describing his conscious realization of the boiling nature of the region due to colonization, the harsh circumstances surrounding its populations, and the endless pressures performed by major powers trying to steal its resources, “notably its oil.”

Linking the current divisions of the Arab world with the Marxist revolutionary’s experience in Cuba, she stressed the importance of “people’s unification”, notably as the sectarian rifts sowed by European colonial powers are dangerously threatening the Arab World’s unity and ability to progress.

On Palestine

In this context, Aleida mentioned her father’s visit to Palestine in 1959. She decreed her love for Palestine, whom her father visited which she considers not only to be a historical nation but a major cause, as she decried “Israel’s” plan to colonize the whole of the Middle East and not simply the Palestinian lands illegally handed over by the UN.

Further diving into the cause, Che’s daughter assured that Lebanon, Syria, and Iran are the only regional countries actively championing a righteous stance towards Palestine, whilst the rest appear to apply a palliative treatment. She mentioned Cuba in this context, which despite being distant from the region, still recently severed all diplomatic relations with “Israel” in solidarity with the Palestinian people.

Regarding the 6 Palestinian prisoners who liberated themselves from the maximum-security Gilboa prison, Aleida considered the operation an “unusual heroism.”

“If you go to the South of Lebanon, you will find remains of Israeli prisons, where you can see with your own eyes what an Israeli prison means, let alone one with extreme security measures,” she added.

She called for the commandment of the prisoners, whose deed should be applauded, supported, and preserved given the historical nature of their struggle, notably under the occupation’s inhumane prison conditions.

Aleida Guevara concluded that the Palestinian people should be supported and that “we must fight with them side by side,” which is an extension of Che’s motto of “solidarity not only being the act raising our voices, but also coming to the aid of our comrades when they need us.”

El Commandante’s daughter has previously sent a letter to Al Mayadeen, on the occasion of the launch of its new website in English, in which she urged the world and the website to “defend the truth above anything else,” and stressing that “correct information, truthful information are essential, and that is what Al Mayadeen does with the stories it gives us every day.”

Foreign Minister Faysal Mikdad: ‘Change’ in International Attitude Towards Syria

Posted by INTERNATIONALIST 360° on 

https://media.thecradle.co/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/01213020/FADt0VQWQAAsWEX.jpg

Esteban CarrilloForeign and Expatriates Minister Faysal Mikdad confirmed a ‘change’ in the international political environment towards Syria in comments to Syrian media on 30 September.

Mikdad’s comments come amidst an opening of reconciliation between West, Gulf states and Syria

In comments to the Syrian Arab News Agency (SANA), Mikdad said that “the change has reflected the achievements of the Syrian Arab Army, in cooperation with allies and friends, on the ground in the war against terrorism.”

On 20 September, Mikdad led a Syrian delegation to a UN meeting in New York, where he also met with Venezuela’s Foreign Affairs Minister, Felix Plasencia Gonzalez, on strengthening bilateral ties between Syria and Venezuela.

Regarding the General Assembly meetings, Mikdad said that while some countries, referring to the United States, continue to practice ‘economic terrorism,’ there was nonetheless a clear ‘retreat’ of the ‘hostile stance’ on Syria.

The Foreign Minister, appointed by Bashar al-Assad in November 2020, added that while Syria welcomes the “openness to the return of normal relations” with the UN and Western nations, he made clear that Syria “will not submit to pressures nor accept any political conditions.”

He also expressed optimism and the prospect of improved relations and cooperation with Syria and its Arab neighbors, following talks held between Syria and Egypt at the New York General Assembly.

In recent years, a number of Arab states, many of whom stood against Syria during the US and Gulf backed war, have sought rapproachment with Damascus.

With the UAE currently leading reconciliation efforts between Gulf Arab states and their allies, even Saudi Arabia reopened secret lines of communication between itself and Damascus, hoping to rectify ties.

Meanwhile, a number of developments between Jordan and Syria have advanced the increased diplomacy and economic cooperation between the two.

Jordan announced on 27 September that the Jaber–Nassib border crossing between itself and Syria will be reopened two days from the date for both freight and travelers.

On 29 September, this main border crossing was opened as planned, and direct flights to Damascus resumed.

Lebanon’s General Security Chief Abbas Ibrahim told The Cradle last week that he ‘totally’ is in favor of ‘open borders with Syria.

Related Videos

Related Articles

انهيار جديد للجماعة الإرهابية!

سبتمبر/أيلول 22 2021

 د. محمد سيد أحمد

ليست المرة الأولى التي نتحدث فيها عن مستقبل جماعة الإخوان الإرهابية، فمنذ الإطاحة بالجماعة من سدة الحكم فى مصر فى 30 حزيران/ يونيو 2013 ونحن نحاول استشراف مستقبلها، وحدّدنا في مقالات سابقة الخيارات المتاحة أمام الجماعة باعتبارها أحد القوى الاجتماعية والسياسية الفاعلة على الساحة المجتمعية المصرية والعربية، فهذه حقيقة سواء قبلها البعض أو حاول إنكارها، ولعلّ محاولات الإنكار هى ما أوصلنا للحالة الراهنة التى تمدّدت فيها الجماعة واتسع نفوذها حتى كادت تبتلع الوطن العربي، حين تمكنت من الوثوب للسلطة فى عدد من الدول العربية في لحظة فارقة من تاريخ الأمة.

 فأخطاء السلطات السياسية داخل البلدان العربية في التعامل مع هذه الجماعة الإرهابية على مدار ما يقرب من نصف قرن كانت سبباً في ما وصلنا إليه الآن من مواجهة شاملة مع هذه القوى الإرهابية، ففي مصر على سبيل المثال ظنّ السادات أنه بإمكانه القيام بثورة مضادة لثورة 23 يوليو/ تموز 1952 يتخلص على أثرها من خصومه السياسيين من الناصريين والشيوعيين، فاستعان على الفور بخصمهم العنيد جماعة الإخوان الإرهابية فأخرجهم من السجون والمعتقلات وأطلق سراحهم لمواجهة هؤلاء الخصوم، لكن هذه المواجهة انتهت باغتياله شخصياً بعدما ظنّ أنهم فرغوا من مهمتهم التي أوكلها لهم.

See the source image

ثم جاء من بعده مبارك ليسير في نفس الطريق، وعلى نفس النهج، حيث قرّر منذ البداية استمالة الجماعة الإرهابية وعقد صفقات تحتية مع قيادتها عبر أجهزته الأمنية، تمكنت على أثرها الجماعة من التغلغل وبناء النفوذ داخل بنية المجتمع المصري، انتظاراً للفرصة التي يمكن من خلالها الانقضاض على السلطة السياسية وانتزاعها، وساعدتهم على ذلك سياسات مبارك المنسحبة من الأدوار الرئيسية للدولة وتخليها عن مسؤوليتها الاجتماعية والاقتصادية تجاه مواطنيها، مما خلق فراغاً تمكنت هذه الجماعة وحلفائها الإرهابيين من ملئه خاصة في الأحياء والمناطق الأكثر فقراً في الريف والحضر.

ومن خلال التحليلات في مقالات سابقة حاولنا طرح مجموعة من الخيارات المتاحة أمام جماعة الإخوان الإرهابية، فعبر قراءة علمية نقدية في أدبيات الجماعة الفكرية، وحركتها التنظيمية، وتجاربها التاريخية، داخل المجتمع المصري والعربي، توصلنا إلى ثلاثة خيارات متاحة أمام الجماعة بعد هزيمتها في 30 حزيران/ يونيو 2013 في مصر وهى: إلى الأمام، والاعتذار عن الفشل وإعادة النظر في تجربتهم والاندماج مرة أخرى في المجتمع بعد مصالحة يتمّ على أثرها معاقبة من أخطأ، والخيار الثانى هو: إلى الخلف، وخوض مواجهة مفتوحة مع الجميع الشعب ومؤسسات الدولة والسلطة السياسية، وهذا خيار اللاعودة فإما الانتصار باستخدام الإرهاب على الشعب ومؤسسات الدولة والسلطة السياسية، أو الانتحار والنهاية الأبدية، والخيار الثالث هو: في المكان، وإتباع مبدأ التقية والعودة مرة أخرى لعقد صفقات وتحالفات مرحلية ومؤقتة مع السلطة السياسية، كما كان يحدث في الماضي، وهي لعبة تجيدها الجماعة تاريخياً، بل هي جزء من عقيدتها حيث اتقاء شر السلطة السياسية حين تكون الجماعة في مرحلة استضعاف، وهو ما تمّ على مدار حكم مبارك، ثم انتهاز الفرصة للانقضاض عليه والإطاحة به والجلوس محله، وهى المرحلة التي تعرف بمرحلة الاستقواء والتمكين.

وكنا قد أكدنا عبر الشواهد والأدلة والبراهين أن الجماعة تسير بالفعل في اتجاه اللاعودة أي الخيار الثاني إلى الخلف، لكننا لم نستبعد الخيار الثالث وهو في المكان، لأنها لعبة تجيدها الجماعة الانتهازية تاريخياً وبشكل كبير، لكننا الآن نستطيع أن نحسم الأمر، فالجماعة عبر السنوات الثمان الماضية قد حسمت أمرها وقرّرت خوض معركة إلى الخلف للنهاية، وذلك من خلال تحالفها مع باقي الجماعات الإرهابية التي خرجت من تحت عباءتها تاريخياً والتي تطلق على نفسها مسمّيات مختلفة ـ سلفية وجهادية وغيرها ـ حيث تعدّدت العمليات الإرهابية المدعومة من بعض القوى الدولية والإقليمية المساندة للتنظيم الدولي للجماعة الإرهابية والتي تسعى لتقسيم وتفتيت مصر والوطن العربي ضمن مشروع الشرق الأوسط الجديد.

وخلال السنوات الثماني الأخيرة كانت حصيلة مواجهة مجتمعاتنا مع الجماعة الإرهابية هزيمة وانهياراً أمام الجيش المصري، ثم انهياراً وهزيمة في سورية تحت أقدام الجيش العربي السوري، ثم هزيمة قبل أيام قليلة في تونس بعد انتصار الرئيس قيس سعيّد لإرادة الشعب، ثم كانت الخاتمة هزيمة مدوية في المغرب وعبر صناديق الاقتراع وهو ما يعبّر عن عودة الوعي للشعب المغربي، حيث فقد حزب العدالة والتنمية الإخواني معظم مقاعده في مجلس النواب الذي سيطر على الأغلبية فيه على مدار عشر سنوات، وصلت للذروة في انتخابات 2016 حيث حصد 125 مقعداً، فقدها في الانتخابات الأخيرة ليحصل على 12 مقعداً فقط وهي هزيمة وصفها المتابعون بالنكراء، وتعد انهيار حقيقي للمشروع الإخواني، سوف تتبعه هزائم أخرى للمشروع في ليبيا بعد محاصرة مصر لتركيا ووضعها لخطوط حمراء لم يتمكن أردوغان من تجاوزها، في ظل تراجع شعبية حزبه في الداخل التركي مما ينبئ بانهيار وشيك، وسوف يضطر الأميركي وحلفاؤئه الأوروبيون التخلي عن دعم التنظيم الدولي الإخواني الذي لم يعد ينفذ لهم ما يريدون.

لكن يجب أن يعيه الشعب العربي والسلطة السياسية في بلداننا معاً أنّ المعركة الراهنة، هي الخيار الأخير أمام هذه الجماعة الإرهابية، وعلينا جميعاً أن نتوحد تحت مظلة الوطن، فالمعركة لا يمكن أن تحسم من خلال الأجهزة الأمنية فقط ـ جيش وشرطة ـ وإنما تحتاج لمواجهة مجتمعية شاملة على كافة المستويات الاجتماعية والاقتصادية والسياسية والثقافية والدينية والإعلامية، وليدرك الجميع أنّ هذه المعركة ستطول ولن تحسم قريباً، فالظهير الاجتماعي للجماعة الإرهابية متغلغل داخل بنية المجتمع العربي وداخل كافة المؤسسات لذلك يجب مواجهته والقضاء عليه، اللهم بلغت اللهم فاشهد.

الفشل الذريع للإسلام الأطلسي


الجمعة 10 أيلول 2021

مقالات

Visual search query image

موفق محادين

ما من تجربة أصابها الفشل الذريع كلما اقتربت من فكرة الدولة والاقتصاد والحداثة والمجتمع المدني، مثل تجربة الإسلام الأطلسي، والأدق التوظيف السياسي لهذا الإسلام.

اعتقد البعض أن الإسلام الأطلسي، البريطاني- الأميركي، في طريقه للسيطرة على الوطن العربي، محمولاً بقرارات أميركية وبـ”حنفيات” مالية وإعلامية من الغاز المسال، حيث يتحول هذا الإسلام إلى حصان طروادة بحقبة جديدة من الاحتلال العثماني. 

وبنى البعض أوهامه على أحلام مريضة بسقوط سوريا واستمرار الحدث العابر في تاريخ مصر ثم عبر تونس والمغرب وقبلهما السودان والعشرية السوداء في الجزائر. 

تأسيس هذا النمط من الإسلام السياسي لم يكن بعيداً منذ لحظته الأولى عن أصابع الاستخبارات البريطانية ثم الأميركية.

بيد أن هذه الأوهام سرعان ما تبخرت وراحت أحجار الدومينو الإسلاموية الأطلسية تتداعى الواحد تلو الآخر: سوريا، ثم مصر، ثم السودان، فتونس، وأخيراً السقوط المدوّي لهذا التيار في الانتخابات البرلمانية والبلدية المغربية. وقريباً من الوطن العربي؛ تتجه مؤشرات الانتخابات البلدية في تركيا وسقوط حزب إردوغان في المدن الكبرى إلى أن تركيا العثمانية قاب قوسين أو أدنى من غروبها وغروب مشروع اليهودي الأميركي برنارد لويس الذي نظّر مبكراً للانبعاث العثماني في تركيا. 

والأدعى إلى السخرية هنا أن تبدو طالبان التي تجسد ثلاثية المفكر المغربي، الجابري، القبيلة- العقيدة- الغنيمة كرمق أخير لإسلام أطلسي أنفقت عليه مئات المليارات. 

ولنا أن نقول، ما من تجربة أصابها الفشل الذريع كلما اقتربت من فكرة الدولة والاقتصاد والحداثة والمجتمع المدني، مثل تجربة الإسلام الأطلسي، والأدق التوظيف السياسي لهذا الإسلام. 

والأخطر هنا هو أن تأسيس هذا النمط من الإسلام السياسي لم يكن بعيداً منذ لحظته الأولى، حتى اليوم، عن أصابع الاستخبارات البريطانية ثم الأميركية، بل إن أول من دافع عن الدولة العثمانية في بداية انحطاطها ومنع سقوطها على أيدي الجيوش المصرية في القرن التاسع عشر، الثنائي اليهودي الذي كان يتحكم في بريطانيا: رئيس الوزراء دزرائيلي، ورجل المال روتشيلد. 

وقد تم توظيف هذا النمط من هذا الإسلام بحسب كل مرحلة، فمن الوهابية النجدية والقطرية وعلاقتها بقلم الاستخبارات البريطانية كما يعترف بيركهارت، إلى توظيف هذا الإسلام ضد حركات التحرر الوطني العربية وغير العربية، إلى استراتيجية تطويق روسيا السوفياتية ثم البوتينية والصين كحزام أخضر إسلاموي تحت سيطرة مطابخ الاستخبارات الأطلسية وأقلامها. 

ومن الوثائق والمراجع حول ذلك: 

–  مذكرات بيركهارت.

–  مارك كورتيس، التاريخ السري لتحالف بريطانيا مع الأصوليين. 

–  ستيفن هات، لعبة بعمر الإمبراطورية. 

–  روبرت درايفوس، لعبة الشيطان. 

–  مذكرات جيمس وولي، مدير الاستخبارات الأميركية الأسبق. 

–  ثروت الخرباوي، سر المعبد. 

–  ايان جونسون، مسجد في ميونخ

–  شاريل بينارد، الإسلام الديموقراطي. 

–  نوح فيلدمان، تدهور الدولة الإسلامية ونهوضها. 

–  بيرنارد لويس، لغة السياسة في الإسلام. 

–  عبد العظيم حماد، الوحي الأميركي. 

–  لوي شتراوس، أعلام الفلسفة السياسية. 

أما في التطبيق، فمن ذلك: 

1- في تونس والمغرب، فضلاً عن الفشل الاقتصادي الاجتماعي، فإن الأخطر هو التغطية على التطبيع مع العدو الصهيوني؛ ففي عهد الحكومة الإسلامية في المغرب، تم التوقيع على العديد من الاتفاقات مع العدو الصهيوني، وفي تونس رفض نواب حركة النهضة التصويت على تجريم التطبيع. 

2- في مصر، فضلاً عن محاولة الإسلاميين المذكورين وضع اليد على مصر وخصخصة ما تبقى من مؤسسات الدولة لنهبها بـ”تراب المصاري”، كما حدث في السودان، واصل حكم مرسي السابق سياسات التطبيع مع العدو وتبادل معه البرقيات بمناسبات مختلفة، وقمعت شرطته أكبر تظاهرة حاولت اقتحام سفارة العدو في القاهرة. 

3- في السودان، وبعد الانقلاب العسكري الدموي للإخوان (تصفية عشرات الضباط)، دخل الإسلام السياسي أسوأ أيامه، من كل النواحي الاقتصادية والاجتماعية والسياسية، وصار من أكثر الدول فساداً ومديونية، رغم خيرات السودان الكثيرة، وذلك فضلاً عن الصراعات الداخلية بين الأجنحة الإسلامية نفسها (الترابي- البشير) وأخيراً المجموعة الحالية التي دشّنت عهدها بالتطبيع مع العدو الصهيوني. 

ولعل الوجه الأخطر في تجربة السودان الإسلاموية تمزق الدولة نفسها بين ولايات انفصالية، مثل دارفور، والموافقة على سلخ الجنوب كمحمية إسرائيلية. 

4- في سوريا والعراق، وإضافة إلى استراتيجية تدمير الدول باسم مواجهة الأنظمة، قدم الإسلامويون للعدو الصهيوني والامبريالية واليهودية العالمية أخطر ذريعة لاتهام العرب والمسلمين بالتخلف والإرهاب الدموي المسلح، وإعادة إنتاج المعزوفة الاستشراقية العنصرية الصهيونية (إعادة الاستعمار لـ تمدين المتوحشين). 

5- ويشار كذلك إلى دور الميليشيات الإسلاموية في دعم عميل الاستخبارات الأميركية في إندونيسيا، سوهارتو، الذي يصنّف من أكثر الرؤساء فساداً ودموية في العالم، والذي نظّم مع الميليشيات الإجرامية المذكورة مذابح تقشعر لها الأبدان بحق الأرياف والطبقة العاملة والمثقفين، راح ضحيتها مليون شخص، كثالثة كبريات المذابح في القرن العشرين، بعد المذبحة التركية ضد الأرمن، والمذابح الأميركية النووية ضد المدن اليابانية. 

6- أما تركيا التي يسوّقها الإسلاميون كنموذج للتنمية، فهي ليست دولة إسلامية بل توظف الإسلام خارجها وفي المحيط العربي والآسيوي لغايات طورانية وأجندة أطلسية. فإضافة إلى وجود أكبر سفارة للعدو الصهيوني فيها، ومستوى واسع من التنسيق العسكري والأمني معه، ووجود كبرى القواعد العسكرية الأميركية مثل إنجرليك، وعضويتها في حلف الأطلسي، الذراع العسكرية الأمنية للإمبريالية العالمية، فإن اقتصادها اقتصاد رأسمالي في كل تفاصيله وليس اقتصاداً إسلامياً، ويقوم على ما يعرف بالتقسيم العالمي للبلدان المتوسطة التطور التي تحل بعد الدول الصناعية الكبرى في سياق استيعاب خطوط الإنتاج والصناعات التي تتخلى عنها البلدان الكبرى تحت تأثير الثورة المتواصلة للتكنولوجيا، مثلها في ذلك مثل البرازيل والمكسيك والهند وجنوب أفريقيا والنمور الآسيوية. 

وليس بعيداً عن ذلك، “الموديل” الاجتماعي لهذه الدول، وعلى رأسها تركيا، وهو “موديل” غير إسلامي إطلاقاً، بالنظر إلى ترخيص البغاء والمشروبات الكحولية، بل إن تركيا تعد مع كولومبيا وآذربيجان وجنوب أفريقيا من بلدان المافيا العالمية، وكذلك من أكبر مستوردي الويسكي في العالم، ومن أكبر مستهلكي المخدرات وطرقها (ممراً ومقراً). 

7- ويشار هنا إلى أن البيئة الاقتصادية عموماً لرجال الأعمال المسلمين ليست بعيدة عن بيئة (يوسف ندا) خصم جمال عبد الناصر والمتورّط في محاولة اغتياله وصاحب الاستثمارات الكبيرة في جزر غسل العملة والتهرب من الضرائب، مثل جزر المارشال، العذراء البريطانية، ومناطق مثل بنما، وفي وسع المهتمين أكثر العودة إلى كتاب ستيفن هات (لعبة بعمر الإمبراطورية) حول بنك BCCI وعلاقته بغاسلي العملة الإسلاميين، وكتاب كورتيس السابق الذكر، وخاصة حول بنك الائتمان وعلاقته بغسل العملة، وكذلك العودة إلى فيلم “التسلل” حول بنك الاعتماد ودور إسكوبار وناشطين إسلاميين. 

Lebanon to Import Gas from Egypt and Electricity from Jordan via Syria

ARABI SOURI 

Lebanon ministerial visit to Damascus to seek approval for transmit of gas and electricity via Syria

Lebanon will be importing its needs of gas and electric power from Egypt and Jordan respectively via Syria after a Lebanese top delegate obtained Syria’s approval during a visit to Damascus by a top ministerial delegation, a first of its kind in more than 10 years.

The Lebanese delegation was headed by Zeina Akar, acting minister of defense and minister of foreign affairs, and included Minister of Finance Ghazi Wazni and Energy Raymond Ghajar, and Director General of Public Security Major General Abbas Ibrahim.

Both Lebanon and Syria suffer massive shortages in fuel and electricity due to US and EU sanctions on Syria dubbed the Caesar Act, the US instructions to its satellite states not to export gas and gasoline to both countries, and the US occupation of Syria’s main oil and gas fields in northeastern Syria.

Syrian Government Rations Distribution of Fuel Amid NATO Blockade

Prior to the US-led war of terror and war of attrition against Syria that started in March 2011, Syria was self-sufficient in its petroleum and energy needs and was exporting excesses to Lebanon and other countries providing 24 hours full supply of electricity to the last remote village in Syria and in Lebanon. Now, the people in both countries barely get a couple of hours of electricity per day due to the aforementioned reasons.

Lebanon, spearheaded by a number of corrupt officials working against the interests of their own country, has effectively contributed to the US-led war of terror against Syria to find itself years later a victim of its own evil deeds which harmed millions of Syrians by terrorists smuggled from and through Lebanon into Syria along with massive quantities of weapons and munition.

Syria will be benefiting from the transit deal, if it goes through after addressing the technical issues, financially from transit tariffs or by taking a share from imports to satisfy the country’s needs until the Biden forces occupying Syria’s oil and gas fields finish their task in ‘democratizing’ those fields and go home on the other side of the planet.

This top Lebanese ministerial visit to Syria and asking Syria’s approval to allow the transit of these imports of gas from Egypt and electricity from Jordan was at the orders of the US ambassador to Lebanon who instructed the Lebanese President MicMichel Aoun to import the country’s needs of gas and electricity in a cheap and futile attempt to circumvent the solution provided by Sayyed Hasan Nasr Allah, the chief of Hezb Allah, who started importing fuel from Iran challenging the US, EU, and Gulfies embargo on his country. The US ambassador who tried to show her country as caring for the Lebanese people during times of crisis has instead exposed her country’s direct responsibility for the economic woes in Lebanon.

Biden Stealing Syrian Gas Causes Severe Shortage in Electricity Supplies

https://syrianews.cc/biden-stealing-syrian-gas-causes-severe-shortage-in-electricity-supplies/embed/#?secret=bm31uSFNz3

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

Related Videos

Baghdad summit | Mideastream

Iraq hosted a regional summit on Saturday supposedly aimed at easing tensions in the Middle East while emphasizing the Arab country’s new role as a mediator. Heads of state attending included Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, King Abdullah II of Jordan, Qatari Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani and French President Emmanuel Macron.

Israeli Media: US Withdrawal from Afghanistan a Sign of Weakness

AUGUST 15, 2021

Source: Israeli Media

By Al Mayadeen

Yossi Kuperwasser, an Israeli intelligence and security expert, points out that the fast fall of the Afghan government is proof of US obstacles in comprehending the Islamic world.

Taliban fighters ride in an Afghan National Directorate of Security car in Kandahar.
Taliban fighters ride in an Afghan National Directorate of Security car in Kandahar.

A researcher at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs and a Brigadier-General in the Israeli reserve army, Yossi Kuperwasser, said that the rapid collapse of the Afghan government and the US-funded army against Taliban (amounting to 300,000 soldiers with advanced equipment!), is a reason to make us concerned.

He complained that US strategy in executing liberalist policies without taking into consideration the cultural and political frameworks showed was a miscalculation from the start. It’s worth noting that this is just another example of the difficulties the West, particularly US intelligence, faces in dealing with the Islamic world.

On a global scale, Kuperwasser believes that the US withdrawal from Afghanistan will be seen as a display of weakness. The departure will be seen as a sign of US weakness which stems from a refusal to sacrifice human lives or pay up in the ongoing fight against radical Islam.

Finally, the Israeli researcher stated that this action will boost radical Islamist morale like Iran, al-Qaeda, and ISIS; it will push them to fight the US and its allies, including “Israel.”

The US withdrawal from the Middle East will affect Iraq and Syria

Nir Dvori, a military analyst for Israeli television channel 12, stated that the Taliban’s takeover of Afghanistan will affect “Israel” and that it is an event that the whole Middle East is watching.

All US allies, according to Dovri, are watching this event and wondering when the US will turn its back on them. 

He went on to add that the US withdrawing from the Middle East is part of the ongoing strategy that has been in place for some time, and that this strategy has now reached its peak. According to him, it may affect Iraq, the US in Syria, and, of course, Iran.

Furthermore, he stated that what is happening today is ceaseless terrorism, that the situation is worsening, that Iraq and Syria are unstable, and that all of this would harm “Israel.”

“We must be very aware that this won’t happen in our region”

Amos Gilad, a researcher and head of the Institute for Policy and Strategy remarked, regarding the US withdrawal and Taliban control over Afghanistan, that strengthening connections with Arab regimes that stand up to these “dark forces” is essential.

He also stressed the importance of relations with Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and the Gulf states, adding that these relationships are significant achievements – at least in terms of intelligence cooperation. He suggested that “Israel” must continue to expand its relationships, despite widespread criticism, as the alternative would be “disastrous.”

Gilad went on to add that “US intelligence made a lot of errors along the decision-making process.” It should be noted that any beginner analyst may forecast that Afghanistan would fall into the hands of the Taliban, but that such a rapid fall was not taken into consideration by the US government.

“We must be very aware that this won’t happen in our region,” Gilad warned.

In the same context, on Sunday, an Afghan presidency source said President Ashraf Ghani agreed to resign in light of the deteriorating situation in the country; he had left Kabul for Tajikistan.

After Egypt, will Erdogan lose Tunisia and then Libya?

ARABI SOURI 

Turkish madman president Erdogan leader of Muslim Brotherhood Turkey Tunisia Egypt Sudan Qatar Syria Lebanon Libya

Erdogan will not easily accept a second loss after the failure of his plan in Egypt, which may push him to maneuver and tactics in Tunisia.

Visual search query image

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

With the difference between the “Brotherhood” of Egypt and the “Ennahda” of Tunisia, Ankara did not delay in responding to the positions of Tunisian President Kais Saied, and considered it “a coup against democracy and the will of the Tunisian people,” forgetting that these people elected Saied by 73% compared to 12% for the Ennahda candidate in the October 2019 elections.

With the noticeable decline in the tone of the attack, and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s attempts to calm down with President Saied through the mediation of Qatari Emir Tamim Al Thani, who called the Tunisian President (a day later the Saudi Foreign Minister traveled to Tunisia), everyone knows that Erdogan does not, and will not easily accept a loss again after losing Egypt.

Which may push him to maneuver and tactics (with statements by Ghannouchi, who admitted his party’s mistakes, and his willingness to dialogue with President Saied) after the failure of his plan in Egypt, ideologically, politically, and historically, when Sisi overthrew the “Brotherhood” Mohamed Morsi (in Egypt) on July 3, 2013, and then the military overthrew his ally Omar al-Bashir (in Sudan) in April 2019.

This explains the signs and messages sent by President Erdogan, eight years after the coup, for reconciliation with Sisi, who stipulated for this to stop all kinds of support for the “Brotherhood” and to stop interfering in the affairs of Arab countries, and this means first of all Libya, the neighboring country of both Egypt and Tunisia.

Everyone remembers the reactions of the Tunisian opposition to the secret visit paid by Rashid Ghannouchi to Istanbul on January 10, 2020, and his meeting with President Erdogan (a day before Fayez Al-Sarraj’s visit to Istanbul) without informing the Tunisian Parliament and President of the Republic Kais Saied of his visit in advance. The visit was the beginning of the dispute between Saied and Ghannouchi, who took positions in support of Erdogan’s policies in Libya, in exchange for a different position from President Saied, who is known for his nationalist positions.

The Tunisian opposition parties and forces at the time accused Ghannouchi and the leaders of “Ennahda” of obtaining financial support from Ankara and accused it of leaking information related to national security to foreign countries, and it meant Turkey and Qatar, the two countries that embrace all political Islam movements, support and finance them, civilly and militarily, especially after what It has been called the “Arab Spring”, which makes Tunisia’s developments more important to President Erdogan and his Qatari ally, Prince Tamim, and they coordinate together against Saudi Arabia and the UAE, and with them Egypt.

It seems clear that Egypt is very happy with what President Saied has done, this, of course, if it was not in advance in the picture of preparations to get rid of Ennahda and the effects of its rule over Tunisia over the past ten years, even if through weak alliances with other parties that Ennahda exploited to achieve its secret and public goals, including the travel of thousands of Tunisian youths to Turkey and from there to Syria to fight in the ranks of terrorist factions, including “ISIS” and “Al-Nusra” and the like. This is the case of thousands of citizens of other Arab countries, especially Saudi Arabia, when it was in the same trench with other Arab countries and Turkey to fight against the Syrian state, which is still a target for all regional moves, including Tunisia’s developments and their possible results.

The Gulf regimes rushed to provide billions of dollars in aid to President Abdel-Fattah Al-Sisi after his overthrow of the “Brotherhood” to prevent him from rapprochement with Damascus, especially since Riyadh, Manama, and Abu Dhabi declared the “Brotherhood” a terrorist organization, without this announcement preventing them from continuing coordination and cooperation with Doha. And Ankara to support the armed Brotherhood factions in Syria until June 2017, when these capitals, along with Cairo, severed diplomatic relations with Doha. The response came quickly from President Erdogan, who sent his army to Qatar to protect it from its Gulf sisters, and its tales are no less exciting than the tales of “One Thousand and One Nights.” Despite the Qatari reconciliation with Cairo, and Prince Tamim’s efforts to mediate between Sisi and Erdogan, the dispute between Doha and Abu Dhabi continues, and until Riyadh resolves its final position on this dispute, i.e. personal competition, and before that it was between the “young men” Mohammed bin Salman and Tamim Al Thani and they are all orbiting in the American orbit.

Although it is still too early to talk about the possible results of what President Kais Saied, who is backed by the army and security forces, did and will do, everyone knows that limiting the role of “Ennahda” and removing it from power will be reflected in one way or another on the potential developments in Libya, through the continuation of reconciliation efforts, with or without it. The armed factions, moderate and extremist, are all under the Turkish umbrella, and are closely monitoring the situation in Tunisia because repeating Egypt’s experience there will put these factions in the jaws of the Egyptian-Tunisian alliance, and it will be supported by European countries, the most important of which are France and Greece, and later from other countries that do not hide its annoyance with President Erdogan’s statements and actions of a religious and historical nationalist, ie Ottoman, character.

In this context, everyone knows that the practical successes that President Kais Saied and his political and military team will achieve in the way of quickly addressing Tunisia’s health, economic, financial and social crises which will determine the course of the next stage, and its repercussions on all regional and international accounts.

As was the case after Al-Sisi’s coup in 2013, most Western capitals, led by Washington, made phone calls to President Saied, and assured him, in quite similar terms, “the need to respect the constitution and constitutional institutions, the rule of law, to remain calm, and to avoid any resort to violence, in order to preserve the stability of the country,” without it occurring in the minds of these capitals to direct any criticism of the Gulf regimes, whose countries lack even constitutions, and where democracy has no place of expression, politically, socially and morally. Nor did the aforementioned capitals take any practical positions against President Erdogan, who took advantage of the failed coup on July 15, 2016, to get rid of all his enemies and opponents, and established an “authoritarian regime”, and this quote is of President Biden, before he became president at the end of 2019, also these aforementioned capitals did not make any move when Erdogan, in April 2017, changed the constitution and took control of all state agencies, facilities, and institutions, saying that he “derived his powers from the constitution,” which President Kais Saied said, with significant differences in content, performance, goals, and results.

In the end, the judgment remains for the Tunisian people, in all their categories, because it is they who will decide the fate of their country which seems that it was and still is an arena for hidden and open conflicts, as is the case in Libya, and to a lesser extent in Algeria and Sudan, and it is close to the arenas in which ISIS, Al-Qaeda, Boko Haram, and similar groups are active in Mali, Chad, Niger, Nigeria, Somalia. and Burkina Faso, for which the imperialist and colonial countries are drawing up a number of plans.

Ankara, in turn, established wide and varied relations with these countries after it opened its embassies in 45 African countries, President Erdogan visited a large number of them, in an attempt to compete with the traditional French, Italian, and other traditional European colonial roles, and he says, “His country did not colonize any of these countries.”

All this comes with accusations by the Turkish opposition to President Erdogan of “pursuing expansionist policies, militarily, politically, economically and intelligence,” not only in Arab and African geography but even in the Balkans, the Caucasus and Central Asia, “and where the Ottomans set foot,” as President Erdogan himself said. The past ten years have proven that he is serious about this issue, otherwise, the situation in Tunisia, and before that Egypt, would not be among his interests, and because defeat there would mean a retreat in other locations, foremost of which is Libya, and then Syria, from which it was the beginning, and with its loss, Erdogan loses Turkey.

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


بعد مصر.. هل يخسر إردوغان تونس ثم ليبيا؟

Visual search query image

لمصدر: الميادين نت

حسني محلي ا

إردوغان لن يتقبّل بسهولة خسارة ثانية بعد فشل مخططه في مصر وهو ما قد يدفعه إلى المناورة والتكتيك في تونس.

مع الفارق بين “إخوان” مصر و”نهضة” تونس، لم تتأخر أنقرة في الردّ على مواقف الرئيس التونسي قيس سعيّد، واعتبرتها “انقلاباً على الديمقراطية وإرادة الشعب التونسي”، ناسية أن هذا الشعب انتخب سعيد بنسبة 73٪ في مقابل 12٪ لمرشح “النهضة” في انتخابات تشرين الأول/أكتوبر 2019. 

الحد من دور “حركة النهضة” وإبعادَها عن السلطة سينعكسان بصورة أو بأخرى على التطورات المحتملة في ليبيا

ومع التراجع الملحوظ في لهجة الهجوم، ومحاولات الرئيس التركي رجب طيب إردوغان التهدئة مع الرئيس سعيد عبر وساطة الأمير القطري تميم آل ثاني، الذي اتّصل بالرئيس التونسي (بعدها بيوم سافر وزير الخارجية السعودي إلى تونس)، فالجميع يعرف أن إردوغان لا، ولن يتقبّل بسهولة خسارة ثانية بعد خسارة مصر. 

وهو ما قد يدفعه إلى المناورة والتكتيك (مع تصريحات الغنوشي الذي اعترف بارتكاب حزبه الأخطاء، واستعداده للحوار مع الرئيس سعيد) بعد فشل مخططه في مصر، عقائدياً وسياسياً وتاريخياً، عندما أطاح السيسي “الإخوَنجيَّ” محمد مرسي في 3 تموز/يوليو 2013، ثم أطاح العسكر حليفَه عمر البشير في نيسان/أبريل 2019. 

ويفسّر ذلك الإشارات والرسائل التي بعثها الرئيس إردوغان بعد ثماني سنوات من الانقلاب، من أجل المصالحة مع السيسي، الذي اشترط من أجل ذلك وقف كل أنواع الدعم لـ”الإخوان”، والكفّ عن التدخل في شؤون الدول العربية، والمقصود بذلك أولاً ليبيا، البلد الجار لكل من مصر وتونس. 

فالجميع يتذكر ردود فعل المعارضة التونسية على الزيارة السرية التي قام بها راشد الغنوشي لإسطنبول في 10 كانون الثاني/يناير 2020، ولقائه الرئيس إردوغان (قبل يوم من زيارة فايز السراج لإسطنبول) ومن دون أن يبلغ إلى البرلمان التونسي ورئيس الجمهورية قيس سعيد بزيارتَه مسبّقاً. وكانت الزيارة بداية الخلاف بين سعيد والغنوشي الذي اتَّخذ مواقف مؤيدة لسياسات إردوغان في ليبيا في مقابل موقف مغاير من الرئيس سعيد المعروف بمواقفه القومية. 

واتهمت أحزاب المعارضة التونسية وقواها آنذاك الغنوشي وقيادات “النهضة” بالحصول على دعم مالي من أنقرة، كما اتهمتها بتسريب معلومات تخصّ الأمن الوطني إلى دول أجنبية، والمقصود بها تركيا وقطر، البلدين اللذين يحتضنان كل حركات الإسلام السياسي ويدعمانها ويموّلانها، مدنياً وعسكرياً، وخصوصاً بعد ما سُمّي “الربيع العربي”، وهو ما يجعل تطورات تونس أكثرَ أهمية بالنسبة إلى الرئيس إردوغان وحليفه القطري الأمير تميم، وينسّقان معاً ضد السعودية والإمارات ومعهما مصر. 

ويبدو واضحاً أن مصر سعيدة جداً بما قام به الرئيس سعيد، هذا بالطبع إن لم تكن مسبقاً في صورة التحضيرات للتخلص من “النهضة” و آثار حكمها لتونس طوال السنوات العشر الماضية، ولو عبر التحالفات الضعيفة مع أحزاب أخرى استغلتها “النهضة” لتحقيق أهدافها السرية والعلنية، بما في ذلك سفر الآلاف من الشبان التونسيين إلى تركيا ومنها إلى سوريا للقتال في صفوف الفصائل الإرهابية، ومنها “داعش” و”النصرة” وأمثالهما. وهو حال الآلاف من مواطني الدول العربية الأخرى، وفي مقدمتها السعودية، عندما كانت في خندق واحد مع سائر الدول العربية وتركيا للقتال ضد الدولة السورية، التي ما زالت هدفاً لكل التحركات الإقليمية، بما فيها تطورات تونس ونتائجها المحتملة. 

لقد استعجلت أنظمة الخليج تقديم مليارات الدولارات من المساعدات إلى الرئيس عبدالفتاح السيسي بعد إطاحته “الإخوان” لمنعه من التقارب مع دمشق، وخصوصاً أن الرياض والمنامة وأبو ظبي أعلنت “الإخوان” تنظيماً إرهابياً، ومن دون أن يمنعها هذا الإعلان من الاستمرار في التنسيق والتعاون مع الدوحة وأنقرة لدعم الفصائل الإخوانية المسلحة في سوريا حتى حزيران/يونيو 2017 عندما قطعت هذه العواصم، ومعها القاهرة، علاقاتها الدبلوماسية بالدوحة. وجاء الرد سريعاً من الرئيس إردوغان، الذي أرسل جيشه إلى قطر لحمايتها من شقيقاتها الخليجية، وحكاياتها ليست أقل إثارة من حكايات “ألف ليلة وليلة”. فعلى الرغم من المصالحة القطرية مع القاهرة، ومساعي الأمير تميم للوساطة بين السيسي وإردوغان، فإن الخلاف بين الدوحة وأبو ظبي ما زال مستمراً، وإلى أن تحسم الرياض موقفها النهائي حيال هذا الخلاف، أي المنافسة الشخصية، وكانت قبلها بين “الشابين” محمد بن سلمان وتميم آل ثاني، وهم جميعاً يدورون في الفلك الأميركي.

ومع أن الوقت ما زال مبكّراً للحديث عن النتائج المحتمَلة لما قام وسيقوم به الرئيس قيس سعيد، المدعوم من الجيش والقوى الأمنية، فالجميع يعرف أن الحد من دور “النهضة” وإبعادَها عن السلطة سينعكسان بصورة أو بأخرى على التطورات المحتملة في ليبيا، عبر استمرار مساعي المصالحة فيها، أو من دون ذلك. فالفصائل المسلحة، المعتدلة منها والمتطرفة، هي جميعاً تحت المظلة التركية، وتراقب الوضع عن كثب في تونس، لأن تكرار تجربة مصر هناك سيضع هذه الفصائل بين فكَّي التحالف المصري – التونسي، وسيكون مدعوماً من دول أوروبية، أهمها فرنسا واليونان، ولاحقاً من دول أخرى لا تُخفي انزعاجها من مقولات الرئيس إردوغان وتصرفاته ذات الطابعَين الديني والقومي التاريخي، أي العثماني.

وفي السياق، يعرف الجميع أن ما سيحقّقه الرئيس قيس سعيد وفريقه السياسي والعسكري من نجاحات عملية في طريق المعالجة السريعة لأزمات تونس الصحية والاقتصادية والمالية والاجتماعية، هو الذي سيحدّد مسار المرحلة المقبلة، وانعكاساتها على مجمل الحسابات الإقليمية والدولية.

فكما كان الوضع عليه بعد انقلاب السيسي عام 2013، أجرت أغلبية العواصم الغربية، وفي مقدمتها واشنطن، اتصالات هاتفية بالرئيس سعيد، وأكدت له، في عبارات متشابهة تماماً، “ضرورة احترام الدستور والمؤسسات الدستورية، وسيادة القانون، والتحلي بالهدوء، وتجنّب أيّ لجوء إلى العنف، حفاظاً على استقرار البلاد”، من دون أن يخطر في بال هذه العواصم أن توجّه أيّ انتقاد إلى أنظمة الخليج، التي تفتقر دولها حتى إلى الدساتير، وليس للديمقراطية فيها أي مكان من الإعراب، سياسياً واجتماعياً وأخلاقياً. كما لم تتخذ العواصم المذكورة أي مواقف عملية ضد الرئيس إردوغان، الذي استغل الانقلاب الفاشل في 15 تموز/يوليو 2016 فتخلص من جميع أعدائه ومعارضيه، وأقام “نظاماً استبدادياً”، والقول للرئيس بايدن، قبل أن يصبح رئيساً نهاية عام 2019. كما لم تحرّك العواصم المذكورة ساكناً عندما قام إردوغان، في نيسان/أبريل 2017، بتغيير الدستور، وسيطر على جميع أجهزة الدولة ومرافقها ومؤسساتها، قائلا إنه “استمدّ صلاحياته من الدستور”، وهو ما قاله الرئيس قيس سعيد، مع فوارق كبيرة في المضمون والأداء والأهداف والنتائج.

يبقى الحكم في النهاية للشعب التونسي، في كل فئاته، لأنه هو الذي سيقرر مصير بلاده. ويبدو أنها كانت وما زالت ساحة للصراعات الخفية والمكشوفة، كما هي الحال في ليبيا، وبنِسَب أقل في الجزائر والسودان، وهي قريبة من الساحات التي تنشط فيها “داعش” و”القاعدة” و”بوكو حرام”، ومجموعات مماثلة في مالي وتشاد والنيجر ونيجيريا والصومال وبوركينا فاسو، التي تضع من أجلها الدول الإمبريالية والاستعمارية عدداً من الخطط. 

أقامت أنقرة بدورها علاقات واسعة ومتنوعة بهذه الدول بعد أن افتتحت سفاراتها في 45 دولة أفريقية، وزار الرئيس إردوغان عدداً كبيراً منها، في محاولة منه لمنافسة الأدوار الفرنسية والإيطالية والأوروبية الاستعمارية التقليدية، وهو يقول “إن بلاده لم تستعمر أياً من هذه الدول”.

يأتي كل ذلك مع اتهامات المعارضة التركية للرئيس إردوغان بـ”انتهاج سياسات توسُّعية، عسكرياً وسياسياً واقتصادياً واستخبارياً”، ليس فقط في الجغرافيا العربية والأفريقية، بل حتى في البلقان والقوقاز وآسيا الوسطى، “وحيث وطئت أقدام العثمانيين”، والقول للرئيس إردوغان نفسه. وأثبت السنوات العشر الماضية أنه جادّ في هذا الموضوع، وإلاّ لَما كان الوضع في تونس، وقبلها مصر، ضمن اهتماماته، ولأن الهزيمة هناك ستعني التراجع في مواقع أخرى، وفي مقدمتها ليبيا، ثم سوريا، التي كانت منها البداية، وبخسارتها يخسر إردوغان تركيا. 

فيديوات متعلقة

مقالات متعلقة

سدّ النهضة: من تهديد إلى فرصة؟

Visual search query image
*باحث وكاتب اقتصادي سياسي والأمين العام السابق للمؤتمر القومي العربي
 زياد حافظ 

الملاحظة الأولى هي أنّ ما وصلت اليه الأمور هو نتيجة تراكم الإهمال المصريّ خلال العقود التي تلت رحيل القائد الخالد الذكر جمال عبد الناصر. فمصر خلال الخمسينيات والستينيات كانت منصة حركات التحرّر الأفريقية تجسيداً وتطبيقاً للرؤية الجيوستراتيجية التي بلورها القائد جمال عبد الناصر في “فلسفة الثورة” حيث الأمن القومي المصري يكمن في دوائر ثلاث: الدائرة العربية والدائرة الإسلامية والدائرة الأفريقية. كم كانت رؤيته الجيوستراتيجية ثاقبة آنذاك وكما هي صحيحة اليوم وفي الغد! لكن بعد رحيله أتيحت الفرصة للكيان الصهيوني التوغل في أفريقيا وبناء علاقات لم تكن ممكنة في وجوده وسياسته. الانكفاء المصري يعود إلى خروج مصر من دائرة الصراع العربي الصهيوني ما سمح للحضور الصهيوني بقوة في القارة الأفريقية.

ونلاحظ أيضاً أن بعد رحيل جمال عبد الناصر تحوّلت منصة حركات التحرّر من القاهرة إلى الجزائر مع الرئيس هواري بومدين. لكن رحيل الرئيس الجزائري سنة 1978 في ظروف تثير الريبة والشكوك تلت زيارة السادات للقدس في تشرين 1977 ومن بعد ذلك دخول الجزائر في العشرية الدامية فقدت الحركة التحررية الأفريقية منصة مؤثرة في نموها. حاولت ليبيا في ما بعد حمل العباءة الأفريقية، لكن مع خروج مصر من دائرة الصراع العربي الصهيوني غاب الدور العربي في أفريقيا وحيّدت محاولات القذافي للإمساك بالورقة الأفريقية. هذه الملاحظات تأتي للتأكيد على أنّ التوغّل الصهيوني في القارة الأفريقية لما كان لولا الغياب القسري العربي بشكل عام والمصري بشكل خاص. فمن الواضح أنّ أعداء الأمة العربية في الغرب وفي الكيان وفي بعض الدوائر العربية يمنعون أيّ دور عربيّ في أفريقيا يساهم في تنمية القارة من جهة ويمكّن استقلال وسيادة الدول المكوّنة من جهة أخرى وأخيراً لحماية الأمن القومي العربي وفقاً لرؤية جمال عبد الناصر. كما أنّ تقسيم السودان وبناء سدّ النهضة استهدف السودان في مرحلة أولى تمهيداً لاستهداف مصر. فالمطامع الصهيونية في مياه النيل معروفة والحذر من قبل بعض الدول العربية من مصر تقاطعت لفرض الضغوط على مصر وترويضها.

على صعيد خاص، كنا شاهدين على نتائج الغياب العربي في أفريقيا وذلك من خلال عملنا في التسعينيات في إحدى مؤسسات البنك الدولي حيث كنا نغطّي أفريقيا الغربية. لاحظنا امتعاض نخب أفريقيّة من التوغل الصهيوني فيما بينما كانت تذكر لنا فضائل مصر في دعم حركات التحرّر في البلدان المعنية. ما نريد أن نقوله إنّ الرأس المال المعنوي الذي كوّنته مصر كان محفوراً في ذاكرة الدول الأفريقية سواء في دعم حركة التحرر وفي ما بعد في دعم الاقتصاد والتعليم. هذا الرأس المال بدّدته سياسات اللامبالاة بعد كامب دافيد المدمّرة التي تحصد نتائجها مصر اليوم وكأن مستلزمات كامب دافيد قضت بالتخلّي عن الدور الأفريقي لمصر كما تخلّت عن دورها في الصراع العربي الصهيوني.

الملاحظة الثانية هي أن المواجهة الحقيقية في موضوع السد ليست مع الشعب الإثيوبي الشقيق ولا حتى مع حكومته. أحد المتكلّمين في الندوة الدكتور محمد حسب الرسول وهو نائب أمين عام المؤتمر القومي العربي أعطى إضاءات هامة حول المشتركات والروابط المصرية والسودانية مع الشعب الإثيوبي. فهناك حوالي 70 بالمئة من سكان اثيوبيا من المسلمين وأن الكنيسة الإثيوبية من أعرق الكنائس ولها ارتباطات مع الكنيسة المصرية، وحيث كادت اللغة العربية تكون لغة رسمية تجعلها مرشحة للانضمام إلى الدول العربية. ما نريد أن نقوله هو أن المواجهة ليست مع الإثيوبيين شعباً وحكومة بل مع رأس الأفعى الحقيقي وهو الكيان الصهيوني الذي ساهم على أكثر من صعيد في بناء ذلك السد. وإذا كان سد النهضة يشكّل تهديداً واضحاً للأمن القومي المصري والسوداني وبالتالي العربي فإن المواجهة هي مع العدو الصهيوني المحتلّ أولاً وأخيراً.

التخلّي عن الدور الريادي المصري في الشأن الأفريقي مبني على نظرية تمّ ترويجها أن 99 بالمئة من أوراق اللعبة تملكها الولايات المتحدة وأن البوّابة للولايات المتحدة هي الكيان الصهيوني المحتل. بغض النظر عن صحة ذلك التقدير آنذاك، أي في السبعينيات من القرن الماضي، فإن موازين القوّة الدولية والإقليمية الحالية والمرتقبة تدحض تلك النظرية وبالتالي الخيارات والسياسة المبنية عليها يجب أن تخضع لمراجعة. فمصر مهدّدة شرقاً وشمالاً من الكيان الصهيوني والخلايا الإرهابية المدعومة من الولايات المتحدة والكيان الصهيوني، وغرباً من أيضاً من جماعات التعصّب والغلو والتوحّش، واليوم من الجنوب عبر خطر التعطيش، وجميع هذه المخاطر مرتبطة بالكيان الصهيوني المحتلّ وداعمه الأساسي الولايات المتحدة. ألم يحن الأوان لمراجعة تلك السياسات لمواجهة التهديدات؟ بل نقول أكثر من ذلك ونعتبر أنه بإمكان تحويل التهديد إلى فرصة انطلاقة جديدة عبر قلب الطاولة على الكيان وجعل من سد النهضة منفعة مشتركة لكلّ من مصر والسودان وبطبيعة الحال إثيوبيا عبر تشبيك إقليمي بين دول وادي النيل والقرن الأفريقي لا مكان للكيان الصهيوني فيه.

الملاحظة الثالثة هي أنّ التشبيك الاقتصادي بين بلاد وادي النيل والقرن الأفريقي يتكامل مع التشبيك المرتقب بين بلاد الرافدين وبلاد الشام من جهة، ومع مشروع التشبيك في دول المغرب الكبير من جهة أخرى. والتكامل بين هذه المكوّنات الأربعة يساهم في وجود كتلة عربية وإقليمية تتكامل مع مشروع الطريق والحزام الواحد الصيني والمشروع الأوراسي الروسي. المستقبل هو في الشرق وليس في الغرب والأفول الغربي هو أفول استراتيجي لا يستطيع أحد إيقافه أو حتى إبطاءه. والمشروع العربي النهضوي الذي نناضل من أجله هو في صميم المواجهة مع الكيان الصهيوني حيث بوجود الكيان لا شيء غير التجزئة والضعف والتخلّف والانقراض. أما المواجهة فهي تأتي بالوحدة وبالوحدة تأتي القوّة وبالقوة تأتي النهضة.

Tunisia Stands Against the Muslim Brotherhood

By Steven Sahiounie

Global Research, July 30, 2021

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is 20210725_2_49334130_67331243-1536x1004-400x261.jpg

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version). 

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

The only democracy to emerge from the Arab Spring in 2011 is going through a process of strategic correction. Tunisian President Kais Saied announced late Sunday he was firing the prime minster, Hichem Mechichi, dismissing the parliament, and assuming executive authority under Article 80 of the constitution.  The speaker of Parliament, Rachid Ghannouchi, declared the actions amounted to a coup.

Saied announced that he was assuming the public prosecutor’s powers and stripping lawmakers of immunity, while assuring Tunisian rights groups on Monday that he remains committed to civil liberties and the democratic process, and that the changes will be temporary.

The crisis stems partly from an economy which never improved, and the COVID pandemic which has hit Tunisia hard.  The main cause of the crisis is a political power struggle between Saied, Mechichi and Ghannouchi which has split the country into two camps: those who want Tunisia to maintain a secular based government, and those who follow Radical Islam as a political ideology.

On Sunday, demonstrators across Tunisia called for the dissolution of Parliament, which gave Saied the green-light to take action based on the will of the people.

Videos posted to social media showed crowds cheering, honking, ululating and waving Tunisian flags after the president’s actions Sunday night.

By Monday afternoon, Saied had fired the defense minister and acting justice minister. On Wednesday, Saied revealed shocking allegations against Ghannouchi’s party, Ennahda, that they accepted money from foreign governments, which amounts to a crime against democracy in Tunisia. Additionally, Saied has identified 480 persons who have defrauded the government of billions of Tunisian dinars.  He has promised to hold all accountable.

Mr. Saied was elected in 2019, and many Tunisians hoped he could turn things around, seeing him as a fresh political outsider. However, since taking the helm he has been locked in a fight with Mechichi and Ghannouchi.

What is Ennahda platform and leadership?

According to western mainstream media, such as the New York Times and Washington Post, Ennahda is a moderate Islamist party.

Likewise, the same media calls the group which holds Idlib, Syria as the ‘moderate rebels’, when in fact they are the Al Qaeda affiliate in Syria.

Anger toward Ennahda has mounted over the past year as the pandemic hit the country and its economy and a movement against police brutality gained steam. Angry citizen activists called for the dissolution of parliament, which is controlled by Ennahda’s highly unpopular leader Rachid Ghannouchi, who has been its president for 38 years.

Ghannouchi wrote, “The Islamic government is one in which: 1- supreme legislative authority is for the shari’a, which is the revealed law of Islam, which transcends all laws. Al-Ghannouchi, R. (1998). “Participation in Non-Islamic Government”.

Critics, lawyers and politicians have accused Ennahda of forming a secret organization that has infiltrated security forces and the judiciary. Ennahda was relaunched during the Tunisian revolution in 2011.  The party was accused of being behind the 2013 assassinations of Chokri Belaid and Mohamed Brahmi, two progressive political leaders of the leftist Popular Front electoral alliance.

Ennahda was founded in 1981 by the Islamic cleric, Rached Ghannouchi.  The party is part of the global network of the Muslim Brotherhood. The party’s decline in popularity continued into mid-2016, and has now hit rock-bottom with the present corrective action undertaken by Saied.

The role of the Muslim Brotherhood in the 2011 Arab Spring

Ghannouchi has remained a steadfast follower and member of the Muslim Brotherhood.  Ghannouchi attened a global Muslim Brotherhood conference in Istanbul in April 2016, and has continued to serve Islamist and Brotherhood-affiliated organizations in Europe, as a high-ranking member. Most notable is his involvement with a Dublin-based center ECFR, and the designated terrorist organization, the International Union of Muslim Scholars.

Most worrying is Ghannouchi’s ties to Islamist and violent extremist groups, both in Tunisia and around the world.  Leaders of the al-Qaeda-affiliated Ansar al-Sharia group in Tunisia (AST) attended meetings at Ghannouchi’s home in 2011 at which he allegedly advised them to encourage AST youth to infiltrate Tunisia’s national army and National Guard.

In a leaked video, Ghannouchi also claimed that his Ennahda party had previously met with AST leader Seifallah Ben Hassine. In 2014, Ben Hassine was sanction-designated by the United States and United Nations for his links to al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) and his implication in various terror attacks, including the assassination of Tunisian security forces and political figures, as well as the September 2012 AST attack on the US Embassy in Tunis. Ben Hassine died in a US airstrike in Libya in mid-June 2015.

Many compare Egypt’s histories with Tunisia.  In 2011 Egypt had a popular revolution which saw Mubarak step-down.  The US engineered a vote which put a Muslim Brotherhood leader, Morsi, in power. However, the Egyptian people took to the streets once again, in a corrective change, and the current leader stepped into the leadership role.  Many western analysts bemoaned that the fledgling Egyptian ‘democracy’ was squandered with the ouster of Morsi. The Egyptian people made a political correction: they decided the Muslim Brotherhood regime of Morsi was more brutal than that of the previous authoritarian leader, Mubarak.

Western governments such as the US and UK, and to a lesser extent Germany, are very close to the Muslim Brotherhood in their own land, and wanted to install, at any cost, like regimes across the Middle East.  Places such as: Libya, Syria, Egypt and Tunisia.  The west recognizes that the Muslim Brotherhood works well in coordination with Israel, and does not present a threat to Israel, or the occupation of Palestine.

What country’s currently struggle against Muslim Brotherhood?

Al Jazeera, the Qatar state news channel, said on Monday the security services had shut-down their bureau in Tunis.  Qatar, and their media, are politically aligned with Ennahda.   Qatar and Turkey are both run by Muslim Brotherhood regimes.

Currently in Libya, there is a civil war raging against those who support the Muslim Brotherhood, and those who wish to maintain a secular form of government.  It is not surprising that the US is on the side of the Muslim Brotherhood there, along with Qatar and Turkey, while Russia supports the secular side.

In Syria, the US-NATO war against the Syrian people which began in 2011 and has raged for 10 years, pitted the US backed Muslim Brotherhood terrorists against the only secular government in the Middle East.  The US and the Muslim Brotherhood lost the war, but not before destroying the country, and killing hundreds of thousands of unarmed civilians.

What will Biden’s position be on the Tunisian crisis?

The current Tunisian crisis presents a major test for the Biden administration.  If Saied is seen as usurping power, and against democratic principles, we may see Biden square off in support of the Muslim Brotherhood, and Ennahda.  Already we have a warning from the State Department, “Tunisia must not squander its democratic gains,” Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken, said in a phone call Monday with Mr. Saied, while encouraging him “to adhere to the principles of democracy and human rights.”

“Tunisia is the last ember of the Arab Spring, now snuffed out,” Said Ferjani, an Ennahda member of Parliament, said in an interview, calling on President Biden to demonstrate his commitment to democracy.

While the US and her allies might be on the Ennahda side, the opposing side is formidable.  Egypt and Saudi Arabia, the two biggest powerhouses of the Middle East, join the UAE and Syria in welcoming the Tunisian president’s strategic correction, and the public denouncement of the Muslim Brotherhood.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

This article was originally published on Mideast Discourse.

Steven Sahiounie is an award-winning journalist.

من كابول إلى بغداد مفاوضات الجلاء تحت النار

 محمد صادق الحسيني

أصوات عالية بدأت تسمع في واشنطن مفادها بأن بايدن رئيس ضعيف وأنّ إيران تستغلّ ضعفه لإخراجنا من كل من أفغانستان والعراق، كما جاء على لسان السيناتور الجمهوري في الكونغرس الأميركي ليندسي غراهام والذي صرّح بالحرف الواحد:

“الإيرانيون يبذلون جهداً لإخراجنا من العراق وأفغانستان ليسيطروا على هذين البلدين، كما يسعون لصناعة قنبلة نوويّة ويبحثون عن تدمير إسرائيل”.

 أضاف: “إنني لم أقلق يوماً كما أقلق الآن من إمكانية نشوب حرب بين إيران وإسرائيل”.

من جهة أخرى، فإنّ كلّ التقارير الميدانية الواردة من أفغانستان والعراق وإنْ بشكل متفاوت ومختلف، تفيد بأنّ واشنطن يتقلص نفوذها هناك وهي في طريقها للرحيل صاغرة أمام تحوّلات البلدين المتسارعة نحو التحرّر من الهيمنة الأميركية.

وهذا قانون من قوانين السنن الكونية بعد خسارة الأميركيين كل معاركهم ضدّ هذين البلدين كما ضدّ شعوب المنطقة.

في المقابل، فإنّ هذا لا يعني سقوط أميركا وهزيمتها الكاملة، والأهمّ إقرارها هي بهذه الحقيقة.

بل إنّ ثمة ما يشي بذهاب واشنطن الى خطط جديدة تقيها دفع الأثمان الباهظة نتيجة هذا الانسحاب بالإكراه ولو مؤقتاً…!

ففي أفغانستان ظلت واشنطن لفترة طويلة تحشد حوالي هذا البلد الإسلامي (جمهوريّات الاتحاد السوفياتيّ السابقة) بمجموعات من المسلّحين الإرهابيين من داعش والقاعدة في مناورة مكشوفة لإشعال حروب اثنية تجعل الاستقرار في هذا البلد الذي يمثل الكوريدور الحيوي شمال – جنوب، صعب المنال ليس فقط للأفغان، بل وأيضاً لإعدائها وتحويل هذا الطريق لكلّ من روسيا وإيران بمثابة حزام ناري يلفّ كلّ الحيّز الحيوي الجيوبوليتيكي لهذين البلدين الصاعدين دولياً الى جانب الصين.

هذا كما لجأت واشنطن مؤخراً الى حارس مرمى الناتو الجنوبي ومخلبها المتقدّم أردوغان لتسليم أمن مطار كابول أولاً ومن ثم المدينة أيضاً (حسب ما جاء في محادثات بايدن وأردوغان في بروكسل أثناء قمة الناتو) ربما في مقدّمة لإحداث قاعدة عسكريّة هناك لهم كما هي الحالة في قطر والصومال (علماً انّ هناك الآن نحو 500 جندي تركي في أفغانستان)، على افتراض ان تتحوّل هذه المعادلة الأمنية الجديدة بمثابة التفاف جديد للناتو حول رقبة كلّ من إيران شرقاً وموسكو جنوباً والصين غرباً…!

في ما يخص العراق تحاول واشنطن أن ترمي بالعراق الجديد الذي تؤكده كلّ حقائق الجغرافيا والتاريخ بمثابة الجار الطبيعي الحليف لإيران، بمثابة حلقة “إبراهيمية” في تحالف “شامي” مزيّف مع كلّ من الأردن ومصر، لترميه في غياهب اللاهوية واللا قرار، غصباً عن أهله وطبيعته الناصعة في الانتماء العربي والإسلامي المقاوم.

ولما كانت تظنّ كما في أفغانستان أنها في طريقها لفقدان نفوذها المباشر وعليها الرحيل في أقرب الآجال فهي تحاول من خلال تعطيل او الإخلال في الانتخابات المقبلة بهدف الإبقاء على بقايا من بقاياها في نسيج السلطة!

إنّ واشنطن تعرف تماماً أنّ موازين القوى العالمية والإقليمية الجديدة تتحدث على أرض الواقع بأنّ وجودها في بحارنا وأراضينا لم يعد مقبولاً، وانّ عليها الرحيل، وهي تحزم حقائبها في إطار دفع هذا الثمن، لكن دفع هذا الثمن بالأقساط وتحت النار، نار الفتن الإثنية والمذهبيّة، وإشغال قوى محور المقاومة وأصدقائنا من الروس والصينيين في معارك جانبية عديدة لمنعهم من ملء الفراغ…!

وقد أتت معركة سيف القدس الأخيرة بمثابة إضافة نوعية مهمة ليس فقط في رفع قدرات محور المقاومة في موازين القوى العالميّة والإقليمية، بل وفي تخفيض وزن العدو “الإسرائيلي” لدى واشنطن أيضاً وليس فقط بالمقارنة مع قوّتنا الصاعدة، ما يجعل واشنطن أكثر حماساً في الرحيل السريع، وأكثر إحجاماً عن الدخول في حروب جديدة منعاً لاستنزاف قواتها في حروب لم تعد مضمونة كما كانت في القرن الماضي…!

ما يجري في لبنان وسورية من ضغوط عالية جداً في مجال التضييق على أهلنا في الغذاء والدواء والمحروقات، ومحاولة وقف عجلة إعادة البناء او التسريع في الانهيارات الاقتصادية، إنما يتمّ بشكل ممنهج ومنظم من قبل عملاء وأدوات أميركا من كارتيلات وحيتان مال وبقايا أمراء حروب، تلعب في الوقت الضائع لصالح سيدها، الى حين تنتهي معركة التفاوض بين إيران وأميركا وروسيا والصين مع أميركا، تحت النار، لا أكثر ولا أقلّ…!

عملية العدوان الغادر على مقار الحشد الشعبي على الحدود العراقية السورية، بأمر من بايدن شخصياً، جاءت لخدمة السياسة الآنفة الذكر وفي رسالة ردع يائسة لمنع العراق من الالتحاق بمعركة “الحرب الإقليميّة من أجل القدس” القادمة لا محالة.

وفي هذا السياق لا فرق إن تمّ التوافق بين طهران وواشنطن في فيينا أو ذهبت الأمور الى نهاياتها المسدودة وهو الأرجح، وكذلك لا فرق أن تعزّز توافق بوتين وبايدن للحفاظ على التوازن الاستراتيجي الذي تمّ في جنيف مؤخراً، أو عاد الطرفان الى تسعير الحرب الباردة بينهما من جديد، فالأمر سيان.

ففي كلتا الحالتين فإنّ المرحلة الانتقالية هذه ستظلّ سائدة الى حين، وأنّ نهاياتها لا بدّ منتهية بنصر وانفراج كبيرين لمحور المقاومة المنتصر.

والمعسكر المهزوم ليس أمامه سوى عدّ أيامه المتبقية في المنطقة بانتظار ترتيبات المغادرة والانسحاب من دون شك أو ترديد.

إنهم راحلون لأنهم طارئون ونحن الباقون لأننا أصحاب الأرض والحق، والسنن الكونية الواضحة والجازمة تعمل كما يجب، وهي في هذه الحالة لصالحنا وهي التي تقطع بأنّ المنهزم عليه دفع الثمن، وانّ المنتصر هو من يحدّد شروط الهزيمة والإذعان، وليس العكس.

بعدنا طيبين قولوا الله…

فيديوات متعلقة

مقالات متعلقة

Islamic Jihad to ’Act Accordingly’ If ’Israel’ Continues Gaza Strikes

19/06/2021

Islamic Jihad to ’Act Accordingly’ If ’Israel’ Continues Gaza Strikes

By Staff, Agencies

Palestinian resistance groups warned Egyptian mediators that their patience is “running out” after the Zionist occupation regime Thursday evening launched an attack against Hamas positions in retaliation for the launching of incendiary balloons, a senior Islamic Jihad official said on Saturday.

The exchanges of hostilities come as the UN and Egypt try to consolidate a fragile ceasefire the ‘Israeli’ side begged for on May 21 following nearly two weeks of intense retaliation from resistance movements in Gaza to the Zionist onslaught.

“The Islamic Jihad will react accordingly to any future ‘Israeli’ military attack,” the official warned, vowing that the Palestinian resistance group “will not allow the ‘Israeli’ government to impose conditions on the resistance or isolate Gaza.”

The official further indicated that “the joint room of the resistance groups in Gaza have formulated a final and unified position to face the ‘Israeli’ action in the coming days.”

Continued ‘Israeli’ strikes “will certainly lead” to a resumption of military confrontation across the border in the near future,’ the Islamic Jihad official added.

On Nasser’s Fight for Arabic Independence and a Free Palestine

Visual search query image

Cynthia Chung

June 15, 2021

Nasser became the catalyst for an Arab Revolution for independence, a revolution that remains yet to be finished, Cynthia Chung writes.

In the 1950s the so-called enemy of the West was not only Moscow but the Third World’s emerging nationalists, from Gamal Abdel Nasser in Egypt to Mohammed Mossadegh in Iran. The United States and Britain staged a coup d’état against Mossadegh, and used the Muslim Brotherhood, a terrorist movement and the grandfather organization of the militant Islamic right, in an attempt to remove Nasser, the leader of the Arab nationalists.

In the 1960s, left wing nationalism and Arab socialism spread from Egypt to Algeria to Syria, Iraq and Palestine. This emergence presented a threat to the old imperialist game of Great Britain, to which the United States was a recent recruit of, and thus they decided to forge a working alliance with Saudi Arabia intent on using Wahhabi fundamentalism as their foreign policy arm in the Middle East, along with the Muslim Brotherhood.

This paper will go through the carving up of the Middle East under Sykes-Picot, the British creation of Saudi Arabia and Israel and the British occupation of Palestine, the origin of the Muslim Brotherhood and Nasser’s fight for Arab independence. In a follow-up paper, I will discuss the role of the City of London in facilitating the bankroll of the first Islamic fundamentalist state Saudi Arabia, along with the Muslim Brotherhood and its terrorist apparatus.

An “Arab Awakening” Made in Britain

The renunciation will not be easy. Jewish hopes have been raised to such a pitch that the non-fulfilment of the Zionist dream of a Jewish state in Palestine will cause intense disillusionment and bitterness. The manifold proofs of public spirit and of capacity to endure hardships and face danger in the building up of the national home are there to testify to the devotion with which a large section of the Jewish people cherish the Zionist ideal. And it would be an act of further cruelty to the Jews to disappoint those hopes if there existed some way of satisfying them, that did not involve cruelty to another people. But the logic of facts is inexorable. It shows that no room can be made in Palestine for a second nation except by dislodging or exterminating the nation in possession.”

– the concluding paragraph of George Antonius’ “The Arab Awakening” (1938)

Much of what is responsible for the war and havoc in the Middle East today has the British orchestrated so-called “Arab Awakening” to thank, led by characters such as E.G. Browne, St. John Philby, T.E. Lawrence of Arabia, and Gertrude Bell. Although its origins go as far back as the 19th century, it was only until the early 20th century, that the British were able to reap significant results from its long harvest.

The Arab Revolt of 1916-1918, had been, to the detriment of the Arab people, a British led rebellion. The British claimed that their sole interest in the affair was the dismantling of the Ottoman Empire and had given their word that these Arab territories would be freed and allowed independence if they agreed to rebel, in large part led and directed by the British.

It is a rather predictable feature of the British to lie and double cross and thus it should be of no surprise to anyone that their intentions were quite the opposite of what they had promised and thanks to the Sykes-Picot Russian leak, were revealed in their entire shameful glory.

If the Sultan of Turkey were to disappear, then the Caliphate by common consent of Islam would fall to the family of the prophet, Hussein ibn Ali the Sharif of Mecca, a candidate which was approved by the British Cairo office as suitable for British strings. T.E. Lawrence, who worked at the Cairo bureau is quoted as saying:

If the Sultan of Turkey were to disappear, then the Caliphate by common consent of Islam would fall to the family of the prophet, the present representative of which is Hussein, the Sharif of Mecca….If properly handled the Arab States would remain in a state of political mosaic, a tissue of jealous principalities incapable of cohesion…” (1)

Once the Arab Revolt was “won” against the Ottoman Empire, instead of the promised Arab independence, the Middle East was carved up into zones of influence under British and French colonial rule. Puppet monarchies were created in regions that were considered not under direct colonial subjugation in order to continue the illusion that Arabs remained in charge of sacred regions such as Mecca and Medina.

In central Arabia, Hussein, Sharif of Mecca, the puppet leader of the Arab Revolt laid claim to the title Caliph in 1924, which his rival Wahhabite Abdul-Aziz ibn Saud rejected and declared war, defeating the Hashemites. Hussein abdicated and ibn Saud, the favourite of the British India Office, was proclaimed King of Hejaz and Najd in 1926, which led to the founding of the kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

The Al Saud warriors of Wahhabism were a formidable strike force that the British believed would help London gain control of the western shores of the Persian Gulf.

Hussein ibn Ali’s son Faisal (under the heavy tutelage of T.E. Lawrence) was bestowed as King of Iraq and Hussein’s other son, Abdullah I was established as the Emir of Transjordan until a negotiated legal separation of Transjordan from Britain’s Palestine mandate occurred in 1946, whereupon he was crowned King of Jordan. (For more on this history refer to my paper.)

While the British were promising Arab independence they simultaneously were promising a homeland in Palestine to the Jews. The Balfour Declaration of November 2nd, 1917 states:

His majesty’s government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object…

Palestine had been seized by the British during the so-called Arab Revolt on December 11th, 1917 when General Allenby marched into Jerusalem through the Jaffa Gate and declared martial law over the city. Palestine has remained occupied ever since.

Britain would receive the mandate over Palestine from the League of Nations in July 1922.

Throughout the 1920s and 1930s violent confrontations between Jews and Arabs took place in Palestine costing hundreds of lives. In 1936 a major Arab revolt occurred over 7 months, until diplomatic efforts involving other Arab countries led to a ceasefire. In 1937, a British Royal Commission of Inquiry headed by William Peel concluded that Palestine had two distinct societies with irreconcilable political demands, thus making it necessary to partition the land.

The Arab Higher Committee refused Peel’s “prescription” and the revolt broke out again. This time, Britain responded with a devastatingly heavy hand. Roughly 5,000 Arabs were killed by the British armed forces and police.

Following the riots, the British mandate government dissolved the Arab Higher Committee and declared it an illegal body.

In response to the revolt, the British government issued the White Paper of 1939, which stated that Palestine should be a bi-national state, inhabited by both Arabs and Jews. Due to the international unpopularity of the mandate including within Britain itself, it was organised such that the United Nations would take responsibility for the British initiative and adopted the resolution to partition Palestine on November 29th, 1947. Britain would announce its termination of its Mandate for Palestine on May 15th, 1948 after the State of Israel declared its independence on May 14th, 1948.

The Rise of the Muslim Brotherhood

In 1869, a man named Jamal al-Din al-Afghani, the intellectual founder of the Salafiyya movement, went to India where British led colonial authorities welcomed him with honors and graciously escorted him aboard a government owned vessel on an all expenses paid voyage to the Suez. (2)

In Cairo he was adopted by the Egyptian prime minister Riad Pasha, a notorious enemy of the emerging nationalist movement in Egypt. Pasha persuaded Afghani to stay in Egypt and allowed him to take up residence in Cairo’s 900 year old Al Azhar mosque considered the center of Islamic learning worldwide, where he received lodging and a monthly government stipend (paid for by the British). (3)

In 1879, Cairo nationalists in the Egyptian Army, led by the famous Egyptian hero Ahmed ‘Urabi, organised an uprising against the British role in Egypt. Afghani was expelled from Egypt by the Egyptian nationalists that same year.

Ahmed ‘Urabi served as prime minister of Egypt briefly, from July 1882 to Sept 1882, however, his movement for Egyptian independence was eventually crushed by the British with the shelling of Alexandria in July 1882 followed by an invasion which resulted in a direct British occupation of Egypt that would last until 1956. It would be Gamal Abdel Nasser who would finally end British colonial rule of Egypt during the Suez Crisis, whereupon the Suez canal was nationalised and the British military bases expelled.

While Egypt was fighting its nationalist fight from 1879-1882, Afghani and his chief disciple Muhammad Abduh travelled together first to Paris and then to Britain, it was in Britain that they would make a proposal for a pan-Islamic alliance among Egypt, Turkey, Persia and Afghanistan against Czarist Russia (4).

In addition, the crisis in Sudan, was in the middle of a tribal religious rebellion against the British led by a man named Mohammed Ahmad a Sudanese sheikh who proclaimed himself the Mahdi, or savior, and was leading a puritanical Islamic revolt. (5)

What Afghani was proposing to the British was that they provide aid and resources to support his formation of a militant Islam sect that would favour Britain’s interest in the Middle East, in other words, Afghani wished to fight Islam with Islam, having stated in one of his works “We do not cut the head of religion except by sword of religion.”(6)

Although it is said that the British refused this offer, this is not likely considering the support Afghani would receive in creating the intellectual foundation for a pan-Islamic movement with British patronage and the support of England’s leading orientalist E.G. Browne, the godfather of twentieth century Orientalism and teacher of St John Philby and T.E. Lawrence.

E.G. Browne would make sure the work of Afghani would continue long beyond his death by immortalising him in his 1910 “The Persian Revolution,” considered an authoritative history of the time.

In 1888, Abduh, the chief disciple of Afghani, would return to Egypt in triumph with the full support of the representatives of her Majesty’s imperial force and took the first of several positions in Cairo, openly casting his lot with Lord Cromer, who was the symbol of British imperialism in Egypt.

Abduh would found, with the hold of London’s Egyptian proconsul Evelyn Baring (aka Lord Cromer) who was the scion of the enormously powerful banking clan (Barings Bank) under the city of London, the Salafiyya movement. (7)

Abduh had attached himself to the British rulers of Egypt and created the cornerstone of the Muslim Brotherhood which dominated the militant Islamic right throughout the twentieth century.

In 1899, Abduh reached the pinnacle of his power and influence, and was named mufti of Egypt.

***

In 1902, Riyadh fell to Ibn Saud and it was during this period that Ibn Saud established the fearsome Ikhwan (translated as “brotherhood”). He collected fighters from Bedouin tribes firing them up with fanatical religious zeal and threw them into battle. By 1912 the Ikhwan numbered 11,000 and Ibn Saud had both central Arabia’s Nejd and Al-Ahsa in the east under his control.

From the 1920s onward, the new Saudi state merged its Wahhabi orthodoxy with the Salafiyya movement (which would be organised into the Muslim Brotherhood in 1928).

William Shakespear, a famed British agent, forged the first formal treaty between England and Saudi Arabia which was signed in 1915, which bound London and Arabia for years before Saudi Arabia became a country. “It formally recognized Ibn Saud as the independent ruler of the Nejd and its Dependencies under British protection. In return, Ibn Saud undertook to follow British advice.” (8)

Harry St. John Bridger Philby, a British operative schooled by E.G. Browne and father to the legendary triple agent Kim Philby, would succeed Shakespear as Great Britain’s liaison to Ibn Saud under the British India Office, the friendly rival of the Cairo Arab Bureau office which was sponsoring T.E. Lawrence of Arabia.

In Egypt 1928, Hassan al-Banna (a follower of Afghani and Abduh) founded the Muslim Brotherhood (Ikhwan al-Muslimeen), the organization that would change the course of history in the twentieth century Middle East.

Banna’s Muslim Brotherhood was established with a grant from England’s Suez Canal Company (9) and from that point on, British diplomats and intelligence service, along with the British puppet King Farouq would use the Muslim Brotherhood as a truncheon against Egypt’s nationalists and later against Egyptian president Gamal Abdel Nasser.

To get the Muslim Brotherhood off the ground, the Suez Canal Company helped Banna build the mosque in Ismailia that would serve as its headquarters and base of operation. (10) The fact that Banna created the organization in Ismailia is itself worthy of note. For England, the Suez Canal was the indispensable route to its prize possession, India and in 1928 the town Ismailia happened to house not only the company’s offices but a major British military base built during WWI. It was also, in the 1920s a center of pro-British sentiment in Egypt.

In the post-WWI world, England reigned supreme, the flag of the British empire was everywhere from the Mediterranean to India. A new generation of kings and potentates ruled over British dominated colonies, mandates, vassal states, and semi-independent fiefdoms in Egypt, Iraq, Transjordan, Arabia and Persia. To varying degrees those monarchies were beholden to London.

In the half century between 1875 and 1925 the building blocks of the militant Islamic right were cemented in place by the British Empire.

Nasser Leads the Fight for Arab Independence

In 1942, the Muslim Brotherhood would earn their well-deserved reputation for extremism and violence by establishing the “Secret Apparatus,” an intelligence service and secret terrorist unit. This clandestine unit functioned for over twelve years almost entirely unchecked, assassinating judges, police officers, government officials and engaging in goon squad attacks on labor unions and communists.

Throughout this period the Muslim Brotherhood worked for the most part in an alliance with King Farouq (and thus the British), using their clandestine forces on behalf of British interests. And throughout its entire existence it would receive political support and money from the Saudi royal family and the Wahhabi establishment (more on this in part 2 of this series).

The Secret Apparatus would be smashed into pieces by Nasser in 1954.

After WWII, the faltering Farouq regime lashed out against the left in an intense campaign of repression aimed at the communists. The Cold War was beginning. In 1946, prime minister Isma’il Sidqi of Egypt who was installed as head of the government with the support of Banna, openly funded the Muslim Brotherhood and provided training camps for its shock troops used in a sweeping anti-left campaign. Sidqi resigned in Dec 1946 after less than one year as PM due to massive unpopularity.

As King Farouq began to lose his grip on the Egyptian people, the Brotherhood distanced itself while maintaining shadowy ties to the army and to foreign intelligence agencies and always opposed to the left.

The Palestine War (1947-1949) resulted in the establishment of the State of Israel at the cost of 700,000 displaced Palestinian Arabs and the destruction of most of their urban areas.

The territory that was under British administration before the war was divided between the State of Israel (officially formed May 14th, 1948), which captured about 78% of it. In opposition to Israel, the Kingdom of Jordan captured and later annexed the West Bank, and Egypt captured the Gaza Strip, with the Arab League establishing the All-Palestine Government, which came to an end in June 1967 when the Gaza Strip, along with the West Bank, were captured by Israel in the Six-Day War.

The Egyptian people were furious over these developments, and the reign of British puppet King Farouq who had done nothing to prevent the dismantling of Palestine was on extremely shaky ground. In response to this, Farouq’s accord with the Muslim Brotherhood broke down, and in December 1948, the Egyptian government outlawed the Muslim Brotherhood. Weeks later a Brotherhood assassin murdered prime minister Mahmoud El Nokrashy.

Two months later, in Feb. 1949, Banna was assassinated in Cairo by the Egyptian secret police.

For Arab nationalists, Israel was a symbol of Arab weakness and semi-colonial subjugation, overseen by proxy kings in Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia.

On the night of July 23, 1952, the Free Officers, led by Muhammad Naguib and Gamal Abdel Nasser, staged a military coup that launched the Egyptian Revolution of 1952, overthrowing the British puppet monarch. The Free Officers, knowing that warrants had been issued for their arrest, launched the coup that night, storming the staff headquarters in Cairo.

Cairo was now, for the first time, under the control of the Arab people after over 70 years of British occupation.

The seizure of power by the Free Officers in Egypt came during an era when the entire Arab world from Morocco to Iraq was locked in the grip of imperialism. Morocco, Algeria, and Tunisia were French colonies; Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, the UAE, Oman and Yemen were British colonies. Iraq, Jordan and Saudi Arabia were kingdoms ruled by monarchies installed by London. And Egypt under King Farouq was the political and economic center of the Arab world.

A growing surge of Arab nationalism arose in response to the Free Officers’ actions in Egypt. The powerful Voice of the Arabs radio in Cairo was reporting to the entire Arab world that they had found their independence movement, and that Nasser was at its helm.

From 1956 to 1958 Iraq, Jordan and Lebanon underwent rebellions, Iraq’s king was toppled, and Syria united with Egypt in Nasser’s United Arab Republic, part of Nasser’s strategy to unify the Arab world.

In Algeria, moral and material support was given from Cairo towards the Algerian revolution that finally won them independence from French colonial rule in 1962.

That same year, Yemen underwent a Nasser-inspired revolt, triggering a proxy war pitting Saudi Arabia against Egypt, with Nasser stating in a 1962 speech, “Yemen’s fight is my fight. Yemen’s Revolution is our Revolution.”

Nasser’s leadership and the inspiration he stirred were so strong that even as late as 1969 the year before Nasser’s death, Libya’s king was overthrown and Sudan’s right-wing regime was eliminated by military leaders loyal to Nasser.

Nasser had managed to threaten the very heart of Anglo-America’s post-WWII strategy in the Middle East. Nasser understood, that if the vast oil fields in Saudi Arabia were under Arab control, the potential for an economic boom would be enormous for all Arab states, such that the old game of imperialism by Britain and France could no longer retain its chokehold on Arab independence.

Not only was Egypt a military rival to Saudi Arabia, not only did Cairo clash with Riyadh in a shooting war in Yemen, not only did Nasser inspire Arabs in Saudi Arabia with republican ideals but the Egyptian leader even won over some of Saudi Arabia’s royal family. This group was led by Prince Talal to form the ‘Free Princes’, which defected to Egypt demanding the establishment of a republic in Saudi Arabia!

What was really going on during the period of 1954 to 1970, under Nasser’s leadership, was a war between two competing visions for the future of the Middle East; an Arab world of independent but cooperative Arab republics utilising their natural resources to facilitate an economic boom in industrialisation vs a semi-feudal scattering of monarchies with their natural resources largely at the West’s disposal.

The real reason why the British and Anglo Americans wanted Nasser removed, was not because he was a communist or because he was susceptible to communist influence; it was because he refused to obey his would-be foreign controllers and was rather successful in this endeavour, bringing their shadowy actions uncomfortably close to the light and inspiring loyalty amongst Arabs outside of Egypt including those sitting on top of the oil.

What especially worried London and Washington was the idea that Nasser might succeed in his plan to unify Egypt and Saudi Arabia thus creating a major Arab power. Nasser believed that these oil wells were not only for the government of those territories to do with as they wished but belonged to all Arab people and thus should be used for the advancement of the Arab world. Afterall, most Arabs are aware that both the monarchies themselves and the artificial borders that demarcate their states, were designed by imperialists seeking to build fences around oil wells in the 1920s.

Nasser understood that if Cairo and Riyadh were to unite in a common cause for the uplifting of the Arab people, it would create a vastly important new Arab center of gravity with worldwide influence.

In 1954 Egypt and the United Kingdom had signed an agreement over the Suez Canal and British military basing rights. It was a short lived. By 1956 Great Britain, France and Israel concocted a plot against Egypt aimed at toppling Nasser and seizing control of the Suez Canal, a conspiracy that enlisted the Muslim Brotherhood.

In fact, the British went so far as to hold secret meetings with the Muslim Brotherhood in Geneva. According to author Stephen Dorrill, two British intelligence agents Col. Neil McLean and Julian Amery, helped MI6 organize a clandestine anti-Nasser opposition in the south of France and in Switzerland, (11) in his book he writes “They also went so far as to make contact in Geneva…with members of the Muslim Brotherhood, informing only MI6 of this demarche which they kept secret from the rest of the Suez Group [which was planning the military operation via its British bases by the Suez Canal]. Amery forwarded various names to [Selwyn] Lloyd, [the British foreign secretary].”

British prime minister Anthony Eden, Churchill’s handpicked successor, was violently anti-Nasser all along and considered a British coup d’état in Cairo as early as 1953. Other than such brash actions, the only political force that could mount a challenge to Nasser was the Muslim Brotherhood which had hundreds of thousands of followers.

Nasser’s long postponed showdown with the Muslim Brotherhood occurred in 1954, this was timed to add pressure during the rising frustration concerning the British-Egyptian negotiations over the transfer of the Suez Canal and its military bases to Egypt. The British, after over 70 years of direct occupation in Egypt, were not going to give up on one of their most prized jewels, their gateway to the Orient, so easily.

From 1954 on, Anthony Eden, the British prime minister was demanding Nasser’s head. According to Stephen Dorrill’s “MI6: Fifty Years of Special Operations”, Eden had ranted “What’s all this nonsense about isolating Nasser or ‘neutralising’ him, as you call it? I want him destroyed, can’t you understand? I want him murdered…And I don’t give a damn if there’s anarchy and chaos in Egypt.”

Nasser would not back down, and in the first few months of 1954 the Muslim Brotherhood and Nasser went to war, culminating in Nasser outlawing them as a terrorist group and a pawn of the British.

On Oct. 1954, a Muslim Brotherhood member Mahmoud Abdel-Latif attempted to assassinate Nasser while he was delivering a speech in Alexandria, which was live broadcasting to the Arab world by radio, to celebrate the British military withdrawal.

Panic broke out in the mass audience, but Nasser maintained his posture and raised his voice to appeal for calm, and with great emotion he exclaimed the following:

My countrymen, my blood spills for you and for Egypt. I will live for your sake and die for the sake of your freedom and honor. Let them kill me; it does not concern me so long as I have instilled pride, honor, and freedom in you.”

The crowd roared in approval and Arab audiences were electrified. The assassination attempt backfired, and quickly played back into Nasser’s hands. Upon returning to Cairo, he ordered one of the largest political crackdowns in the modern history of Egypt, with the arrests of thousands of dissenters, mostly members of the Brotherhood.

The decree banning the Muslim Brotherhood organization said “The revolution will never allow reactionary corruption to recur in the name of religion.” (12)

In 1967, there was a Six-Day War between Israel and the Arab states Egypt, Syria, Jordan and Iraq, which was started by Israel in a coordinated aerial attack on Egypt, eliminating roughly 90% of Egyptian air forces that were still on the ground, followed by an aerial attack on Jordan, Syria and Iraq. Israel then went on to conduct a ground attack with tanks and infantry, devastating whole Arab regions.

Despite the disastrous loss to Israel, the people of Egypt refused to accept Nasser’s resignation and took to the streets in a mass demonstration calling for Nasser’s return. Nasser accepted the call of the people and returned to his position as president where he remained as until his death in Sept 1970.

Five million people turned out on the streets of Egypt for Nasser’s funeral, and hundreds of millions more mourned his death throughout the world.

Although Nasser had devastatingly lost a battle, the Egyptian people along with their Arab compatriots understood that the fight for Arab independence was not lost. The dream of dignity and freedom, in forever opposition to the shackles of tyranny could not be buried now that it had been stirred to its very core. Nasser would be the catalyst for an Arab Revolution for independence, a revolution that remains yet to be finished.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is chung_1-175x230.jpg

Also by this author

Cynthia CHUNG

Cynthia Chung is a lecturer, writer and co-founder and editor of the Rising Tide Foundation (Montreal, Canada).

A Damned Murder Inc: Kennedy’s Battle Against the Leviathan

The U.S. Pivot to Asia: Cold War Lessons From Vietnam for TodayReturn of the Leviathan: The Fascist Roots of the CIA and the True Origin of the Cold WarBeyond Oil: How the UAE’s HOPE Mars Mission Is Breaking the Arab World Out of the Crisis of Scarcity

Newspeak in the 21st Century: How to Become a Model Citizen in the New Era of Domestic Warfare

%d bloggers like this: