More War by Other Means: Sanctioning the Wife of Syria’s President Makes No Sense to Anyone

By Philip Giraldi, Ph.D.
Source: Strategic Culture

January 7, 2021

More sanctions, by all means. More grief and suffering and more people around the world wondering what exactly the United States is doing.

I am a recipient of regular, usual weekly, emails from the Department of the Treasury providing an “Update to OFAC’s list of Specially Designated Nationals (SDN) and Blocked Persons.” OFAC is the Office of Foreign Assets Control, which is tasked with both identifying and managing the financial punishments meted out to those individuals and groups that have been sanctioned by the United States government. A recent update, on November 10th, included “Non-Proliferation Designations; Iran-related Designations.” There were ten items on the list, names of Chinese and Iranian individuals and companies. Those who are “Specially Designated” on the list are subject to having their assets blocked if located in the United States and are also not allowed to engage in any financial transactions that go through U.S. banking channels. As many international banks respect U.S. Treasury “designations” lest they themselves be subjected to secondary sanctions that often means in effect that the individual or group cannot move money in a large part of the global financial marketplace.

The complete SDN list is hundreds of pages long. The Treasury Department defines and justifies OFAC’s mission “As part of its enforcement efforts, OFAC publishes a list of individuals and companies owned or controlled by, or acting for or on behalf of, targeted countries. It also lists individuals, groups, and entities, such as terrorists and narcotics traffickers designated under programs that are not country-specific. Collectively, such individuals and companies are called ‘Specially Designated Nationals’ or ‘SDNs.’ Their assets are blocked and U.S. persons are generally prohibited from dealing with them.”

In reality, of course, OFAC’s sanctions are highly political. They are clearly a form of economic warfare, particularly when entire sectors of a nation’s economy are blocked or a part of a government itself is listed as has been the case with the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Force. Wave after wave of “maximum pressure” sanctions on Iran have made it difficult for the country to sell its only major marketable resource, oil, and it has been locked out of most normal financial networks, making it difficult or even impossible to buy food and medicines.

In many cases sanctions have no practical effect but are rather intended to send a message. There have been new sanctions directed against Moscow and Russian government officials have been sanctioned due to their alleged involvement in activities that the United States does not approve of. The sanctions are imposed even though those “specially designated” have no assets in the U.S. and do not engage in any international financial transactions that could be blocked or disrupted. In those cases, the federal government is sending a message to whomever has been sanctioned to warn them that they are being watched and their behavior has become a matter of record. It is basically a form of intimidation.

Whether sanctions actually work is debatable. The example of Cuba, which was sanctioned by the U.S. for nearly sixty years, would suggest not. Some would argue that on the contrary countries with totalitarian regimes would actually improve their behavior if their citizens could travel freely and welcome visitors, providing evidence that foreigners do not pose a threat justifying a police state.

Within the United States government, it is largely accepted that the most powerful advocate of the sanctions regime is Secretary of State Michael Pompeo, who has been the driving force behind recent sanctions directed against both China and Iran. If that is so he might well be challenged on one of the most bizarre and basically pointless applications of sanctions in recent years, targeting Asma the wife of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad as well as her family that lives in London and are British citizens. Per Pompeo’s statement on the new sanctions “The Department of State today is imposing sanctions on Asma al-Assad, the wife of Bashar al-Assad, for impeding efforts to promote a political resolution of the Syrian conflict pursuant to Section 2(a)(i)(D) of Executive Order 13894… Asma al-Assad has spearheaded efforts on behalf of the regime to consolidate economic and political power, including by using her so-called charities and civil society organizations.”

But the real kicker is Pompeo’s condemnation of Asma, of Syrian origin but English born and raised, is how he involves her family. Her father-in-law Fawaz is a renowned cardiologist at Cromwell Hospital in South Kensington who was educated in England and has lived there for decades. “In addition, we are sanctioning several members of Asma al-Assad’s immediate family, including Fawaz Akhras, Sahar Otri Akhras, Firas al Akhras, and Eyad Akhras as per Section 2(a)(ii) of EO 13894. The Assad and Akhras families have accumulated their ill-gotten riches at the expense of the Syrian people through their control over an extensive, illicit network with links in Europe, the Gulf, and elsewhere.”

Inevitably, no evidence is provided to support any of the allegations about Asma al-Assad and her English family. Asma’s charities are for real in her war-torn country and she is highly respected and admired by those who know her and are not influenced by U.S. and Israeli propaganda.

In reality, the United States has been trying hard to overthrow the Syrian government since 2004 when the Syria Accountability Act was passed. Much of the heat in Congress behind the passage of the act was generated by the Israel Lobby, which wanted to weaken the regime and reduce its ability to represent a viable military force possibly capable of regaining the occupied Golan Heights. Be that as it may, the United States has been hostile to the country’s government and has frequently called for regime change. To bring that about, the U.S. supported al-Qaeda linked terrorist groups operating against Damascus and American soldiers continue to occupy Syrian oil fields in the southeast portion of the country. The Syrians have also been subjected to waves of sanctions that have done grave damage to their economy. American and Israeli concerns have sometimes been linked to the presence of Damascus’ allies Hezbollah and Iran, both of whom have military units based inside Syria, but the simple fact is that neither Iranians nor Lebanese in any way threaten the vastly superior American and Israeli forces present in the region.

One has to ask why, given the realpolitik playing out in the Middle East, Washington and Pompeo feel compelled to go after Asma al-Assad and her family, apparently to include absurdly blaming relatives living for many years outside of Syria for fueling the war. More sanctions, by all means. More grief and suffering and more people around the world wondering what exactly the United States is doing.

حوار العام: توثيق شفوي بامتياز

قاآني لم يملأ فراغ سليماني.. حزب الله قلق بعد رحيله
بثينة شعبان

بثينة شعبان 

المصدر: الميادين نت 4 كانون الثاني

لقد خطّ الأستاذ غسان بن جدو والسيد حسن نصر الله في حوار العام مساراً هاماً للتوثيق الشفوي لا بدّ من متابعته واستكماله ليكون القاسم المشترك بين السياسة والإعلام والتاريخ وثقافة الحاضر والمستقبل.

 لقد خطّ الأستاذ غسان بن جدو والسيد حسن نصر الله في حوار العام مساراً هاماً جداً للتوثيق الشفوي

أن تجلس أمام الشاشة شاخصاً وناصتاً لقرابة أربع ساعات ولا تريد حتى لصوت الرياح أن يزعج خلوتك مع ما يقال، ولا لأحد أن يدب قربك لأي سبب كان؛ فهذا يعني أنك تنصت لما يلامس شغاف قلبك وعصارة عقلك ووجدانك وبأسلوب سلس وهادئ ومريح لا ادعاء فيه ولا محاولة لإبراز حجم مساهمة المتكلم أو المحاور أو تسليط الضوء على ما قد يزيد من مكانة أو مساهمة أي منهما. 

بل كان التركيز والتصويب كله على توثيق حقائق ومعطيات أتت بالكثير من الجديد هدفها الأساس إنصاف الناس قادة كانوا أم شهداء أم جنوداً أم مجموعات مغمورة لم يذكرها أحد، والنتيجة الجميلة كانت توثيقاً شفوياً لذاكرة قائد في الميدان يقارع، ولا يزال، تحالف الشر بين أعداء الأمة وبين المستسلمين الخانعين على مدى سنوات وهو يعمل مع الأصدقاء والإخوة والرفاق عملاً أهمّ ما يميّزه الصدق والغيرية وإنكار الذات ووضع مصير الأوطان والشعوب فوق كلّ اعتبار.

شعرتُ وأنا أحضر هذا الحوار أنني لا أريده أن يصل إلى النهاية أبداً بل أتمنى أن يتطرق إلى كلّ الأوضاع في العالم لأستزيد من خبايا خبرة هذا الذي يحمل اسمه إرث الرسالة والذي يدلي باتصالاته ومعلوماته عن القادة والرفاق وسير العمل على أكثر من صعيد وفي أكثر من بلد في هذه الساحة الإقليمية الصعبة والمعقدة والتي يعصف بها أحياناً عاملون في الطابور الخامس ليذرّوا الرماد في العيون ويمنعوا الحقيقة عن المتسائلين والتوّاقين لمعرفة الحقيقة وجوهرها.

استزدنا من السيد نصرالله عن شخصية فارس من فرسان المقاومة تحلّى بكلّ صفات الفارس النبيلة والأخلاقية والإنسانية الراقية الشفافة؛ فكما كان صلباً وعنيداً في مقارعة الأعداء كان مرهفاً في مقاربة آلام الآخرين ومتواضعاً جداً في تعامله مع الناس وفي نظرته إلى نفسه؛ فجسّد بخلقه وعمله الآية الكريمة “وعباد الرحمن يمشون على الأرض هوناً وإذا خاطبهم الجاهلون قالوا سلاماً”.

وكلما أُفرد ملف عن هذا الفارس اكتشفنا زاوية من شخصيته وعمله وخلقه ونبله لَم نكُن لننفذ إليها من قبل لولا حوار السيد هذا. 

هذا التوثيق في غاية الأهمية لأنه الإرث الذي نتركه للأجيال، والثقافة التي نغذيهم بها وننشئهم عليها؛ فإذا كان الشهيد قاسم سليماني الرجل الذي لا بديل عنه فإن إرثه العسكري والسياسي والأخلاقي والإنساني حكماً لا بديل عنه ويجب أن يعكف الدارسون على توثيقه وتوصيفه ووضعه في متناول الأجيال القادمة كي يساهم في تشكيل وعيها عن الماضي ويساعدها على اجتراح الوسائل المناسبة لمواجهة أعاصير الحاضر واحتمالات المستقبل. هذا الإرث هو السلاح الأمضى كي نقوّض خطوات الأعداء الذين ظنوا أنهم بتنفيذهم هذا العمل الإرهابي المجرم يستطيعون القضاء على هذا المسار النبيل.

الشهيد قاسم سليماني لم يعد رجلاً عادياً بل أصبح مساراً وثقافة وأسلوباً وقدوة، وعلينا ترسيخ هذا النموذج بكلّ الوسائل الممكنة من توثيق وتوضيح وشروحات كي يشكل عضداً لثقافة المقاومة التي هي الضمانة الوحيدة لاستمرار الأجيال على هذا النهج إلى أن يتحقق تحرير الأرض ويتم بناء الأنموذج الذي يضمن حرية الأرض والإنسان وزرع القيم والتي هي أخشى ما يخشاه العدو لأن الصراع الحقيقي هو على القيم والأخلاق والمسار الإنساني الذي تتبناه الشعوب، والصراع هذا هو صراع بالفعل وهو الصراع القديم الحديث بين الحقّ والباطل والخير والشرّ وبين من يقدّس إنسانية الإنسان ومن يسعى لانتهاكها وظلمها كي يراكم ثرواته.

في هذا التوثيق الحصيف الانسيابي الهام جداً تطرّق السيد إلى ما اعترى سوريا وإلى الأشهر الأولى من الحرب الكونية على الشعب السوري فبدّد الأوهام وكذّب السفهاء والمتاجرين بدماء وحيوات شعوبهم؛ إذ ذكر حقيقة في غاية الأهمية وهي أن السيد الرئيس بشار الأسد ومنذ البداية سأل ما هو المطلوب وأنا جاهز للحوار، وأضاف السيد نصرالله أن الأصدقاء في الجمهورية الإسلامية الإيرانية استنفروا للاتصال، كلٌّ بأصدقائه ومعارفه، لكي يبدأ النقاش والحوار حول المطلوب وتعقد الطاولات المستديرة حول المهام المطلوبة لإخماد نار الفتنة وإنقاذ البلاد، ولكن الجواب الذي عاد به الجميع هو أن الطرف المدعي يؤمن أن النظام في طريقه إلى الانهيار وأنهم سوف ينتظرون إلى أن ينهار هذا النظام ولا مصلحة لهم في الدخول في مفاوضات أو نقاشات أو حوار معه الآن. 

هذا يتقاطع، وهذا للتاريخ أيضاً، مع الدور المتواضع الذي كلفني به سيادة الرئيس مع بعض الشخصيات هنا داخل سوريا  لنتحدث مع من يعتبرون أنفسهم ممثلي المعارضة ونرى ما هي طروحاتهم وماذا يريدون أن يبحثوا وما هي في نظرهم النقاط التي ترضي الجميع وتنقذ البلد من أي احتمالات خطرة أو سيناريوهات مغرضة. 

وقد قابلنا كل من كان يقود ما أسموه “حراكاً” في المراحل الأولى، وامتدت اللقاءات لساعات وأيام كانوا يركزون خلالها على سرد تاريخي لأي تجاوزات حصلت منذ عشرات السنين حتى من قبل مسؤولين غادروا البلد ولم يعودوا إليه، ونحن نحاول إعادة البوصلة إلى الوقت الراهن ونقول دعونا من كلّ هذا ونركز على ما يتوجب فعله اليوم كي نتعاون أنتم ونحن في وضع الأمور في نصابها الصحيح ولا نعرّض شعبنا وبلدنا لما قد لا تحمد عقباه. 

ولكن القرار الذي فهمناه من كلّ هؤلاء في ختام كلّ حوار هو أنهم يفضّلون الانتظار وكان واضحاً أنهم كانوا ينتظرون وعداً وعهداً من أعداء سوريا بقلب الطاولة لصالحهم لأن أسيادهم كانوا قد روّجوا عبر وسائل الإعلام أن المسالة مسألة وقت قصير وبذلك شجعوا على الانشقاقات وعلى أن تأخذ هذه المعارضات المواقف المؤدية إلى تدمير مؤسسات البلد ومنشآته أملاً منهم في تحقيق الموعود واعتلائهم سدة الحكم كما وعدهم أسيادهم بذلك وكما جرت الأمور في بلدان أخرى كتونس وليبيا والعراق. 

هذا التوضيح من قبل السيد نصرالله ومن قبل من عمل في الداخل في غاية الأهمية، لأنه يؤرّخ لمرحلة قد تبدو ضبابية لأجيال المستقبل، ويجيب عن أسئلة جوهرية شغلت بال الكثيرين هنا في سوريا: هل كان من الممكن تفادي الكارثة؟ وهل كان إبداء مرونة أكبر سيجبر الآخرين على التراجع عن تحالفهم مع أعداء سوريا وعن مخططاتهم والعمل مع دولتهم وشعبهم على احتواء الحراك في بداياته؟

هذه الأسئلة وغيرها كثير مما يطلقه المغرضون تمت الإجابة عليها وبشكل واضح وصريح من قبل شاهد كان على تماس مباشر مع السيد الرئيس بشار الأسد ومن قبل قائد معنيّ بالمقاومة في لبنان وسوريا والعراق وإيران، ومن قبل إنسان يشهد له العدو قبل الصديق بالصدق المطلق في كلّ ما ينطق به لأنه مسؤول أمام الله قبل أن يكون مسؤولاً أمام البشر. والسؤال: كيف يمكن تطوير وتكثيف هذا النوع من الحوارات التوثيقية مع مسؤولين في المنطقة وخارجها بحيث يتم تسجيل هذا التاريخ من أفواه من صنعوه وقادوه وصاغوه، وبعد ذلك ينشغل الكتاب والباحثون والإعلاميون بترتيب وتصنيف هذه المعلومات لتشكل إضافة نوعية لثقافة المقاومة في المنطقة ولتورث الأجيال القادمة تاريخها الحقيقي وتمكنها من التصدّي لكل حملات التشويه والترويج للأعداء والخصوم؟

هذه الحملات التي تعتمد على اختلاق الأكاذيب والمراهنة على سرعة وتيرة الحياة وعدم صبر الكاتب والمتلقي. لقد خطّ الأستاذ غسان بن جدو والسيد حسن نصر الله في حوار العام مساراً هاماً جداً للتوثيق الشفوي لا بدّ من متابعته ووضع الأطر المنهجية والخارطة الشاملة لاستكماله ليكون القاسم المشترك بين السياسة والإعلام والتاريخ وثقافة الحاضر والمستقبل.

فيديوات ذات صلة

مقالات ذات صلة

Nasrallah in public dialogue: Loyalty to Suleimani and fairness to Assad نصرالله في حوار العام: الوفاء لسليمانيّ وإنصاف الأسد

**Please scroll down for the English Machine translation**

نصرالله في حوار العام: الوفاء لسليمانيّ وإنصاف الأسد

ناصر قنديل

في الحوار الغنيّ والمليء بالمعاني والمعادلات والمعلومات، الذي أجراه الزميل غسان بن جدو مع الأمين العام لحزب الله السيد حسن نصرالله، محاور كثيرة، لبنانيّة وعربيّة وإقليميّة ودوليّة، لكن في الحوار ثوابت ومحاور دار حولها كلام السيد نصرالله في العقل والقلب والمشاعر، أبرزها ما اتصل بالوفاء لقائد فيلق القدس في الحرس الثوري الإيراني الجنرال قاسم سليماني، وما اتصل بإنصاف الرئيس السوري بشار الأسد، فقد مدّ السيّد يده الى جعبته المليئة بالمعلومات ليكشف ما لم يُقَلْ من قبل ولم يكن في التداول، ليقدّم منها ما يكشف عن جوانب مضيئة في سيرة الشخصيتين اللتين تعنيان الكثير للسيد كما كان واضحاً من مسار الحوار.

في الحديث عن الحاج قاسم، كما يُناديه السيد، تناول السيد نصرالله شخصية الحاج قاسم كمثقف ومناضل ومفكّر وقائد عسكري استراتيجي، وكإنسان مرهَف مؤمن ومتواضع وخلوق وصاحب لهفة ونخوة وشهامة وكرم، لكنه خلال استعراضه للأوضاع في المنطقة كشف أدواراً تاريخية للشهيد سليماني، تُعرَف للمرة الأولى، سواء على مستوى التفكير او التخطيط او المتابعة او التنفيذ، فما يعلمه الناس عن دور قياديّ ميدانيّ للحاج قاسم في حربي سورية والعراق بوجه الإرهاب التكفيريّ، ترجمه في الحضور في المواقع الأماميّة للقتال وتحدّي الخطر ليس إلا القليل مما يمكن قوله عن سيرة هذا القائد.

في فلسطين الحاج قاسم صاحب فكرة تزويد المقاومة بصواريخ الكورنيت، وهي الصواريخ التي نالها حزب الله كمساهمة من القيادة السوريّة بقرار من الرئيس بشار الأسد، والتي لعبت دوراً حاسماً في صناعة انتصار المقاومة في حرب تموز 2006، وشكلت بعد وصولها إلى غزة، عنصراً حاسماً في تشكيل عامل الردع الحاسم في وجه مخططات الهجوم البرّي، وفي العراق لم يكن الحاج قاسم قائد المواجهة مع تنظيم داعش وحسب، بل كان العمود الفقري لتشكيلات حركات المقاومة التي فرضت على الأميركيّ الانسحاب عام 2011، وفي سورية تخطى دوره موقعه الميداني ورعايته لمشاركة قوى المقاومة في الدفاع عن سورية، فهو أول من أضاء على القلق من أن تكون سورية في عين الاستهداف من خلال دراسته لظواهر وبواطن الربيع العربي، وبرؤيته الاستباقية ونقاشها مع الرئيس الأسد والقيادة السوريّة وقيادة المقاومة والقيداة الإيرانية أمكن احتواء المراحل الأولى من التحضير للحرب على سورية، وصولاً لنضج المواجهة الميدانيّة كخيار لا بد منه، وفي سورية كان للحاج قاسم دور مؤثر في حسم الرئيس الروسي فلاديمير بوتين قرار المشاركة الميدانية في الحرب على سورية. فالشخصية القيادية السياسية والاستراتيجية للشهيد سليماني التي كشف عنها السيد نصرالله كانت مساهمته في إحياء ذكرى استشهاده.

في الإنصاف الذي يستحقه الرئيس السوري بشار الأسد، بوجه حروب التشويه والإساءة والافتراء، قدّم السيد نصرالله مساهمة راقية وعالية، كشفت عن جوانب من أدوار ومواقف للرئيس الأسد، تسهم في فهمه كقائد تاريخيّ شجاع وملتزم بخيارات حاسمة تجاه مفاهيم الاستقلال والسيادة والمقاومة. فالسيد نصرالله يقول إن الرئيس الأسد لا يقبل أيّ تدخل او وصاية على شؤون سورية من الأعداء ولا من الحلفاء، ويؤكد أنه يتحدّث حديث العارف هنا، وفي منزلة الحديث عن فلسطين يورد السيد نصرالله واقعة أنه عندما سمع من الحاج قاسم سليماني فكرة تزويد المقاومة في فلسطين بصواريخ الكورنيت وتريّث لسؤال الرئيس الأسد صاحب هذه الصواريخ، متوجّهاً للرئيس الأسد بالسؤال، لم يجد لديه أي حسابات كان يمكن انتظارها من رئيس أي دولة في موقعه تجاه نقل سلاح اشتراه الجيش السوري من روسيا الى داخل فلسطين المحتلة، والشهادة اللافتة التي تحدّث عنها السيد نصرالله كانت للميزات الشخصية للرئيس الأسد خصوصاً لجهة سر القوة والثبات والتماسك في أحلك الظروف وأشدّها قسوة وتسبباً بالقلق والخطر.

حوار العام مع السيد نصرالله كان مكرّساً لإعلاء شان محور المقاومة، في الوفاء لرئيس أركان جيوشه الشهيد، وفي إنصاف القائد السياسي والعسكري الذي انتصر على أخطر حرب كونيّة.

فيديوات متعلقة

Nasrallah in public dialogue: Loyalty to Suleimani and fairness to Assad

Nasser Kandil

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is Untitled-988.png

In the rich dialogue, which is full of meanings, equations and information, which was conducted by colleague Ghassan Ben Jeddou with the Secretary General of Hizbullah many themes, Lebanese, Arab, regional and international, but in the dialogue were constants loyalty to the commander of the Quds Force in the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, General Qassem Soleimani, and fairness of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. It reveals bright aspects in the biographies of the two characters as was clear from the path of dialogue where Nasrallah revealed what he did not say before and was not in circulation.

In talking about Haj Qassem, as al-Sayyid calls him, Mr. Nasrallah addressed the character of Haj Qassem, as Mr. Nasrallah calls him, as an intellectual, fighter, intellectual and strategic military leader, and as a slender, devious, humble, creative, eager, magnanimous and generous person, , and as a human being delicate, believing, humble, moral, eager, generous, at the level of thinking, planning, follow-up, or implementation, what people know about the field leadership role of Hajj Qassem in the wars in Syria and Iraq in the face of takfiri terrorism, translated into presence in the front sites of the fighting and challenging the danger is nothing but a little of what can be said about the biography of this leader.

In Palestine, Haj Qassem, who had the idea of supplying the resistance with the Kornet missiles, which Hezbollah received as a contribution from the Syrian leadership by the decision of President Bashar al-Assad, which played a crucial role in the manufacture of the victory of the resistance in the July 2006 war, and formed after its arrival in Gaza, a decisive element the decisive deterrence in the face of the Zionist plans of the ground attack, and in Iraq Haj Qassem was not only the leader of the confrontation with ISIS, but was the backbone of the formations of resistance movements that imposed on the American withdrawal in 20111. Haj Qassem through his study of the phenomena and the signs of the “Arab Spring”, is the first to highlight the concern that Syria is in the eye of targeting and his proactive vision and discussion with President Assad and the Syrian leadership and the leadership of the Resistance and Iranian constraints was able to contain the first stages of preparation of the war on Syria, to mature the field confrontation as an option, and in Syria, Haj Qassem had an influential role in resolving President Putin Vladimir’s decision to interfere in the war on Syria. The political and strategic leadership of Shahid Soleimani, revealed by Mr. Nasrallah, was his contribution to the commemoration of his martyrdom.

In the fairness that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad deserves, in the face of wars of distortion, abuse and slander, Mr. Nasrallah has made a high-class contribution, which revealed aspects of the roles and positions of President Al-Assad, which contribute to his understanding as a courageous historical leader committed to decisive choices towards the concepts of independence, sovereignty and resistance. Mr. Nasrallah says that President Al-Assad does not accept any interference or guardianship on the Affairs of Syria from enemies or allies, Mr. Nasrallah mentioned that Haj Qassem Soleimani asked to provide the resistance in Palestine with Cornet missiles purchased by the Syrian army, which was done after getting Assad’s approval being the owner of these missiles

The general dialogue with Mr. Nasrallah was dedicated to promoting the axis of resistance, in loyalty to the chief of staff of his martyr armies, and in the fairness of the political and military leader who triumphed over the most dangerous global war.

President Assad Slaughtered Neoliberalism’s Four Sacred Cows

By Andrew Korybko

Source

President Assad Slaughtered Neoliberalism

Syrian President Assad just slaughtered neoliberalism’s four sacred cows of gay marriage, radical secularism, marijuana legalization, and gender theory in a short video of his latest speech that recently went viral on social media where he condemned these examples of “total moral degeneracy” that he very passionately believes “target our humanity”.

The “Great Social/Civilizational Reset”

The increasingly sharp contrast between the West’s extreme neoliberal social values and most of the rest of the world’s embrace of conservative traditionalism was brought to the fore of global attention after October’s terrorist beheading of a French schoolteacher for sharing satirical cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad. The author published an analysis at the time asking “Is A ‘Great Social/Civilizational Reset Upon Us?”, which predicted that each value system’s proponents will become more vocal in the future but that this doesn’t necessarily imply that the fearmongered “Clash of Civilizations” scenario is inevitable. Rather, what’s likely to unfold is that each side more proudly reasserts their identity as time goes on, defending that which they hold dearest against what they regard as the threat represented by the other system. This is precisely what recently happened after a short video of Syrian President Assad’s latest speech went viral on social media where he slaughtered the four sacred cows of neoliberalism.

Syrian Girl Made The Syrian Leader Go Viral

Mimi Al Laham, also known as Syrian Girl on Twitter, translated the most important part into English. Her work was then shared by Infowars as part of their article titled “Bashar Al-Assad: Neoliberalism is Based on ‘Total Moral Degeneracy’”, which in turn brought it to the attention of countless people across the world. President Assad is known for his solid support of secularism in the face of fundamentalist religious threats to his country’s society, yet casual observers would have been mistaken if they assumed that this means that he’s sympathetic to neoliberalism. The reality couldn’t be more different since the Syrian leader showed that it’s possible to be a secular anti-liberal unlike what many people might have naively thought. Some of his own supporters abroad might even be a bit surprised by what he said since they probably didn’t expect him to group gay marriage, radical secularism, marijuana legalization, and gender theory together as examples of “total moral degeneracy” which he very passionately believes “target our humanity.”

Slaughtering The Four Sacred Cows

For the reader’s convenience, the author is sharing Syrian Girl’s translation of President Assad’s speech below:

Neoliberalism is based on promoting a total moral degeneracy and separating individuals from any principles or values and affiliations and beliefs in order to reach this moral degeneracy. Neoliberalism promoted gay marriage. They started in the 1970s and now gay marriage is legal. And now they have children but it’s different from adopting because how can they have children?

Neoliberalism promoted that a child does not choose his own religion and this is against the child’s freedom of expression. A child is born without any religion and later choose his own religion when he’s grown up. This is against human nature. Ever since human made their own idols and Gods, a child would instinctively belong to his family’s religion. They contradict humanity itself.

It has recently promoted that marijuana is not harmful and now it’s sold in shops legally. They started claiming that drugs are not harmful, and later they will find something more harmful. Now in some places you can buy marijuana-flavored bread. This is neoliberalism. It (neoliberalism) now claims that a child is born and does not have a gender, that the child chooses later to be a male or a female. Very strange indeed!

So what do we understand from this? Neoliberalism targets our humanity, and by doing so, it collides with religions because religions serve humanity while neoliberalism separates individuals from their values.”

From the above, there’s no doubt that President Assad slaughtered all four of neoliberalism’s sacred cows.

Reviewing President Assad’s Principled Views

Gay marriage, as he noted, has been pushed by neoliberals onto society for nearly the past half-century, after which it finally succeeded to such a wild extent that sex change surgeries can now even lead to so-called “male pregnancies”. According to President Assad, the radical neoliberal ideology of forcibly secularizing children “contradicts humanity itself”. Legalizing drugs, and especially Western society’s normalization of marijuana, is harmful in his eyes, and he also regards gender theory as “very strange indeed”. Taken together, it can unambiguously be said that President Assad sees little difference between “impregnating” sex-changed males, forcing children to accept secularism despite their parents’ wishes, eating a marijuana “brownie”, and convincing children that gender is a choice. These are all similar expressions of neoliberalism’s “moral degeneracy” and “targeting of humanity”, hence why they’re equally condemned. All four of these are like a cancer eating Western society from within, something that he wants to avoid having happen in Syria.

The Syrian Model Stands To Inspire The World

President Assad’s very principled defense of traditional values despite his vehement support for secularism challenges the assumption that the only ones who support the former are religious fundamentalists. As proven by none other than himself and his millions of supporters across the world, it’s entirely possible to simultaneously support secularism and traditional values while being strongly against both neoliberalism and religious fundamentalism. It’s not an either-or choice like those who want to provoke a so-called “Clash of Civilizations” dishonestly try to make everyone think. The world is so complex that not every society neatly falls into one or the other category as Syria shows. For this reason, the Syrian model might eventually be replicated by other countries that are striving to strike a balance between those two social extremes. In hindsight, the nearly decade-long Hybrid War of Terror that was launched against his country in 2011 might have even been partially predicated on erasing Syria’s unique social system from the face of the earth in order to prevent that.

Leaked files show how UK govt spent millions exploiting Syrian women in cynical PR offensive

RT

18 Dec, 2020 15:17 

Leaked files show how UK govt spent millions exploiting Syrian women in cynical PR offensive
FILE PHOTO: Women stand as they wait their turn to cast the votes inside a polling station during the parliamentary elections in Douma, in the eastern suburbs of Damascus, Syria July 19, 2020 ©  REUTERS/Omar Sanadiki

By Kit Klarenberg, an investigative journalist exploring the role of intelligence services in shaping politics and perceptions. Follow Kit on Twitter @KitKlarenberg

A swath of leaked documents reveals the lengths to which the British government went to paint the Syrian opposition in a flattering light. They also confirm that women unknowingly formed part of this effort.

The leaked UK Foreign & Commonwealth Office (FCO) documents reveal a variety of covert ways in which London sought to not only propagandize women in Syria, but to exploit them as weapons in a vast information warfare campaign waged at home and abroad.

The papers are among bombshell files released by hacktivist collective Anonymous, which expose a number of cloak-and-dagger actions undertaken by Whitehall against Damascus. Women figured prominently in a number of the plans, which cost the FCO millions of pounds over many years.

‘Outreach initiatives’

The propaganda value of women in conflicts has long-been well understood and cynically exploited by governments.

A leaked US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) memorandum from March 2010 on covert means of increasing flagging support for NATO’s Afghanistan mission noted women in the country “could serve as ideal messengers” in “humanizing” the military occupation, due to their “ability to speak personally and credibly about their experiences under the Taliban, their aspirations for the future, and their fears of a Taliban victory.”

“Outreach initiatives that create media opportunities for Afghan women…could help to overcome pervasive skepticism among women in Western Europe toward the mission,” the document noted. “Media events that feature testimonials by Afghan women would probably be most effective if broadcast on programs that have large and disproportionately female audiences.”

Over a decade later, Afghanistan remains one of the worst countries in the world to be a woman, by some margin.

Roughly a year after that CIA memo was authored, A Gay Girl in Damascus, a blog purportedly written by Syrian-American lesbian Amina Arraf, garnered significant mainstream attention. Widely hailed for her “fearless” and “inspiring” eyewitness reporting, the author was lauded as a symbol of the “progressive” revolution erupting in the country.

In June  2011, Amina’s cousin announced on the blog she (Amina) had been kidnapped by three armed men in the Syrian capital. In response, numerous Facebook pages were set up calling for Amina’s release and ‘liked’ by tens of thousands, #FreeAmina trended widely on Twitter, journalists and rights groups begged Western governments to demand her release, and the US State Department announced it was investigating her disappearance.

Six days later, it was revealed ‘Amina’ was in fact Tom MacMaster, a US citizen residing in Scotland. While corporate news outlets hurriedly rushed to forget all about the hoax they’d so comprehensively fallen for, their appetite for dubious ‘human interest’ stories emanating from the crisis evidently wasn’t diminished.

‘Huge global coverage’

In July 2019, an image of two young Syrian girls trapped in rubble in opposition-occupied Idlib attempting to haul their sister to safety as she dangled off the precipice of a dilapidated building, their father looking on in horror above, spread far and wide on social media.

The photo, snapped by a photographer for Syrian news service SY24, went viral the world over. Unbeknownst to the overwhelming majority of observers, though, SY24 was created and funded by The Global Strategy Network (TGSN), founded by Richard Barrett, a former MI6 counter-terrorism director.

In a file submitted to the FCO, TGSN boasted of how “campaigns” it broadcast via SY24 generated “huge global coverage,” having been seen by “many hundreds of millions of people,” and “attracting comment as far as the UN Security Council.”

SY24 content was produced by a network of ‘stringers’ in Syria that TGSN trained and provided with equipment, including “cameras and video editing software.” The firm drew particular attention to a team of female journalists it had tutored, “who provide about 40 percent of all SY content,” and were part of “a broad ‘network of networks’” enabling TGSN “to drive stories into the mainstream.”

TGSN also established a dedicated centre for training female journalists to produce content for SY24 in Idlib, “accessing stories that male journalists cannot,” which were then shared on social media. It boasted that almost half of SY24’s followers were women, “a remarkably high ratio for Syria-focused platforms.

‘Communications surges’

Carefully cultivating an entirely misleading image of an inclusive, credible ‘moderate’ Syrian opposition was of paramount importance to the FCO – it helped whitewash the barbarous nature of the various ‘rebel’ factions London was backing in the region, while simultaneously engendering support among Western publics for regime change.

In order to engage the “international community” to this end, TGSN, in conjunction with ARK – a shadowy “conflict transformation and stabilization consultancy” headed by veteran FCO operative Alistair Harris – planned“communication surges” around “key dates” such as International Women’s Day.

In a particularly elaborate example of such a “surge,” the pair collaborated on a campaign, ‘Back to School,’ in which young Syrians returned to education while Idlib City Council, opposition commanders, and other elements on the ground concurrently engaged in a “unified” communications blitz, using “shared slogans, hashtags and branding.”

Rebel fighters were sent to “clear roads” and “enable children and teachers to get to schools,” all the while filmed by the pair’s voluminous local journalist network, footage of which was then “disseminated online and on broadcast channels.” Ensuring “female teachers” received sizable coverage in the Western media was a key objective of the campaign.

In many of the leaked files, ARK boasts of the huge network of journalists it trained and funded in Syria, who would cover such PR stunts; their reports in turn fed to the firm’s “well-established contacts” at major news outlets including Al Jazeera, BBC, CNN, The Guardian, New York Times, and Reuters, “further amplifying their effect.”

‘Thrust by tragedy’

However, other documents make clear ARK well-understood the immense difficulties inherent in promoting the role of women internally and externally during the crisis.

One file on “[incorporating] the role of women in the moderate opposition” notes Syrian women in rebel-occupied areas faced “an almost overwhelming variety of problems,” and “the space for women to participate in public life has contracted significantly as the conflict has progressed.”

As a result, ARK said it was “extremely aware of the risks of promoting women’s participation beyond currently accepted social norms…given the potential to hinder message resonance or result in a backlash against female participation.” It therefore proposed to “subtly reframe the narrative of women…increasing the amount of coverage of their initiatives and opinions as the context allows.”

One such means of “subtle reframing” was Moubader (which translates to “a person who takes initiative”), a media asset comprising a “high-quality hard copy monthly magazine with widespread distribution across opposition-held areas of Syria,” with a website and Facebook page boasting over 200,000 likes as of December 2020.

Moubader was established by ARK in 2015 specifically to achieve “behavioural change” in readers, at Whitehall’s request. “Given the importance of broadcast television as a trusted source” in Syria, ARK also sought FCO funding to develop a Moubader TV programme to “leverage stories and values to maximum effect and reach an even wider audience.”

Documents submitted to the FCO by another psyops contractor, Albany, similarly noted women’s access to education, healthcare, and economic opportunity had “been debilitated” during the crisis, with issues such as early marriage, child military recruitment, and “transactional sex” exacerbated. The UN defines the latter as “non-commercial sexual relationships motivated by an implicit assumption that sex will be exchanged for material support or other benefits.”

Still, Albany considered so many Syrian women having been “thrust by tragedy into head of household and breadwinner positions” over the course of the crisis as a golden opportunity to propagandize them and, in turn, their families, while promoting the ‘inclusive’ nature of the opposition, by creating and partnering with female civil society organizations and journalists.

ARK likewise believed women to be a “critical audience” given the number of Syrian households headed by women –“up to 70 percent”– so sought to ensure they were well-represented in all its domestic and international “broadcast products,” as well as on social media.

‘Jihadis You Pay For’

Unsurprisingly, the files make no acknowledgement of the fact this increasingly hostile environment for women in Syria directly resulted from foreign efforts to destabilise and depose its government.

Islamic State, (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) and al-Nusra are rightly notorious for their monstrous treatment of women in the areas which they occupied, which included widespread rape, sexual violence and abduction.

However, many armed opposition groups, backed by foreign powers, whether openly Salafist or not, imposed stringent restrictions on women in the areas they occupied, requiring them to wear hijabs and abayas, doling out extreme punishments for failing to comply, imposing discriminatory measures prohibiting them from moving freely, working, attending school, and more.

There are indications FCO contractors were in close quarters with such activities. For instance, in December 2017 BBC Panorama documentary Jihadis You Pay For alleged FCO cash distributed on its behalf by Adam Smith International (ASI) in Syria ended up in the pockets of Free Syrian Police (FSP) officers who’d stood by passively while women were stoned to death.

The program focused on the Access to Justice and Community Security (AJACS) program, under which ASI funded and trained FSP, an unarmed civilian force set up to reestablish law and order in opposition-controlled areas.

In a perverse irony, leaked ASI files relating to the project indicate it, too, sought to exploit women for propaganda purposes, applying a gender policy to AJACS “which [aimed] to encourage female participation in justice and policing,” and boasting of how, of the 1,868 police officers it trained under the scheme, six – 0.32 percent ­­– were female.

Quite some revolution. As Human Rights Watch notes, prior to 2011, women and girls across the country were “largely able to participate in public life, including work and school, and exercise freedom of movement, religion, and conscience.” While the Syrian penal code and laws governing issues such as marriage, divorce, and inheritance, contains provisions discriminatory to women, the country’s constitution guarantees gender equality.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

ALSO ON RT.COM

Erdogan Used 3000 Syrian Terrorists in the Nagorno Karabach Battles

 ARABI SOURI

Hamzat terrorist group north Syria - Erdogan Muslim Brotherhood Army - فرقة الحمزات الإرهابية

Erdogan sent at least three thousand Syrian terrorists to fight on the side of Azerbaijan in the battles of Nagorno Karabach against the Armenian army and the Artsakh defense army, reports reveal.

The Turkish madman Erdogan took advantage of the brainwashed mercenaries from the ‘armed Syrian opposition’ groups operating in northern Syria in his military adventures in Libya and now in the contested region of Artsakh – Nagorno Karabach. Hamzat, Sultan Murad Brigade, and Sultan Sulaiman Shah (Aamshat) were the main groups Erdogan recruited his cross-border mercenaries from.

Despite their sacrifice for their deity Erdogan, the Al Qaeda affiliated terrorists of the above-mentioned groups and the families of their killed and injured ones are still waiting for the balance of their pay.

Erdogan paid 10,000 Turkish Lira for each terrorist as a down payment in exchange for joining the fight in the Caucasian conflict he ignited, the balance was supposed to be paid later on, yet to be done. The families of the killed and injured terrorists, however, haven’t received their blood money until now, some of the ‘armed opposition’ propaganda outlets started reporting.

One of those media outlets reported that most of the casualties among the Syrian terrorists were from bombing by the Artsakh Defence Forces.

Terrorists 'media' reporting on Syrian mercenaries sent by Erdogan to Nagorno Karabakh
Terrorists ‘media’ reporting on Syrian mercenaries sent by Erdogan to Nagorno Karabakh

A report published by one of the ‘armed Syrian opposition’ organizations in early last November stated that two thousand mercenaries were transferred to the battlefields via Turkey in the second half of September, many of them were civilians with no military experience and have joined the fight because of the miserable living situation in the regions controlled by Erdogan forces, the Turkish Army and its Al Qaeda affiliated terrorist groups, in northern Syria.

One of the terrorists described to a media outlet how their movements were only at night in Azerbaijan. They’d arrive at the airport and immediately taken to a military academy by military buses and cars. They stayed in the academy for 4 days, handed over weapons, uniforms, and military badges with engraved numbers on them then were taken to a camp to join the fight.

The 25-years-old terrorist added that the Syrian mercenaries were sent to the battlefront for direct fighting and breaking into ‘enemy lines’ while the Azeri military was ‘a step behind’. This terrorist, who had earlier military experience killing Syrian civilians, complained that fighting in Karabach was very difficult, the terrain was rigid, they had to walk for long distances in mountain narrow strips to reach the battleground. Injured mercenaries were taken to a hospital in the Azeri capital Baku for treatment and were treated much better by the Azeris than how the Turks treated them, the terrorist concluded.

Erdogan propaganda outlets and his officials repeatedly denied using Syrian terrorists in the Sultan wannabe military adventures in both Libya and Karabach, despite the multiple reports by the terrorists themselves in both areas and even after the Armenian army arrested two of them during the battles and the Azeri and the Turks refused to include them in the prisoners’ exchange deal after the Russian-brokered ceasefire was established.

President Bashar Assad slammed Erdogan’s abuse of the living conditions of the Syrians in the regions under the Turkish occupation in the Turkish madman’s military adventures and in instigating the crisis in Nagorno Karabach:

James Jeffrey’s Confessions: Syria is the gift that continues to give to us, we are in control of northeastern Syria. Erdogan retreats under threat (2) اعترافات جيمس جيفري: سورية الهديّة التي تستمرّ بالعطاء لنا نحن المسيطرون فعلياّ على شمال شرق سورية.. وأردوغان يتراجع تحت التهديد (2)

**Please scroll down for the English translation**

نضال حمادة

نستكمل الجزء الثاني والأخير من المقابلة التي أجراها المبعوث الأميركيّ الخاص السابق الى سورية جيفري جيمس مع «المونيتور».

يقول جيفري جيمس يجب الفصل بين أردوغان وتركيا، وستكون أكبر التحديات التي يواجهها بايدن هي الصين وروسيا وكوريا الشمالية وخطة العمل الشاملة المشتركة الإيرانية والمناخ. هؤلاء هم الخمسة الكبار. المرتبة السادسة هي تركيا، حيث إنّ تركيا لها تأثير مباشر على اثنين من المراكز الخمسة الأولى: إيران وروسيا، وهذا له تأثير على الإرهاب رقم ثمانية أو تسعة.

ويضيف: تركيا دولة مهمة للغاية في الناتو يقع رادار الناتو في قلب نظام الصواريخ المضادة للصواريخ الباليستية الذي يواجه إيران في تركيا. لدينا أصول عسكرية هائلة هناك. لا يمكننا فعلاً «القيام» بالشرق الأوسط أو المؤتمرات الحزبيّة أو البحر الأسود من دون تركيا. وتركيا خصم طبيعي لروسيا وإيران.

ويتابع: أردوغان مفكر كبير في أساليب الحكم. حيث يرى ما يجذب يتحرّك، الأمر الآخر بالنسبة لأردوغان هو أنه متعجرف للغاية ولا يمكن التنبّؤ بما يفعله، وببساطة لن يوافق على حلّ يربح فيه الجميع. ولكن عندما يكون في عجلة من أمره – وتفاوضت معه – فهو ممثل عقلانيّ..

لذا، إذا رأى بايدن العالم مثل الكثير منا الآن، منافسة قريبة من الأقران، تصبح تركيا مهمة للغاية. انظروا إلى ما فعله (أردوغان) للتوّ خلال ثمانية أشهر في إدلب وليبيا وناغورني كاراباخ. كانت روسيا أو الحلفاء الروس هم الخاسرون في الثلاثة.

يصف جيفري أردوغان فيقول: أردوغان لن يتراجع حتى تظهر له أسنانك، هذا ما فعلناه عندما تفاوضنا على وقف إطلاق النار في تشرين الأوّل/ أكتوبر 2019، كنا مستعدّين لسحق الاقتصاد التركي.

هذا ما فعله بوتين بعد إسقاط الطائرة الروسيّة لقد أرسل الروس الآن إشارات قوية مرتين إلى الأتراك في إدلب.

يجب أن تكون مستعداً، عندما يذهب أردوغان بعيداً، لقمعه حقاً والتأكد من أنه يفهم ذلك مسبقاً. الموقف التركيّ ليس صحيحاً أبداً بنسبة 100 %. لديهم منطق وحجج معينة من جانبهم. نظراً لدورهم كحليف مهمّ وحصن ضدّ إيران وروسيا، فإنّ الأمر متروك لنا على الأقلّ للاستماع إلى حججهم ومحاولة إيجاد حلول وسط.

حول رغبة ترامب في مغادرة القوات الأميركية المنطقة يقول جيمس جيفري: الرئيس غير مرتاح لوجودنا في سورية. كان منزعجاً جداً مما اعتبره حروباً لا نهاية لها. هذا شيء لا ينبغي أن ينتقد بسببه. أسقطنا الخلافة (داعش) ثم بقينا. ظلّ ترامب يسأل، «لماذا لدينا قوات هناك؟» ولم نعطه الإجابة الصحيحة.

إذا قال أحدهم، «الأمر كله يتعلق بالإيرانيين»، فربما كان سينجح. لكن الأشخاص الذين كانت مهمتهم معرفة سبب وجود القوات هم وزارة الدفاع. وقد أعطوا الإذن (من الكونغرس) لاستخدام القوة العسكريّة، نحن هنا لمحاربة الإرهابيين.»

أعتقد أنّ سبب سحب ترامب للقوات كان لأنه سئم من تقديم كلّ هذه التفسيرات لسبب وجودنا هناك. كان هناك وعد ضمني له: يا رئيس، لا شيء خطأ، نحن نعمل مع الأتراك، ونعمل مع الروس. ومن ثم يحصل على هذه الكوارث.

لم أبلغ الرئيس بذلك. لقد فعل بومبيو ذلك وقدّم له الحجة، وركز على إيران. لكن ترامب كان غير مرتاح لهذه القوى، وكان يثق بأردوغان. سيواصل أردوغان طرح هذه القضايا حول حزب العمال الكردستاني، وسيستجوب الرئيس الناس، ويجب أن يكونوا صادقين ويعترفوا». بالطبع، الأمر أكثر تعقيداً من ذلك. الحروب معقدة، ويضيف: لقد شرحنا الأسباب للرئيس لكنه يستمع أيضاً إلى أردوغان. أردوغان مقنع تماماً بالنسبة له.

في وزارة الخارجية، لم نكشف للرئيس عن عدد القوات في سورية. إنها ليست وظيفتنا. لم نحاول خداعه. لكننا كنا نعطيه أرقاماً أقلّ بكثير من الأرقام الفعليّة، لذلك عند التحدث إلى وسائل الإعلام والكونغرس، كان علينا توخي الحذر الشديد وتجنبها. بالإضافة إلى أنّ الأرقام كانت مضحكة. هل تحصي الحلفاء الذين لا يريدون الكشف عن هويتهم هناك؟ هل تشمل ثكنة التنف؟ هل تحسب أن وحدة برادلي تأتي وتذهب؟

كنا خجولين لأنّ الرئيس أعطى الأمر بالانسحاب ثلاث مرات. كانت الضغوط مستمرة والتهديد بسحب القوات من سورية. شعرنا بالضعف الشديد وربما شربنا القليل من الخوف لأنه كان يعني الكثير بالنسبة لنا. أتفهّم مخاوفه بشأن أفغانستان. لكن المهمة في سورية هي الهدية التي تستمرّ في العطاء. نحن وقوات سورية الديمقراطية ما زلنا القوة المهيمنة في شمال شرق سورية.

كان الأكراد يحاولون دائماً جعلنا نتظاهر بأننا سندافع عنهم ضد الجيش التركي. وحثوا قوة المهام المشتركة، على الرغم من اعتراضاتي، على البدء في إقامة نقاط استيطانيّة على طول الحدود التركيّة.

James Jeffrey’s Confessions: Syria is the gift that continues to give to us, we are in control of northeastern Syria. Erdogan retreats under threat (2)

Nidal Hamada

We complete the second and final part of the interview that former U.S. special envoy to Syria Jeffrey James gave to Al-Monitor.

Jeffrey James says Erdogan and Turkey must  be separated, and Biden’s biggest challenges will be China, Russia, North Korea, Iran’s JCPOA and climate.

“Turkey is a very important NATO country, and NATO’s radar is at the heart of the anti-ballistic missile system that confronts Iran in Turkey.” We have enormous military assets there. We can’t really “do” the Middle East, party conventions or the Black Sea without Turkey. Turkey is a natural opponent of Russia and Iran.

“Erdogan is a great thinker in governance.” Where he sees what attracts he moves, the other thing for Erdogan is that he is too arrogant and unpredictable as to what he is doing, and simply won’t agree to a win-win solution. But when he’s in a hurry, (and I negotiated with him), he’s a rational actor.

So, if Biden sees the world like so many of us now, a close-up competition, Turkey becomes very important.   

“Erdogan won’t back down until you show him your teeth, that’s what we did when we negotiated a ceasefire in October 2019, we were ready to crush the Turkish economy,” he said.

The Russians have now sent twice strong signals to the Turks in Idlib.

You must be prepared, when Erdogan goes away, to really suppress him and make sure that he understands it in advance. The Turkish position is never 100% true. They have certain logic and arguments on their part. Given their role as an important ally and bulwark against Iran and Russia, it is up to us at least to listen to their arguments and try to find compromises.

“The president is uncomfortable with our presence in Syria,” said James Jeffrey. He was very disturbed by what he considered endless wars. This is something that should not be criticized for it. We brought down the caliphate (ISIS) and then we stayed. Trump kept asking, “Why do we have troops there?” and we didn’t give him the right answer.

If someone said, “It’s all about the Iranians,” maybe it’s going to work. But the people whose job it was to find out why the troops were present was the Ministry of Defence. They have given permission (from Congress) to use military force, we are here to fight terrorists.”

I think the reason Trump pulled the troops out was because he’s tired of providing all of these explanations of why we’re there. There was an implicit to him: President, nothing is wrong, we are working with the Turks, we are working with the Russians. And then he gets these disasters.

I didn’t report it to the President. But Trump was uncomfortable with these forces, and he trusted Erdogan.

At the State Department, we have not disclosed to the President the number of troops in Syria. It’s not our job. We didn’t try to fool him.

We were shy because the president gave the order to withdraw three times. Pressure was continuing and the threat of withdrawing troops from Syria. We felt very weak and maybe even drunk a little fear because it meant so much to us. I understand his concerns about Afghanistan. But the task in Syria is the gift that continues to give. We and the Syrian Democratic Forces are still the dominant force in northeastern Syria.

The Kurds were always trying to make us pretend that we would defend them against the Turkish army. They urged the Joint Task Force, despite my objections, to start establishing outposts along the Turkish border.

قراءة في كلمة الرئيس بشار الأسد في مشاركته في الاجتماع الدوري لوزارة الأوقاف في سورية

زياد حافظ

See the source image

استوقفنا عنوانان في الصفحة الأولى لصحيفة «واشنطن بوست» الأميركية الصادرة في 8 كانون الأول/ ديسمبر 2020: العنوان الأول: «الإنجيليون يسيّرون ترامب ما يعني فشل الدين»، والعنوان الثاني: «شرعنة المخدرات». العنوانان يمثلان الذهنية القائمة في الولايات المتحدة عند النخب وخاصة عند من يسوّق لليبرالية. وهذا الموضوع بالذات تناوله رئيس الجمهورية العربية السورية الدكتور بشار الأسد في كلمته لمجمع العلماء والعالمات (التشديد على العالمات كان من الرئيس السوري) في افتتاحية الاجتماع الدوري لوزارة الأوقاف. لم يكن المقصود الردّ على ما أتت به الصحيفة لأنّ كلامه سبق ما صدر فيها بل لأنه ربط الموقف السياسي بالبعد الثقافي والمجتمعي لما يمثّله الدين بشكل عام والإسلام بشكل خاص والعروبة والعلاقة بينهما واللغة العربية والقضايا المرتبطة بكلّ ذلك في السجالات التي تدور في الفضاء الثقافي. فلماذا نعتبر كلمة الرئيس في غاية الأهمية في هذه الظروف ومن خلال المنصة التي اختارها؟

السبب الأول هو أنه لأول مرّة نشهد مقاربة من شخص يعتلي أعلى موقف في المسؤولية السياسية أيّ الحكم ويقدّم مقاربة حول ترابط العديد من القضايا الثقافية الفكرية بالسلوك الفردي والجماعي وبالسياسة وبشكل دقيق يتجاوز تعداد العناوين العريضة. فالمواضيع التي تناولها الرئيس بشار الأسد تشمل السياسة والثقافة والدين والمجتمع والفكر كما طرح الإشكاليات المتعدّدة وكيف تنعكس على السياسة. ولم يكتف الرئيس بالتوصيف والتشريح بل رسم الخطوط العريضة لمعالجة الإشكاليات التي تكلّم عنها وجميعها تستحق النقاش المعمّق. وبالتالي أن تأتي هذه المقاربة عن مسؤول يعني أنّ القيادة لمشروع عربي نهضوي موجودة في أعلى هرم المسؤولية وأنّ التجدّد الحضاري هو سينتج عن المقاربات التي يقوم بها المجتمع العربي والإسلامي لكافة قضايا العصر. هذه النقطة في رأينا في بالغ الأهمية خاصة وأنّ الأمة مستهدفة بكلّ ما يكوّنها من مجتمع ودولة وثقافة وحضارة وخاصة في ما يتعلّق بالدين واللغة والموروث الحضاري والفكري. فالحروب التي شُنّت على هذه الأمة منذ قرون عديدة ما زالت قائمة ولم تفلح حتى الآن في محو هذه القوّة الذاتية التي تقاوم الاحتلال والاغتراب.

السبب الثاني هو أنّ الكلمة أتت دون قراءة لنصّ ما وبتسلسل ما يدلّ على عمق الاستيعاب لمجمل القضايا الشائكة وبالتالي تسكنه. كما أنّ إشاراته المتعدّدة لوسائل التواصل الاجتماعي وما يدور من سجالات فيها يدلّ على أنه ليس منقطعاً عن واقع المجتمع. بعض القضايا التي عرضها كالهجوم على القرآن الكريم كالوصف بأنه منتوج سرياني هو هجوم موجود في تلك وسائل التواصل الاجتماعي وقد اطّلعنا عليها. وفي هذه الكلمة عبّر الرئيس عن قناعات عميقة يستطيع المرء من خلالها فهم كيفية التفكير وكيفية المقاربة وبالتالي المواقف التي يتخذها. فهي إحدى المفاتيح لقراءة تفكيره ومواقفه والضوابط والخطوط الحمر التي لن يتجاوزها. فالعروبة خط أحمر وليس شعاراً بل ممارسة لهوية جامعة.

السبب الثالث هو أنّ جوهر كلمة الرئيس السوري يجسّد أدبيات التيّار العروبي الواسع والموجود في مخرجات المؤتمر القومي العربي ومنشورات مركز دراسات الوحدة العربية. وهذا ليس مستغرباً أن يكون كذلك الأمر في سورية وقيادتها بل هو أمر طبيعي بينما العكس لن يكون ذلك، أيّ أن يكون على قمة الهرم السياسي في سورية إلاّ من يجسّد الروح العروبية. فهذه هي سورية قلب العروبة النابض والتي استهدفها العدوان الكوني عليها خشية من تلك العروبة. ويأتي كلام الرئيس ليحسم فكرياً وسياسياً جدلاً عبثياً في الفضاء الفكري والسياسي حول العلاقة بين العروبة والإسلام. فالعديد من المثقفين العرب حاولوا في مراحل مختلفة وضع العروبة في وجه الإسلام كما حاولوا تسويق الهويات الفرعية على حساب الهوية الجامعة. فجاء كلام الرئيس السوري ليدحض كلّ ذلك ويعتبر ألّا تناقض بين هوية العائلة والقبيلة والمدينة والمنطقة والإقليم مع الهوية العربية الجامعة لكلّ تلك المكوّنات. وهذا هو متن الخطاب العروبي للمؤتمر القومي العربي ومن يؤمن بالمشروع النهضوي العربي. فهذه العروبة الجامعة تحلّ المشكلة المصطنعة للأقلّيات التي أدخلتها الحقبة الاستعمارية منذ القرن التاسع عشر.

هذه الملاحظات تستدعي التوقف عند النقاط العديدة التي أثارها الرئيس في حديثه إلى مجمع العلماء والعالمات كما شدّد في بداية كلمته. والنقاط العديدة أثيرت في سياق خط بياني واضح. فالحرب التي تخوضها سورية حرب متعدّدة الأوجه منها ما يمسّ بتماسك المجتمع ويضعف صموده. والتماسك المجتمعي مهدّد إذ الهجوم يستهدف مقوّمات ذلك التماسك وهي الهوية من جهة والدين من جهة أخرى والعلاقة بينهما. ومقاربة الرئيس السوري كانت لها عدّة أبعاد بدءاً بالفكر وثم بالسياسة وتداعياتها على قدرة المواجهة وعلى المستقبل. واستند في المقاربة إلى مخزون فكري وفقهي في آن واحد إضافة إلى ربط ذلك بالخيار والموقف السياسي.

لن نستطيع في هذه المقاربة تناول كلّ الأفكار التي أتى بها الرئيس السوري في كلمته لضيق المساحة أولاً ولأنّ العديد منها يستحق مقاربات منفصلة كحديثه عمّا سمّاه بالليبرالية الحديثة مثلاً أو حول أصول اللغة العربية أو حتى دور الإسلام في بلاد الشام. لذلك سنتناول بعضها لما نعتبره من أساسي في فهمنا لكلمته.

في البداية، الخط البياني للكلمة هو تشخيصه لطبيعة المواجهة التي فُرضت على سورية عبر العدوان الكوني عليها. لم يكرّر أسباب العدوان ومن اشترك وما زال في ذلك العدوان لكنه أراد أن يركّز في تشخيصه للمشهد على استهداف المجتمع في سورية. وأحد محاور الاستهداف هو عبر الهجوم على مكوّنات الوعي أيّ الدين واللغة في بعديهما التاريخي والمستقبلي وفي دورهما في تماسك المجتمع. ومن هنا تأتي أهمية المنصة التي اختارها لدحض الكثير من الاتهامات التي وجّهت لبنية الدولة والمجتمع ليس فقط من قبل الخصوم والمتشدّدين الذين استعملوا الدين كوسيلة لأهداف سياسية لا علاقة بالدين بل للذين اعتبروا أنّ الحداثة هي عبر نقض الدين في المجتمع والدولة. والرسالة التي أراد إرسالها هي التكامل بين الدين والدولة عندما تكلّم عن «العلمانية» وبعض المفاهيم المغلوطة التي يتمّ ترويجها وعن إمكانية إخراج الدين من الدولة. فهذا لن يحصل إلاّ إذا تمّ إخراج الدين من المجتمع. وبما أنّ مقاربته للأمور تفيد بأنّ الدين ضرورة لتماسك المجتمع فإنّ ذلك يعني أنه لا يجوز وضع الدين في قفص الاتهام كعائق لتنمية المجتمع لأنه قاعدة أساسية لتماسكه وبقائه. وتشديده على الدور الذي يقوم به مجمع العلماء والعالمات هو لتثبيت تلك العلاقة ودحض أيّ فكرة أنّ الدولة القائمة في سورية هي ضدّ الدين كما يروّج له خصومها أو كما يعتقد البعض من «المتحرّرين» أو «العلمانيين». من جهة أخرى نفى مزاعم جماعات التعصّب والغلو والتوحّش بأنها تمثّل الإسلام. فهذه الجماعات ترتكب الكبائر المحرّمة في الدين وذلك عبر قتلهم للأبرياء والتمسّك بالطقوس على حساب المقاصد. وتشديده على المقاصد كان لافتاً لأنّ ذلك يعكس فهمه للإسلام وتمسّكه به والمختلف عن التفسيرات الضيّقة والحرفية والخارجة عن السياق.

صحيفة «واشنطن بوست» في عنوانها عن «فشل الدين» تنتمي إلى تيّار ليبرالي انتقده الرئيس السوري. استفاض الرئيس في كلمته عمّا سمّاه بـ «الليبرالية الحديثة» التي تهدف إلى سلخ الإنسان عن هويته ليس فقط بالمعنى السياسي أو الثقافي بل أيضاً من هويته الجنسية أو الجندرية كما سمّاها (الجندرية تعريب لكلمة «جندر» الإنكليزية التي تشير إلى جنس المرء من ذكر أو أنثى). وهذا يتنافى مع موروثنا الثقافي والديني. فكيف يمكن للمرء أن «يختار» هويته الجندرية بينما الطبيعة هي التي تقوم بذلك؟

وأوضح أنّ الليبرالية الحديثة تنقض مفهوم مرجعية الجماعة وتريد نقلها إلى مرجعية الفرد ما يسهل نزع الهوية وما تمثّلها. فمرجعية الفرد مدمّرة للمجتمع عبر تدمير الوحدة الأساسية له وهي العائلة ومن ثم القبيلة وأو العشيرة ومن ثم الوطن. كما تدعو تلك الليبرالية إلى تعميم ما هو مناف للأخلاق والصحة العامة كالدعوة لتعميم المخدّرات كما ذكر الرئيس وكما جاء في عنوان آخر في الصحيفة الأميركية، وهي إحدى الأبواق البارزة لليبرالية وتدّعي ذلك بدون خجل. فالدين غير مقبول عند هؤلاء الليبراليين الحديثيين على حدّ قوله خاصة لدوره في المجتمع. في هذا السياق يفتح الرئيس، سواء قصد ذلك أو لم يقصد، باب التفكير بالموروث الثقافي المستورد من الغرب. الرئيس الروسي بوتين انتقد الديمقراطية المستوردة والرئيس السوري انتقد الثقافة المستوردة. ونحن ندعو إلى بناء منظومة معرفية عربية منبثقة عن موروثنا الثقافي مع التمسك بالمخزون العلمي الذي كوّنه العالم عبر القرون.

الهجوم على الدين في المجتمع السوري، واستطراداً في المجتمع العربي أجمع، يأتي عبر كتابات تشكّك في مكوّنات الشرع الإسلامي بدءاً بالقرآن الكريم وثم في الحديث ووصولاً إلى الفقه. وحرص الرئيس السوري أن يربط بين الحالة السورية التي يعتبرها متقدّمة في هذا المجال وبين حالة العالم الإسلامي التي اعتبرها متراجعة، فسورية هي جزء من العالم الإسلامي ولها مكانتها المميّزة تاريخيا، في الماضي، والحاضر، والمستقبل. فهو حريص على الحفاظ على تلك المكانة وهذه هي إحدى مهام مجمع العلماء والعالمات. وفي ما يتعلّق بالقرآن الكريم أشار الرئيس إلى ما يتمّ تداوله في وسائل التواصل الاجتماعي حول «سريانية» القرآن. هذه إحدى الاتهامات وليست الوحيدة ولكن نكتفي بما ذكره الرئيس السوري. والمقصود في «سريانية» القرآن، أنّ القرآن الكريم مؤلّف منقول وليس من كلام الله الذي أوحى به إلى الرسول الأكرم. والتشكيك بالقرآن الكريم هدفه ضرب عصفورين بحجر واحد. الأول هو ضرب أساس الإسلام والثاني ضرب العروبة. صحيح أنّ العروبة موجودة قبل الإسلام ولكن على حدّ قول علماء آسيويين أشار إليهم الرئيس السوري في كلمته أنهم لا يتصوّرون الإسلام خارج العروبة. ونحن نقول إنّ العروبة مفتاح لفهم الإسلام كما أنّ الإسلام مفتاح لاكتشاف العروبة. ولا يغيب عنّا أدبية أحد مؤسّسي حزب البعث الأستاذ ميشال عفلق في محاضرته الشهيرة «في ذكرى الرسول العربي» حيث قال: «فالإسلام هو الهزة الحيوية التي تحرّك كامن القوى في الأمة العربية فتجيش بالحياة الحارة، جارفة سدود التقليد وقيود الاصطلاح. مرجعة اتصالها مرة جديدة بمعاني الكون العميقة، ويأخذها العجب والحماسة فتنشأ تعبّر عن إعجابها وحماستها بألفاظ جديدة وأعمال مجيدة، ولا تعود من نشوتها قادرة على التزام حدودها الذاتية، فتفيض على الأمم الأخرى فكراً وعملاً، وتبلغ هكذا الشمول.»

من هذه الزاوية انتقل إلى الهجوم الآخر على الدين وهو التشكيك باللغة العربية فقدّم مطالعة سريعة حول أصول اللسان العربي وعلاقته بالسريانية والآرامية. ومن جهة أخرى اعتبر الاجتهاد الفقهي إنجازاً مشكوراً للفقهاء الذين قدّموا التفاسير والاجتهادات ولكن كانت مبنية على أرضية معرفية غير التي هي موجودة اليوم. لكنه رفض تقييم تلك الاجتهادات بمعايير الحاضر لبيئات مختلفة في الماضي لما يحمل ذلك من إجحاف بحق الفقهاء الذين قدّموا ما لديهم ضمن ظروفهم. لذلك اعتبر أنّ من مهامّ مجمع العلماء والعالمات الذي يمثل أمامه هو تقديم اجتهادات متماهية مع شؤون العصر دون بالضرورة ترك الموروث الفقهي. نعتقد أنّ هذا موقف في غاية الأهمية ولكنه شائك لأنه يفتح باب عصرنة الفقه في عصر معادي للدين بشكل عام وللإسلام بشكل خاص. فالتمسّك بالموروث الفقهي من تماسك المجتمع المسلم عبر القرون وبالتالي يجب الانتباه والحذر من الشروع في اجتهادات قد تكسر ذلك التماسك. وبالنسبة لنا التماسك هو عنصر استراتيجي في عصر التجزئة والتفتيت. كما يجب الحذر من الوقوع في إنشاء فقه الدولة التي تتغيّر مع الظروف وبالتالي يهدّد بتماسك الفقه والشرع.

كما ذكرنا أعلاه ليس بمقدورنا تفصيل كلّ ما جاء في كلمة الرئيس بشّار الأسد لضيق المساحة ولعمق الإشكاليات التي تتلازم مع الطروحات الفكرية التي ذكرها. من الواضح أنّ أمامنا قائد شاب ولكن مخضرماً وواسع الاطلاع بالتاريخ والثقافة وبأهمية التجدّد الحضاري عبر التمسّك بالهوية الجامعة التي تصون وحدة المجتمع كمرتكز لتحقيق وحدة الأمة. فلا تجدّد في رأينا في ظلّ الضعف ولا قوّة في ظلّ التجزئة. كما أنّ المعركة ليست سياسية فحسب بل مجتمعية وثقافية وحضارية. هذا ما خرجنا به بعد الاستماع للكلمة مع الشعور بالاطمئنان حول مستقبل سورية ومستقبل الأمة العربية.

*كاتب وباحث اقتصادي سياسي

والأمين العام السابق للمؤتمر القومي العربي

العرب بين انحطاط المطبّعين ومقاومة الجولان

د. وفيق إبراهيم

التطبيع العربي المتسارع مع الكيان الإسرائيليّ مشهد يثير القلق، لكنه لا يستحوذ على كامل تفاصيله، فهناك مشهد آخر يقاومه في كل زاوية من أنحاء سورية، وصولاً إلى الجولان السوري المحتل.

هناك اذاً قتال مسعور بين جزء كبير من الدول العربية، كشف عن علاقاته السرية بـ»إسرائيل» وحوّلها الى تطبيع دبلوماسي، وبالتالي اقتصادي وسياسي وعسكري مقابل سورية التي قرّرت الرد على الانحطاط بتكثيف حركتها المقاومة، لردع ثلاثة احتلالات تنهش من جغرافيتها السياسية وهم الإسرائيليون الذين يحتلون الجولان السوري وفلسطين المحتلة والأتراك في غرب سورية والمناطق الحدوديّة والمحتل الاميركي في شرقي الفرات.

فهل يمكن مقارنة انتفاضة شعبيّة في الجولان بالانهيار العربي في الخليج والسودان والمغرب كتتمة متأخرة للتطبيع المصري الأردني والمتعلق بالسلطة الفلسطينية؟

هل يمكن اعتبار الصمود السوري منذ 2011 وحتى هذا التاريخ في وجه تدخل خارجيّ من قرابة ثلاثين دولة وتنظيمات إرهابية كافياً لجبه الانهيار العربي؟

كانت الخطة الاميركية تلحظ منذ 1990 ضرورة تفكيك العراق وسورية للإمساك بكامل الشرق الاوسط، فتعثرت نسبياً في العراق وسجلت إخفاقاً واضحاً في سورية ما فرض عليها الذهاب مباشرة نحو دفع البلدان العربية المحسوبة على النفوذ الأميركي للتطبيع مع «إسرائيل» في محاولة لمعادلة النجاح السوري في الدفاع عن بلاده وتمكّن حزب الله من طرد «إسرائيل» من لبنان في العام ألفين ومرة ثانية في 2006 وانتصاره على الإرهاب في ميادين سورية وشرق لبنان ولا يزال يؤدي دوراً مستمراً في حماية لبنان من تياراته الداخلية التي تريد التطبيع مع الكيان المحتل، لكن قوة حزب الله الداخلية تمنعها وتحصرها في زاوية ضيقة.

ان نجاح سورية بحماية دولتها لهو من العناصر الأساسيّة في منع الانهيار النهائي من السيطرة على المنطقة العربيّة بكاملها.

قد يعتبر البعض هذه المقارنة مبالغة على جاري الطرق العربيّة في الهرب نحو الإنشاء والبلاغة لتبرير الهزائم، لكن تذكير المشككين بأن الفرنجة في القرن العاشر أسقطوا كامل دول المنطقة وألحقوها بنفوذهم حتى اصبح التوازن الداخلي مفقوداً بشكل كامل وكان كافياً إلحاق هزيمة واحدة بالفرنجة لكي يهرب من تبقى منهم الى بلادهم في أوروبا.

ألا يشبه هذا المشهد ما يحدث الآن في المنطقة، لذلك فإن الأهمية الأولى للصمود السوري هو في منعه الاستسلام الكامل للمنطقة وتأسيسه لحركة مقاومة لرفض الغزو الجديد للفرنجة الجدد الى المنطقة، وما الدول المطبّعة مع الكيان الإسرائيلي والملحقة بالنفوذ الأميركي الا النماذج المماثلة التي كانت قبل ألف عام تقريباً جزءاً من دولة الفرنجة الاستعمارية في بلاد الشام والعراق ومصر.

هنا تكمن أهمية الجولان السوريّ المحتل منذ 53 عاماً متواصلاً.

فهذا المدى الزمني الطويل من الاحتلال والاعتراف الأميركي بيهوديّة هضبة الجولان على شكل هدية قدمها الرئيس الأميركي الحالي ترامب لرئيس وزراء الكيان نتانياهو، كل هذه الأمور لم تقنع أبناء هذه الهضبة بالاستسلام حتى تبين أنهم فخورون بسوريّتهم ولا يقايضون عليها بأي شيء، على الرغم من المحاولات التي قام بها سياسيو لبنان والداخل الفلسطيني لتمرير مطالب «اسرائيل» ببناء مراوح لتوليد الطاقة.

هؤلاء أبناء الجولان انتفضوا في وجه جيش الاحتلال الذي حاول بناء المراوح بالقوة والإرهاب والاعتداء على المتظاهرين ويواصلون استنكارهم بكل أشكال المجابهات غير عابئين بالتهديد الأمني الإسرائيلي من جهة والصمت العربي المتواطئ مع «إسرائيل» ضد مقاومتهم من جهة ثانية.

فكيف يمكن للمغرب أن يُطبّع مع العدو في وقت تهاجم قواته أبناء الجولان؟

وكذلك بالنسبة للإمارات والبحرين والتجاهل المصري السعودي القطري؟

ألا تعادل هذه الانتفاضة في الجولان هذا الانهيار العربي؟ هناك مَن يرى أنها تتفوّق عليه لكن تجاهل الإعلام الغربي لها، ومعه الإعلام العربي قد ينجح في منع تسويقها وتعميمها، لكنه يعجز عن منع تعميمها في كل مكان محتلّ في فلسطين المحتلة وشرق سورية وغربها.

فهكذا اتسعت في مطلع القرن الماضي ثورات سلطان الأطرش في جبل العرب وصالح العلي في جبال الساحل وإبراهيم هنانو في المدن حتى تحرّرت سورية بكاملها.

فهل نحن في وضع مشابه؟

لقد انتصر السوريّون على الاحتلال الفرنسيّ ويجابهون خطة لتفتيت سورية منذ عقد تقريباً بما يؤكد أن ثورات تحرير الجولان وشرقي البلاد وغربها هي من المسائل غير القابلة لأي مفاوضة، وعلاجها الوحيد هو في القتال الاستراتيجي المدروس المبنيّ على قوة داخلية وتحالفات وازنة، وذلك لأن العدو يحتكم على مقدرات متمكنة تحتاج الى إيمان المجاهدين مع قدرات عسكرية من الداخل والخارج، وبذلك يتضح أن مشهد انتفاضة الجولان اكثر وزناً من مشهد التطبيع وأفعل منه لأنه يأتي في سياق جهود دولة سورية مصرّة على تحرير بلادها والتأثير الإيجابي في كامل الإقليم.

Will Joe Biden “Revise” U.S Agenda in Syria? Use Terrorism Pretext to “Keep Boots on the Ground”?

By Ahmad Salah

Global Research, December 10, 2020

The mayhem of the presidential elections left the American policy-makers locked in heated arguments about the future of the US domestic and foreign policy alike. One of the most pressing issues on the agenda is the Middle East developments, especially the U.S. role in Syria.

After his ultimate defeat in the national vote Donald Trump handed down his successor a controversial legacy of multiple unresolved issues coupled with the badly damaged image of the White House. This is true especially for Syria, where despite repeated claims of total victory over ISIS, the terrorists continue to carry out sporadic attacks throughout the eastern part of the country Syria. The activity of sleeper cells became a pretext for rejecting the idea of a complete U.S. military withdrawal from Syria.

It is widely believed that the Biden administration intends to make use of the terror threat to keep boots on the ground in Syria in order to ensure the security of oil and gas fields. Indeed, the fight against international terrorism constitutes the basis of Washington’s foreign policy in the Middle East. However, the U.S history in the region has shown that the White House primarily regards terror groups as an opportunity to benefit from seizing previously inaccessible resources.

In pursuit of economic and political goal human rights are sidelined, as is the case in Al-Hawl camp, where refugees suffer from miserable conditions living side by side with captured ISIS terrorists. The camp that was initially established in 1991 by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees for Iraqi citizens fleeing from the Persian Gulf War, started to host ISIS terrorists and their families in late 2018. The camp originally designed for 11,000 people currently counts about 70,000 – more than six time over of its capacity – the majority of whom are women and children of various nationalities. Camp dwellers blame the overcrowding and poor management for a shortage of water, lack of food and inadequate medical care.U.S. Expands Military Budget – How Will This Affect Syria

The American leadership persistently ignores this humanitarian catastrophe, a byproduct of the neglectful approach to the civilian population applied by the U.S.-backed Kurdish-dominated Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). By doing this Washington possibly violates the Geneva Convention of August 12, 1949, under which the U.S. is obliged to ensure the safety of civilians in northeast Syria.

Another worrying tendency is the increase in cases of riots and escapes from the SDF-controlled prisons that hold around 10,000 detainees. The most serious incidents of this kind took place in October 2019, when several hundred prisoners broke out of the Ain Issa jail. The Americans did not pay sufficient attention to these developments and chose not to investigate human trafficking networks used to smuggle militants out of jail and ultimately out of Syria despite the risk of reappearance of armed groups and rise in subversive activities. This deliberate ignorance will persist until the armed groups pose a threat for U.S. military bases located in the energy-rich areas of Hasakah and Deir Ezzor provinces.

This is yet another reminder that the U.S. is not a reliable ally for the Kurdish autonomous administration. As Ankara continues to strengthen its positions in the region there has been growing speculation about Turkey planning another military operation in northern Syria. Earlier, the Turkish leadership had abused the buffer zone agreement with the SDF that was brokered by the U.S. to evict the Kurds from these areas. Back then the Turks faced no obstacles in implementing their plan as the American troops withdrew from the buffer zone on the very eve of the Turkish Peace Spring operation. During the Turkish offensive a number of massive escapes that let dozens of terrorists out of SDF jails took place. Keeping in mind the U.S. practical approach to its geopolitical interests, the new American administration will likely prefer not to obstruct its NATO ally and the Kurds will be again hit by the Turkish artillery and UAVs.

The U.S. foreign policy under the Donald Trump’s presidency has been dominated by the pursuit of economic benefits under the pretext of promoting democracy and protecting civilians, a perfect representation of the “world leader’s” disregard for the interests of any state, be it ally or enemy, whose resources fall in the White House’s sphere of interests. Double standards have become a defining trait of the international relations with civilians whose interests are supposedly protected by the U.S. military reduced to a bargaining chip.

The upcoming transition of the U.S. leadership and the inauguration of President Joe Biden have to determine whether the United States is capable of being a guarantor of security and stability, or Washington’s economic ambitions come first.

*

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

Ahmad Salah is a freelance Syrian journalist focused on the Middle East, especially the Levant.The original source of this article is Global ResearchCopyright © Ahmad Salah, Global Research, 2020

أين لبنان من المبادرتين العراقيّة والسوريّة؟

بشارة مرهج

الأخبار الآتية من سورية عن قرب انتهاء العمل بترميم وتجديد خط السكك الحديديّة الذي يربط بين دمشق وحلب من جهة، وبين سورية والعراق من جهة أخرى، يمكن اعتبارها أخباراً إيجابية واعدة وتعاكس الوضع السائد المبني على القطع والانفصال وصولاً الى التفتيت والتشظي على كلّ الصعد، عربياً وداخل كلّ قطر بمفرده.

وتكتسب هذه الأخبار – الحقائق أهمية كبيرة عندما ننظر إليها بمنظار الإرادة التي ترفض الاستسلام للانقسام وتصرّ على البناء والربط والاتحاد في ظلّ تصاعد العدوان الصهيوني المدعوم أميركياً على فلسطين وسورية والعراق ولبنان دونما أيّ اعتبار للحقوق الثابتة أو الحقائق الفلسطينية المرسومة على ألواح الأمم المتحدة.

على أنّ هذه المبادرات التي طال انتظارها من قبل المواطن العربي المهدّد، بالجوع والانسحاق، من شأنها إذا أحيطت بالعناية والحماية إحياء الأمل وتبديد الجزع لدى هذا المواطن الذي يخشى أكثر ما يخشى أن تترسّخ موجة التقسيم والانعزال والفدراليّة التي تبدو، لأوساط كثيرة طاغية، وجارفة لكلّ مَن يقف بوجهها من القوى التي تؤمن بالوحدة الوطنية للأقطار العربية وبوحدة الأمة ذاتها على قواعد ديمقراطية حضارية حديثة.

أما المبادرة الثانية التي لا تقلّ أهمية عن المبادرة السورية في هذا المضمار فقد أطلت برأسها من خلال الموقف الذي تعهّد به رئيس وزراء العراق عندما أكد للشعب العربي إعادة فتح منفذ عرعر مع السعودية المغلق منذ 30 عاماً، بالتزامن مع غلق المعابر غير الشرعية، وإطلاق حرية الاستثمار ونقل التكنولوجيا بين الدول العربية الثلاث العراق – الأردن – مصر، على أن يرتبط كلّ ذلك بمشروع إنشاء سوق اقتصادية عربية تمتدّ من العراق الى مصر مروراً بسورية والأردن ولبنان. ومما يجب التوقف عنده بانتباه وتقدير تأكيد المصادر العراقية أنّ اللقاءات العربية تتضمّن تعهّدات بمساعدة لبنان في احتواء تبعات أزمته الاقتصادية، خصوصاً بعد تفجير مرفأ بيروت.

إنّ هذه التطورات المهمة في كلّ من دمشق وبغداد ينبغي أن تكون حافزاً للهيئات الشعبية والاقتصادية اللبنانية، على أنواعها، للضغط على المسؤولين المتردّدين والمهملين الى ملاقاة العاصمتين العربيتين في منتصف الطريق لنسج علاقات أوثق وأقوى وأشمل معهما على الصعيد الاقتصادي كما على الصعيد الاستراتيجي مما يزيد من منسوب الحماية الاقتصاديّة والأمنيّة التي يحتاجها لبنان وكلّ قطر عربي في ظلّ التغوّل الصهيوني المتصاعد الذي يتناول في هذه اللحظات أهل فلسطين وأطفالهم ومقدّساتهم وأراضيهم وبيوتهم ومؤسّساتهم ومصانعهم ومزارعهم بقصد تهجيرهم والمضيّ قدماً في مشروع الدولة اليهودية الخالصة التي تهدّد فلسطين ولبنان وسورية والمنطقة بنكبة أسوأ وأفظع من نكبة عام 1948 فيما لو لم نتدارك الأمر بمزيد من الخطوات الديمقراطية والوحدوية على الصعيد الوطني كما القومي.

*نائب ووزير سابق

Deep State Wars: Trump vs. Biden On China & Iran

By Andrew Korybko

American political analyst

7 DECEMBER 2020

Deep State Wars: Trump vs. Biden On China & Iran

Should Biden succeed in seizing power from Trump, he’ll be forced to confront serious internal challenges to his envisioned foreign policy decisions towards China and Iran, which will likely lead to a worsening of tensions within the US’ permanent military, intelligence, and diplomatic bureaucracies (“deep state”) even though the chance still exists for a possible compromise between its two most prominent factions.

“Deep state” deniers — those who refuse to acknowledge the existence of factionalism within the US’ permanent military, intelligence, and diplomatic bureaucracies — are attempting to mislead the public into expecting that the implementation of Biden’s envisioned foreign policy decisions towards China and Iran will be perfectly smooth if he succeeds in seizing power from Trump. It’s extremely unlikely that such a scenario will come to pass since the Democrat presidential candidate will almost certainly face intense internal resistance from the pro-Trump elements of the deep state that hang around for his possible presidency. What follows is an extended bullet point summary describing the current deep state dynamics, predicting their forthcoming development under a possible Biden Administration, identifying their fault lines with respect to China and Iran, proposing some areas of compromise, and then touching upon some other common points between their largely contradictory worldviews. The purpose in sharing this insight is to debunk the deep state deniers and provide observers with a glimpse of what might transpire across the coming four years.

Deep State Dynamics

* All permanent military, intelligence, and diplomatic bureaucracies (“deep states”) in the world are comprised of different factions.

* Each deep state has a different dynamic which changes with time.

* The past four years of the Trump Administration proves that zealous individuals will overtly and covertly attempt to sabotage the President’s foreign policy.

* This unilateral assertion of interests (whether individually or in coordination with like-minded supporters) against the chain of command is very worrying.

* It was seen most prominently with respect to Trump’s envisioned desire to reach a “New Detente” with Russia, which his deep state foes feared (sincerely or not) represented a dire threat to national security.

* Even after four years, Trump was still unable to “purge” and/or “politically neutralize” these forces, hence why they continued to hinder the implementation of his policy in that respect.

* Of relevance as well was the Syrian chemical weapons incident of early 2017 which provoked Trump into hypocritically going against his prior criticism of Obama when he threatened to bomb the country in late 2013.

* The specifics of that incident are in dispute, but Russia and Syria officially alleged that it was a provocation carried out by US intelligence-backed “rebels”.

* That being the case, which is consistent with their prior claims about similar incidents, then it proves that elements of the US deep state can stage provocations to pressure the President in a certain direction.

* There’s no reason to predict that this dynamic will change if Biden seizes the presidency, it’s just that this time it’ll likely be anti-Chinese and anti-Iranian elements of the deep state that might be driving this instead.

Bureaucratic Challenges

* Trump thought that replacing the heads of various departments would lead to positive changes down the chain of command, but this proved to not have been the case.

* In Trump’s experience, some of the individuals who he chose to lead those departments (ex: the CIA’s Gina Haspel and former Defense Secretary Mattis) have/had sharp contradictions of vision with him on some issues.

* It’s impossible to know in advance whether a nominee is “ideologically pure” on all issues since the importance is in immediately selecting someone to lead those departments who seems to be on the same page.

* It’s only throughout the course of time that differences might make themselves apparent, whether they preceded that individual’s nomination or independently developed later on.

* There’s nothing wrong with contrasting visions, but they become problematic when the individuals tasked with leading key departments defy the Executive Branch’s will, whether overtly or covertly.

* Even with the most “ideologically pure” individuals, they’re still literally only just one person and cannot exercise full control of the countless people below them, some of whom might be more zealous in their dissent.

* Institutional safeguards and oversight unique to each department are supposed to prevent this from happening by identifying it in advance and/or rigorously responding after the fact to prevent its recurrence.

* That hasn’t always worked as intended, as the storied experience of the State Department’s many disagreements with Trump’s policies attest, and the President wasn’t able to perfectly impose his will.

* The ideal solution then is for the most “ideologically pure” individuals to take charge of departments and ensure that dissenters who might go against the chain of command are identified and rooted out.

* Nevertheless, these actions are regarded in American political culture (whether rightly or wrongly) as “witch hunts” which go against the country’s traditions, which is how they were described when Trump attempted them.

* Biden, however, is held to different standards by a much more supportive media, so any efforts in this direction likely won’t receive the popular pushback that Trump’s did.

* In this case, dissenters might only receive a platform (whether directly or via leaks) to share their views on suppressed media outlets such as Breitbart and a few others, therefore mitigating their impact on public opinion.

* This might in turn embolden Biden and his team to carry out the “purge” that Trump only dreamed that he’d have been able to do, especially since new nominees are career bureaucrats unlike Trump’s relative “outsiders”.

* The unintended consequence of that success might be the development of more powerful groupthink, which could in turn blind policy makers and increase the risk of ideologically radical policies being promoted.

* As a case in point, the Biden team is known to prioritize “spreading democracy” and “protecting human rights” through Obama-era Color Revolutions and “Humanitarian Interventions”.

* Without responsibly expressed dissent within their ranks against these ideological desires, they might be more prone to resort to coercive (including kinetic) means to impose them abroad.

* That could in effect lead to a more militant foreign policy than was pursued under the comparatively less ideological and much more pragmatic Trump, whose vision was kept in check by deep state dissenters.

Deep State Fault Lines: China

* The primary deep state fault line that’s expected to develop within a possible Biden Administration is over the US’ approach towards China.

* If there’s one deep state front that Trump scored some success on, it’s with installing anti-Chinese individuals into these three institutions (the military, intelligence, and diplomatic bureaucracies).

* They’ve already developed clear strategies, implemented tangible policies (some of which irreversibly changed the state of play), and published comprehensive policy documents for guiding the deep state.

* For these reasons, it’ll be extremely difficult for Biden to reverse the trajectory of ever-intensifying US-Chinese competition, although he might try to regulate it a bit better.

* There are already several flashpoints between these two countries — namely the Korean Peninsula and territorial disputes (Japan/Taiwan/South China Sea/India) — that could be exploited by the dissident deep state.

* It’s not even so much the fact that it might just be one “rogue” individual who could spoil everything (unlikely), but that there’s an institutional mindset in the military at least not to “be soft” on China.

* With this in mind, Biden will likely have to compromise with members of the dissident deep state with respect to China the same as Trump had to do vis-a-vis Russia, though it’s unclear whether the same outcome will occur where he ends up bending to their will for the most part.

* What’s meant by this is that Biden can only go so far in seeking to regulate the US’ Great Power competition with China since members of the military might go against him just like diplomats defied Trump on Russia.

* Where Biden has much more flexibility then is on the economic front since that doesn’t fall within the typical domain of the “deep state”, which is also why Trump was so successful in pushing through his trade war agenda.

* Biden, therefore, might try to reach a more comprehensive trade deal with China which mitigates economic tensions but retains most of the military legacy thereof that he inherited from Trump.

* A possible compromise with the dissident deep state might be to continue Trump’s strategy of assembling an anti-Chinese economic coalition with the EU.

* Some exceptions might occur, though, such as if “ideologically pure” intelligence and/or diplomatic allies succeed in “reforming” some of Trump’s anti-Chinese containment measures in Asia.

* For instance, the situation in the South China Sea might remain tense, but it might also not get any worse, with Biden’s allies “freezing” the state of affairs in order to prevent it from spiraling out of control.

* That might not be ideal for the deep state dissenters, but it might also not be unacceptable for them either.

* Ultimately, it still remains to be seen how he’ll manage this complex interplay of shadowy interests since the outcome of this intra-governmental competition will greatly shape global affairs across the next four years.

Deep State Fault Lines: Iran

* The second most consequential deep state fault line lies with Iran, especially considering the influence that the “Israeli” and Gulf lobbies hold over the US government in general and the Trump Administration in particular.

* It already seems like dissident anti-Iranian deep state elements opposed to Biden’s possible return to the Iranian nuclear deal are conspiring to sabotage that scenario.

* This speculation is the result of Pompeo’s recent trip to Saudi Arabia, which Netanyahu was reported to have attended as well despite Tel Aviv and Riyadh’s denial.

* Observers are of the opinion that this wasn’t just a “going away party” for Pompeo, but a plot to undermine any Iranian-friendly outreaches by Biden.

* It can only be speculated what form this might take, but the subsequent assassination of a top Iranian nuclear scientist might suggest possible ways in which this could play out.

* It’s unclear who was responsible, but whether it was the US, “Israel”, or Saudi Arabia, all three (at least under the outgoing Trump Administration) are on the same page that it was a positive development.

* Even in the event that Biden is able to “purge”/”politically neutralize” as much of his deep state as possible of anti-Iranian forces, “Israel” and Saudi Arabia can still engage in similarly destabilizing and provocative acts.

* Moreover, while Gulf influence over the US government can potentially be mitigated, “Israeli” influence is recognized as being much more powerful and unquestionably has strong bipartisan support.

* That observation, however, doesn’t explain why Obama went through with the Iranian nuclear deal in the first place, which shows that there are still some divisions between some of the US deep state and “Israel”.

* That doesn’t mean that a split is imminent, but just that those in the US who might want to assert their view of national interests at “Israel’s” perfecived expense might be emboldened under Biden’s Obama-era team.

* It’s here where Biden’s “purge”/”political neutralization” of anti-Iranian elements will be important because if he roots out Pompeo’s allies, then “Israel” and Saudi Arabia would be more isolated if they sabotaged his policies afterwards.

* Should he fail in this attempt or not do so to the extent that’s needed, then Biden’s Iran policy might be sabotaged from within just like Trump’s Russia one was.

* Unlike with China, it might be more difficult to reach a deep state compromise on Iran because anti-Iranian elements regard the country as an existential threat to their “Israeli” ally, which China doesn’t represent.

* The ideological radicalism influencing their opposition to Iran makes them unlikely to compromise, meaning that this might become the most intense front of dissident deep state subterfuge of Biden’s foreign policy.

* For instance, the military likely won’t agree to any compromise with Iran since it was the military which supported Trump’s anti-Iranian policies the most.

* The intelligence and diplomatic communities, however, were always split in this respect, and if anything, they’ve leaned closer to preferring Obama-era policies, thus making it easier for Biden to promote them.

* Although a compromise is difficult to reach in the Mideast, deep state dissent might be quelled if the US’ return to the Iranian nuclear deal somehow or another has loopholes for intensifying pressure on the country.

* Iranian conservatives were against the initial deal since they didn’t trust the US, and they’re skeptical of any future one which mandates more international inspections and any missile cuts for that reason.

* If Biden were to propose what’s presented (whether rightly or wrongly) as a “perfect deal” but was rebuked, then this might set into motion a chain reaction of escalations that would serve the military’s interests.

* Although it’s only speculative, such a plan of action could be discussed behind closed doors with dissident deep state members from the military to either ensure their support or create staged drama.

* If Iranian conservatives saw that the military vehemently opposed a deal, they might then think that maybe it really is more to their interests than they thought, even if that’s only a ruse to strategically disarm them.

* In any case, it’s still a risky proposal because there’s no way to ensure the military’s support for something that they’re so clearly against even if they promise otherwise, hence why this is only speculation.

Possible Points Of Deep State Compromise

* There are some common points of interest between the Trump and Biden teams, as well as those who are influenced by both of their visions within the deep state.

* The first is the recognition that China is the US’ top strategic competitor, though Trump’s deep state regards it as the greatest threat while Biden’s thinks that Russia fulfills this role instead.

* Nevertheless, they can still find some common ground in strengthening the US’ anti-Chinese alliance system, focusing first on the Quad and 5G, then perhaps on trade (such as what was proposed earlier with the EU).

* The military-industrial complex is also very important to both so there was never any credible risk of either administration — Trump or Biden — pulling away from international affairs and “isolating” despite critics’ claims.

* This nod to the military dimension of the deep state ensures that it remains a prominent force influencing the US’ grand strategic designs, even if the other two (intelligence and diplomacy) override it on topics like Iran.

* Trade and tech (5G especially) are other areas of common interest between the Trump and Biden deep states, and representatives from both spheres regard China as the US’ top global competitor.

* Dissident deep state elements might therefore be appeased if Biden expanded the US’ anti-Chinese global alliance network on the basis of trade and tech even if militarily de-escalating in the South China Sea.

* American values are also important to both too, and these can be incorporated into the basis for a more comprehensive worldwide anti-Chinese alliance system, possibly winning over the dissident deep state.

Concluding Thoughts

As was argued in this analysis, dissident members of the deep state are prone to replicating the Russiagate precedent by actively working to sabotage Biden’s envisioned foreign policy decisions towards China and Iran. While the projected president-elect might make some headway in politically neutralizing the internal opposition to his vision, he’ll more than likely still have to confront significant pushback along these two main fronts. The possibility therefore exists for him to consider a compromise between the deep state’s two most prominent factions which could see the US retaining some elements of its prior strategies against those two countries in exchange for moderating its hostile approach towards them in specific spheres. It’s way to early to predict with a lot of confidence whether this will all play out or not, especially since Biden hasn’t (yet?) been certified as the president-elect, but it’s nevertheless important to begin prognosticating how everything might unfold if that does indeed come to pass. In any case, the importance of this analysis rests with the attention that it gives the deep state level of analysis, which is deliberately neglected by most mainstream analysts.

هجوم على وزير الأوقاف السوري .. فعلى أي الجانبين ستكون؟

Posted on 2020/12/10 by naram.serjoonn

لاشك ان كلام الرئيس الاسد عن العروبة والاسلام والعلمانية يعبر عن الدوامات الفكرية التي تعصف بالعقل المشرقي والذي يبحث عن حلول للمعضلات العقائدية واللايديولوجية التي تصارعت في المنطقة وتتصارع .. وكلام الأسد هو كلام العارفين بطبيعة الصراع وطرق حله عن طريق فهمه .. عبر فهم مكوناته واختلافاتها المنطقية والضرورية وتوافقاتها المنطقية والضرورية ..
ويبدو ان الاحتكاكات الفكرية بين التيارات الدينية واللادينية لاتزال تعبر عن محاولات لايجاد معادلة الحل .. ولذلك نجد ان التيار الديني في الشرق لايزال يحاول ان يمارس نوعا من الوصاية على التيارات الأخرى فيما التيارات الاخرى تريد اقصاء الدين ومعاملته كمشكلة حضارية أكثر من كونه شكلا من أشكال الحضارة ومرحلة من مراحل تطور الفكر الانساني .. ولذلك شن موقع فيرل هجوما معاكسا على تصريحات السيد وزير الاوقاف معتبرا ان الوزير هو من مروجي الداعشية المقنعة .. فهل توافق على التوصيف ام تجد ان موقع فيرل يبالغ في توصيفه .. اقرأ واحكم بنفسك ولك انت ان تختار الى اي الجانبين تميل

رد من مركز #فيريل (المانيا) على خطبة الجمعة لـ #وزيرالأوقاف ..

” العروبة سابقة على الإسلام”

وزير أوقاف أم زعيم في #داعش؟

مركز فيريل للدراسات: لسنا في مركز فيريل للدراسات بواردِ الدفاع عن مُعتقد أو عقيدة أو طائفة أو حزب، لكننا سندافع بالتأكيد عن سوريا كوحدة متكاملة أرضاً وحضارةً وشعباً، وهذا مبدؤنا الذي عنه لا نحيد. أتحفنا وزير الأوقاف السوري عبد الستار السيد بتاريخ 04 كانون الأول 2020بخطبة جمعة طائفية عنصرية إقصائية. الخطبة تلك كانت في جامع خديجة الكبرى بطرطوس وعلى الهواء مباشرة، وعنوانها (الرد على طروحات ما يسمى الأمة السورية). خطبة عنصرية طائفية إقصائية تحدّث الوزير المذكور بطريقة طائفية عنصرية هازئة من كل ما هو غير عربي وغير إسلامي، ناسخاً آلاف السنوات من تاريخ سوريا وحضارتها، واصفاً باقي القوميات والحضارات والطوائف والأديان بأنها “مُتفرّق وضئيل”. لو أنّ ما قالهُ عبد الستار صدرَ عن أميرٍ داعشي أو من جبهة النصرة، لما استغربنا، أما أن يصدر عن صاحبِ كرسيّ لاصق في الوزارة السورية، فهذا ما يدفعنا للتساؤل؛ إلى متى سيبقى الحبلُ على غاربهِ؟ (في منطقتنا عقيدتان أساسيتان هما العروبة والإسلام، وكلّ ما سواهما مُتفرّقٌ وضئيل. الأساس هو الإسلام في هذه الدول والمجتمعات) عبد الستار السيد. لم يسمع عبد الستار بأنّ في سوريا قوميات وحضارات وأديانٌ أخرى سبقت الإسلام والعروبة بآلاف السنين. لم يسمع بأنّ سوريا كانت مهداً لـ33 حضارة ودولة عبر التاريخ. (كلّ الحروب التي تمت وتتم منذ المغول والتتار إلى حروب الفرنجة إلى الاستعمار الفرنسي والبريطاني إلى الاحتلال الأميركي… إلى الحرب على سوريا وإلى وإلى، كل ما يجري يستهدفُ الإسلام والعروبة) عبد الستار السيد. هل نسيتَ احتلالاً استمر أربعة قرون يا سيادة الوزير المعتدل؟ لماذا تناسيتَ عملية التتريك ومحو العروبة التي قامت وتقوم بها الدولة العثمانية البائدة والحالية؟ يبدو أنك تعتبرُ الإسلام العثماني نموذجي تقوم باستنساخهِ في سوريا… (شو هاي #الأمةالسورية؟ هل سمعتم بالأمة السورية؟) عبد الستار السيد.


هذا حديثُ وزير وليس عنصر في داعش أو جبهة النصرة
(أصلنا فينيقيّون أصلنا سريان أصلنا كذا) عبد الستار السيد. فجأة يقفز إلى الأكراد فيخلط شعبان برمضان (المشكلة الكردية).
(لا يمكنُ الفصل بين #العروبة و #الإسلام، ومَن يستهدف العروبة يستهدف الإسلام واللغة العربية) عبد الستار السيد.
دمج العروبة بالإسلام، وانتقاد أحدها يعني انتقاد الآخر، هو مبدأ تكفيري بحت لا يختلف عن طريقة داعش والقاعدة، وهنا لا يصح أن نُعيبَ على الوهابيين والإخوان والإرهابيين في شيء قبلَ أن نُعيبَ على وزير الأوقاف السوري.
اسمع يا عبد الستار
خطبتكَ فتنة لأنها تُنكرُ وجود قومياتٍ وحضاراتٍ قبل القومية العربية في سوريا. خطبتك فتنة يا عبد الستار لأنها تُنكرُ وجود ديانات أخرى قبل الديانة الإسلامية في سوريا، يبدو أنك لم تسمع بالصابئة واليهود واليزيديين والمسيحيين؟
هؤلاء الذينَ أسميتهم “مُتفرّق وضئيل” هم الأصل، ومَن لا أصل له لا رباطَ على لسانه. السريان والآشوريون والكلدان نفّذت بهم معشوقتك تركيا مئات المجازر وتم تهجير وأسلمة معظم مَن بقيَ حيّاً، لهذا تناقص عددهم.
في العصر الحديث يا عبد الستار؛ #ناصيفاليازجي صاحب مجمع البحرين ونار القرى، المسيحي الذي كان يحفظ القرآن آية بعد آية، والذي حارب عملية تتريك وترجمة القرآن إلى اللغة التركية. #بطرسالبستاني هو أولُ مَن ألف موسوعة عربية وقاموساً عربياً ودار معارف عربية. الأب لويس نقولا اليسوعي صاحبُ اللغات السبع، ألّف “المُنجد” وتاريخ الأدب العربي. مارون حنّا عبود صاحب الستين كتاباً في الأدب العربي… هؤلاء هم الـ “ضئيل” يا كثير.
هل حدّثوك عن جبران خليل جبران ونسيب عريضة وأنطوان صقّال وميخائيل نُعيمة وعبد المسيح حداد وإيليا أبو ماضي وإلياس القدسي وندرة حداد وحنّا مينا وماري معمر وجورج سالم ووو…
يقول العظيم #جبران خليل جبران: “لو أن موتي سيفعل شيئاً عظيماً من أجل سوريا، فلتأخذ سوريا حياتي”. من رسائله لماري هكسل صفحة 177 توفيق صايغ. ويقول أيضاً في رسالة إلى أميل زيدان: “أنا من القائلين بوحدة سوريا الجغرافية وباستقلال البلاد تحت حكم نيابي وطني”.
معظمُ هؤلاء العظماء آمنوا بالأمة والحضارة السورية، ورغم ذلك حافظوا على اللغة العربية وصانوها وألّفوا بها مئات الكتب والقواميس والمراجع، ولم يُهاجموا القومية العربية، هل تعلم لماذا يا عبد الستار؟ لأنهم عظماء…
العروبة ضرورة وليست مصيراً يا عبد الستار
مَنْ يؤمن بالأمة السورية لا يتعارضُ إيمانه هذا مع العروبة… صعبة عليك؟ سأبسطها لك. العروبة موجودة قبل الإسلام لهذا الربط بينهما سلاحُ الطائفيين والإقصائيين. أتعلم أنّ #طرفةبنالعبد و #امرؤالقيس وعدي بن زيد العبادي والنابغة الذبياني و #جرير بن عبد المسيح الضبعي و #الزيرسالم الذي شوهتم سيرته بمسلسلاتكم الكاذبة، كل هؤلاء كانوا عرباً مسيحيّون آمنوا بالعروبة قبل الإسلام.
هل سمعتَ بالملكة ماويا العربية التي سكنت خناصر؟ أسمعتَ بمملكة الغساسنة ومملكة بصرى وفيليب العربي؟
لا نؤمنُ في مركز فيريل للدراسات بوجود رابطٍ بين العرب والإسلام أو العروبة والإسلام، الأمران بالنسبة لنا منفصلان تماماً، فهناك عربٌ من كافة الأديان والاعتقادات، نحترمها جميعاً مهما كانت. لكننا لا نسمحُ بوصف العرب والعروبة بصفاتٍ سيئة، العربُ، وبحيادية تامة، كانوا أصحاب حضارة وقوة وممالك، وصلوا بها إلى حدود فارس ومصر وآسيا الوسطى في العصر الذي أسميتموهُ جهلاً وتزويراً بالعصر الجاهلي.
بالمقابل؛ لا نسمحُ بإنكار وجود باقي الحضارات والقوميات والأديان، والذي يحترمُ نفسه، يحترم التاريخ ويبتعدُ عن التعابير #الشوارعية (((شو هاي الأمة السورية!!!))).
الأمة والحضارة السورية موجودة وهي الأصل، شئتَ أم أبيت يا عبد الستار… العروبة امتداد للأمة السورية وعمقٌ استراتيجيٌّ لها وليس العكس. في سوريا نشأت عشرات الممالك والحضارات غير العربية.
عندما غزا العرب سوريا هل كانت خالية؟ أجب عن هذا السؤال يا عبد الستار… أين ذهب سكانها؟ تبخروا أم ابتلعتهم أفواه الغزاة؟ السريان موجودون قبل أجدادك يا وزير يا معتدل وكذلك الفنينيقيّون والآشوريون والكلدان والسومريون وووو… حتى الأرمن كانت سوريا ضمن مملكتهم قبل الميلاد…
حضارة سوريا عمرها 12000 عاماً، ولن تستطيع أنتَ وأمثالك مسح هذا التاريخ بخطبة #طائفية #عنصرية مقيتة، يا مَن صدعت رؤوس العباد باعتدالك…
سوريا واحة زهور متنوعة فوّاحة، وفيها أشواك أيضاً. إن كنتَ تنوي وتُخطط لإقامة دولة دينية طائفية عنصرية في سوريا تكون “مرجعها”، فهذا لا يُعطيكَ الحق بتزوير التاريخ وإقصاء الآخر ومحو الأصل. أنتَ يا وزير يا معتدل؛ كتابٌ مفتوح وباللغة العربية، كتابٌ بات إغلاقهُ بل إتلافهُ حاجة مُلحّة…


مركز فيريل للدراسات . 08.12.2020

تعليق على رد مركز فيريل للدراسات

داعش لا تقتصر علي اصحاب الدقون بل كل من يرفض الاعتراف بالاخر بغص النظر عن دينه او لونة او عرقه، لم استمع لخطبة وزير الأوقاف واتفق مع مركز فيريل للدراسات لكني أسأل المركز هل الوزير أكثر داعشية من ماكرون رئبس جمهورية الاخاء والمساواة والكثير من مدعي العلمانية. المركز يتحدث عن العزو العربي لسوريا تم يناقض نفسه فيتحدث الغساسنة وينسى ان الأمة السورية التي فتحها واستعمرها العرب قد غزت واستعمرت اسبانيا ل 800 عام كما أسال المركز ماذا عن اليمن وهجرات اليمنببن نحو الشمال؟؟

أنصح المركز بالاستماع الى محاضرة الاسد

فيديوات ذات صلة

كلمة السيد الرئيس بشار الأسد للسادة العلماء 25.8.2011
كلمة السيد الرئيس بشار الأسد أمام مجموعة من السادة العلماء ورجال الدين وأئمة المساجد والداعيات 2014

مقالات ذات صلة

Assad and Islam of the Levant الأسد وإسلام بلاد الشام

الأسد للعلماء: لقيادة المواجهة مع مشروع الليبراليّة دفاعاً عن الهويّة بوجه التفلّت والتطرّف

Photo of الأسد للعلماء: لقيادة المواجهة مع مشروع الليبراليّة دفاعاً عن الهويّة بوجه التفلّت والتطرّف

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad launched from a gathering of scientists in Damascus a call for the renaissance of scientists with the task of leading the confrontation with the liberalism project, which aims to strike the national identity and the ideological depth represented by Islam, together with social and family values, considering that this project aimed at dismantling societies and opening the way to the project of hegemony, This project stands behind both fragmentation, Misrepresentation and extremism, Assad accused French President Emmanuel Macron and Turkish President Recep Erdogan of sharing roles in managing extremist climates to strike the true identity of societies, He called for realising the lack of contradiction between their Islamic affiliation, their national identity and their secular state.

Assad and The Islam of the Levant

Nasser Qandil

 When an Islamic reference with the rank and knowledge of Sheikh Maher Hammoud said that when he listened to the speech of President Bashar al-Assad yesterday, in a council of leading scholars in Syria, he was surprised that the level of talk and depth in the issues of jurisprudence, doctrine, Qur’an and interpretation matched the senior scholars, as he was surprised by the clear and deep visions in dealing with issues affecting the Islamic world in deeper matters than politics, this is some of what will be the case for anyone who has been able to hear the flow of President Assad in dealing with matters of great complexity, sensitivity and accuracy, over the course of an hour. He is half-spoken in the sequence of the transition from one title to another, and supports every idea of religious evidence, Qur’anic texts, prophetic hadiths and historical evidence, and he paints the framework of the battle he is fighting intellectually to address decades-old dilemmas known as titles such as secularism, religiosity, Arabism and Islam, moderation and extremism, the task of scholars in interpreting and understanding biography and providing example in the front lines of identity battles, in drawing the paths of social peace, and establishing a system of moral, national and family values.

 Assad is crowned by efforts led by great reformers in the Arab and Islamic worlds to address these thorny issues, courageously advancing to this difficult, risky course, taking it upon himself as an Islamic, nationalist and secular thinker, to present a new version of the doctrinal, intellectual and philosophical understanding, seeking To replace imaginary virtual battles with historical reconciliation between lofty concepts and values related to peoples and elites, but divided around them, and fighting, instead of looking for the points of fundamental convergence that begin, as President Al-Assad says, of human nature, divine year and historical year. High values cannot collide, people’s attachment to them cannot be contradictory, and scientists and thinkers must resolve the contradiction when it emerges, and dismantle it. This is the task that Assad is dealing with by diving into the world of jurisprudence, thought and philosophy, and he is putting his hand on a serious intellectual wound, which is his description of the role played by the liberal school based on the destruction and dismantling of all societal structures, and elements of identity, to turn societies into mere individuals racing to live without meaning and controls, closer to the animal instinctive concept, and to the law of the jungle that governs it.

The historical role of Islam in the East, its structural and historical overlap with the manufacturing of major transformations, and universal identities, a title that needs the courage of Assad to approach it in terms of adherence to secularism, nationalism, prompts Assad to reveal the danger of realizing those who look to take control of this East of the importance of occupying Islam, as an investment less expensive than occupying the land, and doing its place and more. Whoever occupies Islam and speaks his tongue cuts more than half way to achieve his project, and reveals the danger of Assad realizing this in the heart of the war on Syria as one of the most prominent titles of the war prepared to control Syria, and in parallel the demonstrations of Islam in Syria, elites, scientists and the social environment. of resistance to the projects of intellectual, political and related occupation Seeking to destroy identity, belief, family cohesion, morality and value system, which carried the project of extremism financed and programmed with hundreds of satellite channels to spread strife and sow fear and encourage terrorism, with a neat rotation between the two sides feeding each other, and pushing Syrian scientists in the face of the precious sacrifices of the ranks of scientists, and they played in this confrontation a role that President Assad places as the role of the army on the front sands.

 Historically, Syria has been the focal point of the national identity, from which Islam has established its status as a cultural political project, and in front of doctrinal and religious schools divided between Wahhabism and the Muslim Brotherhood led by Saudi Arabia and Turkey, the aspiration for Islam in the Levant has always been to promote the Islam of al-Azhar, and together constitute the historical turning point in the course of the East, in harmony with the understanding of the national identity of society and the secular foundation of the state. In this historic conversation, it is clear that President Assad has taken this important task upon himself as a thinker, not just as head of state.

الأسد للعلماء: لقيادة المواجهة مع مشروع الليبراليّة دفاعاً عن الهويّة بوجه التفلّت والتطرّف

Photo of الأسد للعلماء: لقيادة المواجهة مع مشروع الليبراليّة دفاعاً عن الهويّة بوجه التفلّت والتطرّف

أطلق الرئيس السوري الدكتور بشار الأسد من لقاء علمائي جامع في دمشق الدعوة لنهضة العلماء بمهمة قيادة المواجهة مع مشروع الليبراليّة الذي يستهدف ضرب الهوية القوميّة والعمق العقائديّ الذي يمثله الإسلام، ومعهما القيم الاجتماعية والأسرية، معتبراً أن هذا المشروع الهادف لتفكيك المجتمعات وفتح الطريق لمشروع الهيمنة، هو الذي يقف وراء التفلّت والتطرّف معاً، متهماً الرئيس الفرنسي امانويل ماكرون والرئيس التركي رجب أردوغان بتقاسم الأدوار في إدارة مناخات التطرّف لضرب الهوية الحقيقيّة للمجتمعات التي دعاها الأسد الى إدراك عدم التناقض بين انتمائها الإسلاميّ وهويتها القوميّة ودولتها العلمانيّة.

الأسد وإسلام بلاد الشام

ناصر قنديل

 عندما يقول مرجع إسلامي بمرتبة وعلم الشيخ ماهر حمود أنه عندما استمع الى حديث الرئيس بشار الأسد أول أمس، في مجلس ضمّ كبار العلماء في سورية، فوجئ بأن مستوى الحديث وعمقه في قضايا الفقه والعقيدة والقرآن والتفسير يُضاهي كبار العلماء، كما فوجئ بالرؤى الواضحة والعميقة في تناول القضايا التي تطال العالم الإسلامي في شؤون أعمق من السياسة، فهذا بعض ما سيقع عليه كل مَن أتيح له سماع تدفّق الرئيس الأسد في تناول شؤون شديدة التعقيد والحساسية والدقة، على مدى ساعة ونصف متحدثاً بتسلسل الانتقال من عنوان الى آخر، وتدعيم كل فكرة بالشواهد الدينيّة والنصوص القرآنية والأحاديث النبوية والشواهد التاريخية، وهو يرسم إطار المعركة التي يخوضها فكرياً لمعالجة معضلات عمرها عقود طويلة عرفت بعناوين، مثل العلمانية والتديُّن، والعروبة والإسلام، والاعتدال والتطرف، ومهمة العلماء في التفسير وفهم السيرة وتقديم المثال في الخطوط الأماميّة لمعارك الهوية، وفي رسم مسارات السلم الاجتماعي، وإرساء منظومة القيم الأخلاقية والوطنية والأسرية.

 يتوّج الأسد مساعي قادها إصلاحيّون كبار في العالمين العربي والإسلامي لتناول هذه القضايا الشائكة، متقدماً بشجاعة لخوض هذا المسلك الوعر، والمحفوف بالمخاطر فيأخذ على عاتقه كمفكر إسلاميّ وقوميّ وعلمانيّ، تقديم نسخة جديدة من الفهم الفقهيّ والفكريّ والفلسفيّ، تسعى لاستبدال المعارك الافتراضيّة الوهميّة بمصالحة تاريخية بين مفاهيم وقيم سامية تتعلق بها الشعوب والنخب، لكنها تنقسم حولها، وتتقاتل، بدلاً من أن تبحث عن نقاط التلاقي الجوهري التي تنطلق كما يقول الرئيس الأسد من الفطرة البشريّة، والسنة الإلهيّة والسنة التاريخيّة. فالقيم السامية لا يمكن لها أن تتصادم، وتعلّق الشعوب بها لا يمكن أن يأتي متناقضاً، وعلى العلماء والمفكرين حل التناقض عندما يظهر، وتفكيكه. وهذه هي المهمة التي يتصدّى لها الأسد بالغوص في عالم الفقه والفكر والفلسفة، وهو يضع يده على جرح فكري خطير يتمثل بتوصيفه للدور الذي تقوم به المدرسة الليبرالية القائمة على تدمير وتفكيك كل البنى المجتمعية، وعناصر الهوية، لتحويل المجتمعات الى مجرد أفراد يتسابقون على عيش بلا معنى ولا ضوابط، أقرب للمفهوم الحيوانيّ الغرائزيّ، ولشريعة الغاب التي تحكمه.

 الدور التاريخيّ للإسلام في الشرق، وتداخله التركيبي والتاريخي مع صناعة التحوّلات الكبرى، والهويات الجامعة، عنوان يحتاج الى شجاعة الأسد لمقاربته من منطلق التمسك بالعلمانيّة، والقوميّة، يدفع الأسد للكشف عن خطورة إدراك الذين يتطلعون لوضع اليد على هذا الشرق لأهميّة احتلال الإسلام، كاستثمار أقل كلفة من احتلال الأرض، ويقوم مقامها وأكثر. فمن يحتلّ الإسلام ويلبس لبوسه وينطق بلسانه يقطع أكثر من نصف الطريق لتحقيق مشروعه، ويكشف الأسد خطورة إدراكه لهذا الأمر في قلب الحرب على سورية كواحد من أبرز العناوين للحرب التي أعدّت للسيطرة على سورية، وبالتوازي ما أظهره الإسلام في سورية، من النخب والعلماء والبيئة الاجتماعية من قدرة مقاومة لمشاريع الاحتلال الفكري، والسياسي، وما يتصل بها من سعي لتدمير الهوية والعقيدة والترابط الأسري والأخلاق ومنظومة القيم، وهو ما حمله مشروع التطرّف المموّل والمبرمج بمئات الفضائيّات لبثّ الفتن وزرع الخوف والتشجيع على الإرهاب، بتناوب متقن بين طرفَيْه يغذي أحدهما الآخر، ودفع علماء سورية في مواجهته تضحيات غالية من صفوف العلماء، وأدوا في هذه المواجهة دوراً يضعه الرئيس الأسد بمصاف دور الجيش على الجبهات.

 تاريخياً، كانت سورية هي نقطة الارتكاز التي تأسست عليها الهويّة القوميّة، والتي امتلك منها الإسلام صفته كمشروع سايسيّ حضاريّ، وأمام مدارس فقهيّة ودينيّة تتوزّع بين الوهابية والأخوان المسلمين بقيادة سعودية وتركية، كان التطلع دائماً لإسلام بلاد الشام ليستنهض معه إسلام الأزهر، ويشكلان معاً نقطة التحول التاريخية في مسار الشرق، بالتناغم مع فهم الهوية القوميّة للمجتمع، والأساس العلماني للدولة. وفي هذا الحديث التاريخي، يبدو بوضوح أن الرئيس الأسد قد أخذ هذه المهمة الجليلة على عاتقه كمفكّر، وليس فقط كرئيس للدولة.

فيديوات متعلقة

كلمة الرئيس الأسد خلال مشاركته في الاجتماع الدوري لوزارة الأوقاف

كلمة الرئيس الأسد خلال مشاركته في الاجتماع الدوري لوزارة الأوقاف يوم أمس الموجودة على الرابط ادناه، تعد محاضرة فلسفية عميقة يتناول فيها

مفاهيم عقدية ومسائل دينية شائكة بنظرة عميقة وفاحصة، ويتحدث عن أخطار اللبرالية الحديثة (المفاهيم ما بعد الحداثوية) على أصل الإنسان والإنسانية، وعن مفاهيم المجتمع والاسرة في الدين

ومغالطات اطروحات فصل الدين عن الدولة والأخلاق، ويضع كل هذا في اطاره الموسع في نقاش العروبة والإسلام في المعركة السياسية والاستعمارية القائمة على اوطاننا

والمستمرة منذ زهاء القرن من الزمن، مع الاستدلالات الشرعية حسب الأصول.

القى الرئيس الأسد هذه الكلمة في جامع العثمان، فهكذا تكون الخطب الدينية بحق، وكان لافتا شموليتها، ناهيك عن الإجابة على بعض المسائل الفقهية

والفلسفية الشائكة التي كانت الإجابة عليها صعبة رغم كثرة الكُتّاب والخطباء.

عمرو علان

كلمة الرئيس الأسد خلال مشاركته في الاجتماع الدوري لوزارة الأوقاف

After Trump the flood:

After Trump the flood:

December 08, 2020

by Ghassan and Intibah Kadi for the Saker Blog

Whether there was indeed voter fraud and rigging, and I personally believe there was and at a huge scale, it seems that, by hook or by crook, Joe Biden will become the next President of the United States of America; and we should prepare ourselves for this, regardless of our political points of view and inclinations.

The presence of Biden in the Whitehouse will definitely change course on a number of issues, both domestically within the USA and overseas, but the objective of this article is to shed a bit of light on what is likely to happen to the current pro-Biden camp and the diverse array of supporters who have helped elevate him to this position.

In more ways than one, I have always seen in Syria a microcosm of world politics and conflicts. Long before the enemies of Syria decided to launch their attack in March 2011, the masterminds of the conspiracy put the most unlikely allies together, only united by their hatred of Syria. Back then I called them the ‘Anti-Syrian Cocktail’. Those allies each had their own agenda regarding Syria and had nothing in common other than their desire to remove President Bashar Al-Assad from office. Among the issues they disagreed on was his replacement, how to share the spoils, not to mention the alternative political system to install, Syria’s future position in the region, international alliances, and so forth.

With a whole array of enemies, Trump inadvertently caused a rounding up of a very loosely-united anti-Trump-cocktail; only united by their hatred of him. So, let’s face it and acknowledge it; they will never let him win the November 2020 elections. Though only united by their hatred of Trump, there are too many of them, they are powerful; extremely powerful, and they are very determined to get rid of him by any means possible, legal, illegal, using tactics like bribery, intimidation, threats, thuggery, and they have no one to fear because, collectively they have given each other impunity, covering each other’s backs and producing a culture where criticizing them is taboo. Crucially, the ‘law’ and the media are on their side.

With the exception of the Clintons and Bidens perhaps, the other Democrats have their traditional political opposition to Trump, even when they see and know he is making good decisions. This is the golden rule of political duopoly. But the Clintons and the Bidens have personal dirt on them and even blood on their hands that they want to keep the lid on in order to avoid prosecution and possibly even jail. They are likely to remain united after a Trump loss, but the same cannot be said about other odd couples.

Most of the other November 2020 Biden supporters are destined to be on a collision course, and they will soon enough realize that their differences are much stronger than what united them and that they were taken for fools. None will be disappointed more than the so-called ‘Progressives’.

The definition of the term progressive has morphed quite significantly over the last decade or so. Currently, it seems to include any one who stands up against Trump; and this is the primordial cause of the confusion and reason for future conflict between them. In reality, what defines the term ‘progressive’ in any existing progressive movement can be totally different from that of another movement; and the difference is not necessarily marginal. Being ‘progressive’ in the 21st Century implies the presence of a very specific agenda or slogan that may or may not be compatible with other ‘progressive’ agendas.

Take the Assange supporters for example. The moment they wake up from their deep slumber, they will realize that the man they supported to become President is actually the leader of the political party that has put Assange in jail for exposing his party’s dirt. I hope that Trump pulls the rug from underneath their feet and pardons Assange before the 20th of January 2021. But will this show the Assange supporters who is who? Not necessarily because if they wanted to open up their eyes and see, they would have seen from day one that Assange’s biggest enemy is none but Hillary Clinton and that she is the one responsible for his demise; not Trump.

But the Assange supporters did not play a major role in the elections; at least not directly, and at least not as much as their closest ‘progressives’; the peace activists.

The Democrats and their cohorts have portrayed Trump as a warmonger. When peace activists eventually see that Biden will have to serve his warlord masters and start new wars across the globe, they will have to think again. He is already touting hiring well known hawks in key positions in his forthcoming cabinet and team of advisors, with his Defense Secretary reportedly selected.

When it comes to street power however, none has been more powerful and effective as the combination of BLM and the environmentalists.

BLM activists have just fallen a tad short of blaming Trump for an American five-century long history of racism. But how much do BLM activists really care about Climate Change and specifically about Greta-type environmental vision of how the world should run? Moreover, most environmentalists, if not all of them, are anti-vaxxers. When they see that Biden is the trump card for the vaccine empire, they may wish they didn’t take to the streets to unseat the Trump card they had in the Whitehouse. If there is/was one person standing up against the malevolent “Gates vaccine”, it has to be Trump, and the single-issue anti-vaxxers are against Trump. Try to make sense of this.

This is not to forget and ignore that the Climate Change activists will soon find out, the hard way, that Biden will not come clean on the zero-emission promise; not only because he doesn’t want to, not only because he goes to bed with the petro-dollar lobby, but also because he does not have the alternative technology to replace fossil fuel with.

In and out and in between the BLM and Climate Change activists, what do the Climate Change activists have in common ideologically with BLM and at what stage will they break ranks and decide to go against one another? What will happen after either one of them accuses the other, rightfully I must say, that they have been used as pawns by the ‘Deep State’?

And who said that the BLM has more in common with the LBGTI community and activists than it does with the gun lobby? Sections of the BLM likely also love guns.

And speaking of Greta, for how much longer will she able to keep up the fallacy that her agenda and those of her friends Soros and the World Economic Forum (WEF), and its members that include Monsanto, are actually compatible?

And for the right or wrong reasons, who is to guarantee that the tens of millions of Trump supporters are going to sit and accept that the election win of Biden is legitimate and that they have to swallow it? Will this cause social strife, violence on the streets, even worse perhaps civil war and much more? We don’t know. What we do know is that a controversy about election results should have been dealt with in total transparency in order to put all concerns to rest. But this is not happening, and it is not going to happen because a decision has been made against Trump dictating that he must lose.

But the after-Trump-effect is not necessarily going to affect only America. Right-wing politics, including the extreme version of it, have been on the rise in the world, and especially in Western Europe. And if the Neo-Nazis look threatening because their ideology is based on a very dark chapter in human history, what do we really know is on the agenda of the forces that have combined the very diverse elements of the anti-Trump cocktail in order to serve its objective(s)? What is it really that they want?

Hitler was at least clear about his mission statement. He wanted an Aryan Third Reich to rule the world for a thousand years. The rest of the world did not have to wonder and ponder about his intentions. He sent a very clear message to rest of the world, a message clear enough to unite the West with the Bolsheviks against him.

But today, we have an invisible driving force that has managed to put together an array of the most unlikely partners in order to fight a common cause. Do we not at least ask the question ‘why?’

In the case of Syria, the answer to the ‘why’ question was to topple Assad, albeit without having a plan that went further, at least as a united coalition. It would have been impossible for the plotters and planners to each disclose what they had in mind. In reality, they did not have any plan at all other than replacing him with a void. Fast-forward; the get-rid-of-Trump plan is very similar; get rid of him without having a plan so as to ensure all participants are pleased and appeased, because the plan seems to also be based on replacing Trump with chaos and anarchy.

The irony here is that the anti-Trump-cocktail is not only comprised of his political opponents, mainstream media, social media, but also includes government agencies such as the DOJ, the CIA, the FBI and even some American Republicans.

Briefly put, Trump has been chosen to lose, but after him, the flood is imminent. The current allies who lobbied against him will very shortly come to the realization that they are no longer united, and some will even turn into enemies fighting over the spoils of the win.

In more ways than one, they will harvest the fruit of the seeds they planted, and they will rightfully deserve all consequences. A Biden win is the most befitting ‘punishment’ of the anti-Trump cocktail.

Apart from the hapless American populace, the biggest loser of this all is the international stature of America as the leader of the so-called Democratic Free World. In a fitting blowback for these pernicious actors, Trump would have proven without a shadow of doubt, that the Deep State is so deep and powerful, powerful enough to mobilize its own enemies to serve it. At that point, to quote the rhetoric of the “Great Reset” agenda, but again, as blowback, things will never be the same again for these dangerous characters.

The Smearing of Robert Fisk…Now That He Can’t Defend Himself

DECEMBER 3, 2020

Jonathan Cook: the View from Nazareth - www.jonathan-cook.net
Jonathan Cook is a Nazareth- based journalist and winner of the Martha Gellhorn Special Prize for Journalism [ MORE ]

BY JONATHAN COOK

Something remarkable even by the usually dismal standards of the stenographic media blue-tick brigade has been happening in the past few days. Leading journalists in the corporate media have suddenly felt the urgent need not only to criticise the late, much-respected foreign correspondent Robert Fisk, but to pile in against him, using the most outrageous smears imaginable. He is suddenly a fraud, a fabulist, a fantasist, a liar.

What is most ironic is that the journalists doing this are some of the biggest frauds themselves, journalists who have made a career out of deceiving their readers. In fact, many of the crowd attacking Fisk when he can no longer defend himself are precisely the journalists who have the worst record of journalistic malpractice and on some of the biggest issues of our times.

At least I have the courage to criticise them while they are alive. They know dead men can’t sue. It is complete and utter cowardice to attack Fisk when they could have made their comments earlier, to his face. In fact, if they truly believed any of the things they are so keen to tell us now, they had an absolute duty to say them when Fisk was alive rather than allowing the public to be deceived by someone they regarded as a liar and fantasist. They didn’t make public these serious allegations – they didn’t air their concerns about the supposedly fabricated facts in Fisk’s stories – when he was alive because they know he would have made mincemeat of them.

Most preposterous of all is the fact that the actual trigger for this sudden, very belated outpouring of concern about Fisk is a hit-piece written by Oz Katerji. I’m not sure whether I can find the generosity to call Katerji a journalist. Like Elliot Higgins of the US government-funded Bellingcat, he’s more like an attack dog beloved by establishment blue-ticks: he is there to enforce accepted western imperial narratives, disguising his lock-step support for the establishment line as edgy, power-to-the-people radicalism.

Anyone who challenges Katerji’s establishment-serving agenda gets called names – sometimes very rude ones. Fisk is just the latest target of a Katerji hatchet job against any journalist (myself, of course, included) who dares to step outside of the Overton Window. That these “serious” journalists think they can hang their defamation of Fisk on to anything said by Katerji, most especially the thin gruel he produces in his latest article, is truly shameful. If their concerns really relate to journalistic integrity and reliability, Katerji would be the very last person to cite.

Katerji’s prime area of western narrative enforcement is the Middle East – perhaps not surprisingly, as it is the place where there is an awful lot of oil that western states and corporations are desperate to control. But one should not ignore his wide-ranging efforts to boot-lick wherever he is needed on behalf of western establishment narratives.

Here he is desperately trying to breathe life into two fairytales: that the election of the leftwing Evo Morales as Bolivia’s president was fraudulent, and that Morales was forced to resign last year rather than that he was ousted in a CIA-backed military coup. Notably, Katerji was clinging to these discredited story lines as late as last month, long after even the liberal corporate media had abandoned them as no longer tenable.

Katerji was also, of course, an enthusiastic recruit to evidence-free establishment smears that Labour was overrun with antisemitism under the leadership of the leftwing Jeremy Corbyn, the very same anecdotal claims promoted by the entire corporate media.

Not only that, but he even had the gall to argue that he was speaking on behalf of Palestinians in smearing Corbyn, the only leader of a major European party ever to champion their cause. Labour’s new leader Keir Starmer, like most other politicians in the wake of the Corbyn episode, has all but disappeared the Palestinians from the political agenda. Katerji must be delighted – on behalf of Palestinians, of course.

But Katerji’s beef with Fisk derives chiefly from the fact that the Independent’s foreign correspondent broke ranks with the rest of the western press corps over an alleged chemical weapons attack in Syria.

Katerji is part of what – if we were being more brutally honest about these things – would be called the west’s al-Qaeda lobby. These are a motley crew of journalists and academics using their self-publicised “Arabhood” to justify the intimidation and silencing of anyone not entirely convinced that ordinary Syrians might prefer, however reluctantly, their standard-issue dictator, Bashar al-Assad, over the head-chopping, women-stoning, Saudi-financed jihadists of Islamic State and al-Nusra, the al-Qaeda franchise in Syria; or who question whether the western powers ought to be covertly funding and backing these extremists.

Exercise any doubt at all on either of these points and Katerji will lose no time in calling you an “Assadist”, “war crimes denier”, “antisemite”, “9/11 truther” and worse. Then in yet more evidence of a circle jerk, those establishment blue ticks, even ones beloved by much of the left, will cite his smears as proof that you are indeed an Assadist, war crimes denier, and so on.

Here are just a few examples of Katerji engaging with those critical of the imperial western narrative on Syria, so you get the idea:

Back in 2011 and 2012, in what looked like the possible eruption of an Arab Spring in Syria, the arguments of Katerji and co at least had an air of plausibility. But their real agenda – one that accorded with western imperialism rather than an Arab awakening – became much clearer once local protests against Assad were subsumed by an influx of jihadi fighters of the very kind that had been labelled “terrorists” by the western media everywhere else they appeared in the Middle East.

Inevitably, anyone like Fisk who adopted a position of caution or scepticism about whether the majority of Syrians actually wanted a return to some kind of Islamic Dark Age incurred the wrath of Katerji and his cohorts.

But Fisk infuriated these western al-Nusra lobbyists even further when he visited the town of Douma in 2018 and raised serious questions about claims made by the jihadists who had been ruling the town that, just before Assad’s forces drove them out, the Syrian military had bombed it with chemical gas, killing many civilians. The story, which at that stage was based exclusively on the claims of these head-chopping jihadists, was instantly reported as verified fact by the credulous western media.

Based solely on claims made by the al-Qaeda franchise in Douma, President Donald Trump hurriedly fired off missiles at Syria, in flagrant violation of international law and to cheers from the western media.

Fisk, of course, knew that in discrediting the evidence-free narrative being promoted by the western press corps (who had never been in Douma) he was doing himself no favours at all. They would resent him all the more. Most of his peers preferred to ignore his revelations, even though they were earth-shattering in their implications. But once the official watchdog body the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) issued its report into Douma many months later, implicitly backing the jihadists’ version of events, Fisk’s earlier coverage was snidely dismissed by fellow journalists.

Sadly for them, however, the story did not end there. Following publication of the OPCW’s Douma report, a number of its senior experts started coming forward as whistleblowers to say that, under pressure from the US, the OPCW bureaucracy tampered with their research and misrepresented their findings in the final report. The evidence they had found indicated that Assad had not carried out a chemical attack in Douma. More likely the jihadists, who were about to be expelled by Assad’s forces, had staged the scene to make it look like a chemical attack and draw the US deeper into Syria.

Of course, just as the corporate media ignored Fisk’s original reporting from Douma that would have made their own accounts sound like journalistic malpractice, they resolutely ignored the whistleblowers too. You can scour the corporate media and you will be lucky to find even an allusion to the months-long row over the OPCW report, which gained enough real-world prominence to erupt into a major row at the United Nations, including denunciations of the OPCW’s behaviour from the organisation’s former head, Jose Bustani.

This is the way frauds like Katerji are able to ply their own misinformation. They sound credible only because the counter-evidence that would show they are writing nonsense is entirely absent from the mainstream. Only those active on social media and open-minded enough to listen to voices not employed by a major corporate platform (with, in this case, the notable exception of Peter Hitchens of the Daily Mail) are able to find any of this counter-information. It is as if we are living in parallel universes.

The reason why Fisk was so cherished by readers, and why there was a real sense of loss when he died a month ago, was that he was one of the very few journalists who belonged to the mainstream but reported as though he were not beholden to the agenda of his corporate platform.

There were specific reasons for that. Like a handful of others – John Pilger, Seymour Hersh, Chris Hedges among them – Fisk made his name in the corporate media at a time when it reluctantly indulged the odd maverick foreign correspondent because they had a habit of exposing war crimes everyone else missed, exclusives that then garnered their publications prestigious journalism awards. Ownership of the media was then far less concentrated, so there was a greater commercial incentive for risk-taking and breaking stories. And these journalists emerged in a period when power was briefly more contested, with the labour movement trying to assert its muscle in the post-war decades, and before western societies were forced by the corporate elite to submit to neoliberal orthodoxy on all matters.

Notably, Pilger, Hersh and Hedges all found themselves struggling to keep a place in the corporate media. Fisk alone managed to cling on. That was more by luck. After being forced out of Rupert Murdoch’s Times newspaper for breaking a disturbing story in 1989 on the US shooting down of an Iranian passenger plane, he found a new home at Britain’s Independent newspaper, which had been recently founded. As a late-comer to the British media scene, the paper struggled not only to make money but to create a distinctive identity or gain any real visibility. Fisk survived, it seems, because he quickly established himself as one of the very few reasons to buy the paper. He was a rare example of a journalist who was bigger than the outlet he served.

Readers trusted him because he not only refused to submit to his peers’ herd-think but endlessly called them out as journalistically and intellectually lazy.

Those now trying to tarnish his good name are actually inverting the truth. They want to suggest that support for Fisk was cultish and he was hero-worshipped by those incapable of thinking critically. They will say as much about this piece. So let me point out that I am not without my own criticisms of Fisk. I wrote, for example, an article criticising some unsubstantiated claims he made during Israel’s massive bombardment of Lebanon in 2006.

But my criticism was precisely the opposite of the blue-tick crowd now traducing him. I questioned Fisk for striving to find an implausible middle ground with those establishment blue ticks (before we knew what blue ticks were) by hedging his bets about who was responsible for the destruction of Lebanon. It was a rare, if understandable, example of journalistic timidity from Fisk – a desire to maintain credibility with his peers, and a reluctance to follow through on where the evidence appeared to lead. Maybe this was a run-in with the pro-Israel crowd and the corporate journalists who echo them that, on this occasion, he did not think worth fighting.

The discomfort Fisk aroused in his peers was all too obvious to anyone working in the corporate media, even in its liberal outlets, as I was during the 1990s. I never heard a good word said about Fisk at the Guardian or the Observer. His death has allowed an outpouring of resentment towards him that built up over decades from journalists jealous of the fact that no readers will mourn or remember their own passing.

Fisk’s journalism spoke up for the downtrodden and spoke directly to the reader rather than, as with his colleagues, pandering to editors in the hope of career advancement. In the immediate wake of his death, his colleagues’ disdain for Fisk was veiled in weaselly language. As Media Lens have noted, the favourite term used to describe him in obituaries, even in his own newspaper, was “controversial”.

“It turns out that the term ‘controversial’ is only applied in corporate media to political writers and leaders deemed ‘controversial’ by elite interests.

“This was unwittingly made clear by the big brains at the BBC who noted that Fisk ‘drew controversy for his sharp criticism of the US and Israel, and of Western foreign policy’. If Fisk had drawn ‘controversy’ from China, Iran or North Korea, the ‘weasel word’ would not have appeared in the Beeb’s analysis…

“In corporate media newspeak, ‘controversial’ can actually be translated as ‘offensive to power’. The term is intended as a scare word to warn readers that the labelled person is ‘dodgy’, ‘suspect’: ‘Handle with care!’ The journalist is also signalling to his or her editors and other colleagues: ‘I’m not one of “them”!’”

The journalists who now claim Fisk was a fraud and fantasist are many of those who happily worked for papers that readily promoted the gravest lies imaginable to rationalise an illegal attack on Iraq in 2003 and its subsequent occupation. Those publications eagerly supported lies supplied by the US and British governments that Iraq had WMD and that its leader, Saddam Hussein, was colluding with al-Qaeda – claims that were easily disprovable at the time.

Journalists now attacking Fisk include ones, like the Guardian’s Jessica Elgot, who have been at the forefront of advancing the evidence-free antisemitism smears against Corbyn. Or, like the Guardian’s Hannah Jane Parkinson, have engaged in another favourite corporate journalist pastime, ridiculing the plight of Julian Assange, a fellow journalist who puts their craven stenography to shame and who is facing a lifetime in a US super-max jail for revealing US war crimes in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Even the Guardian’s Jason Burke, who claims to have experienced Fisk’s lying first-hand while working for the Observer newspaper in 2001 (as was I at that time), has been unable to come up with the goods when challenged, as the pitiable Twitter thread retweeted here confirms:

Noticeably, there is a pattern to the claims of those now maligning Fisk: they hurry to tell us that he was an inspiration in their student days. They presumably think that mentioning this will suggest their disillusionment was hard-earned and therefore make it sound more plausible. But actually it suggests something different.

It indicates instead that in their youthful idealism they aspired to become a journalist who would dig out the truth, who would monitor centres of power, who would comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. To do, in fact, exactly what Fisk did.

But once they got a footing on the corporate career ladder, they slowly learnt that they would need to adopt a more “nuanced” approach to journalism – certainly if they hoped to progress up that ladder, earning the right to their blue tick, and gaining a big enough salary to cover the mortgage in London or New York.

In other words, they became everything they despised in their student days. Fisk was the constant reminder of just how much they had sold out. His very existence shamed them for what they were too cowardly to do themselves. And now in death, when he cannot answer back, they are feasting on his corpse like the vultures that they are, until there is nothing left to remind us that, unlike them, Robert Fisk told uncomfortable truths to the very end.

Jonathan Cook won the Martha Gellhorn Special Prize for Journalism. His latest books are “Israel and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East” (Pluto Press) and “Disappearing Palestine: Israel’s Experiments in Human Despair” (Zed Books). His website is http://www.jonathan-cook.net/

Hezbollah SG’s Political Adviser: Al-Moallem Was the Resistance’s FM in All International Fora

Hezbollah SG’s Political Adviser: Al-Moallem Was the Resistance’s FM in All International Fora

By Ali Hassan

Damascus – He was a man that presided over Syrian diplomacy throughout many stages. He was the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Lebanon, Syria, and all the resistance in all international fora.

This is what Haj Hussein al-Khalil, the political advisor to the Secretary General of Hezbollah His Eminence Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, told the family of the late Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem when the party’s delegation offered its condolences Wednesday night in Damascus.

Other members of the Hezbollah delegation included the head of the Baalbek and Hermel bloc, MP Hussein Hajj Hassan and Dr. Hassan Hammoud, the assistant of the SG political advisor.

Al-Khalil told al-Ahed News that the delegation “came to Damascus to convey the warm condolences of His Eminence, the Secretary General of Hezbollah, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah and as well as all the Lebanese resistance fighters to His Excellency, the loyal and persevering President Bashar al-Assad, to the prime minister and members of the government in the Syrian Arab Republic, to the foreign ministry staff, and to the family of the late Walid al-Moallem, who was able to lead this diplomacy and defend the causes of Syria and the resistance.”

“Walid al-Moallem was a national, Arab, and Islamic figure par excellence. He raised the concerns and causes of the Arab nation to the entire world and in all fora,” al-Khalil added. “He diligently carried the cause of resistance and the concerns of Palestine. He sat on the throne of major diplomacy in the Arab world at a time when Syria was going through the most difficult circumstance, as it was being fiercely attacked and subjected to the biggest media war. He defended it with intelligence, sophistication, logic, and a distinguished calmness with which he coaxed the enemies and pleased the friends.”

In his interview with al-Ahed, Hajj Hussein Al-Khalil recalled two of al-Moallem’s stances. The first was when he came from Washington after the Zionist aggression in 1996 to take part alongside the resistance in drafting the April Understanding. This is considered the first foundation for establishing the deterrence base set by the Islamic Resistance in Lebanon with the support of Iran and Syria.

The second stance was in some of the meetings that brought together Arab and other officials during the 2006 “Israeli” aggression against Lebanon. He addressed the then-Lebanese prime minister as the men of the Resistance laid down the most wonderful epics on the ground against the Zionist enemy. Al-Moallem told the tearful Fouad Siniora,

إعتذر يا فؤاد...إعتذر :: موقع النبطية

“Why are you crying? You are the most powerful prime minister in the Arab world because you have the strongest resistance in the Middle East. You should laugh with pride.”

During the memorial service, the Hezbollah delegation stressed the role the late minister played in key events concerning Lebanon and the Resistance – the first of which was his prominent political role in the face of the “Israeli” enemy.

Related Videos

Syria: The complicated scene

By Abir Bassam

November 24, 2020 – 10:49

It is a dirty war that has been going on in Syria, Libya, and Yemen. Almost nine and a half tragic years have passed. The three countries were subjected to all kinds of terror and brutally destroyed. Actually, what has been going on is a world war! All weapons were used and tested and many countries were involved.

It was a real dirty war, in which the West and the Americans and their allies in the region have used the worst kind of men: a group of collaborators and barbaric terrorists. 

The worst kinds of mercenaries from all over the world were sent to Syria. They practices the ugliest inhumane deeds: they decapitated heads, literally ate hearts, and burned people alive to death. 

These groups were directly led by generals from the U.S., France, and Turkey. This information was supported by different informed resources that reported capturing French, British, and Turkish officers since 2015, in particular, during the invasion of Idlib. The district was invaded by a tenth of thousands of terrorists from Nusra, especially its group Fateh al-Sham which is directly supported and trained by Turkey, and Ahrar al-Sham which was directly supported by the Americans. The invasion was directly led by the Turkish tank battalions and the NATO alliances. 

By December 2015, the northeast of Syria was also invaded by another terrorist group, the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria [ISIS]. ISIS was created with the utmost attention of Hilary Clinton, during Barak Obama’s administration. This was revealed by Donald Trump during his election campaign in 2016. ISIS swept over the al-Jazeera region and extended to Palmira through the Syrian Desert and occupied Homos, the biggest Syrian district. It was directly protected by the American extending military bases in northern Syria and the eastern base in al-Tanf. ISIS attacked both the Syrian government forces and the opposition factions. 

The plan was to allow ISIS invasion of northern-eastern Syria territories and western-northern Iraqi territories in order to terminate the opposition factions in the region. It was carefully planned by Obama’s administration and in particular his vice president Joe Biden, the new president of the United States of America.

Under the pretense of fighting terrorism, the Americans were back in Iraq and restored bases in Iraq, built new ones in Syria and reestablished new militia groups in the area of the northeast, mainly Kurdish groups. They were trained and equipped by the Americans. For the U.S., it was a necessary step to launch a Kurdish federalism on the Syrian territories.  

Nonetheless, the U.S. had set the return plan before withdrawing from Iraq in 2010. Upon its departure, the American administration empowered the al-Qaeda group in Iraq, and supported its existence, as Trump declared and accused Hillary Clinton of being the mastermind behind it. ISIS was basically the American approach to siege Syria, and eventually, apply the plan of division in the region and establish a Kurdish state. 

Saying that may seem to be naive and simple. However, executing the plan required initiating “revolutions” in other Arab countries, recruiting media specialists, recruiting special personnel to initiate eruptions by social media, and consuming billions of dollars in the process, of which the Saudi kingdom and Qatar were the main contributors.

In 1992, I was on a visit to al-Hassaka and al-Qamishli. I was just a young beginner in journalism. I was conducting an investigation report about the Yazidis. At that stage, a large number of Yazidis and Kurds were immigrating to Syria. They escaped the biased and brutal treatment of Saddam Hussein and the fanatic Turks. These Kurds were building a wide network in Europe. They bought sympathy and support to establish a federation in Iraq in 1996. The process was facilitated by the Americans after the second Persian Gulf War in 1991 as Saddam’s power was fading.

The idea of having a similar kind of federation in Syria became appealing to both the Americans and Israelis. The size of Israeli foreign intelligence service Mossad’s presence in the Iraqi Kurdistan is not a secret anymore. It is an established fact. The Americans also facilitated the Israeli presence in northeast Syria, especially those who came with American nationality to work in the oil fields.

The Turkish president Erdogan was one of the supporters of the American plan to dismantle Syria. Erdogan was able to recruit Qatar to the best interest of Turkey. Both countries were discontent with the Syrian government’s refusal to allow building the Qatari gas pipeline to Turkey through its territories. Syria saw that a move that would discomfort its allies in Russia and Iran. However, Erdogan had bigger plans in Syria. In the northwest region, Erdogan mainly saw the Idlib and Aleppo districts as the extent of Turkey, and a head starts to initiate the Ottoman dream. 

This dream vanished to thin air when Syria started liberating the area occupied by ISIS in West Euphrates, and al-Gab plain after cleaning the Damascus area, Homos, and the center of Syria from terrorism with unlimited support from Russia. The second shock Erdogan received when the Americans started supporting the establishment of the Kurdish federation in al-Hassaka. 

The Kurdish militia was founded in October 2015 under the name Syrian Democratic Forces [SDF]. SDF in its formation includes Kurds from Syria and others who came mainly from Turkey and other countries, most of them do not speak Arabic, unlike the Syrian Kurds. 60% of the militia includes Arab Syrians, according to the Pentagon. There are other nationalities included among the formation of SDF, who are Turkmens, Armenians, Circassians, and Chechens, who came from all over Asia.

In 2016, SDF updated its constitution from a separate federal state into an Autonomous Administration of Northern and East Syria [NES] and declared SDF as its official defense force, which complicated the Syrian political scene, furthermore. Now NES or SDF are cooperating with the official American forces in east-north of Syria and serve as “the Southern Lebanese Army, [SLA]” in South Lebanon during the Israeli occupation in South Lebanon. As SLA has tried to establish an independent state in South Lebanon, SDF or NES is trying to acquire the same course. 

Since 2018 the Syrian army, with the help of allies – Russia, Iran, and Hezbollah- has been able to liberate most of the occupied lands. However, the liberation coincided with the rise of economic pressure on Syria. The price of the Syrian lira if compared to the American dollar dropped and its purchasing value decreased. It was due to the economic sanctions that were imposed on Syria, and lately “Caesar Law” which was activated in the mid of June 2020. 

In 2018, the American troops withdrew from the north of Syria and were redeployed in the al-Hassaka district around the Syrian richest oil fields. The American companies, in particular ARAMCO, are now draining the Syria oil to the interest of NES and financing the American troops stationed in the northern-eastern area of the Euphrates in Syria. Actually, Syria is facing an internal problem with the lack of petroleum resources. The hard winter is coming and the lines for buying the diesel needed for heating the houses will be crowded as much as the lines for gasoline.

After burning and stealing the wheat plains in the al-Jazeera district by the Americans and the Turks, the bread prices went 25% higher. Shortage in bread supplies was triggered by the government’s decision to set the bread rations. The Americans were literally applying Kissinger’s policy which states that nations are ruled by bread, not by arms. The shortage of bread and petroleum products is new to the Syrian population; therefore, the successive Syrian governments are facing major challenges since the beginning of 2019. 

Caesar Law added additional pressure on the countries that may establish economic and commercial deals with Syria. The law was imposed at a time in which the world is suffering from COVID-19 epidemic, which spread in Syria as well. In addition, Syria needs to deal with the issue of the Syrian refugees. It is a dilemma that needs to be dealt with appropriately. The refugees’ dilemma is used as a political card to force the Syrians to submit to the American political demands, which are set on two levels: national and international.

On the national level, the international community wants to pressure the Syrian government into implementing a new constitution based on the sectarian division of power, just like Lebanon, which would diminish the presidential authority and redistribute it, as it happened in Tunisia and Sudan, which would divide the power of the head of the state. The second issue is related to the question of the forcibly disappeared people, who were kidnapped or killed by the rebel groups, and treating the killers and kidnappers as political opponents without subjecting them to trials. This issue will be a matter of conflict, and will not be accepted by those whose families and friends were kidnapped or killed. This fact was revealed a few days ago by the new Syrian Foreign Minister, Mr. Feisal Muqdad. 

On the international level, the requirements of the international community, i.e. the U.S., have become common knowledge.  Since 2003, after the invasion of Iraq, the U.S. secretary of state, Colin Powell, came to Syria and laid down the U.S. demands: dismantling Hezbollah arms, ending Syrian support to the resistance groups in Lebanon, Palestine, and Iraq, and ending cooperation with Iran in the region. The end means, as usually explained, is ensuring the security of Israel. 

Naturally, the Syrians refused American demands. Therefore, we should make no mistake and assume that what had happened in the Arab region under the pretense of “Arab Spring” was meant for the destruction of Syria in order to dismantle it into minor sectarian states that can be easily controlled to the best interest of “Israel” and America.

Hence, Syria requires two essential needs to start its reconstruction process: the first is lifting the sanctions imposed on it; and the second is to end the American occupation in the northeast area. However, the West insists on linking lifting the sanctions to the political process. But when it comes to the achievement of the liberation from the Americans this process cannot be realized unless the national resistance would be highly activated in the northeast of Syria. It is America that we all know. It did not end its occupation of Vietnam, Korea, and eventually Iraq in 2010 until the number of causalities becomes unbearable in the American community.

Syria’s essential needs were clearly stated by its president Bashar Al-Assad on two occasions, the first was during a video call with Russian President Vladimir Putin on the 10th of November. The second time was in his speech at the opening of the International Conference on the Return of the Refugee in Damascus [ICRRD] on the 11th of November.

During his visit on the 5th of November to the exhibition “Producers 2020” in “Tekia Sulaymaniyah” in the capital, Damascus. It was attended by producers from the Aleppo governorate whose facilities, workshops, and shops were damaged during the war. President al-Assad talked about the economic impact of the issue of shortage of oil supplies and burning the wheat fields in northeastern regions. 

He also explained that the economic problem was clearly becoming worse when the banks in Lebanon blocked the Syrian deposits. President al-Assad said that there is vagueness about the Syrian deposit’s estimations. Its assessment ranges from 20 billion dollars to 42 billion dollars. The blockade has been going on for years. He added the crisis began years before the Caesar Law and began years after the siege. It coincided with the money disappearance in the Lebanese banks. Furthermore, al-Assad declared that we do not know what the real number is, and this figure for an economy like the Syrian one is a frightening number.

Al-Assad’s declaration became one week before ICRRD to which Lebanon was invited. Was this a message to Lebanon? It could be, although many observers have denied it. The denial is basically based on Syria’s previous special treatment of Lebanon. Lebanon in the Syrian considerations are two contradictory facts: the first, Lebanon is an opening to the western world with bipolar swings. The first swing expressed in the historical Arab and regional ideology.

And the second swing is expressed in the lining towards a Western ideology, with the tendency to sign normalization agreements with “Israel”. The second group was of great concern to the Syrians since the creation of Lebanon. It is known as the right-wing groups, who allied with the Americans and the Israelis. 

The second fact, Lebanon as a state is based on providing services and tourism. It is considered to be the lung that Syria needs to breathe with. However, this lung health became worse since 2011, when the United States accused the Lebanese Canadian Bank of laundering terrorism money. And then again in 2016, since many banks faced the same accusations and were prohibited to deal with customers that the U.S. listed them as Hezbollah members.

Accordingly, the Lebanese banks froze several balances for many customers and in particular the Syrian customers that were importing goods to Syria through Lebanon after imposing an embargo on Syria. It is clear for the Syrians, regardless of the unique relationship with Hezbollah, it is about time that Lebanon should release these balances, and pay its debts to Syria, especially the debts that have been accumulating since 1990, which are the revenues from selling electricity.

Syria, as President al-Assad explained, will need its money in the process of rebuilding the country’s main infrastructure and vital installations, which were destroyed during the liberation war against the terrorist groups. It is a call for Lebanon to join forces with Syria to demand lifting the embargo and to be excluded from Cesar Law consequences because Lebanon needs to open up to Syria for commercial trades towards the east, in particular, to Arab countries, or Lebanon will be demanded to pay back its debts. 

The Americans were pushing Syria and the region since 1973 towards peace and normalization treaties with “Israel”. However, Syria has proven that such an agreement would be difficult to execute unless it was a “peace for land” agreement, which would ensure the right of return of the Palestinian people. An equation, nor the Israeli, neither the Americans are willing to sign for. In addition, Syria’s main condition, during the negotiations held in Oslo in 1992, was the return of all occupied Arab territories. However, the series of recognitions Trump has approved throughout his reign made the return to the negotiation table almost impossible. It also pushed into more complications with the relation between Syria and Lebanon since the assassination of Rafiq al-Hariri in 2005. The need to separate the Syrian-Lebanese course in the peace process is becoming a must for the Americans. A need until today could not be achieved.

Syria now is subjected to American pressure that requires its approval to initiate peace and normalization agreements with Israel. This goal so far was difficult to achieve, especially after Trump’s recognition of the Golan Heights as part of Israel. Even Syria’s allies, in particular Russia, cannot force the Syrians to give up part of their land. Syria’s war on terror has spared all its allies the tragedy of dragging this war into their own territories. 

Hence, Syria prepaid in blood for the security of its “friends” now. History will, sooner or later, reveal this fact. Syria’s insistence on the unity of its land, and its refusal to have any divided authority is now a fact. The Syrians cannot compromise it, and the allies cannot go against it. The course of negotiations the allies led in Astana and Sochi has affirmed it. However, this fact has complicated the Syrian scene furthermore. It might even force the Americans to lead directly the war in the region, whether in arms or diplomacy, since the proxies have proven their disabilities.

RELATED NEWS

بايدن يغازل طهران عبر الكاظمي وقاءاني في بغداد: لا نعدك بشيء

محمد صادق الحسيني

قالت مصادر وثيقة الصلة بمطبخ صناعة القرار الإيراني بأنّ رئيس الوزراء العراقي مصطفى الكاظمي تلقى رسالة خاصة من فريق بايدن يطلب منه نقلها الى أصدقائه في طهران، أن يتحمّلوا قليلاً ما سمّوه بالنفق الترامبي ويصبروا على استفزازاته الى حين استقرار الإدارة الجديدة والتي سيكون لها شأن آخر يختلف عن ترامب تجاه طهران…!

وقد قام الكاظمي بإرسال موفد عنه الى طهران لإبلاغ الإيرانيين هذه الرسالة الإيجابية من فريق بايدن، والتي تمّ تلقيها بكلّ مسؤولية واقتدار من دون أن يعدوا الأميركيين بأيّ شيء عدا عدم الانجرار الى ما قد يُقدم عليه ترامب من ارتكابات تصعيدية او استفزازية…!

في هذه الأثناء كان قائد لواء القدس في الحرس الثوري الإيراني اللواء اسماعيل قاءاني العائد لتوّه من زيارة رسمية مهمة لسورية التقى خلالها الرئيس بشار الأسد تمّت خلالها مناقشة كلّ القضايا الإقليمية والدولية لا سيما تنسيق المواقف تجاه تطوّرات المرحلة الانتقاليّة بين فريقي ترامب وبايدن، كان يحضر لزيارة بغداد في إطار زيارة رسمية من رئيس الوزراء العراقي مصطفى الكاظمي…

وبالفعل فقد قام قاءاني بزيارة بغداد الأربعاء الماضي والتقى المسؤول العراقي الأول وعدداً من الفصائل وقادة الأحزاب العراقيين، تحت «ظلال رسالة فريق بايدن»، لكن برنامج الزيارة كان معداً سلفاً لأمرين: العلاقات الثنائية والانتخابات العراقية البرلمانية المبكرة وكيفية مساهمة طهران في إنجاحها وتخفيف حدة التوتر بين الفصائل العراقية المناهضة للاحتلال الأميركي والكاظمي الذي يراهن كثيراً على توازن صداقاته مع كلّ من واشنطن وطهران…!

قاءاني كان واضحاً جداً مع الكاظمي بأنّ طهران لا تريد إلا الخير والاستقرار والاستقلال الناجز للعراق بناء على رؤية عراقية مستقلة، كما أنها لا تريد مطلقاً التدخل في الشأن العراقي الداخلي وكيفية إدارة كلّ الملفات المتعلقة بهذا الخصوص من انتخابات او أجندات تتعلق بمستقبل ونوع نظام الحكم العراقي، ومنها قضية الانتخابات التي هي شأن عراقي داخلي محض…

وفي ما يخصّ سؤال الكاظمي إنْ كان الموفد الإيراني يحمل رداً عليه قال قاءاني: لسنا مهتمّين بغير استقرار المنطقة، ولا نعدك بأيّ شيء آخر…!

متابعون وخبراء مطلعون على أجواء وفضاءات المنطقة وإقليم غرب آسيا يؤكدون في هذه الاثناء بأنّ أطراف حلف المقاومة في كلّ من طهران ودمشق وبغداد وبيروت متفقة على ضروة تهدئة المواقف العامة وتمرير ما اتفق على تسميته بـ «النفق الترامبي» الذي يبحث عن بقية ماء وجه لمن خسر كلّ معاركه الخارجية والداخلية وآخرها الانتخابات الرئاسية (أيّ دونالد ترامب)، وانتظار استقرار الإدارة الأميركية الجديدة، وحينها سيكون لكلّ حادث حديث..!

في هذه الأثناء نفت المصادر الآنفة الذكر أنّ يكون قاءاني قد زار بيروت، كما نفت أنه كان في سورية أثناء القصف الاسرائيلي لبعض مواقع الجيش العربي السوري الأسبوع الماضي، والذي ادّعت تل أبيب كذباً بأنها استهدفت مواقع لقوة القدس، ذلك انّ زيارة قاءاني كانت قبل ذلك بأيام ولم يتخللها أيّ تحرّك عسكري من جانب العدو الصهيوني، تماماً كما انّ العدوان الذي تلى تلك الزيارة لم يستهدف أيّ موقع استشاري للحرس الثوري الإيراني على الإطلاق.

بانتظار تحوّلات كبرى تزيد من خسارة الأميركي وهزائمه المتكرّرة والجسيمة في المنطقة مع استقرار إدارة بايدن في البيت الأبيض، وهي الإدارة التي ستأتي ضعيفة ومنعدمة الرؤية الواضحة تجاه محور المقاومة، ستقوم عملياً محلّ مقام إدارة منهكة ممزقة متقطعة الأوصال خائرة القوى تخرج بخفي حنين من كلّ معاركها الخارجية والداخلية كما أشرنا آنفاً.

بعدنا طيّبين قولوا الله…

%d bloggers like this: