Al-Masirah Yemeni news channel reveals footage of Ethiopian migrants murdered by Saudi border guards and cites survivors stating that it the massacres are carried out daily
Footage of Ethiopian migrants massacred by Saudi border guards.
The Yemeni Al-Masirah news channel on Saturday revealed footage it said was of a “mass grave containing dozens of African victims killed by Saudi border guards.”
The footage shows Saudi border guards filtering out dozens of Ethiopian migrants, believed to have been taken in the moments before they were killed.
قناة المسيرة اليمنية تنشر صوراً و #فيديو لمقبرة جماعية تضم عشرات الضحايا الأفارقة ممن قتلهم حرس الحدود السعودي، والناجون يقولون إن الحرس السعودي يستخدم الهاونات للقضاء على تجمعات المهاجرين.#السعودية#السودان#أفريقياpic.twitter.com/DmIQSk5pyZ
The channel quoted African survivors of the massacre saying that “Saudi soldiers deliberately electrocuted dozens of Ethiopian migrants in a room where they were gathered.”
African migrants placed in body bags after being murdered by Saudis on the Saudi-Yemen borders.
“Saudi border guards shoot directly, often using mortars, to eliminate migrants gatherings,” one survivor noted.
Ethiopian migrants confirmed to the channel that, “the Saudi border guards kill about 5 migrants at the border every day and injure many more.”
Elena Panina, Director of the RUSSTRAT Institute – Machine Translated and cleaned up from the Russian original.
MOSCOW, June 29, 2022, RUSSTRAT Institute.
BRICS expansion has been discussed for a long time. It is significant that the last summit on June 24 in the BRICS Plus format was attended by such countries as Algeria, Argentina, Cambodia, Egypt, Fiji, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Iran, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Senegal, Thailand and Uzbekistan.
At the same time, the fact that the first applications for membership were submitted by Argentina and Iran, which did not take part in the BRICS Plus meeting, does not seem accidental.
Initially, the BRICS group was created as an association of the largest developing economies in the world. However, in the modern world, it is political decisions that determine the nature of the development of economic ties. It is quite logical that the first countries with a pronounced geopolitical sovereignty and having their own geopolitical scores with the collective West are preparing to join the expanded BRICS.
Iran is already almost two and a half thousand years old, since the time of Cyrus the Great is a powerful historical power, and its geopolitical significance cannot be overestimated. The geography itself determines the potential of its influence on the countries of the Arab world up to the coast of the Mediterranean Sea and the Persian Gulf, in the Transcaucasus, Central Asia, as well as on the Afpak region (Afghanistan and Pakistan). Since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, Iran’s state ideology has been anti-Western. Tehran is engaged in an intense struggle with the US-British coalition for influence in Iraq, and is helping Syria in the fight against terrorism.
From an economic point of view, Iran’s potential is also great. The Iranian economy is in the world’s top 20 in terms of purchasing power parity, the country is third in the world after Saudi Arabia and Venezuela in terms of proven oil resources, and has 16 percent of the world’s proven gas reserves.
Argentina, since the time of General Juan Domingo Peron, has also clearly felt its geopolitical role, being one of the regional leaders in Latin America. This role is recognized all over the world. Argentina, while not one of the world’s largest economies, is nevertheless a full member of the G20. Having survived the failed war with Great Britain over the Falkland Islands (Malvinas), as well as the collapse of liberal reforms according to the IMF recipes, the country has an obvious request to find an independent path of development. Today, Argentina is in a difficult economic situation, it has a huge external debt. However, the potential of Argentina as one of the global food exporters has significantly increased in recent years.
For various reasons, both Iran and Argentina are extremely interested in BRICS projects to create new international settlement systems that are alternative to the global hegemony of the dollar. Iran, which is under sanctions, life itself has forced to go to “de-dollarization”, the country practically does not use the US currency. For Argentina, the transition to a hypothetical new monetary and financial zone would mean an escape from the stranglehold of the IMF, from the pressure of American creditors, which today have an extremely destructive impact on the national economy.
In any case, against the background of aggressive pressure from the United States and its allies on potential new BRICS members, the desire of Iran and Argentina to join the community requires a certain amount of foreign policy courage. There is reason to assume that the process of their joining the BRICS will be successful, since both countries do not cause rejection even in India, which until recently was the main opponent of expansion. We can confidently predict that in the near future the process of adding new members to the BRICS will continue due to the entry of a number of Asian and African countries.
But even now, the BRICS expansion at the expense of Iran and Argentina is the final departure of the community from the idea of Goldman Sachs analyst Jim O’Neill, who coined this abbreviation twenty years ago, who decided to designate such a term as “emerging economies” that are “catching up” with the developed West.
We can say that BRICS is confidently turning into a “collective Non-West”, from a community of emerging markets it is finally transformed into a community of world powers with a pronounced geopolitical sovereignty.
Saudi authorities are concealing rampant abuses and pitiful conditions at migrant detention centers while continuing to arrest thousands of African and Yemeni migrants, Middle East Eye can reveal.
Ethiopians tell MEE they are being beaten, extorted, and left in putrid, overcrowded rooms as thousands of people are rounded up and deported from across the kingdom
Cramped conditions in a migrant detention centre in Saudi Arabia (supplied)
Ethiopian migrants awaiting deportation said Saudi authorities have conducted mass searches of the centers, confiscating phones and any devices that could be used to relay images of their suffering to the outside world.
The sources said the crackdown was an attempt to prevent their conditions from being broadcast to the world during Ramadan, which would risk criticism and uproar in the Muslim world during the holy month.
Police have also ordered people set for deportation to sign non-disclosure agreements forbidding them from talking to journalists about their experiences.
“They came in here looking for phones because they don’t want the world to see images of our suffering here,” says Semir, an Ethiopian migrant currently held at a deportation center in Riyadh. “When they would find a phone, they would beat up the owner with batons.”
The number of Ethiopian detainees held at various migrant detention centers has swelled in recent months. In an attempt to ease the burden, Saudi authorities reached an agreement with Ethiopia in March to fly out at least 100,000 Ethiopians, many of whom were detained in waves of anti-migrant crackdowns last year.
Ethiopians held in the centers have told MEE that they are given little to eat and are held for months in putrid, overcrowded rooms.
“People are going mad here. There is little food and many of us haven’t been outdoors in almost nine months,” says Nebil, a detainee in Riyadh. “We used to get a piece of bread three times a day. Since Ramadan, we get it only once, at night.”
The Saudi foreign ministry has not responded to a request for comment.
In 2020, smartphones smuggled into two migrant detention centers captured graphic images depicting hundreds of emaciated African men, some appearing to be on the brink of death, in cramped quarters where sewage flowed and disease was rampant.
Rights groups confirmed that abuse and deaths were commonplace at these centers and in October 2020, the European Union parliament passed a resolution condemning Saudi Arabia for its mistreatment of migrants.
The uproar eventually led to tens of thousands of migrants being repatriated throughout 2021, many of whom are struggling to cope with enduring trauma.
But many remained behind in the facilities, with Ethiopia’s government preoccupied last year by the county’s civil war and rebel fighters threatening to attack the capital city.
Eventually, the outcry of social media users and relatives in Ethiopia is believed to have pushed Ethiopian officials to send a high-level delegation to Riyadh earlier this year, to begin negotiating the return of their citizens.
Since an agreement was signed in March, thousands of Ethiopians have returned to their homeland, with another 1,031 landing in the Ethiopian capital Addis Ababa on Wednesday.
However, mass arrests by Saudi authorities continue to target thousands more, with 15,000 migrants, almost all of them Ethiopians and Yemenis, detained in a single week in March alone.
As a result, detention centers aren’t emptying, and the abuse persists, according to detainees.
“This place is disease-ridden. Everyone grows sick because they leave us to live and eat on a filthy floor with the stench of urine everywhere,” one told MEE.
The statements by the migrants about the conditions at the detention centers appear to correspond with the assessment of staffers from the International Organization for Migration [IOM] and other UN agencies supporting relief efforts at returnee reception centers in Ethiopia.
“In addition to injuries and illnesses suffered due to the hazardous journey, the IOM has observed that communicable diseases, such as tuberculosis and skin conditions are prevalent among returnees,” says Yvonne Ndege, spokesperson for the agency’s East and Horn of Africa office.
“Prolonged periods in overcrowded and unsanitary facilities may well be a contributing factor to this issue.”
MEE spoke to nine inmates at the Riyadh deportation center and the infamous al-Shumaisi prison near Mecca. Detainees used mobile phones with no internet connection that survived the pre-Ramadan purge.
“We have been left here to rot,” said Ali, a migrant at al-Shumaisi center. “Since they put me here, I’ve seen diplomats from Chad, Ghana, and Somalia come to inquire about their citizens. Nobody from the Ethiopian embassy has visited even though Ethiopians are the majority here.”
Ali added that while beatings of migrants and poor sanitation have long been the norm, he revealed that in recent months, prison officials have begun extorting the families of detainees.
“Every week, the guards come here with what they call a ‘souq’ [market]. They bring clean water, biscuits, and other items from outside. We can only purchase these items by having our families transfer money to the personal accounts of guards and prison staff. But they charge us more than the price on the Saudi market, and they pocket a lot of the money transferred to them.”
Ethiopia’s ambassador to Saudi Arabia, Lencho Bati, appeared unwilling to address accusations of neglect by his office, nor claims that extortion and abuse by Saudi prison officials are ongoing in the centers.
“I am returning to Riyadh from Mecca. Let’s talk after Eid,” he told MEE. Bati is yet to respond to a request for comment sent after the Eid holiday.
Many of the detainees are among the tens of thousands who are estimated each year to trek along the extremely dangerous migrant corridor from East Africa, across the Red Sea, into Yemen, and up to Saudi Arabia. But others had spent up years living and working legally in the kingdom prior to being arrested.
“I spent seven years working for a company in Jeddah. I never needed assistance and provided for my loved ones,” said Omer, another migrant at al-Shumaisi.
“But my company laid me off as it went bankrupt because of the pandemic. Without an employer, I couldn’t renew my residency papers. I was arrested shortly after my papers expired.”
Semir added that this was the case with many of the new arrivals that had flooded the Riyadh facility he is currently held at. Nearly 10,000 of those detained in the March crackdown were singled out for residency permit issues.
“Imagine being a driver for a company one day, and then suddenly being forced to squat in a tiny, crowded room with no food and contagious skin rashes the next day. It’s tragic,” Semir said.
Three Ethiopians deported home described being told to sign non-disclosure agreements instructing them to avoid speaking about their experiences in detention. One said the officer warned that “legal action would be taken against violators even in Ethiopia”.
Others, meanwhile, weren’t actually migrants, but Saudi-born children of Ethiopian migrants who under Saudi law aren’t eligible for citizenship.
Aisha, 18, spent four months at al-Shumaisi before being put aboard a flight to her parents’ country. She recalled the night when the immigration police, known as “jawazat”, raided her family’s home in Mecca and arrested her alongside her brother and father.
Both Aisha and her brother were born in Saudi Arabia and have lived there all their lives.
“They came unannounced at night and broke down the door. They used foul language while addressing us and escorted us to a minibus they brought along with the raiding party,” she said while fighting back tears. “It was very humiliating.”
Many returnees to Ethiopia are suffering from mental illness, alongside recovering from the physical abuse they endured. Mental health workers at returnee centers are already under strain.
The IOM’s Yvonne Ndege said that in addition to the counselling and psychosocial support the IOM is providing, “many returnees also often require intensive and clinical psychiatric care when they arrive home”.
Ethiopia is not a country that is on many Americans’ radar. Yet, since 2020, a brutal civil war has raged, displacing an estimated 4 million people. As the conflict continues, hawks in Washington are beginning to circle, demanding the U.S. intervene militarily.
“Ethiopia’s civil war is a problem U.S. troops can help solve,” Admiral James Stavridis, former supreme allied commander of NATO, wrote in Bloomberg andThe Washington Post. “Sending peacekeepers to the pivotal nation of East Africa wouldn’t be popular domestically, but may be the only way to stop the conflict,” he added. Meanwhile, former Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs Jendayi Frazer argued that the West should establish a “no-fly zone” across the country – a nation of 115 million people and twice the size of France.
When it comes to Ethiopia – said head of USAID Samantha Power, one of the architects of the U.S. intervention in Libya – “every option is on the table,” using a phrase that has long been understood to be a threat of war. Secretary of State Antony Blinken also refused, when directly asked, to rule out sending troops into Ethiopia.
Joining MintCast host Mnar Adley today to discuss what is going on in Ethiopia is Eugene Puryear. Eugene is a founder of and host at BreakThrough News, for which he recently traveled to Ethiopia to report from the ground. In the 2008 and 2016 U.S. elections, he was the vice-presidential candidate for the Party for Socialism and Liberation. He is also author of the book “Shackled and Chained: Mass Incarceration in Capitalist America.”
Ethiopia’s war is a conflict between the Tigrayan People’s Liberation Front (TPLF), a group that held power across the country between 1991 and 2018, and the government of Abiy Ahmed in Addis Ababa. Yet corporate media have refrained from presenting the conflict as a struggle between rivaling factions, but rather have characterized it as the government “waging a reign of terror… [that] bears the hallmarks of genocide” (CNN) against a “a scrappy force of local Tigrayan recruits” (The New York Times). Ignoring credible accusations against the TPLF of using child soldiers and other war crimes, both the press and the United States appear to have chosen to back their longtime allies in this campaign.
Many Ethiopians are dead against any further American involvement, expressing alarm that the U.S. has already sent warships and thousands of troops to the region in anticipation of future events. Some have even likened the situation to the one in Libya in 2011, where the West hyped up fake news stories about atrocities and an impending genocide to unseat Colonel Muammar Gaddafi from power and bring about a decade of Jihadist rule.
Between 1991 and 2018, the United States had a loyal partner in Ethiopia. However, in recent years, the country has begun to try to develop deeper ties to its neighbor Eritrea and forge a more independent path. To this end, China has helped, and has quickly become Ethiopia’s major economic partner, much to the chagrin of Washington, where war drums are beginning to be beaten.
Ethiopians have taken to social media, popularizing the anti-intervention hashtag “#NoMore” to signal their opposition to Western involvement. Yet their voices, they claim, are being systematically silenced by big-tech giants, leaving critical voices harder to find. Could Ethiopia soon turn into another Libya? Join us to find out.
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.
USAID – with an annual budget of over $27 billion and operating in over 100 countries – is notoriously intertwined with covert operations run by the CIA, Finian Cunningham writes.
An ominous development underway in Ethiopia’s devastating civil war is the intervention by the United States under the pretext of humanitarian relief.
The U.S.’ international aid agency – USAID – announced last week it has deployed a Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART) in the northern Tigray region where millions of people are facing starvation.
A humanitarian crisis has been created in Ethiopia after the central government in Addis Ababa launched a military offensive against the Tigray region in November last year. Heavy fighting continues between Tigray militia and the Ethiopian National Defense Force. The Ethiopian government forces are being assisted by Eritrean troops which have invaded Tigray. There are reports of widespread violations against civilians.
U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken warned Ethiopia’s Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed in a phone call on February 27 to open up Tigray to humanitarian access and he expressed deep concern over possible war crimes. Washington then promptly deployed the USAID intervention apparently without authorization from the Ethiopian federal government.
The American move came despite a row during a closed meeting at the UN Security Council last week when it is understood that Russia and China objected to U.S. intervention plans in Ethiopia, which they said was over-riding legal processes and issues of national sovereignty.
USAID said its disaster response team is “assessing the situation in Tigray, identifying priority needs for the scaling up of relief efforts”. Given the dire humanitarian and security situation in Ethiopia that provision is logically paving the way for a major U.S. military intervention under the guise of the “right to protect” (R2P) presumption which has been unilaterally invoked by Washington in other conflicts.
President Joe Biden has picked Samantha Power as the new head of USAID. The former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations and a former national security advisor to President Barack Obama, Power is a stalwart proponent of R2P foreign interventions. Biden also wants to make Power a member of his national security council.
Secretary of State Antony Blinken is, like Power, another staunch advocate of “humanitarian interventions”. They were senior members of the Obama administration who formulated American military interventions in Libya and Syria. The “humanitarian” remit is rightly seen as a cynical moral cover for what would otherwise be condemned as American military aggression to achieve Washington’s own political objectives, such as regime change.
USAID – with an annual budget of over $27 billion and operating in over 100 countries – is notoriously intertwined with covert operations run by the CIA.
The damnable thing about Ethiopia’s current crisis is that arguably it was provoked by the United States from its geopolitical ambitions to control the Horn of Africa region and in particular to cut out China and Russia from this strategically important global hub.
Ethiopia’s Abiy Ahmed worked previously as a top military intelligence officer in the Ethiopian army before he became prime minister in early 2018. A long-time bilateral security partnership between the U.S. and Ethiopia made Abiy an ideal CIA asset. He was involved in developing Ethiopia’s telecom spying network in a replication of the National Security Agency in the U.S.. He was also educated at a private American university.
Before Abiy’s rise to political power, Ethiopia had an independent policy on foreign relations, pursuing strategic partnership with China for economic development. Ethiopia – the second most populous country in Africa and home to the African Union – was seen as a crucial link in building China’s new silk routes from Asia to Africa.
Oddly, Abiy was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize at the end of 2019 for a supposed rapprochement with Ethiopia’s northern neighbor Eritrea. The two countries fought a bitter border war in 1998-2000. In hindsight, the award was a travesty given how Abiy has invited Eritrean troops into Tigray to wage war against the civilian population there, committing horrendous massacres.
But the Nobel prize can be seen as part of Abiy’s image-building by his CIA handlers for their objective of reordering Ethiopia. Tellingly, the Western media during his early months in office gushed with praise about the “young democratic reformer” and “peacemaker”. How foolish and fawning those media look now in light of the mayhem and suffering that Abiy unleashed in Tigray over the past four months.
In truth the war was building ever since Abiy took office. Almost from the get-go, there was a campaign of low-intensity aggression directed against the Tigray region. (This author was living there.) This was while the Western media were hailing him as a “reformer”. Abiy’s campaign of hostility towards Tigray involved the central government cutting electricity, water and communications as well as political assassinations. The purpose was to wear down the region and the people’s support for the Tigray People’s Liberation Front which had been the previous dominant governing party before Abiy’s ascent. The Tigray region represented a bastion of opposition to the plan by Abiy and his CIA handlers to refashion and reorient Ethiopia geopolitically. The power struggle culminated in the full-blown war launched against Tigray on November 4, 2020, under false claims of being a security operation against a “terrorist junta”.
The terrible irony is that the war and humanitarian crisis inflicted on six million people in Tigray was predictable because Abiy seems to have been following an American imperial plan to destabilize Ethiopia for boosting its great power rivalry with China and Russia. The Horn of Africa is a geopolitical hotspot: it provides a commanding position for North Africa and Sub-Saharan mineral-rich countries, overlooking the vital shipping lanes of the Red Sea and Indian Ocean, and proximate to the oil-rich Arabian Peninsula. Russia last year opened a naval base in Port Sudan on the Red Sea, while China’s only overseas military base is located in Djibouti adjacent to Ethiopia.
Now humanitarian interventionists in the Biden administration are stepping in to “resolve” a mess that the U.S. was instrumental in creating. If the USAID mission is scaled up, as seems intended, then American military could be deployed in Ethiopia giving Washington an unprecedented foothold in a strategically vital region.
It is notable that while the Biden administration seems to be over-riding the authority of the Abiy regime in Addis Ababa, the American objective does not necessarily seek regime change on this occasion. The Biden administration is promoting itself as a mediator in Ethiopia’s civil war, even though this war would not have come about were it not for America’s covert manipulation of Abiy. Recently, the Tigray militia have appeared to be gaining the upper-hand against Abiy’s forces and their Eritrean allies. The American intervention seems prompted in part by concern in Washington to prevent the Abiy regime collapsing in defeat.
Egypt’s parliament on Monday unanimously approved the deployment of armed forces abroad if necessary to defend Egypt’s national security following the rapid expansion of Libya’s Turkey-backed Government of National Accord (GNA), which appears to be preparing for a major assault to capture the key coastal city of Sirte.
The stage is set for a dramatic escalation of the conflict in Libya, which appears to be certain to occur if the armed forces of the Government of National Accord and its major ally Turkey attempt to capture Sirte. They appear determined to do so, notwithstanding repeated warnings by Egypt’s president that Egypt will join the battle in force if this occurs.
Under Egypt’s constitution, the president, who is the supreme commander of the Armed Forces, shall not declare war or deploy troops outside the country without first seeking the opinion of the National Defence Council and the approval of a two-thirds majority of MPs.
Libya’s Tobruk-based parliament, the House of Representatives, has already granted permission for Egypt to deploy its armed forces in Libya if deemed necessary. Now, the Egyptian Parliament has cleared the way for any future deployment by President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi.
In an official statement following a closed-door session, the parliament said it “unanimously approved sending elements of the Egyptian armed forces in combat missions outside the borders of the Egyptian state to defend the Egyptian national security in the western strategic front against the acts of criminal militias and foreign terrorist elements until the forces’ mission ends.”
“The Egyptian nation, throughout history, has advocated for peace, but it does not accept trespasses nor does it renounce its rights. Egypt is extremely able to defend itself, its interests, its brothers and neighbours from any peril or threat.”
“The armed forces and its leadership have the constitutional and legal licence to determine when and where to respond to these dangers and threats.” LINK
The decision was announced several days after Egyptian President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi said Egypt “will not stand idle” in the face of any attack on Sirte, which he earlier described as a “red line” for Egypt’s national security and warned it would prompt military intervention by Cairo.
President El-Sisi also met with Libyan tribal leaders on 16 July in Cairo, where they called on the Egyptian Armed Forces “to intervene to protect the national security of Libya and Egypt.” El-Sisi said that Egypt “will quickly and decisively change the military situation” in Libya if it intervenes, adding that the Egyptian Army is one of the strongest in the region and Africa.
Earlier in July, the Egyptian Armed Forces conducted an exercise near Libya’s border. The drills, codenamed Resolve 2020, took place in the north-western district of Qabr Gabis, about 37 miles from the Libyan border.
The parliament also reviewed the outcomes of a meeting on Sunday of the country’s National Defence Council (NDC) headed by El-Sisi. The closed-door session was also attended by Minister of Parliamentary Affairs Alaa Fouad and Major General Mamdouh Shaheen, assistant minister of defence.
The statement of the NDC after Sunday’s meeting declared that Egypt seeks to stabilise the current situation in the field and not to cross declared lines — referring to the Libyan cities of Sirte and Al-Jafra — with the aim of bringing about peace between all Libyan parties.
“Egypt will spare no efforts to support the sister Libya and help its people to bring their country to safety and overcome the current critical crisis, grounded in the fact that Libya is one of the highest priorities for Egypt’s foreign policy, taking into account that Libyan security is inseparable from Egyptian and Arab national security.”
The NDC affirmed commitment to a political solution to put an end to the Libyan crisis, in a manner that maintains its sovereignty and national and regional unity, eliminates terrorism, and prevents the chaos of criminal groups and extremist armed militias. It also asserted the importance of limiting illegal foreign interference that contributes to aggravating the security situation and threatens neighbouring countries and international peace and security.
The meeting of the National Defence Council also discussed ongoing trilateral negotiations with Sudan and Ethiopia concerning the latter’s Renaissance Dam Project. LINK
Finian Cunningham Former editor and writer for major news media organizations. He has written extensively on international affairs, with articles published in several languages
July 17, 2020
Ethiopia appears to be going ahead with its vow to begin filling a crucial hydroelectric dam on the Nile River after protracted negotiations with Egypt broke down earlier this week. There are grave concerns the two nations may go to war as both water-stressed countries consider their share of the world’s longest river a matter of existential imperative.
Cairo is urging Addis Ababa for clarification after European satellite images showed water filling the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD). Ethiopia has stated that the higher water levels are a natural consequence of the current heavy rainy season. However, this month was designated by Addis Ababa as a deadline to begin filling the $4.6 billion dam.
Egypt has repeatedly challenged the project saying that it would deprive it of vital freshwater supplies. Egypt relies on the Nile for 90 per cent of its total supply for 100 million population. Last month foreign minister Sameh Shoukry warned the UN security council that Egypt was facing an existential threat over the dam and indicated his country was prepared to go to war to secure its vital interests.
Ethiopia also maintains that the dam – the largest in Africa when it is due to be completed in the next year – is an “existential necessity”. Large swathes of its 110 million population subsist on daily rationed supply of water. The hydroelectric facility will also generate 6,000 megawatts of power which can be used to boost the existing erratic national grid.
Ominously, on both sides the issue is fraught with national pride. Egyptians accuse Ethiopia of a high-handed approach in asserting its declared right to build the dam without due consideration of the impact on Egypt.
On the other hand, the Ethiopians view the project which began in 2011 as a matter of sovereign right to utilize a natural resource for lifting their nation out of poverty. The Blue Nile which originates in Ethiopia is the main tributary to the Nile. Ethiopians would argue that Egypt does not give away control to foreign interests over its natural resources of gas and oil.
Ethiopians also point out that Egypt’s “claims” to Nile water are rooted in colonial-era treaties negotiated with Britain which Ethiopia had no say in.
What makes the present tensions sharper is the domestic political pressures in both countries. Egypt’s President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi is struggling to maintain legitimacy among his own population over long-running economic problems. For a self-styled strong leader, a conflict over the dam could boost his standing among Egyptians as they rally around the flag.
Likewise, Ethiopia’s Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed is beset by internal political conflicts and violent protests against his nearly two years in office. His postponement of parliamentary elections due to the coronavirus has sparked criticism of a would-be autocrat. The recent murder of a popular singer-activist which resulted in mass protests and over 100 killings by security forces has marred Abiy’s image.
In forging ahead with the dam, premier Abiy can deflect from internal turmoil and unite Ethiopians around an issue of national pride. Previously, as a new prime minister, he showed disdain towards the project, saying it would take 10 years to complete. There are indicators that Abiy may have been involved in a sinister geopolitical move along with Egypt to derail the dam’s completion. Therefore, his apparent sudden support for the project suggests a cynical move to shore up his own national standing.
Then there is the geopolitical factor of the Trump administration. Earlier this year, President Donald Trump weighed in to the Nile dispute in a way that was seen as bolstering Egypt’s claims. Much to the ire of Ethiopia, Washington warned Addis Ababa not to proceed with the dam until a legally binding accord was found with Egypt.
Thus if Egypt’s al-Sisi feels he has Trump’s backing, he may be tempted to go to war over the Nile. On paper, Egypt has a much stronger military than Ethiopia. It receives $1.4 billion a year from Washington in military aid. Al-Sisi may see Ethiopia as a softer “war option” than Libya where his forces are also being dragged into in a proxy war with Turkey.
Ethiopia, too, is an ally of Washington, but in the grand scheme of geopolitical interests, Cairo would be the preferred client for the United States. Up to now, the Trump administration has endorsed Egypt’s position over the Nile dispute. That may be enough to embolden al-Sisi to go for a showdown with Ethiopia. For Trump, being on the side of Egypt may be calculated to give his flailing Middle East policies some badly needed enthusiasm among Arab nations. Egypt has the backing of the Arab League, including Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.
Egypt has previously threatened to sabotage Ethiopia’s dam. How it would do this presents logistical problems. Egypt is separated from Ethiopia to its south by the vast territory of Sudan. Cairo has a strong air force of U.S.-supplied F-16s while Ethiopia has minimal air defenses, relying instead on a formidable infantry army.
Another foreboding sign is the uptick in visits to Cairo by Eritrean autocratic leader Isaias Afwerki. He has held two meetings with al-Sisi at the presidential palace in the Egyptian capital in as many months, the most recent being on July 6 when the two leaders again discussed “regional security” and Ethiopia’s dam. Eritrea provides a Red Sea corridor into landlocked Ethiopia which would be more advantageous to Cairo than long flights across Sudan.
Nominally, Eritrea and Ethiopia signed a peace deal in July 2018 to end nearly two decades of Cold War, for which Ethiopia’s Abiy was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. However, the Eritrean leader may be tempted to dip back into bad blood if it boosted his coffers from Arab money flowing in return for aiding Egypt.
There will be plenty of platitudinous calls for diplomacy and negotiated settlement from Washington, the African Union and the Arab League. But there is an underlying current for war that may prove unstoppable driven by two populous and thirsty nations whose leaders are badly in need of shoring up their political authority amid internal discontent.
Roughly half-way through the year 2020 it is becoming pretty obvious that there are a number of major developments which almost got our total attention, and for good reason, as these are tectonic shifts which truly qualify as “catastrophe” (under the definition “a violent and sudden change in a feature of the earth“). These are:
The initiation of the global collapse of the AngloZionist Empire.
The immense economic bubble whose ever-growing size is the best predictor of the magnitude of the huge burst it will inevitably result in.
The implosion of the US society due to a combination of several and profound systemic crises (economic collapse, racial tensions, mass poverty, alienation of the masses, absence of social protections, etc.).
The COVID-19 (aka “it’s just like the seasonal flu!!“) pandemic which only exacerbates all the other major factors listed above.
Last, but not least, it is hard to imagine what the next US Presidential election will look like, but one thing is certain: by November we will already have a perfect storm – the election will only act like a battery which will feed even more energy into this already perfect storm.
To be sure, these are truly momentous, historical, developments whose importance cannot be over-stated. They are, however, not the only very serious developments. There are, in fact, several areas of serious political tensions which could also result in a major explosion, albeit a regional one “only”!
I will list just a few, beginning with the most visible one:
Turkey
Erdogan is up to no good. Again. What a big surprise, right? Every time I hear somebody writing something about Erdogan the dreaming of becoming the sultan of a new Ottoman Empire, I tend to roll my eyes as this is a cliche. Yet, there is no denial that this cliche is true – the neo-Ottoman ideology is definitely alive and well in Turkey and Erdogan clearly wants to “ride that horse”. So let’s list some of the things which the Turks have been up to:
Syria: The Turks have clearly been dragging their feet in northern Syria where, at least according to the deal Erdogan made with Putin, the “bad terrorists” should have left a long time ago and the key highway should have been under the joint protection of the Russian and Turkish forces. Well, Turkey did some of this, but not all, and the “bad terrorists” are still very much present in northern Syria. In fact, they recently tried to attack the Russian Aerospace Forces base in Khmeimim (they failed, but that is still something which the Turks have to answer for since the attack came from a zone they control). Protecting terrorists in exchange for promises of immunity from their attacks has been tried many times in the past and it has never worked – sooner or later the terrorist groups always slip out of the control of their masters and even turn against them. This is now happening to Turkey.
Libya: The Turks are also deeply involved in the Libyan civil war. In fact, “deeply involved” does not give enough credit to the Turkish military which used Turkish-made drones with devastating effectiveness against the forces of Field Marshal Khalifa Belqasim Haftar, the commander of the Tobruk-based Libyan National Army (which is backed by both Russia and Egypt). Only the prompt (and rather mysterious) deployment of Russian air defenses and a number of unidentified MiG-29s succeeded in eventually bringing down enough Turkish drones to force them to take a pause. The Egyptians have made it clear that they will never allow the so-called “Government of National Accord” to take Sirte or any land East of Sirte. The Libyan Parliament (of East Libya) has now given Egypt the official authorization to directly intervene in Libya. This makes some kind of Egyptian intervention an almost certain thing.
Hagia Sophia: And just to make sure there are enough sources of tension, the Turks have now declared that the Saint Sophia Cathedral in Istanbul will no longer be a museum open to all, but a mosque. Now the CIA-puppet modestly known as “His Most Divine All-Holiness the Archbishop of Constantinople, New Rome, and Ecumenical Patriarch” Bartholomew should be the most vocal opponent to this move, but all he can do is mumble some irrelevancies (he wanted to go down as the Patriarch who patronized the Ukrainian schism and, instead, he will go down in history as the Patriarch who did nothing to prevent the Ottomans from seizing one of the holiest sites of the Orthodox world. Truth be told, he probably could not have prevented that (Erdogan’s move is entirely due to upcoming elections in Turkey) – but he sure could have tried a little better. Ditto for the head of the Moscow Patriarchate (and, for that matter, the Russian government) who expressed stuff like concern, or dismay, of some form of condemnation, but who really did nothing to make Erdogan pay for his move.
What the Turks just did is a disgrace, not only for Turkey itself which, yet again, proves that the Ottoman version of Islam is a particularly toxic and dangerous one. It is also a disgrace for the entire Muslim world which, with a few notable exceptions such as Sheikh Imran Hosein, has done nothing to prevent this and, if anything, has approved of this move. Finally, this is a disgrace for the entire Orthodox world as it proves that the entire worldwide Orthodox community has less relevance and importance in the eyes of the Turkish leader than the outcome of local elections. Russia, especially, would have the kind of political muscle needed to inflict all sorts of painful forms of retaliation against Turkey and yet Russia does nothing. This is a sad witness to the extreme weakness of the Orthodox faith in the modern world.
Add to this all the “traditional” sources of instability around Turkey, including the still unsolved (and unsolvable!) Kurdish issue, the tensions between Turkey and Iraq and Iran, Turkish low-key support for anti-Russian factions in the various former Soviet Republics and the constant confrontation with Greece).
Turkey remains one of the most dangerous states on the planet, even if most people remain unaware of this. True, in the recent years Turkey lost a lot of its power, but it still has plenty of formidable assets (including a very strong domestic weapon systems manufacturing capability) which it can use for a vast spectrum of nefarious political and military interventions.
Egypt
Egypt is another country which regularly makes some headlines and then disappears from the public’s radar. Yet, right now, Egypt is faced not with one, but with twopossible wars!
Libya: as I mentioned above, should it come to an open clash between Turkey and Egypt in Libya, there could be a rapid horizontal escalation in which initial military clashes in Libya could turn into clashes over the Eastern Mediterranean and even possible strikes on key military objectives in Turkey and Egypt. The only good news here is that there are a lot of major actors who do not need a shooting war in the Eastern Mediterranean and/or the Middle-East. After all, if it came to a true military confrontation between Turkey and Egypt, then you can be pretty sure that NATO, CENTCOM, Greece, Israel and Russia would all have major concerns. Besides, it is hard to imagine what kind of military “victory” either Turkey or Egypt could hope for. Right now the situation is very tense, but we can hope that all the parties will realize that a negotiated solution, even a temporary one, is preferable to a full-scale war.
Ethiopia: Egypt has a potentially much bigger problem than Libya to deal with: the construction by Ethiopia of the “The Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam(GERD)” on the Blue Nile river. While nobody really knows what the eventual impact of this dam will be on Sudan and Egypt, is is pretty clear that a civilization built along the Nile river will face a major threat to its way of life if the way the Nile river flows is disturbed in a major way (which this dam will definitely do).
Of the two possible conflicts I mentioned above, it is the second one which has me most worried. At the end of the day, neither Turkey nor Egypt will get to decide what happens in Libya which is mostly a kind of multi-player “chessboard” where “big guys” (US, France, Russia) will eventually decide the outcome. In the case of the dam in Ethiopia, the local actors will probably have a decisive say, especially since both sides consider that this is an existentially important issue for them.
If you look at a map of the region, you will see that the distance between the Egyptian border and the location of the dam on the border between Ethiopia and Sudan is a long one (about 1’200km or 745 miles). Should it come to a military confrontation between the two countries, this distance will pretty much decide the shape of the warfare we shall see: mainly air and missile strikes. The main problem here (for both sides) is that neither side has the kind of air force or missiles which would allow it to effectively strike the other country. This, however, could change very rapidly, especially if Russia does sell 24 of its advanced Su-35 multi-role air superiority fighters to Egypt, and even more so if Russia throws in a few capable air-to-ground strike missiles into the package (the delivery of the first Sukhois appears to be imminent). Then there is this “minor detail” of Sudan being stuck between the two combatants: Khartoum simply cannot look away and pretend like all is well if two of its major neighbors decide to fight each other over Sudanese airspace.
In theory Egypt could also try to mount some attack from the Red Sea, but right now the Egyptian Navy does not pack the kind of punch which would allow it to effectively strike Ethiopia (especially with Eritrea in between the Red Sea and Ethiopia). But that could also change, especially since Egypt agreed to purchase the two Gamal Abdel Nasser (ex-Mistral) class amphibious assault ships and helicopter carriers which, while not ideal, would definitely boost the Egyptian’s command and control capabilities, especially if the Egyptians succeed in deploying AWACS and strike aircraft (rotary or even light fixed wing V/STOL) on these ships. In practice, however, I think that the Egyptians could engage these ships much more effectively in Libya than they would in the Red Sea (especially since these ships are poorly defended against missile strikes).
Finally, not only is the GERD defended by decent air defense systems (along with a few decent, if aging, air force aircraft), a dam is a pretty hard target to disable: it is big, strong, and has a large volume which, by itself, also contributes to the “hardness” against attacks.
So there are reasons to hope that a conflict can be avoided, but it will be very hard to get the two sides to agree to compromises on issues which both sides see as vital to their national security.
The Ukraine
Yes, the Ukraine. Again. This insanity which began with the Euromaidan has not stopped, far from it. In fact, ever since the election of Zelenskii the Ukraine has become something of a madhouse which would be outright hilariously comical if it wasn’t also so tragic and even horrible for millions of Ukrainians. I will spare you all the details, but we can sum up the main development of the past months as “Zelenskii has completely lost control of the country”. But that would not even begin to cover the reality of this situation.
For one thing, the war of words between Trump and Biden over the Ukraine-gate has now “infected” the Ukrainian political scene and each side is now busy with what is known locally as “black PR”: trying to dig up as much dirt against your opponent as possible. Zelenskii is so weak that, amazingly, the previously almost totally discredited Poroshenko has now made a strong comeback and thereby acquired the support of a lot of influential nationalists. The latest incredible (but true!) “informational bomb” was set off by a member of the Ukrainian Rada, Andrei Derkach, who released a recording of Joe Biden and Poroshenko discussing the pros and cons of organizing a terrorist attack in Crimea (see here for details about this amazing story). This makes both Biden and Poroshenko “sponsors of terrorism” (hardly a surprise, but still). Other “juicy” news stories about the Nazi-occupied Banderastan include Zelenskii possibly fathering a kid with an aide and the brutal attacks on the members of a small (but growing) “Sharii” opposition party which the authorities not only ignored, but most likely ordered in the first place. It is not my purpose here to discuss all the toxic intricacies of internal Ukronazi politics, so I will only look at one of the major dangers resulting from this dynamic: there is talk of war with Russia again.
Okay, we have all heard the very same rumors for years now, and yet no real and sustained Ukrainian attack on the LDNR or, even less so, Crimea ever took place (there were constant artillery strikes and diversionary attacks, but those remain below the threshold of open warfare). But what we hear today is a little bit different: an increasing number of Ukrainian and even Polish observers have declared that Russia would attack this summer or in September, possibly using military maneuvers to move forces to the Ukrainian border and attack. Depending on whom you ask, such an attack could come from Belarus and/or from central Russia – some even worry about a Russian amphibious operation against the Ukrainian coastline and cities like Mariupol, Nikolaev, Kherson or Odessa.
The Ukronazis are truly amazing. First they cut off all the electricity and even water from Crimea, and then they declare that Russia will have to invade to retake control of the water supply. The notion that Russia will solve Crimea’s water problem by peaceful and technological means is, apparently, quite unthinkable for the Ukronazi leaders. In the real world, however, Russia has a comprehensive program to comprehensively solve Crimea’s water problems. This program has begun by laying down water pipes, improving of the irrigation system of Crimea, the use of special aircraft to trigger rain and might even include the creation of a desalination plant. The simple truth is that Russia can easily make Crimea completely independent from anything Ukrainian.
And just to make things worse, the head of the Ukrainian Navy (which exists on paper mostly) has now declared that a new Ukrainian missile, the Neptune, could reach as far as Sevastopol. The problem is not the missile itself (it is a modernized version of an old Soviet design, and it is slow and therefore easy to shoot down), but the kind of “mental background noise” that this kind of talk of war creates.
From a purely military point of view, Russia does not even have to move any troops to defeat the Ukrainian armed forces: all Russia needs to do is to use its powerful long-range stand-off weapons and reconnaissance-strike complexes to first decapitate, then disorganize and finally destroy the Ukrainian military. Russia’s superiority in the air, on the water and on land is such that the Ukrainians don’t have a chance in hell to survive such an attack, nevermind defeating Russia. The Ukrainians all know that since, after all, their entire military could not even deal with the (comparatively) minuscule and infinitely weaker LDNR forces (at least when compared to regular Russian forces).
Still, the Ukrainians have one advantage over Russia: while this would be extremely dangerous to try, they must realize that, unlike in the case of their attacks on the Donbass, should they dare to attack Crimea, President Putin would not have any other option than to order a retaliatory strike of some sort. Any Ukrainian attack or strike on Crimea would probably fail with all the missiles intercepted long before they could reach their targets, but even in this case the pressure on Putin to put an end to this would be huge. Which means that it would not be incorrect to say that whoever is in power in Kiev can force Russia to openly intervene. This means that in this specific case the weaker side can have at least some degree of escalation dominance.
Now the Ukraine definitely cannot achieve strategic surprise and is even most unlikely to achieve tactical surprise, but, again, the actual success of any Ukrainian strike on Crimea does not require the designated targets of the strike to be destroyed: all that would be needed, in some plans at least, is the ability to do two things:
Force Russia to openly intervene and
Choose the time, place and mode of attack most problematic for the Russian side
Finally, I would suggest that we look at this issue from the point of view of the AngloZionist Empire: in many, if not most, ways, the Banderastan the West created in the Ukraine has outlived its utility: the USN won’t get a base in Crimea which is now lost forever (it is now one of the best defended places on the planet), Russia has not openly intervened in the civil war, the Ukronazi forces were comprehensively trounced by the Novorussians and in economic terms, and the Ukraine is nothing but one big black hole with an ever growing event horizon. Which might suggest to some in the US ruling elites that to trigger a losing war against Russia might be the best (and, possibly, only) thing their ugly creation could do for them. Why?
Well, for one thing, such a war will be bloody, even if it is short. Second, since the Russians are exceedingly unlikely to want to occupy any part of what is today the Nazi-occupied Ukraine, this means that even a total military defeat would not necessarily result in a complete disappearance of the current Banderastan. Yes, more regions in the East and the South might try to use this opportunity to rise up and liberate themselves, and should that happen Russia might offer the kind of help she offered the Novorussians, but I don’t think that anybody seriously believes that Russian tanks will be seen on Kiev or, even less so, Lvov (nevermind Warsaw or Riga). So a military loss against Russia would not be a total loss for Banderastan and it might even yield some beneficial dynamics to whatever consolidated Ukronazi-power might come out from such a conflict. Actually, should that happen I fully expect the Ukronazis to declare a kind of jihad to liberate the Moskal’ -occupied Ukraine. This means that the initial bloodbath would be followed by a festering low to medium level military conflict between Russia and the Ukraine which could last a very long time and also be most undesirable for Russia.
During my studies I had the honor and privilege to study with a wonderful Colonel of the Pakistani Army who became a good friend. One day (that was around 1991) I asked my friend what the Pakistani strategy would be during a possible war against India. He replied to me: “look, we all know that India is much stronger and bigger than Pakistan, but what we all also know is that if they attack us we can give them a very bloody nose”. This is exactly what the Ukrainian strategy might be: to give Russia a “bloody nose”. Militarily, this is impossible, of course, but in political terms any open war against the Ukraine would be a disaster for Russia. It would also be a disaster for the Ukraine, but the puppet-masters of the Ukronazis in Kiev don’t care about the people of the Ukraine anymore than they care about the people of Russia: all they want is to give the Russians a big bloody nose.
In summary, here is one possible scenario which might result in a regional catastrophe: whoever is in power in the Ukraine would begin by realizing that the project of an Ukronazi Banderastan has already failed and that neither the EU nor, even less so, the US is willing to continue to toss money into the Ukie black hole. Furthermore, clever Ukie politicians will realize that neither Poroshenko nor Zelensii have “delivered” the expected “goods” to the Empire. Then the East-European US vassal-states (lead by Poland and the Baltic statelets) also realize that EU money is running out and that far from having achieved any real economic progress (nevermind any “miracle”), they are also becoming increasingly irrelevant to their masters in the EU and US. And, believe me, the political leaders of these US vassal-states have realized a long time ago that a war between Russia and the Ukraine would be a fantastic opportunity for them to regain some value in the eyes of their imperial overlords in the EU and US. To people who think like these people do, even an attempted Neptune strike against Sevastopol would be a quick and quite reasonable way to force Putin’s hand.
Lastly, we can now look at the situation in Russia
Russia
One would think that following the massive victory the Kremlin has achieved with the vote on the changes to the Russian Constitution, the political situation in Russia would be idyllic, at least compared to the sinking Titanic of the “collective West”. Alas, this is far from being the case. Here are some of the factors which contribute to a potentially dangerous situation inside Russia.
As I have mentioned in the past, besides the “official” (pretend) opposition in the Duma, there are now two very distinct “non-system” oppositions to Putin: the bad old “liberals” (which I sometimes call the 5th column) and the (relatively new) “pink-nationalist” Putin-haters which I christened, somewhat tongue-in-cheek, I admit – as a 6th column (Ruslan Ostashko calls them “emo-Marxists“, and that is a very accurate description too). What is so striking is that while Russian 5th and 6th columnists hate each other, they clearly hate Putin even more. Many of them also hate the Russian people because they don’t “get it” (at least in their opinion) and because time and again the people vote with and for Putin. Needless to say, these “5th and 6th columnists” (let’s call them “5&6c” from now on) declare that the election was stolen, that millions of votes were not counted at all, while others were counted many times. According to these 5&6c types, it is literally unthinkable that Putin would get such a high support therefore the only explanation is that the elections were rigged. While the sum total of these 5&6c types is probably not enough to truly threaten Putin or the Russian society, the Kremlin has to be very careful in how it handles these groups, especially since the condition of the Russian society is clearly deteriorating:
Russia has objective, real, problems which cannot simply be dismissed. Most Russians clearly would prefer a much more social and economically active state. The reality is that the current political system in Russia cares little for the “little man”. The way the Kremlin and the Russian “big business” are enmeshed is distressing to a lot of Russians, and I agree with them. Furthermore, while the western sanctions did a great job preparing Russia for the current crisis, it still remains true that Russia does not operate in such a favorable environment, revenues are down in many sectors, and the COVID19 pandemic has also had a devastating effect on Russian small businesses. And while the issue of the COVID19 virus has not been so hopelessly politicized in Russia has it has in the West, a lot of my contacts report to me that many people feel that the Kremlin and the Moscow authorities have mismanaged the crisis. So while the non-systemic opposition of the 5&6c cannot truly threaten Russia, there are enough of what I would call “toxic and potentially dangerous trends” inside the Russian society which could turn into a much bigger threat should a crisis suddenly erupt (including a crisis triggered by an always possible Ukrainian provocation).
More and more Russians, including Putin-supporters, are getting frustrated with what they perceive as being a lame and frankly flaccid Russian foreign policy. This does not necessarily mean that they disagree with the way Putin deals with the big issues (say Crimea, or Syria or the West’s sabre-rattling), but they get especially frustrated by what they perceive as lame Russian responses against petty provocations. For example, the US Congress and the Trump Administration have continued to produce sanctions and stupid accusations against Russia on a quasi-daily basis, yet Russia is really doing nothing much about that, in spite of the fact that there are many options in her political “toolkit” to really make the US pay for that attitude. Another thing which irritates the Russians is that arrogant, condescending and outright rude manner in which western politicians (and their paid for journalists in Russia) constantly intervene in internal Russian matters without ever being seriously called out for this. Sure, some particularly nasty characters (and organization) have been kicked out of Russia, but not nearly enough to really send a clear message Russia’s enemies.
And, just to make things worse, there are some serious problems between Russia and her supposed allies, specifically Belarus and Kazakhstan. Nothing truly critical has happened yet, but the political situation in Belarus is growing worse by the day (courtesy of, on one hand, the inept policies of Lukashenko and, on the other, a resurgence of Kazakh nationalism, apparently with the approval of the central government). Not only is the destabilization of two major Russian allies a bad thing in itself, it also begs the question of how Putin can deal with, say, Turkey or Poland, when Russia can’t even stabilize the situation in Belarus and Kazakhstan.
To a large degree, I share many of these frustrations too and I agree that it is time for Putin and Russia to show a much more proactive posture towards the (eternally hostile) West.
My problem with the 5th column is that it is composed of rabid russophobes who hate their own nation and who are nothing but willing prostitutes to the AngloZionist Empire. They want Russia to become a kind of “another Poland only further East” or something equally insipid and uninspiring.
My problem with the 6th column is that it hates Putin much more than it loves Russia, which is regularly shows by predicting either a coup, or a revolution, or a popular uprising or any other bloody event which Russia simply cannot afford for two main reasons:
Russia almost destroyed herself twice in just the past century: in 1917 and 1991. Each time, the price paid by the Russian people was absolutely horrendous and the Russian nation simply cannot afford another major internal conflict.
Russia is at war against the Empire, and while this war remains roughly an 80% informational/ideological one, about 15% an economic one and only about 5% a kinetic war, it remains that this is a total, existential, war for survival: either the Empire disappears or Russia will. This is therefore a situation where any action which weakens your state, your country and its leader always comes dangerously close to treason.
Right now the biggest blessing for Russia is that neither the 5th nor the 6th column has managed to produce even a halfway credible political figure who at least appears as marginally capable of offering realistic solutions. A number of 5th columnists have decided to emigrate and leave what they see as “Putin’s Mordor”. Alas, I don’t see any stream of 6th columnists leaving Russia, which objectively makes them a much more useful tool for outfits like the CIA who will not hesitate to infiltrate even a putatively anti-US political movement if this can weaken Russia in general, or Putin personally.
Right now the Russian security services are doing a superb job countering all these threats (including the still very real Wahabi terrorist threat) all at the same time. However, considering the rather unstable and even dangerous international political situation, this could change if all the forces who hate Putin and what they call “Putinism” either join forces or simply strike at the same time.
Conclusion
There are, of course, many other potential flashpoints on the planet, including India, Pakistan and China, the South China Sea, the Persian Gulf, the Korean Peninsula and many others. Thus the above is only a sampling of a much larger list.
The huge changes taking place before our eyes are real, and they are huge. But we should not follow the lead of the corporate media and focus on only one or two “hot” topics, especially not when there are plenty of very real dangers out there. This being said, there is no doubt that what will happen in the next couple of months inside the United States is by far the biggest and most important development out there, one which will shape the future of our planet no matter what actually happens. And I am not referring to the totally symbolic non-choice between Biden and Trump.
I am referring to how the US society will deal with a virulently anti-US coalition of minorities which hate this country and everything, good and bad that it stood for in the past. Right now the US elites are committing national suicide by not only failing to oppose, but also by actively supporting the BLM thugs and everything they stand for: BLM & Co. remind me of Ukronazis whose main expression of national identity is to hate everything Russian – the BLM thugs do the same thing: their entire worldview is pure hatred of the hetero White male and the western civilization; and just as the Ukies regale each other with stories about the “ancient Ukrs” the BLM folks imagine that they will somehow turn the US into a type Wakanda before expelling (or worse) all those who are not willing to hand over their country to roaming gangs of illiterate thugs.
While Russia has to face the potential of internal violence, the United States is already facing a dangerous and violent insurrection which is likely to become much worse as the economic crisis triggered by the pandemic fully explodes. So far, the effects of this crisis have been somewhat tempered by a combination of 1) political denials about the nature of the threat (“oh, nonsense, it is just like the seasonal flu!“) 2) the mass distribution of money (which has only helped temporarily) 3) the existence of a huge financial bubble which will only make matters worse, but which temporarily can create the illusion that things are not nearly as bad as they really are.
It is said that nature abhors a vacuum. This is true. It is also true that the collapse of the Empire has now created several vacuums which will be filled by new actors, but there is no guarantee at all that this transition will be peaceful. So while we are watching some very big trees burning, we should not forget that behind these trees there is a big forest which can also burn, possibly creating a much bigger forest fire than the trees we see burning today.
ليست المرة الأولى التي نتحدّث فيها عن دقّ طبول الحرب التي بدأت تتعالى أصواتها في محيطنا المصري، فمنذ بداية أحداث الربيع العربي المزعوم في مطلع العام 2011 وكل ما يحدث سواء بالداخل المصري أو في محيطنا العربي ينبئ بأن هناك حرباً مقبلة لا محالة، وبما أن العدو الأميركي قد خطط أن تكون مصر هي الجائزة الكبرى في مشروعه المزعوم الذي يطلق عليه الشرق الأوسط الكبير أو الجديد فقد بدأت الحرب مبكراً عندما ساند جماعة الإخوان الإرهابيّة لتصدّر المشهد والقفز لسدة الحكم، وكان تحالفه مع هذا التنظيم الإرهابي مبنياً على أساس إيمان هذه الجماعة بأن “الوطن لا يعني الحدود الجغرافية ولا التخوم الأرضيّة إنما الاشتراك في العقيدة” على حد تعبير مؤسس الجماعة في كتابه “رسائل الإمام الشهيد حسن البنا” (صفحة 26).
ومن هنا وجد العدو الأميركي ضالته في تقسيم مصر وتفتيتها بواسطة جماعة إرهابيّة لا تؤمن بفكرة التراب الوطنيّ ولديها استعداد كامل للتفريط في الأرض وهي عقيدة منحرفة مخالفة للعقيدة الوطنية السليمة والتي دفعتنا لدخول حروب كثيرة للدفاع عن التراب الوطني. وبالطبع هذه العقيدة متجذرة وثابتة وراسخة لدى جموع الشعب المصري بشكل عام ولدى جيشنا البطل بشكل خاص. ومن هنا بدأت طبول الحرب تدق في الداخل المصري على شكل حرب أهلية، لكن الجيش المصري العظيم حسم الأمر برمّته في 30 يونيو و3 يوليو 2013 عندما خرجت جموع الشعب مطالبة بإسقاط الجماعة الإرهابية من سدة الحكم، فأعلن انحيازه للوطن ودخل في معركة مباشرة مع الجماعة الإرهابيّة التي حشدت أعضاءها في الداخل، واستدعت أعوانها بالخارج للانتشار على كامل جغرافية سيناء، وتمكن الجيش من حسم معركة الداخل في رابعة والنهضة وكرداسة، وتوجّه إلى سيناء وخاض معارك شرسة استمرت لسبع سنوات تمكّن خلالها من تجفيف منابع الإرهاب على أرض سيناء.
ومع حسم هذه الحرب مع الإرهاب بدأت طبول الحرب تدق من جديد عبر البوابة الغربية لمصر حيث ليبيا العربية التي وقعت فريسة للعدوان الغربي حيث تمّ اجتياحها بواسطة قوات الناتو في العام 2011 وأصبحت ساحة للصراع وهو ما يهدد الأمن القومي المصري بشكل مباشر، وفي الوقت نفسه بدأت طبول الحرب تدق عبر البوابة الجنوبية لمصر، حيث أعلنت أثيوبيا عن مشروع بناء سد النهضة والذي يشكل تهديداً مباشراً لشريان حياة المصريين وهو نهر النيل.
وبعد أن أطاح الجيش المصري بالجماعة الإرهابية بدأت مصر في إدارة ملف الأمن القوميّ المشتعل عبر حدودها الغربية والجنوبية وهى تدرك أن الأعداء يتربّصون بها وبكل خطوة تخطوها نحو تأمين حدودها المشتعلة، فالجميع ينتظر موقف مصر من ليبيا وأثيوبيا وهي الملفات التي يمكن أن تتورط مصر في حرب بسببها وهي غير جاهزة بسبب حربها مع الإرهاب بالداخل.
وهنا قرّرت مصر إدارة الملفين بوعي وهدوء فهي تعلم أن ليبيا قد تحوّلت لساحة صراع دولي ولا توجد قوى واحدة مسيطرة بعد اغتيال الشهيد معمر القذافي، لذلك كان على مصر أن تختار الوقوف بجانب إحدى القوى الموجودة على الأرض، وبالفعل وقفت داعمة للمشير خليفة حفتر الذى يسعى للسيطرة من أجل القضاء على الجماعات الإرهابيّة والحفاظ على ليبيا موحّدة على الرغم من شراسة المعركة، وكان خيار مصر بدعم حفتر من منطلق سيطرته على المنطقة الشرقية الليبية المتاخمة للحدود الغربية المصرية، وعندما تدخلت تركيا لدعم السراج وجماعاته الإرهابيّة، تحركت مصر سريعاً وأعلنت عن مبادرة للحل السياسي وقدّمتها للمجتمع الدولي، وأعلنت أن دخول القوات التركية إلى سرت والجفرة خط أحمر وهو ما يجعل تدخلنا مشروعاً للحفاظ على أمننا القوميّ.
أما ملف سد النهضة والذي يتقاطع مع السودان وإثيوبيا فقد تعاملت مصر معه بوعي وهدوء شديد، فحاولت دائماً إطفاء النيران المشتعلة بالداخل السوداني واستنفدت كل مراحل التفاوض مع إثيوبيا وعندما قرّرت إثيوبيا ملء السد بشكل منفرد من دون التوقيع على اتفاق دولي ملزم وتعالت الأصوات بضرورة ضرب السد وهو ما يعني قيام الحرب قررت مصر الذهاب بالقضية إلى مجلس الأمن ليوقف هذا العدوان على الأمن القومي المصري وإلا سيكون أي تدخل عسكري مصري مشروعاً ولا يمكن أن يواجه بإدانة دولية.
والسؤال المطروح الآن هو هل مصر وهي تدير ملفات الأمن القومي دبلوماسياً وبهدوء وحكمة كبيرة مستعدّة وجاهزة للحرب إذا استنفدت كل الوسائل السلمية ولم يعد أمامها خيار غير الحرب؟
والإجابة القاطعة تقول إن مصر جاهزة لكل الحلول، ففي أعقاب 30 يونيو 2013 بدأ الجيش المصري عملية بناء جديدة حيث تنوعت مصادر السلاح، وحصلت مصر على أسلحة متطورة للغاية، جعلت الجيش المصري يتقدّم للمرتبة التاسعة عالمياً.
ولتأمين حدود مصر الغربية والاستعداد لمواجهة أي خطر مقبل من البوابة الليبية قام الجيش المصري بتشييد قاعدة محمد نجيب العسكرية على مساحة 18 ألف فدان في مدينة الحمام في مرسى مطروح والتي وصفت بأنها أكبر قاعدة عسكرية في أفريقيا والشرق الأوسط والتي استغرق تشييدها عامين وافتتحت في 22 يوليو 2017 لحماية حدود مصر الغربية.
ثم قام الجيش المصري بتشييد قاعدة برنيس العسكرية على مساحة 150 ألف فدان في جنوب شرقي البحر الأحمر لتصبح أكبر قاعدة عسكرية في أفريقيا والشرق الأوسط على الإطلاق وقد تم تشييدها خلال عام واحد فقط وتم افتتاحها في 15 يناير 2020 لحماية حدود مصر الجنوبية.
ومن هنا يتضح كيف تتعامل مصر مع أمنها القومي بوعي وهدوء وتقديم الحلول السياسية والسلمية على الحلول العسكرية، لكن مع الاحتفاظ بحقها في استخدام القوة المشروعة في أي وقت للدفاع عن أمنها القومي. اللهم بلغت اللهم فاشهد.
تمر العلاقات الدولية عالمياً في حال متغيّرة، تفرضها من جانب قوانين التغير والحركة والتطور دائمة الدوران، ومن جانب آخر عوامل مساعدة منها جائحة كورونا التي تجاوز عدد ضحاياها نصف المليون نفس بشرية، وعدد المصابين بالفيروس قد قفز عن حاجز الاثني عشر مليوناً، والأعداد في تزايد مستمر. ومع دخول الجائحة طوراً ثانياً اعتبرته منظمة الصحة العالمية أكثر ضراوة، نلاحظ أنها تجاوزت في عدوانها الإنسان وسلامته لتصيب وتعطل الدورة الاقتصادية من صناعة وتجارة وزراعة في طول العالم وعرضه؛ الأمر الذي قاد إلى معدلات بطالة مرتفعة حتى في المجتمعات الصناعية النشطة وكساد اقتصادي وانهيار في أسعار النفط ومعظم السلع وأثر بدوره على الرعاية الاجتماعيّة والنظم الصحيّة اللاهثة وراء الجائحة.
دفع كل ذلك دول العالم للانكفاء إلى دواخلها، وإلى البحث عن حلول لما تعانيه بشكل منفرد، والتفكير بأساليب الحماية والاكتفاء الداخلي (الذاتي) وإعادة التفكير باتفاقيات التجارة الحرة وضريبة القيمة المضافة، وظهر الوهن على المنظمات العابرة للقومية، كالاتحاد الأوروبي الذي فشل في معالجة الجائحة كاتحاد وترك إيطاليا وإسبانيا واليونان تعالج كل منها جراحها بشكل منفرد فيما رأت ألمانيا أن أولوياتها ألمانية بحتة، نتيجة لذلك أخذت دول الاتحاد تتلمس طرقها القومية القديمة بمعزل عن القوميات الشريكة لها في الاتحاد الأوروبي. فبدأت الدولة الإيطالية طريق العودة إلى إيطاليتها وإسبانيا إلى إسبانيتها وكذلك ألمانيا بمعزل عن المشروع الإقليمي.
وإذا كان العالم يمرّ في هذا المخاض المأزوم، فإن العالم العربي يمرّ بما هو أدهى وأمرّ. حاله غير مسبوقة من السيولة وأبواب أمن قومي مشرّعة لا حارس لها، في المشرق العربي استطالت الأزمة السورية، وإن كانت ملامح نهايتها بادية، إلا أن الأعداء لا زال لديهم من الأوراق ما يطيل في عمرها. ولبنان يترنّح تحت ضغط سعر صرف الليرة مقابل الدولار، والدولة تعاقب القاضي الفاضل الذي أنفذ القانون بالطلب من سفيرة الولايات المتحدة عدم التدخل في شؤونه الداخلية. العراق يعيش حالة تقسيم بادية للعيان، والأردن يعاني من التغول الإسرائيلي بالضفة الغربية. الأمر الذي يمثل تهديداً وجودياً له، فيما تكشف تصريحات رئيس وزراء أسبق عما يدور في العقل السياسي لبعض جماعة الحكم، ولمن رسم شكل الأردن في مرحلة ما بعد عام 1994 (اتفاقية وادي عربة)، وفلسطين التي تعارض رسمياً قرار نتنياهو بضمّ ثلث الضفة الغربية، إلا أنها لا تملك من الآليات وأدوات الضغط ما يحول دون ذلك، هذا وإن تفاءل البعض من المؤتمر الصحافي المشترك لقياديين من فتح وحماس، إلا أن المؤتمر الصحافي لم يتطرق للبحث في الآليات أو في إنهاء حالة الانقسام البشع أو الاتفاق على برنامج حد أدنى واقتصر على مجاملات متبادلة. وعملية الضمّ من شأنها تقطيع ما تبقى من الضفة الغربية إلى ثلاثة معازل منفصلة بالواقع الاستيطاني الذي سيتم ضمة ويحول دون قيام دولة أو شبه دولة في الضفة الغربية. اليمن يصمد ويقاوم بأكلاف عالية، فيما الكورونا والفساد يضربان كل هذه المجتمعات.
الأوضاع في غرب العالم العربي تفوق خطورة وتهافت الأوضاع في مشرقه على صعوبتها، فحالة السيولة وأبواب الأمن القومي المشرّعة، خاصة في ليبيا ومصر والسودان. ليبيا اليوم مسرح وساحة مفتوحة للفرنسيين والأتراك فيما تلعب مصر دوراً ملحقاً بالفرنسيين بدلاً من أن يكون العكس، وأصبحت ليبيا مصدر خطر على مصر من خاصرتها الغربية التي لم تكن عبر تاريخ مصر الطويل تمثل تهديداً لأمنها القومي، فلم يحدث أن غُزيت مصر من الغرب إلا مرة واحدة على يد المعز لدين الله الفاطمي.
طيلة عقود تحاشت مصر الاهتمام بمسائل الأمن القومي، وهي التي رسمت أولى ملامح نظريات الجغرافية السياسية والاستراتيجية وضرورات الأمن القومي بالاشتراك الصدامي مع اتحاد الدول الكنعانية وذلك في القرن الخامس عشر قبل الميلاد في معركة مجدو الشهيرة بقيادة مملكتي قادش ومجدو، حيث رأى الفرعون المصري أن أمن بلاده يبدأ من مرج إبن عامر، فيما رأى التحالف الكنعاني أن أمن اتحادهم يبدأ من غرب سيناء. تطوّرت نظرية الأمن القومي المصري لاحقاً لتضيف عنصراً ثانياً وهو نهر النيل وفيضانه ومنابعه. هذه الرؤية الاستراتيجية سكنت العقل السياسي المصري وعقل كل مَن توالى على حكم مصر منذ تحتمس الثالث حتى عهد الرئيس الأسبق أنور السادات.
منذ تسلم السادات حكم مصر بدأ العمل على إخراج مصر من عالمها العربي، وقد أخذت ملامح هذا الدور تتبدّى خلال حرب تشرين، بمحادثات فك الارتباط بمعزل عن دمشق، ثم ما لبث أن أخذ شكله الصريح عام 1977 في زيارة السادات المشؤومة للقدس وتوقيع اتفاقية كامب دافيد في العام التالي، ثم الترويج لذلك الانقلاب على الاستراتيجيا بالتنظير أن العالم العربي كان عبئاً على مصر التي تستطيع بالتخفف منه الانطلاق في عوالم السوق الرأسمالي والتطور والازدهار وتحقيق الرخاء، ولم تلتفت تلك التنظيرات إلى أن علاقة مصر مع العالم العربي تكاملية يحتاج فيها كل منهما أن يكون ظهيراً للآخر. هذه المدرسة أنتجت ورثة السادات، ومنهم مَن أيّد بحماس تدمير العراق واحتلاله، وتواطأ على الجناح الشرقي للأمن القومي في سورية، وافتعل معارك لا لزوم لها حول منطقة حلايب مع السودان، ولم يلتفت – ولا زال – لخطورة الاعتراف بدولة جنوب السودان التي يمرّ من أراضيها النيل الأبيض، واستمر بعلاقات عدائية مع إثيوبيا التي ينبع من هضبتها النيل الأزرق، ولم يستقبل من أمره ما استدبر لإيقاف مشروع سد النهضة أو للتفاهم مع إثيوبيا بالدبلوماسية أو بغيرها طيلة عقد من الزمن كانت الشركات الإسرائيلية والأميركية تنفذ خلاله مشروع بناء ذلك السد، ولم تستشعر أجهزة أمنه أن خمس مؤسسات مالية مصرية قد استثمرت في السندات الإثيوبية التي موّلت بناء السد الذي قد يحرم مصر من سرّ وجودها، وقد قيل قديماً أن مصر هبة النيل.
في شرق مصر تم إهمال الخاصرة الشرقية التي حددها تحتمس الثالث وسار على هديها كل من أتى من بعده، فلم يتم ايلاء شبه جزيرة سيناء أي اهتمام وتمّ استثناؤها من مشاريع التنمية والرعاية الحكومية، هذا الإهمال والتجاهل الذي هدف إلى إفراغها من كثير من سكانها إرضاء لتل أبيب عاد على مصر بنتائج عكسية إذ خلق بيئة رطبة ومناسبة لجراثيم الإرهاب والتطرف، في حين انصبّ اهتمام الدولة في مرحلة ما قبل الربيع الزائف على بناء حاجز تحت الأرض يحول دون إمداد غزة بحاجاتها الأساسية، وفي العهد الحالي تم إغراق الأنفاق الغزيّة بمياه البحر وإقامة جدار مكهرب فوق الأرض، وكأن المهم أمن «إسرائيل» لا أمن مصر القومي.
مصر التي نحبّ في خطر، وهذا الخطر لا يصيبها منفردة وإنما بالشراكة مع كامل المحيط العربي، مصر لم يهزمها الغرباء والأعداء ولا الجهات الخارجية أو المؤامرات الأجنبية، وإنما هزمها مَن قدّم أولوية البقاء في الحكم على حسابات الاستراتيجية والأمن القومي، ومن جعل الأمن القومي ضحيّة لأمن النظام.
على الرغم من كل تلك التسريبات التى كان يتم تسريبها عن عمد من جانب دوائر معادية لمصر، تسريبات تشارك فيها أطراف متعدد تكشف مدى التربص بمصر وبالدور المصرى، إلا أن ما يحدث الآن من تهديد متعدد الأطراف وفى تزامن غير مسبوق تجاوز كل مضامين تلك التسريبات التى كانت تؤكد أن “مصر ستبقى مصدراً للتهديد يجب التحسب له”.
من أبرز تلك التسريبات كانت مقولة أن مصر هى “التفاحة الكبرى” أو “الهدية الكبرى” التى جرى إطلاقها فى غمرة تساقط العواصم العربية الواحدة تلو الأخرى، كانت تلك المقولة تحمل إشارات أن “موعد مصر لم يأت بعد”، وأن هذا الموعد “سيأتى حتماً”. الملفت أن معظم هذه التسريبات كانت أمريكية وإسرائيلية، ما يعنى أن توقيع مصر لاتفاق السلام مع إسرائيل، لم يكن كافياً لإرضاء غرور الإسرائيليين، ولم يتوقفوا لحظة عن التعامل معها باعتبارها “العدو التاريخى”، وإن كان الصراع معها يبدو “صراعاً مؤجلاً” لحين الانتهاء من حسم مصائر الملفات الأخرى مثار التهديد. لم تتوقف أنظارهم لحظة عن متابعة تطور القدرات العسكرية المصرية بقلق شديد، سواء من ناحية كفاءة التسليح وتنوع مصادره بعيداً عن “أحادية التحكم الأمريكية” فى مصادر التسليح المصرى، أو من منظور تطور الكفاءة القتالية المصرية. ولم تغب سيناء لحظة عن أطماعهم انتظاراً لمجئ الوقت والحوافز التى تفرض عليهم العودة إليها مجدداً كى يتحول شعار “إسرائيل الكبرى” من “حلم” أو “أوهام” إلى أمر واقع.
لم تكن إسرائيل وحدها هى من يناصب مصر العداء ولكن كانت تركيا وبالذات مع سقوط أحلام رئيسها فى إحياء عهد “الخلافة العثمانية” بالتأسيس لـ “عثمانية جديدة”، مع سقوط مشروع حكم الإخوان فى مصر، وكانت إثيوبيا، ولكن على استحياء، وربما بخبث ودهاء يفوق الدهاء الإسرائيلى ويتجاوز الرعونة التركية، لكن ما يحدث الآن من تناغم فى التخطيط ضد مصر، سواء بتنسيق أو عدم تنسيق، بين إسرائيل وإثيوبيا وتركيا، يكشف، وربما للمرة الأولى أن مصر باتت “فى عمق دائرة الخطر”. فهل من الصدفة أن يتزامن إعلان رئيس الحكومة الإسرائيلية بنيامين نتنياهو وتأكيده أن يوليو المقبل هو موعد البدء الإسرائيلى الفعلى فى فرض السيادة الإسرائيلية على الكتل الاستيطانية الإسرائيلية ووادى عربة فى الضفة الغربية المحتلة، مع إعلان آبى أحمد رئيس الحكومة الإثيوبية تحديد يوليو المقبل موعداً لبدء ملء خزان “سد النهضة الإثيوبى” بالمياه، دون انتظار، أو بالأحرى دون اعتبار، لتوافق مع كل من مصر والسودان حول القضايا الخلافية المثارة معهما؟
فرض السيادة الإسرائيلية، بإرادة إسرائيلية مستقلة وبدعم أمريكى على الجزء الأكبر من الضفة الغربية للشروع الفعلى فى تصفية القضية الفلسطينية وفرض مشروع “إسرائيل الكبرى” كدولة يهودية على كل أرض فلسطين، وفرض السيادة الإثيوبية على نهر النيل وتصفية كل الحقوق التاريخية لمصر والسودان فى نهر النيل، التزاماً بقول آبى أحمد رئيس الحكومة الإثيوبية أن سد النهضة “أصبح قضية شرف وطنى ولن نتخلى عنه” وتأكيدات وزير خارجيته بأن “الأرض أرضنا، والمياه مياهنا، والمال الذى يبنى به سد النهضة مالنا، ولا قوة يمكنها معنا من بنائه”. هل هذا كله يمكن أن يكون محض صدفة وأن يكون شهر يوليو المقبل، أى بعد ما يقرب من أسبوع من الآن هو موعد خوض “معركة السيادة” الإسرائيلية والإثيوبية ضد مصر، باعتبار أن مصر أول المعنيين بمصير القضية الفلسطينية من منظور الأمن الوطنى المصرى البحت باعتبار أن فلسطين مكون أساسى فى نظرية الأمن الوطنى المصرى ناهيك عن كونها قضية أمن قومى عربى بالدرجة الأولى، ومصر هى على رأس المعنيين بواقع ومستقبل هذا الأمن القومى العربى.
من الصعب أن نتعامل ببراءة، ولا أقول بسذاجة مع المدلول الفعلى للتزامن فى شروع تل أبيب وأديس أبابا خوض ما يسمونه بـ “معركة فرض السيادة”، فى ظل قوة العلاقات الإسرائيلية- الإثيوبية، ووجود مكون شعبى إثيوبى مهم ضمن مكونات “الشعب الإسرائيلى” (يهود الفلاشا الإثيوبيين) ومجمل الإتفاقيات التى جرى التوقيع عليها بين إسرائيل وإثيوبيا خلال زيارة رئيس الحكومة الإثيوبية لإسرائيل، وفى ظل تأكيدات بأن “إسرائيل طرف قوى فى ملف سد النهضة” و”أطماع إسرائيل فى مياه النيل” وكونها طرفاً مباشراً فى إدارة ملف سد النهضة وتداعياته، سواء من الجانب الأمنى فى ظل تسريبات تؤكد بأن شبكة صواريخ إسرائيلية متطورة باتت مسئولة عن حماية سد النهضة، أو من الجانب التقنى حسب ما أفصحت عنه نائبة المدير العام للشئون الأفريقية فى وزارة الخارجية الإسرائيلية أيثان شيلين فى لقائها مع هيروت زامين وزيرة الدولة الإثيوبية للشئون الخارجية، حسب ما أوردته وكالة الأنباء الإثيوبية الرسمية، حيث أعلنت إسرائيل على لسان إيثان شيلين “استعدادها لتبادل الخبرات مع إثيوبيا فى مجال إدارة المياه”، ووصفت العلاقات الإسرائيلية مع إثيوبيا بأنها “تاريخية وتدعمها علاقات قوية بين الشعبين”.
هل ما يحدث هو توافق أم تحالف إسرائيلى- إثيوبى لإحكام الضغط على مصر؟
السؤال تزداد أهميته، بل وخطورته بدخول تركيا كطرف مباشر فى ما يمكن تسميته بـ “معركة كسر إرادات مع مصر” وهذه المرة فى العمق الإستراتيجى لمصر بالأراضى الليبية. تركيا التى تقاتل بعنف فى شمال سوريا لفرض منطقة نفوذ تركية شمال سوريا معتمدة على تحالفها مع المنظمات الإرهابية المتطرفة، وتسعى لإسقاط النظام فى سوريا، سواء بتنسيق مباشر أو غير مباشر مع كل من الولايات المتحدة وإسرائيل لتحقيق نفس الهدف تحت غطاء خوض معركة إخراج إيران من سوريا، اختارت هذه المرة فى عدائها المباشر مع مصر أن تتجاوز احتضان كل القوى المتآمرة ضد مصر على الأراضى التركية، وأن تنقل تهديدها إلى الحدود المصرية المباشرة فى إعلان تهديد مباشر للأمن المصرى من خلال دعم حكومة الوفاق برئاسة فايز السراج، دعماً عسكرياً بالأسلحة المتطورة وبالميليشيات الإرهابية لفرض السيطرة الكاملة على ليبيا. وفى إعلان تهديد مباشر للمصالح الاقتصادية المصرية من خلال السعى لفرض سيطرتها على حقول غاز المتوسط بالشكل الذى تريده إسقواءً بالسيطرة على القرار الليبى بهذا الخصوص.
تركيا تخوض الآن معركة خليج سرت، ويؤكد رئيسها رجب طيب أردوغان أنه “لن تكون تكون هناك أى مفاوضات سياسية، أو وقف لإطلاق النار فى ليبيا إلا بعد سيطرة قوات حلفائه على مدينة سرت” لذلك رفض إعلان القاهرة كمبادرة مصرية لحل الأزمة الليبية سياسياً، ويسعى للسيطرة على مدينة سرت باعتبارها “بوابة الشرق الليبى” حيث آبار النفط والغاز واحتياطياته الرئيسية، وإذا نجح فى هذه المعركة فإنه يعتقد أنه سيكون بمقدوره تكريس النفوذ التركى فى ليبيا سياسياً وعسكرياً.
يحدث هذا كله على حدود مصر الغربية بتزامن مع ما يحدث من تهديد إثيوبى لموارد مصر الحياتية من مياه النيل، ومع المخطط الإسرائيلى للتوسع والتهويد وفرض السيادة على معظم أنحاء الضفة الغربية فى وقت بدأت فيه الإدارة الأمريكية بفرض أقسى وأقصى عقوبات ضد سوريا ببدء تنفيذ أسوأ قانون عقوبات أمريكى على سوريا يحمل اسم “قانون قيصر لحماية المدنيين السوريين” لعلها تستطيع أن تحقق بالعقوبات الاقتصادية ما عجزت هى وحلفاءها عن تحقيقه طيلة السنوات الماضية، بالعمل العسكرى الذى تحول فعلاً إلى “حرب على سوريا” ابتداء من عام 2014، هدفه ليس فقط إسقاط الحكم السورى وإنهاء تحالفه مع إيران بل كان الهدف هو إسقاط سوريا كما أسقط العراق. ما يحدث هو “هندسة للأزمات” المحيطة بمصر تضعها فى عمق “دائرة الخطر” الذى يجمع للمرة الأولى إسرائيل وإثيوبيا وتركيا فى تهديد مصر وأمنها ومصالحها الوطنية، تطور يفرض على مصر حسابات ومراجعات كثيرة للأهداف والمصالح والقدرات لمواجهة الخطر.
During WWII, the leaders of the World Zionist Movementrefused an offer by London to help European Jews to immigrate to British occupied Palestine. But they refused the offer. Why? Because they were only interested in the creation of a Western post in the heartland of Islam – Palestine. Their agenda had nothing to do with the creation of a ‘safe heaven’ for the European Jews.
Currently, the pro-Israel Ethiopian minority governmenthas repeated the same story by refusing neighboring Muslim-majority Eritrea’s offer to let its two large ports bring in food aid into Ethiopia and clear a backlog of food aid at the small Djibouti port.
Ethiopia rejected the offer under pressure from Israel and American Jewish Lobby that want a regime change in Eritrea.
According to aid agencies more than 10 million Ethiopians are facing starvation and more than $1.4 billion is needed to deal with the crisis. Only half of that has been secured so far.
But as famine ravaged the horn of Africa nation, aid ships are waiting for days to unload food aid at the Djibouti port, the only that serves the landlocked nation of about 96 million people.
What kind of leaders refuse to save the lives of thousands of their own citizens to die of starvation to please their masters in Washington and Tel Aviv?
The answer comes from Thomas C. Mountain, an investigative journalist living in Asmara (here).
“Why isn’t the USA and its lickspittles in the EU pressuring the Ethiopians, who are supposed to be under UN Article 7 Sanctions for their refusal to accept final and binding peace and border agreements, and entirely dependent on foreign loans to keep running ($11 billion in 2015)? The politics of famine is what it’s all about as death from starvation stalks Ethiopia, again.” Mountain said.
The US and Israel which are world’s greatest human rights abusers, have always been in the forefront for waging so-called ‘humanitarian wars’ against regimes that refuse subservience to the world Zionist power. Like Sudan, Eritrea had been accused of human rights violations, and supporting al-Shabaab in Somalia. The country has been under the US sanctions even though all the allegations have been refuted by the UN officials.
The so-called ‘terrorist group’ al-Shabaab was created and is funded by the USand Israel to demonize Muslims and destabilize African Muslim majority nation-states just like the ISIS/ISIL in Iraq and Syria.
The Zionist enemies of Eritreans don’t want them to live under an independent sovereign government that refuse to take orders from the anti-African Western colonial powers. But Eritreans will not surrender their sovereign rights nor they will abandon their support for the government’s independent political stance under any PR lies including the human rights violations.
UPROOTED PALESTINIANS: SALAM ALQUDS ALAYKUM 