تجاوزت حملة توقيعات تطالب بالتحقيق في ثروة زعيم حركة النهضة الإخوانية في تونس راشد الغنوشي، حاجز الـ5 آلاف مُوقّع، وتسعى الحملة في هدفها المقبل إلى رفع العدد إلى 7500 توقيع.
ويرتاب الناشطون في ثروة الغنوشي، لكونه لم يمارس أي نشاط مهني أو اقتصادي منذ قدومه إلى تونس قبل 9 سنوات آتياً من لندن.
وتقول العريضة إن الغنوشي أصبح من «من أغنى أغنياء تونس»، بثروة تقدر بأكثر من مليار دولار.
ودعا الموقعون على العريضة، وهم عدد من الأكاديميين والنشطاء والفنانين والمواطنين، إلى ضرورة «ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﺑﻜﻞ ﺟﺪﻳﺔ ﻭﺷﻔﺎﻓﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺛﺮﻭﺓ ﺍﻟﻐﻨﻮﺷﻲ وﻣﺼﺎﺩﺭﻫﺎ».
كما دعوا إلى تشكيل ﻟﺠﻨﺔ ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻠﺔ للتحقيق في مصادر هذه الثروة التي تقول تقارير إنها تجاوزت المليار دولار، تتكون من الاتحاد العام التونسي للشغل ونقابة المحامين والرابطة التونسية للدفاع عن حقوق الإنسان.
وقالوا إنه «باعتبار أن السيد راشد الغنوشي هو زعيم واحد من أكبر الأحزاب تمثيلاً في البرلمان، وباعتبار أنه رئيس مجلس النواب، وباعتبار تفشي الفساد في الدولة والمجتمع، وباعتبار كثرة التمويلات الأجنبية المشبوهة التي تفد على البلاد التونسية بعنوان العمل الخيري والجمعياتي، وباعتبار تقاطع هذه التمويلات غالباً مع التنظيمات الإرهابية والأجندات السياسية المشبوهة، فإنه قد بات من الضروري أن يتم التحقيق بكل جدية وشفافية في ثروة الغنوشي وفي مصادرها».
يضغط الاتراك عسكرياً وسياسياً لتحقيق المكانة المحورية بين المتصارعين للسيطرة على اعماق البحر الأبيض المتوسط وسواحل بلدانه مع بعض امتداداتها الداخلية في البر.
فما يجري أدرك مرحلة حرب ضروس بين قوى دولية من اوروبا وشرقي المتوسط وروسيا واميركا مع بعض النحيب المصريّ الشجيّ والرقص الإماراتي على حبال اميركية متينة.
مدى هذه الحرب واسع جداً لشمولها المياه الإقليمية والدولية للمتوسط في جهاته الشرقية والجنوبية فتشمل سواحل بلاد الشام في سورية ولبنان وفلسطين المحتلة ومصر الى السواحل الجنوبية في ليبيا وتونس والجزائر والمغرب وتضم أيضاً سواحل قبرص من كل جهاتها وصولاً الى اليونان.
هناك اذاً صراع مفتوح على المتوسط يأخذ شكل حرب عسكرية شرسة في ليبيا بين دولتيها المتصارعتين الغربية للسراج الموالية لتركيا والشرقية الجنوبية لحفتر المدعومة من فرنسا وإيطاليا وروسيا وألمانيا وبريطانيا، والأميركيين المكتفين بالتأييد السياسي، انما مع مواصلة الحوار مع الأتراك ورجلهم الليبي الاخواني السراج.
كما يتجسّد هذا الصراع في ارتفاع حدة التوتر بين تركيا واليونان على غاز ونفط قبرص وأعماق البحر. وهذا الموضوع محكوم باعتقاد تركي ان الأميركيين خصوصاً والغربيين عموماً بحاجة اليهم، منذ زمن الاتحاد السوفياتي، لذلك ترك الغرب تركيا تحتل الجزء المسكون من أتراك قبارصة في الجزيرة المستقلة منذ 1974.
بالمقابل تعتبر اليونان أن قبرص هي جزء من تراثها الإغريقي بالاضافة الى انتمائها القومي الى اليونان، فتتصرف اليونان وكأنها صاحبة الحق المبرم في الجزيرة وثرواتها.
لكن هذا الصراع ليس إلا الجزء البسيط من صراع عثماني – يوناني تاريخي، نجح فيه الأتراك منذ قرون عدة بالسيطرة على جزء نهائي من تركيا.
هذه الصراعات في المتوسط وليبيا تدفع نحو صراعات عالمية الطابع ومياهه الوطنية والدولية. وهذا يشمل الخلاف اللبناني مع الكيان الإسرائيلي المحتل عند الحدود البحرية في الجنوب وخلاف كامن تركي سوري على إمكانات كبيرة من الغاز والنفط في أعماق حدوديهما البحرية.
ما هي الخطة التركية؟
تشرف تركيا على مسافة طويلة من سواحل المتوسط بدءاً من حدودها البحرية مع سورية وحتى بحار اليونان، وأضافت دوراً متوسطياً لها بالسيطرة على قبرص التركية وليبيا «السراج» وتطمح من خلال العلاقة مع حزب النهضة التونسي الذي يمسك رئيسه الغنوشي برئاسة مجلس نواب بلاده. تطمح الى ضم تونس الى نفوذها. فتستطيع بذلك ان تمسك بالحدود البحرية والإقليمية لقبرص الواقعة في منتصف البحر المتوسط. وتمتد الى ليبيا براً وبحراً مع مدياتها الاقليمية، هذا بالاضافة الى ان سواحل المتوسط التركية تبيح لها التنقيب في اعماق المتوسط بين اليونان وقبرص وحتى سواحلها المباشرة، وتعتبر تركيا أنها دولة متوسطية اساسية لها كامل الحق والاولوية في التنقيب في اعماق البحر المتوسط قبالة العالم العربي من المغرب وحتى حدودها الإقليمية مع اليونان وبلغاريا، اي ما يعادل خمساً وسبعين في المئة من سواحل البحر المتوسط وبالتالي أعماقه الدولية.
هذا ما يدفع الى السؤال التالي: أين العرب من كل ذلك وأين الغرب وروسيا؟
معظم العرب في الخليج مرتبطون بالمشروع الأميركي المتريث من جهة والمشترك من جهة أخرى في الحرب عبر التورط الاماراتي في حرب ليبيا بالإسناد وبالسلاح والتمويل لقوات حفتر.
اما اوروبا فمنزعجة من الاستيلاء التركي على دولة السراج الليبية فتدعم حفتر إنما من دون السماح له بالحسم النهائي، لان المفاوضات الدولية على اقتسام المغانم في كامل البحر المتوسط لم تصل بعد الى خواتيمها، ما يتطلب تسعيراً للمعارك بدأ يظهر بالسلاح الأوروبي والإماراتي المتدفق الى بنغازي والجنوب مع قوات روسية تابعة لشركات فاغنر الى جانب دعم مصري مباشر بالخبراء والمدربين وبعض الكتائب العسكرية، بالمقابل تقف قوات تركية مع جيش السراج ومجموعات من تنظيمات سورية إرهابية وأخرى من الاخوان المسلمين. اما العرب المجاورون لليبيا، فمصر تخشى من انتصار الاخوان المسلمين الليبيين ومعها تركيا، فينعكس على وضعها في الداخل المصري، حيث لا يزال الاخوان المسلمون فيها القوة الأساسية بعد الجيش المصري. لجهة السودان فلا يزال غارقاً في خلافاته الداخلية، وتطبيق سياسات منصاعة للأميركيين تجعله من مؤيدي حفتر حيناً وصامت في معظم الاحيان.
لكن تونس يتنازعها تياران، الاول من الاخوان المسلمين يؤيد السراج الليبي والآخر من أجنحة رئيسها قيس سعيّد الذي يدعو الى الحياد.
واذا كان باستطاعة قائد الاخوان في تونس رئيس مجلس النواب الغنوشي الذي يترأس ايضاً اخوان ليبيا بجهاديين متطوعين فإن قيس سعيّد عاجز عن دعم حفتر إلا بالدعاء.
على مستوى البلدان العربية غير المجاورة، فسورية منهمكة بالتصدّي لتركيا واخوانها مع احتلال عسكري اميركي الى جانب الإرهابيين، والمغرب لم يعد يأبه للصراعات العربية. وهذا حال كامل العالم العربي الذي تجتاحه تركيا اما بالوسائل المباشرة كحال العراق وسورية وليبيا وحزب الإصلاح في اليمن وبعض اجنحة الاخوان في السودان والجزائر وتونس، وإما بالسياسة. لذلك فإن المشروع التركي يبدو واضحاً بمحاولة الاستفادة من تراجع الدور الاميركي في الشرق الأوسط وتقهقر الدور السعودي في معظم العالمين الاسلامي والعربي لإعادة العثمانية الاردوغانية الجديدة بوسيلتين: السيطرة الاستراتيجية والايديولوجية والاستيلاء على الغاز والنفط.
ألا يشكل هذا الأمر انقلاباً تركياً على نتائج الحرب العالمية الثانية؟
يعتبر الأتراك ان الاميركيين سمحوا لهم باحتلال ثلث قبرص منذ 46 عاماً. وكان هناك عدو واحد لهم هو الاتحاد السوفياتي، اما اليوم فلديهم عدوان اثنان واكثر من منافس هما الصين وروسيا والمانيا واليابان والهند، لذلك تبقى تركيا حاجة اساسية للنفوذ الاميركي العالمي، واي تخلٍ عنها يذهب نحو تدمير كبير للجيوبوليتيك الاميركي. هذا هو صميم المراهنة التركية التي تجزم بأن الاميركيين لن يعترضوا على دور كبير لها في مياه البحر الابيض المتوسط وسواحل بلدانه، لا يفعل أكثر من صد النفوذ الروسي الصيني.
فهل هذا صحيح؟
لن تقبل دول اوروبا المتوسطية في فرنسا وايطاليا بهذه المعادلة. وقد تتمكن اليونان العضو في الاتحاد الاوروبي من جذب المانيا ومعظم دول الاتحاد الى مياه البحر المتوسط للاستفادة من ثرواته، كما ان الاميركيين لن يذهبوا الى حدود إثارة غضب الاوروبيين من اجل ارضاء اردوغان، وقد يذهبون كعادتهم نحو التوفيق بين تحالفاتهم انما على اساس الاولوية للمصالح الاميركية.
يتبقى العرب وعندما يستيقظون من سباتهم تكون المعركة على ثروات المتوسط اختتمت فصولها وانتقلت للسيطرة على بحار جديدة.
A reliable and exceptionally knowledgeable source, who doesn’t wish to be publicly identified, has confidentially informed me that an agreement has been reached in which U.S. troops will remain permanently in Iraq but under exclusively NATO command, no longer under the command of CentCom (US Central Command in the Middle East).
On February 12th, NATO’s defense ministers agreed to increase operations in Iraq. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg has been working ever since Fall of 2019 to prepare this plan (Trump had been pushing for it even before that), and Stoltenberg has consulted in Jordan with King Abdullah, and also in Brussels with Sabri Bachtabji, Tunisia’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, because Tunisia is a key part of Trump’s plan, to use other NATO nations as America’s proxies controlling the Middle East.
America’s position regarding the jihadists that Turkey has been protecting in Syria’s Idlib province is that they can be useful as proxy boots-on-the-ground to defeat Haftar, whom America too opposes, favoring al-Sarraj, whom Turkey likewise backs; so, Turkey and U.S. are cooperating on this effort in Libya.
America’s interest is in overthrowing Syria’s secular Government and replacing it with one that would be acceptable to the fundamentalist-Sunni Saud family who own Saudi Arabia. In order to do this, America will therefore need to keep its forces in Iraq. Otherwise, Russia and Iran, both of which America and the Sauds hope ultimately to conquer, would have stronger influence in the Middle East, which neither America nor the Sauds want. America invaded Iraq not only directly for its international corporations to profit, but also in order to have its hundreds of bases there from which to control the entire Middle East — bases that are supplied out of the world’s largest Embassy building (from which even other U.S. embassies are supplied), which building was constructed in Baghdad after the 2003 invasion. Trump’s plan now is to bring in NATO allies, so that they will help out in the Middle East, more than in the past. Trump wants America’s vassal-nations to absorb some of the financial burdens of imposing empire, so that America’s taxpayers won’t need to fund the full cost of it, for the benefit of the billionaire owners of international corporations that are based in the United States and in its allied (or vassal) (including other NATO) countries. This is why Stoltenberg has been working, for months, to effectuate Trump’s plan.
A representative of the US military told the Iraqis present that the United States was prepared to leave positions in or near Shia-majority areas, such as Balad Air Base, which is located 80km north of Baghdad and houses US trainers and contractors.
Washington, the Iraqis were told, could even consider reducing its presence in Baghdad.
“We are prepared to leave some of the Shia-majority areas, like the base in Balad. Maybe we could reduce our presence in Baghdad,” the military representative told his Iraqi counterparts, who understood from this that the US presence in the Iraqi capital would be reduced to guarding its embassy and the airport.
However, the US side categorically ruled out withdrawing from their biggest air base in Iraq, and indeed the whole Middle East, Ain al-Assad. …
For the US side, Ain al-Assad was its “red line”.
The representative said: “We cannot even start talking about withdrawing [from that base]. Withdrawal is out of the question.”
Such was the sensitivity of these discussions that they were held well away from Iraq. The meeting took place in the private residence of the Canadian ambassador to Jordan in Amman, Middle East Eye was told.
Present at the meeting was a representative of the US military, a Nato official and a senior Iraqi security adviser.
America needs the vast Ain al-Assad base in order ultimately to overthrow Bashar al-Assad (no relation), Syria’s secular President, who is allied with Russia and with Iran. NATO will increasingly be taking over this function of assisting the war for regime-change in Syria.
On February 15th, Middle East Monitor bannered “Iraq: Washington to strengthen presence of NATO to disengage militarily from Baghdad” and reported that America’s allies will take over there but “This will only work if the NATO mission includes a strong US component.” So: America’s withdrawal will be only nominal. This will help NATO by assuring that Trump won’t abandon NATO if he wins a second term, and it will also help Trump to win a second term by Trump’s claiming to be withdrawing from the Middle East even without actually doing any such thing.
The aim of this is to fool the public everywhere. In international affairs, this is the way to win: first, fool your own public; then, get your allies to fool theirs. That builds a “coalition.” Donald Trump is doing precisely this.
Trump is continuing Barack Obama’s wars, just like Barack Obama continued George W. Bush’s wars. The plan for America to control the Middle East remains on course, now, ever since 2001. As Obama often said, “America is the one indispensable nation.” (All others are therefore “dispensable.”) It is certainly the leading nation. And America’s aristocracy possess patience. They know that Rome wasn’t built in a day. In order to be the leading nation and the biggest international aggressor (so that “America is the one indispensable nation”), what is essential is to treat every other nation as being “dispensable” (make them fear you), so that either they will do as the leading nation wants, or else they will be dispensed with — they will become added to the list of target-nations to be conquered. They are dispensable; they are disposable. A disposable nation is aware of its subordinate position. On February 15th, the International Institute for Strategic Studies reported that
the US dedicated a significantly higher proportion of its defence budget to procurement and R&D than its NATO allies. European countries are increasing their defence investments as a share of their total spending – for those countries with available data, funds rose from 19.8% in 2018 to 23.1% in 2019 – but the equivalent category reached 29% in the US. The United States’ defence investments were thus worth around four times as much as European states’ combined.
A nation which spends 29% of its GDP on “defence” might be weak in other ways, but everyone in the world will fear it, and all other nations will know that they are “dispensable,” because the country which spends that high a percentage (and there is only one which does) also happens to have the world’s largest economy. Any other country, which isn’t one of its vassals, will be viewed by it (or by its aristocracy) as being an “enemy” — a nation that is targeted for “regime-change,” instead of for being a market. And being a targeted nation is very different than being a target market. It is to be only a target — a target of sanctions, a target of coups, and, if those fail, then a target of invasion and military occupation, like Iraq is.
Iraq and Iran and Syria — and every other nation that is friendly toward Russia — all of them, are targets of the U.S. regime. That’s why Trump plans to keep U.S. forces in Iraq: Iraq was conquered in 2003, and he wants it to stay that way.
Syrian Presidential Media and Political Advisor Dr. Bouthaina Shaaban has affirmed that the announcement of the ceasefire agreement in Idleb is approved by Syria and Russia and it has nothing to do with rapprochements between other countries.
“The decision of ceasefire in IIdleb is temporary,” she said, asserting that what has been done by terrorists in Idleb countryside is planned by countries.
She underscored that any ceasefire agreement serves the big strategy of liberating every inch in the country.
“Turkey is not serious in dealing with de-escalation zones and Erdogan will be forced to leave the Syrian territories. This is our decision and it is not up to him,” Dr. Shaaban added.
She advised those who are dealing with the US to return to the homeland.
As for the constitutional committee, the advisor stressed that no final agreement has been reached yet.
“The war on Syria comes within a world framework because of our desire to have an independent decision,” she said in an interview with the Lebanese-based al-Mayadeen TV channel.
Dr. Shaaban also pointed out that the Syrian state exerts every possible effort to meet the needs of Syrian people for oil, but we do not know the destination of Iranian oil tankers .
The advisor concluded by saying that President Bashar al-Assad’s vision about the country is that every inch of Syrian territories will be liberated.
Basma Qaddour
بثينة شعبان : سيادة سوريا ووحدة أراضيها سيتحقق مهما كلف الثمن
المستشارة السياسية والإعلامية للرئاسة السورية بثينة شعبان تؤكد أن أي قرار لوقف إالنار يخدم الاستراتيجية الكبرى لتحرير كل شبر من الأراضي السورية، وتوضح أن قرار وقف إطلاق النار في إدلب مؤقت.
قالت المستشارة السياسية والإعلامية للرئاسة السورية بثينة شعبان إن ما فعله الارهابيون بريف إدلب من تخطيط دول.
وفي حديث مع الميادين ضمن “المسائية” أكدت شعبان أن أي قرار لوقف اطلاق النار يخدم الاستراتيجية الكبرى لتحرير كل شبر من الأراضي السورية، مشيرة إلى أن قرار وقف إطلاق النار في إدلب مؤقت.
وأوضحت أن الاتفاق الروسي التركي يؤكد على سيادة وسلامة الأراضي العربية السورية، موضحةً إلى أن الاعلان عن وقف إطلاق النار في إدلب تمّ بقرار من سوريا وروسيا ولا علاقة له بأي تفاهمات.
وردت شعبان على كلام الرئيس التركي لرجب طيب إردوغان قائلةً “المياه تكذب الغطاس”، لافتةً إلى أن لإردوغان أطماع في العراق وسوريا وله علاقات مع المجموعات الإرهابية على الأرض.
كما أشارت شعبان إلى أن الجيش التركي سوف يغادر مجبراً الأراضي السورية.
كذلك أضافت أن على هامش قمة إردوغان بوتين لم يجر لقاءات سورية تركية، موضحةً أن تركيا ليست صادقة بالتعاطي مع مناطق خفض التصعيد.
شعبان تابعت قائلةً “رؤية الرئيس السوري بشار الأسد لهذا البلد أنه سيتم تحرير كل شبر من الأراضي السورية”.
وفي حديثها أوضحت أن “من رهن قراره للأميركي في شرق الفرات ليس فقط من الكرد”، ناصحةً من يتعامل مع الأميركيين شرق الفرات أن يعودوا الى بلدهم.
كما شددت على أن سيادة سوريا ووحدة أراضيها سيتحقق مهما كلف الثمن، مضيفةً “حتى الان لا يوجد اتفاق نهائي على اللجنة الدستورية”.
كذلك أضافت شعبان أنه “لا يمكن تحقيق أي شي أو الحديث عن أي انجاز في المسار السياسي دون موافقتنا”.
في سياق متصل، قالت شعبان إن “الحرب على سوريا هو ضمن إطار عالمي سببه سعينا لاستقلالية قرارنا”.
ولفتت إلى أن زيارة بومبيو إلى المنطقة “أوقفت قرارات لاعادة فتح بعض الدول العربية سفاراتها في سوريا”، مضيفةً أن “رجال اعمال من سلطنة عمان والامارات العربية ستشارك في معرض دمشق الدولي، وسوريا سعيدة بأي مبادرة من الاردن لتحسين العلاقات وستتعامل بإيجابية”.
وحول لبنان تابعت شعبان، “لبنان بلد شقيق وصديق ونحن ولبنان بلد واحد، وسوريا عنوان وعاصمة للمقاومة ومعنية بما يجري لحزب الله في لبنان، ولا يمكن لسوريا ان تقول انها غير معنية بما يجري في العراق ولبنان، وهي جزء من محور المقاومة في المنطقة وصمود الجيش السوري ساهم بتقوية هذا المحور”، وشددت على أنه “في الحرب القادمة لن تتمكن اسرائيل من أن تقود حرباً ضد طرف واحد من محور المقاومة”.
هذا وأشارت إلى أن سوريا تحاول الحصول على حاجات شعبها من النفط لكن السلطات لا تعلم أين تتجه الناقلة الايرانية.
المستشارة الإعلامية والسياسية للرئيس الأسد تطرقت إلى ملف الانتخابات الرئاسية التونسية وقالت إن “مستقبل تونس سيكون أفضل اذا نسقت مع الدول العربية، وإن انتماء حركة النهضة في تونس هو للاخوان المسلمين وليس للعمق العربي”.
دان الاتحاد العام التونسي للشغل ما أسماه «استباحة أرض تونس من قبل الصهاينة وبتواطؤ من جهات سياسية وأخرى تعمل في مجال السياح»، وذلك على خلفية ما بثته قناة اسرائيلية عن زيارة «إسرائيليين» لمنزل الشهيد الفلسطيني أبو جهاد في تونس، وظهورهم وهم يهتفون باسم الكيان الصهيوني وجيش الاحتلال.
كما دان اتحاد الشغل في بيان له التصريحات الإعلامية لوزير السياحة و»محاولته التغطية على ما حدث ويحدث في مجال التطبيع السياحي بالتهرّب ومغالطة الرأي العام»، مؤكداً رفضه تبرير التطبيع بتبرير الأزمة الاقتصادية وحاجة البلاد إلى تنمية سياحتها.
وجدّد مطالبته بالتحقيق في أنشطة إحدى الشركات السياحية التي تقوم برحلات إلى الأراضي الفسطينية المحتلة بالتنسيق مع جيش الاحتلال الصهيوني، محملاً الحكومة مسؤوليتها في اتخاذ الإجراءات القانونية لمنع كل أشكال التطبيع ومحاسبة القائمين عليه مهما كان موقعهم ومكانتهم.
وعبر عن تجنّده مع المجتمع المدني والقوى الوطنية من أجل مقاومة التطبيع بشتى أشكاله ومن أجل فرض قانون يجرّم التطبيع، داعياً كافة القوى الوطنية إلى استعمال كافة النضالات السلمية لوقف «هرولة البعض إلى التطبيع».
وأكد الأمين العام المساعد بالاتحاد العام التونسي للشغل محمد علي البوغديري رفض الاتحاد بشكل قاطع التطبيع مع الكيان الصهيوني، مشدداً على أن ما جرى عار على الحكومة.
وقال إنه قد تبيّن أن «هناك تطبيعاً من قبل الحكومة مع الكيان الصهيوني للأسف، والتونسيون لن يقبلوا ذلك، معتبراً أن ما جرى يُعدّ استفزازاً».
في حين أكد عضو المكتب السياسي بحركة النضال الوطني أحمد الكحلاوي أن تقرير القناة الصهيونية عرض مشاهد من أمام منزل الشهيد محمد الزواري، معتبراً أن الهدف هو تدريج عملية التطبيع مع الكيان الصهيوني.
وكان وزير الخارجية التونسي خميس الجهيناوي نفى علمه بكامل المعطيات المتعلقة بالتقارير الإعلامية حول زيارة صهاينة إلى تونس.
من جهته، اعتبر سالم الأبيض عضو مجلس نواب الشعب عن حركة الشعب أن مرافقة رئيس الحكومة للوفد الصهيوني في تونس هو وصمة عار، مضيفاً في كلمة له في البرلمان أن الحكومة التونسية تقف صامتة أمام ما يحدث من ارتباطات لتونسيين بالكيان الصهيوني.
– يحتاج أي تحليل أو موقف مما تشهده الجزائر إلى إدراك خطورة الوقوع في قياسات التشبيه بتجارب أخرى، تتجاهل فرادة الحالة الجزائرية. فالحديث عن أن دور الجزائر قد حان في تجارب الربيع العربي المقيت، يتجاهل أن التجربة الاختبارية لكل ما شهدناه من مسمّيات الربيع كان في الجزائر في ما عرفته في تسعينيات القرن الماضي من انتخابات أوصلت الجماعات الإسلامية إلى الأغلبية البرلمانية، وما تلاها من حرب ضروس نزفت خلالها الجزائر لعشر سنوات عرفت بالعشرية السوداء. والقول بأن الحال في الجزائر تكرار لما شهدته سورية أو مصر مجاف للحقيقة. فالجزائر رغم كل التشوش الذي أصاب موقفها في محطات عربية مفصلية، لم تغادر ثوابت رئيسية في الاستقلال ولا تزال دولتها على كل ما فيها من علل وفساد دولة رعاية اجتماعية، في بلد كثير الثروات، وهي في هذا نصف سورية ونصف ليبيا، لكنها من حيث الموضوع الراهن الذي فجّر الشارع وفتح ملف الأحداث، تشكل نصف مصر، فالرئيس عبد العزيز بوتفيلقة الذي يملك تاريخاً وطنياً يستحق التقدير، بات عاجزاً عن ممارسة الحكم، وترشيحه لولاية خامسة شكل استفزازاً قاسياً للشارع والنخب، خصوصاً الذين لا مخططات مسيئة لبلدهم تسيِّر تحركاتهم أو تتحكم بمواقفهم.
– الدعوات لدعم غير مشروط لحراك الشارع ليحسم الموقف ويرسم المستقبل، تتجاهل ما توفره السيولة التي يقدمها حراك الشارع مهما بلغ نبل المقاصد، ومهما كانت درجة الانضباط. وهذه السيولة تشكل هدفاً بحد ذاتها، يراد له أن يطول في ظل استعصاء مطلوب يحول دون اي حل سياسي يضمن خروجاً سلمياً من الأزمة، حتى تتكسر هيبة الدولة ومؤسساتها ويتم تحييدها من المشهد، وخصوصاً مؤسسة الجيش الوطني الجزائري، وتذبل هياكل السلطة وتتآكل، بينما يتعب الشارع المتدفق بحيوية، فيصير المجال متاحاً للتشكيلات المنظمة أن تنزل إلى الساحة بمخططاتها السياسية والأمنية، وهي تملك طول النفس وحسن التنظيم والمقدرات والدعم الخارجي وتفرض أجندتها على الجميع، وفي ظل الأهمية الاستثنائية للجزائر في أسواق النفط والغاز ومشاريع الخصخصة، قد يكون التحرر من الجغرافيا والديمغرافيا الجزائرية كأعباء، لحساب منظومة خفيفة الأثقال تمسك ملفات النفط والغاز، بعدما قالت التجربة الليبية الكثير عن القدرة على التحكم بهذه الثروات مهما اشتدّت وتسعّرت الحرب والفوضى، مقابل ترك الداخل الفقير والريفي للجماعات الإسلامية بمتشدديها ومعتدليها يتنافسون ويتحاربون.
– الخطوات التي أقدم عليها الرئيس الجزائري شكلت خطوة في اتجاه فتح الطريق لمسار سلمي للخروج من الأزمة، لكنها كما يقول الشارع الجزائري ونخبه النظيفة غير كافية، بحيث لا يقبل استبدال التجديد بالتمديد، والمطلوب خريطة طريق واضحة للانتقال إلى دستور جديد وانتخابات في ظل حكومة انتقالية موثوقة، في ظل غياب قيادات سياسية موثوقة وازنة في الشارع وقادرة على قيادته، مقابل هامشية تشكيلات المعارضة التقليدية بإسلامييها وعلمانييها في لحظات التأجج الشعبي الذي يصعب الرهان على دوامه، كما تقول التجارب، وهو ما لا يجب أن يُحرجنا بالقول إن الجيش لا يزال يشكل الجهة الأشد موثوقية لتحقيق هذا الغرض الانتقالي، برعاية الحكومة التي تتولّى صلاحيات الرئاسة لزمن محدود، مع تحويل الندوة الوطنية إلى جمعية تأسيسية تحلّ مكان البرلمان وتضمّ أبرز قواه، بالإضافة إلى رموز الحراك وقادة الأحزاب، لتخرج بدستور يتناسب مع غياب القيادات التاريخية، وبالتالي ينتقل من النظام الرئاسي إلى النظام البرلماني الذي يتيح قراراً جماعياً للدولة، عبر حكومات وحدة وطنية تتمثل فيها التكتلات بحجم وزنها النيابي، وتمنع التسلط على الحكم عبر شخصيات مموّهة، تضيع معها ثوابت الجزائر والتزاماتها في مجال الأمن القومي، وهكذا تحفظ للجيش مكانته ودوره، وهذا ما يحول دون وقوع الجزائر في النتيجتين المصرية والتونسية بوجههما الأخواني أو بالعودة للنظام القديم بحلة جديدة، أو ذهابها للمسار الليبي. وفي كل الأحوال الجزائر لن تكون سورية، ليس لأنها ليست بأهميتها، بل لأن الكتلة الشعبية الوازنة والغالبة في سورية بقيت وراء مشروع الدولة ورئيسها ولأن ليس في الجزائر قائد تاريخي صاعد يمثل وجدانها الوطني والقومي قادر على قيادتها كالرئيس بشار الأسد.
– لأننا نحبّ الجزائر لا نستطيع أن نقف بلا شروط وراء الحكم أو الشارع، بل نقف بقوة مع مسار سياسي سلمي ينهي الأزمة بسلاسة ويحفظ ثوابتها، لأننا ضنينون ببلد الثورة العظيمة، ونريد أن نشهد ضماناً يحول دون أن تضيع منا الجزائر.
The Tunisian crowds protested in Central Tunis on Tuesday heavily and angrily against the Saudi crown prince Mohamad bin Salman’s visit, denouncing his role in the aggression on Yemen, attempt to eradicate the Palestinian cause, murder of the journalist Jamal Khashoggi and persecution of local activists.
Al-Manar correspondent reported that Bin Salman who, had arrived earlier, would leave Tunisia in few hours, adding that Arab and foreign media outlets were banned from covering up his visit.
The protestors chanted slogans against Bin Salman’s visit, calling on him to leave their country and holding saws in reference to his role in harshly murdering and dismembering Khashoggi.
Dozens of protesters rallied in central Tunis on Monday to decry Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s scheduled visit.
Prince Mohammed, commonly known by his initials MBS, is expected to arrive in Tunisia on Tuesday afternoon as part of a regional tour as he makes his way to the G20 summit set to take place in Argentina at the end of the month.
It is also MBS’s first overseas tour after the killing of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul two months ago. The murder – widely seen as orchestrated by the crown prince – created an international firestorm against Saudi Arabia that continues to reverberate.
Holding several banners, Crowds were acting out the war on Yemen where a Saudi-Emirati led war against Yemen.
The outbreak of mass protests in Tunisia this week comes on the seventh anniversary of the Arab Spring uprisings in 2011. This week, seven years ago, saw Tunisia’s strongman ruler Ben Ali fleeing for exile to Saudi Arabia. Before the month was out, Egypt’s longtime ruler Hosni Mubarak was also ousted. Back then, revolution was in the air and the region was convulsed with potential change. In many ways, arguably, it still is.
Seven years on it is appropriate that social protests have reemerged in Tunisia. That demonstrates the Arab Spring is still unfinished business. The potential change for full democracy did not occur back then, nor since. At least, not yet.
Tunisia was the first country where the uprisings in 2011 kicked off after a young street vendor named Mohamed Bouazizi self-immolated in protest against poverty and state corruption. Today, protesters in Tunisia are still calling for liberation from political and economic oppression.
So, we may ask, what happened the Arab Spring and its promise for sweeping progressive change?
Before we review the momentous events, a note of clarification is needed. Back in the heyday of the Arab Spring some analysts posited that the social movements were part of a grand plan orchestrated by Washington to clear out despots who had passed their sell-by dates.
Authors like Michel Chossudovsky and William Engdahl were among those claiming a hidden hand from Washington as part of grand scheme. They point to communications between the State Department and certain protester groups, like the April 6 youth movement in Egypt, as evidence of a master-scheme manipulated from Washington. In that view, the Arab Spring was just another version of so-called Color Revolutions, which Washington did indeed orchestrate in other parts of the world, like Georgia and Ukraine in the early 2000s.
This author disagrees on what was the motive force behind the Arab Spring events. Admittedly, Washington did have a hand in the events, but more often this was reactionary, to curtail and divert the mass uprisings – uprisings which in this author’s observations were genuine popular revolts against the US and European-backed status quo serving international capital.
Instead of successful revolution, what happened the Arab Spring were three categories of reaction. Here we look at seven countries in the region to illustrate.
Restoration
Tunisians and Egyptians may have seen the backs of Ben Ali and Mubarak, but seven years on it is evident that the ruling system which both these strongmen oversaw has been restored. In Tunisia, the Nidaa Tounes party which Ben Ali patronized is in power as part of a coalition with the Nahda Islamist party. The ruling structure of crony capitalism remains in place. The government’s signing up to an IMF loan last year for $2.9 billion is conditioned on imposing harsh economic austerity cuts on the majority working-class population. The rule of international capital has thus been restored.
In Egypt, the Mubarak regime was restored through in July 2013. El-Sisi was a senior military holdover from Mubarak’s 30-year de facto dictatorship. Admittedly, Morsi’s ascent to power after Mubarak did not represent a pluralist democratic revolution. Morsi was beholden to the Muslim Brotherhood and his short-lived rule was associated with disturbing sectarian hostility. His government alienated secular Egyptian workers. Nevertheless, el-Sisi’s violent overthrow of Morsi can be seen as a reactionary restoration of the old regime. Like Tunisia, today Egypt resembles much of the status quo as before the 2011 uprisings.
Repression
Three countries illustrating this category are Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Yemen. There were similar developments in other countries, such as Jordan, Oman, Morocco, but on a smaller scale.
After Ben Ali and Mubarak fled from power, the Arab Spring wave soon buffeted Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Yemen. Like Tunisia and Egypt, those three countries were ruled by US-backed despots. If the whole regional ferment was somehow a devious plot to renovate the status quo by Washington, as some authors contended, then why didn’t the despots in Saudi Arabia and Bahrain succumb to the State Department’s “human rights” proxies?
This author was in Bahrain when its protests erupted on February 14, 2011. For almost one month, the Al Khalifa monarchial regime was reeling from mortal insecurity.
The protests were mainly led by the majority Shia population against the Sunni self-styled king. Their demands, as far as this author observed, were for a worker-dedicated democracy, not a sectarian Islamic-style revolution. Bahrain’s protests were brutally repressed with the invasion of Saudi troops in mid-March 2011. The Saudi repression had the full backing of the US and Britain since the island state was and is a key military base for those two powers in the geo-strategic Persian Gulf.
Similar protests were unleashed in Saudi Arabia, particularly in the oil kingdom’s Eastern Province where the mainly Shia population have been historically marginalized by the hardline Sunni House of Saud. The protests in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia continue to this day. But Washington and London, along with Western media indifference, have given political cover for the ongoing repression of these protests.
In Yemen, the story is slightly different, in that the protest movement emerging in 2011 actually succeeded in ousting the US-backed regime of Ali Abdullah Saleh in 2012. Saleh was sidelined in a stitch-up deal overseen by the US and the Saudis to be replaced by his deputy, Abdrabbuh Mansour Hadi. The latter was prescribed as a “transition president” but ended up delaying the handover of democratic power that the Yemeni people had demanded in 2011.
No doubt that was part of the cynical US plan to restore the old order. However, the Houthi rebels grew tired of the charade and ousted the lingering Hadi by force of arms in September 2014. The US-backed Saudi war on Yemen that started in March 2015 has ever since been aimed at repressing the Yemeni uprising in order to restore their puppet Hadi.
Regime Change
Libya and Syria represent a very different category of reaction – namely, an opportunistic regime change carried out by Washington, its European NATO allies and regional client regimes. In mid-March 2011, the US, Britain and France exploited a UN Security Council resolution under the pretext of “protecting human rights” to launch a seven-month aerial bombing campaign on Libya. That war crime resulted in the overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi and his murder at the hands of NATO-backed jihadists. Gaddafi had always been an object for Western imperialist hostility. Under the cover of Arab Spring popular revolts, the US and its allies got their chance for regime change in Libya. But seven years on, the regime change has proven to be disastrous for the people of Libya, turning the once socially developed country into a failed state of jihadist-warlord chaos. Cruel poetic justice is that Libya has haunted Europe ever since with a migration crisis owing to NATO’s criminal sabotage of that country and turning the failed state into a gateway for millions of migrants from the African continent.
In Syria, minor protests in mid-March 2011 were hijacked by US and European-backed provocateurs similar to Libya which then turned into a full-blown war. As many as 500,000 people were killed in the nearly seven-year war which was waged by the US, Britain, France, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Israel and Turkey sponsoring jihadist mercenaries, who gravitated to Syria from dozens of countries around the world. The US-led regime-change plot to oust President Bashar Al-Assad failed mainly because Russia, Iran and Lebanon’s Hezbollah intervened with military support for the Syrian state.
However, the announcement this past week by US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson that American military forces are to expand their presence in Syria shows clearly that Washington’s audacious and criminal regime-change agenda persists.
Conclusion
The Arab Spring events in early 2011 were momentous. But seven years on, the progressive promise of the uprisings has yet to materialize. The recurrence of social protests in Tunisia this week is testament to the unfulfilled promise of democratic liberation for the mass of working people in that country and the wider region. The US and Europe had, and continue to have, a vested interest in maintaining the anti-democratic status quo in most of the region. The custodians of international capital managed to stymie revolution by a combination of restoration and repression. In Libya and Syria, the Western powers used the cover of the Arab Spring for opportunistic regime change with horrendous consequences.
Seven years on, the Arab Spring may seem to have been buried as a genuine popular revolutionary movement. But wherever the mass of people are oppressed by an oligarchic elite, hope for liberation will always spring eternal and is always a potential threat to the oppressors.
The Western powers may have partially succeeded in “managing” the Arab Spring. But the potential for revolt against the Western-backed capitalist order has not gone away. That potential is always there, even for an American or European Spring.
Comment
Readers are advised to check the the following posts, posted in 2012, exposing sectarian”Muslim” Brotherhood who hijacked the so-called “Arab Spring” missed a great chance to turn Arab’s people uprising into a second Arab Islamic revolution against the real ENEMY (Anglozionist Empire), because they thought to govern they have to please the Empire.
The events of the last five years have proved that I was right and on the right track. Moreover, old reader may remember my dispute with brother Daniel Mabsout on Syria, Egypt and the war on terror. Please also check:
Family of the late Tunisian singer Thikra has exploded a bomb stating that they possess solid evidence proving that Jamal Mubarak, son of ousted Egyptian President Husni Mubarak, is involved in her murder.
Tawfiq Al Dali, Thikra’s brother, has made a call out to all those that have any information about Thikra’s murder to come forward. Forensic reports have shown that Ayman Al Suwaidi, Thikra’s husband and who is accused of killing her while being intoxicated, suffers from stomach problems and therefore was not drunk during the time the murder happened.
Thikra’s family doubts her husband shot her and then committed suicide, but rather strongly believes Jamal Mubarak had a strong hand in the murder of both. The family assured that it holds vital evidence that the former overthrown Tunisian and Egyptian governments fabricated evidence and placed the blame on her husband.
It is said that there was a relationship between Thikra and Jamal. Thikra’s family has called on all members of the press and lawyers from Tunisia and Egypt to help in uncovering all the fact. In addition, Thikra’s family has released phone numbers, emails, and created a page on the social network Facebook for people with information to contact them.
في مقال مزلزل , تجدونه في الرابط اسفل المقال , بمناسبة ذكرى رحيل الرئيس السابق حافظ الاسد اعلن القيادي السوري المعارض والحقوقي هيثم المناع عن خيبة امله من الثورة الحادثة في بلاده. وعبر عن تحسره لوقوعها اصلا مؤكدا ان خيارات الرئيس الراحل الذي وصفه ب“الاعظم” هي الاعمق والانسب في ادارة الشان السوري ( مقال هيثم المناع)… ولئن لم يكن ما صرح به هيثم المناع جديدا من حيث السخط على ما وصلت اليه الاوضاع في سوريا والتعبير عن الخيبة من ثورة علق عليها العديدون امالا كثيرة ,والتأكيد على ان نظريات الديمقراطية وحقوق الانسان بالمفهوم الغربي لا تتناسب مع الحالة الراهنة للمجتمعات العربية التي ما زالت تحتاج الى انساق الزعامة والمستبد المستنير العادل …مع ان مثل هذا الموقف من الشائع المألوف عند فئات عديدة عربية وغير عربية , فان اهمية ما قاله المناع تتأتى من الجوانب التالية
اولا هو مثقف عربي درس الطب وعلوم الاجتماع ومتحصل على الدكتوراه في الانتروبولوجيا , كما الف العديد من الكتب والدراسات واشتغل مع عدة مؤسسات عالمية لحقوق الانسان والمجتمع المدني …وبالتالي فهو منطقيا يستند في نظرته وتقييمه للاشياء الى تجربة قيمة و كفاءة بحثية وعمق اكاديمي لا يستهان به
ثانيا انه احد القياديين السياسيين المشرفين على الثورة السورية , انخرط عن قرب في مطابخها الداخلية واطلع على خوافيها وما يدور حولها لا سيما وهو الذي تقلد خطة رئيس هيئة الانفاذ المعارضة .
ثالثا , وهذا هام جدا حسب عديد المتابعين , وهو ان ما قاله هيثم المناع لا ينطبق على الحالة السورية فحسب , بل يستقيم مع اكثر من وضع من اوضاع ثورات بلدان الربيع العربي على غرار الحالتين الليبية واليمنية تحديدا ثم الحالة التونسية الاقل هلاكا نسبيا رغم تعثرها الواضح..
لاشك ان العناصر السالفة الذكر تجعل مما كتبه هيثم المناع (وهو صديق مقرب للمنصف المرزوقي) اكثر من مجرد ردة فعل غاضبة , او مزاج متعكر من الثورات وارتداداتها..لان القيمة العلمية والاعتبارية للرجل لا تسمح له بذلك ..وهو اكثر مما يردده العوام في السر وفي الجهر..فيفهم منه اذن محاولة اولى من نوعها لنقد ذاتي , لا شك انه سيهز النخب القاعدة التي تقف عليها النخب الفكرية والسياسية الجديدة في بلاد ما يسمى ب”الربيع العربي”
(انقلاب ب180 درجة) – شاهد ماذا كتب ابرز معارض سوري في الاسد :”انت الاعظم”
تونس-الاخبارية-عرب-نزاعات-رصد
كتب د. هيثم المناع احد ابرز معارضي النظام السوري و رئيس هيئة الانفاذ المعارضة بذكرى رحيل حافظ الأسد النص التالي
رسالة إلى حافظ الأسد من كاره للنظام
بعد كل ما جرى .. وبعد التعرف على شعبي السوري .. وعلى مثقفيه وفئاته وحدود تفكيرها..أقر أنا الكاره السابق للنظام.. و الهارب من الخوف والذل.. والعائد إليه لاحقا بإرادتي.. أن حافظ الأسد أعظم رجل في التاريخ السوري..فهو أفهم من الأدباء والمثقفين بأنفسهم.. أدرى من المتدينين بربهم وأعلم من الخونة… والقتلة بما في صدورهم.
حافظ الأسد عرف السوريين جيدا.. وعرف أفضل طريقة ممكنة لسياستهم ..فحاسب كلا كما يستحق تماما بحسب أثره في المجتمع دون أدنى ظلم..عرف كيف يرضي المتدينين ويضحك على عقولهم ويكسبهم..أجبر الدين أن يبقى حيث يجب أن يبقى.. في البيت والجامع..فلا يخرج إلى الحياة السياسية.. وأشرك بالمقابل كل الطوائف في الحكم
طهر الأرض من المجرمين والقتلة.. وجفف منابعهم الطائفية بالقوة..وكسب البيئات الدينية المعتدلة التي تسمح لغيرها بالحياة..و إندمج فيها فأحبته من قلبها وأغلبها لا تزال مخلصة له حتى الآن
لم أكن عرف ما هي الطائفية على أيامه و قضيت أغلب سني عمري لا أجرؤ على التلفظ بأسماء الطوائف حتى بيني وبين نفسي..كم كان ذلك جميلا .. أن يقمع رجل عظيم الشر الكامن فينا حتى قبل أن ينبت
عرف نوعية المثقفين لديه.. فعامل كل منهم كما يستحق..إحترم بعضهم وقال له أفكارك لا تنفع هنا فاص
مت أو ارحل وعد متى شئت..مثل نزار قباني والماغوط وممدوح عدوان وأدونيس..ومن لم يفهم أو كان حالما وربما كان سيستسبب بالبلبلة فقد جنى على نفسه وسجن حتى لو كان من طائفته فلا فرق عند هذا الرجل العادل.. مثل عارف دليلة وعبد العزيز الخير و مئات أخرين
ميز المثقفين الطائفيين والحاقدين المخربين للمجتمع كما أثبت الزمن اللاحق فسجنهم..و إن لم يكونوا قد استحقوا سجنهم وقتها -و لا أعتقد – فقد استحقوه بجدارة لاحقا..مثل ياسين الحج صالح وميشيل كيلو وحازم نهار وفايز سارة ولؤي حسين وأمثالهم
طوع المثقفين الدنيئين الذين يبحثون عن مستأجر..ووجد لهم عملا يتعيشون منه طالما هم تحت الحذاء..حيث مكانهم المستحق.. مثل حكم البابا وعلي فرزات وأمثالهم
إهتم بالفنانين والشعراء السوريين والعرب الذين يستحقون الاهتمام ..مثل مصطفى نصري والجواهري والرحباني. وغيرهم
حصر الدعارة في أماكن مخصصة لها بدل أن تنتشر في الشوارع والمقاهي وأماكن العمل والصحف
عرف كيف يستقر الحكم ويتوازن دون مشاكل .. استعمل الوطني كالشرع ..والوطنيين المؤلفة قلوبهم..أي من يحتاج للمال حتى يبقوا وطنيين كخدام والزعبي وأمثالهم
أطعم الفاسدين بميزان دقيق.. وصرامة.. فكانوا لا يجرؤون على القضم أكثر مما يسمح لهم..أرضى التجار والعائلات الكبيرة
كان رجلا ترتعد له فرائص أعدائه وأصدقائه في الداخل والخارج.. فحكم أطول مدة في التاريخ السوري الحديث
كان حافظ الأسد الحل الأمثل لسورية مع الأخذ بعين الاعتبار طبيعة الشعب وثقافته وظروف البلد والأخطار المحيطة به..فبنى سورية الأمن والأمان..سورية المنيعة في مواجهة أعدائها.. سورية المدارس والمستشفيات المجانية .. سورية السلع المدعومة ..سورية الفقر الموزع بالتساوي بين الجميع.. ولو كان الغنى ممكنا لوزعه بالتساوي..عاش بسيطا فقيرا.. ومات فقيرا لا يملك شيئا..
كان رجال دولته يتمتعون بالنساء والمال والاستجمام في أجمل مناطق العالم وهو يعيش في شقته المتواضعة.. لا يفكر إلا بمصلحة الشعب.
عرف كيف يضع حذائه في فم إسرائيل والغرب وأعوانهم ملك الأردن وعرب البعير والميليشيات اللبنانية..
عادى عرفات والسادات وكل من فرط بشبر من أرض فلسطين
ضبط الميليشيات الفلسطينية بالقوة و بنى مقاومة لبنانية و دعم الفلسطينية ووجهما تجاه العدو و بنى توازن رعب يعمل الأعداء وعملاؤهم في الدخل والخارج منذ سنوات على تفكيكهما..
بنى لسورية قيمة أكبر من مساحتها وقدراتها قبل أن ينقض عليها أعداؤه بعد مماته لاعنين روحه
فعل كل ذلك باللين والحب عندما كان ينفع.. وبالشدة والبطش تارة أخرى
لا يزال كارهوه يخشونه حتى الآن..لن يستطيعوا هزيمته في رؤوسهم.. ومهما حدث سيبقى ذلا أبديا لهم.. لن يستطيعوا تجاوزه..
كثير كثير .. لا مجال يتسع لتعداد مناقب هذا العظيم العظيم..كان رجل دولة من أرفع طراز.. لا يتكرر إلا كل بضعة قرون
أقول هذا.. أنا مناصر الإنسانية والحريات وحقوق الإنسان..بعد تجربتي مع شعبي السوري ومثقفيه وموالاته ومعارضته..لاقتناعي أن سياسة حافظ الأسد هي السياسة الأمثل التي تخفف الألم السوري الكلي إلى حده الأدنى..والدليل ما يحدث الآن
وأعلن أني مستعد للعيش في سورية تحت حكم رجل مثله بغض النظر عن طائفته طالما أنه على عهده لا يجوع فقير ولا يجرؤ أحد على استباحة دم أحد .. ولا تستطيع الكلاب أن تفلت في الشوارع
تعلم أنك ولدت في المكان الخطأ والزمن الخطأ بين الناس الخطأ.. عش بسلام كما يليق بك بين الانبياء
Islamic State Eyes North Africa: Hot Issue on Global Agenda
The Islamic State (IS) fighters are trying to flee Mosul. No doubt, the US-supported Iraqi forces will establish control over the city pretty soon. At first, IS militants will leave Iraq for the province of Deir-ez-Zor, Syria, to intensify fighting there. But with Syria no longer a safe haven, they’ll have to move elsewhere looking for weak points, like the countries of Maghreb.
Roughly, 8-11 thousand jihadi fighters come from Maghreb countries. The numbers vary according to different estimates. Some of the militants will lose lives on the battlefield, some will lay down their arms, but a large part will continue the efforts to reach the coveted goal of establishing a caliphate. With the battle experience received in Syria and Iraq, these seasoned fighters will pose a great threat to the stability of their respective homelands.
It has already started. Algeria faces a security challenge. The war against jihadism has turned Algeria into one of Africa’s top military powerhouses. In the past 20 years, Algeria has spent more on its military than all three of its immediate neighbors — Morocco, Libya and Tunisia — combined.
Algeria is a country with a 1,200 km coastline. If waves of asylum seekers hit Europe from there, the Old Continent will be in real trouble. Besides, the country is a key supplier of oil and gas to the West. The implications of internal conflict in Algeria could be a real nightmare. Russia helps to prevent it and, thus, save Western Europe.
At least 6 thousand of IS fighters are Tunisians. Some of them hold prominent positions in the IS and the Nusra Front (Jabhat Fatah al-Sham) in Syria. Many Tunisian extremists are affiliated with Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, which is active in a half-dozen countries across North Africa. Tunisia is at odds over what to do if and when they come home. These fighters would have the capabilities and cultural familiarity to potentially create a formidable and sustained destabilizing force in Tunisia. Meanwhile, Tunisian security forces break up one IS recruiting cell after another.
Algeria, Tunisia and Morocco face threats from the East as well as from the South, where they have to counter the emerging «Sahara-Sahel Front». Islamists from Mali, Niger and Mauritania are regrouping to expand the zone of influence. For instance, Al-Qaeda militants have recently attacked a Malian army post near the border of Burkina Faso.
In North and West Africa, Al Qaeda is on the rise again. Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) has withstood the chokehold of the Algerian security services, US drones, and the French-led intervention in Mali, to launch a range of attacks in recent years, whether storming a beach resort in Ivory Coast or conducting a low-level insurgency in northern Mali.
A number of terrorist groups operating in Mali and neighboring areas – Ansar Dine, al-Mourabitoun, the Massina Brigades, the Sahara Emirate – united this February into one organization called Nusrat-ul-Islam. The newly formed group pledged allegiance to Taliban leader Mullah Haibatullah, al-Qaida leader Ayman Al-Zawahiri and the leader of al-Qaida’s North African franchise Abu Musab Abdul Wadud.
Al-Qaeda and its affiliates are challenged by the IS. In November 2016, the Islamic State in Greater Sahara was formed, led by Adnan Abu Walid al-Sahrawi.
The IS militants may regroup in the war-torn Libya. This country is probably the weakest link among Maghreb states. Defense officials have said the hardline Sunni Muslim militants are considering moving their headquarters to that country. A US military intervention is an option. According to Gen. Thomas D. Waldhauser, head of the Pentagon’s Africa Command, «The instability in Libya and North Africa may be the most significant near-term threat to U.S. and allies’ interests on the continent». Russia has been asked to intervene by Libyan political and military leaders.
The armed forces of Maghreb countries are getting prepared. The Moroccan military has just held exercises Flintlock-2017 with the US. Weapons systems, like, for instance, Russian Mi-28N Night Hunter attack helicopters, are procured to make the counterterrorist operations more effective. On March 15th, 2016, King Mohamed VI visited Moscow to sign several important agreements, including the agreement on mutual protection of classified information on military and military-technical matters and the declaration on the fight against international terrorism. Morocco is interested in strengthening its military capabilities with Russian weapons.
Last year, Russia provided Algerian and Tunisian authorities with intelligence and military aid to strengthen counterterrorism efforts. The package included Russian high-resolution satellite imagery of key Algerian border crossings with Tunisia, Libya, Chad and Mali. The imagery has enabled Algerian authorities to thwart several attempts by terrorists and insurgents to infiltrate Algerian borders. Algeria has shared this data with Tunisia.
Russia has close military cooperation with the states of the region. A country with a significant Muslim minority, about 10% of its population, it has been battling jihadists in the Caucasus for a number of years. It understands the problem and has vast experience to share. Unlike the US and other Western powers, Russia does not accompany its aid with lectures about human rights or political demands pushing for «democratic reforms». As Russian armaments have proven themselves on the battlefield, it seems likely that Maghreb governments under terrorist threat will increasingly turn towards Moscow.
Today, Islamists of all kinds, especially the IS, are emerging as a very serious threat for the United States, its NATO allies and Russia. Despite the existing differences on Ukraine and a host of other issues where Russia and the West are on opposite side of the barricades, cooperation on fighting the threat is possible and necessary. After all, the enemy is common and its deadly activities go far beyond the scope of a regional threat.
Russia and the West could coordinate activities in Libya. Sharing intelligence and cooperating in joint special operations against key targets could be a start of a broader process. Russia and the US-led West could launch preliminary talks on the wording of a hypothetical UN Security Council resolution to make it approved if an international effort will be required to keep the region from abyss.
North Africa should not become a divisive issue to complicate the relations between Russia and the West. The situation calls for cooperation and dialogue. The IS will soon become a thing of the past if Russia and the West set aside what divides them and concentrate on what brings them together. This approach will benefit all.
An international spy network, comprised of at least 10 agents, operating for the “Israeli” entity was exposed and subsequently arrested in Algeria, according to Channel 2 citing Arab media networks Friday.
Reports indicated that the spies were operating in southern Algeria and held citizenship in a variety of African countries including Libya, Mali, Ethiopia, Liberia, Nigeria and Kenya.
The suspects were arrested on charges of espionage, attempt to create anarchy and damaging national security.
Communications equipment used by the suspects was also seized by authorities.
Arab media reported that the “Israeli” entity’s foreign intelligence agency, Mossad, assassinated in December a Hamas member operating out of Tunisia.
The target, Mohhamed Zawari, known to the “Israeli” entity’s security echelon as “The Engineer,” was found shot to death inside his vehicle in the city of Sfax, local media reported.
Five suspects were later detained by Tunisian authorities, along with multiple vehicles, weapons and mobile devices.
One Tunisian journalist said the killing was carried out by the Mossad, who had been following Zawari for some time, Channel 10 added.
Zawari, an aviation engineer and scientist, was shot three to seven times by unknown assailants in his car near his home.
Though, the motive behind his shooting remains unclear.
According to Channel 10, the nationalities of the detainees included one suspect from the Netherlands, one from Morocco and the rest from varying European countries.
About 200 people have protested in the Tunisian capital against the return of Tunisian jihadis who have fought abroad.
The gathering Saturday was prompted by the deadly truck attack in a Berlin Christmas market by Tunisian Anis Amri, who had pledged allegiance to the Islamic State group and was killed Friday in a police shootout. Amri, 24, was slated to be deported home from Germany.
Banners at the protest in front of Parliament in Tunis read “Close the doors to terrorism” and “No tolerance, no return.” Protesters waved Tunisian flags and sang the national anthem.
Protester Faten Mejri said “for us, they are not Tunisians. They are awful people.”
Tunisia says at least 800 Tunisian jihadis are under surveillance since returning home after fighting in Syria, Iraq and Libya
This text is slightly modified from an interview that Andrew Korybko gave to a Moscow-based PhD student specializing in the “Arab Spring” regime change events.
The Role Of Social Media
Social media platforms were instrumental in organizing and deploying the regime change destabilizations that took place during the “Arab Spring” theater-wide Color Revolutions. They allowed the initiators of these events to more easily connect with tens of thousands of sympathizers and propagate their provocative messages to them in a bid to incite as many participating individuals as possible. Social media at that time was naively assumed by many of the masses, especially the comparatively uneducated and less technologically adept ones of the “Arab Street”, to be the “uncensored” and “genuine” “voice of the people”, ergo why so many people fell for the narratives (some of which were deliberately misleading or outright false) being spread by core organizers through these media. Had it not been for social media platforms such as Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and even the technical application of Google Maps (which assists with planning ‘protest’ routes and urban guerrilla warfare), it’s doubtful that the so-called “Arab Spring” would have ever unfolded as it did, let alone at all perhaps.
The “Green Revolution”
What happened in Tunisia and Egypt in 2010-2011 was the beginning of what the US hoped would be a transregional Color Revolution campaign, and it’s directly connected to the so-called “Green Revolution” which the US encouraged in Iran in 2009. The whole point of that latter exercise was to gauge the responses of the Iranian government – the strongest and most security-conscious of the Mideast states – and to identify structural vulnerabilities which could be exploited in the comparatively weaker countries of the region. The US only half-heartedly supported the “Green Revolution” because it was always meant to be a probing exercise, not a full-fledged regime change attempt, but it also had the intended aftereffect of signaling to the Ayatollah and his military-security “conservatives” that the US could do much worse against them at a future date if they don’t agree to what turned out to be forthcoming secret negotiations about the country’s nuclear energy activity. It also impacted the psyche of Iranian youth by emboldening them to vote for the “moderate” Rouhani four years later, which ultimately facilitated the eventual nuclear deal in summer 2015.
Hybrid War
The successful regime change campaigns in North Africa are emblematic of what my definition of Hybrid War is, namely the interweaving of Color Revolution and Unconventional Warfare tactics for the purpose of overthrowing a targeted government. What began as ‘peaceful’ anti-government protests provoked by external social media management techniques and in-country collaborators quickly spiraled into urban terrorism, with the main difference between Tunisia and Egypt being that the Cairo authorities held out slightly longer before capitulating to the insurgents’ demands.
As would later be seen in the case of Syria, however, the government and the vast majority of the population united in their opposition to what they already knew was a foreign-concocted regime change plot against their civilization-state, which is why they resisted so fiercely and the Color Revolution instruments were ordered to transform into outright terrorist groups such as Al Nusra, Daesh, and other “moderate rebels”.
The whole point behind the “Arab Spring” Color Revolution wave in the first place was to replace the governments in North Africa and the Levant with the Muslim Brotherhood, thus creating a transregional ideologically identical ‘super state’ which could be controlled by proxy via Neo-Ottoman Erdogan (just as the Eastern Bloc was controlled by the USSR up until a generation ago), though the geopolitical reality tremendously changed throughout the course of this campaign and thus prevented this wide-ranging geostrategic plot from succeeding.
The Role Of Foreign Influence
Foreign influence was crucially important in sparking the “Arab Spring” regime change riots, especially in North Africa. The first thing to remember is that the US works best when it’s operating indirectly, in this case, through the social and structural preconditioning that it carried out on these two states and their peoples well in advance of their formal destabilizations. Using a combination of macroeconomic instruments and ‘NGOs’, the US was able to both damage the Tunisian and Egyptian economies and consequently use various incitements to provoke the already agitated masses into coming out to the streets and overthrowing the government. It can safely be assumed that the US had at least several teams of in-country experts guiding the events, but for the most part, these operatives would not have had much success had it not been for the prior conditions that the US manipulated in shaping the dismal state of these country’s economies and fomenting widespread anti-government sympathies. Under such circumstances, all that it took was a highly publicized spark and carefully crafted Mainstream Media hysteria to set the ‘NGO’-social media apparatus into motion and craft a self-sustaining auto-synchronous destabilization which required minimal direct interference to execute its desired objective.
Foreign-Funded “Civil Society” NGOs
Foreign-funded ‘NGOs’ were used as some of the most powerful tools to destabilize Tunisia and Egypt in the run-up to, and during, the “Arab Spring” regime changes. George Soros and the scores of organizations that he directly and indirectly sponsors engage in ‘investigative’ and ‘activist’ activity which seeks to uncover corrupt relationships between public officials, the financial sector, and others. In and of itself, there’s nothing wrong with legitimately indigenous civil-society groups engaging in political and electoral criticisms, provided of course that they’re grounded in facts and not deliberately disruptive provocations, and it should of course be celebrated anytime that a corrupt individual is exposed for their illegal and unethical behavior. However, the relationships that the said civil society organizations have cultivated, as well as their and their patrons’/partners’ intent, must also be taken into consideration.
There’s a big difference between patriotic individuals carrying out the abovementioned activities for the intended betterment of their societies and internal collaborators conspiring with external (often intelligence-linked) organizers in plotting to sow unrest and topple the government. Sometimes it turns out that the latter category of “activists” are just “useful idiots” who have been duped by their naïve optimism, the comparatively hefty paychecks of their financiers, and/or the self-absorbed attention and sense of importance that they seek to receive from their work into unknowingly collaborating with forces which they aren’t even aware are foreign intelligence agents hostile to their home government. International ‘NGOs’ (INGOs) are oftentimes very shadowy like this and don’t regularly reveal their true intentions to their in-country staff, and some of them typically operate through ‘shell NGOs’ superficially based inside the targeted country, thus promoting the false perception that they are ‘indigenous’ when they’re not.
The Role Of INGOs
In the context of Hybrid War, INGOs function as the catalysts in organizing large masses of people and propagating their external patron’s political message. They operate through a combination of deceit and openness; on the one hand, they usually don’t proclaim their true regime change objectives or emphasize their foreign origins, but on the other, they do whatever they can to spread awareness about their overt or strongly inferred anti-government agenda. There are some INGOs which are officially apolitical but are in fact inherently political organizations, such as some of those dealing with environmental and animal rights. It should be emphasized that this doesn’t mean that every one of these groups is necessarily working as organizational fronts for a foreign government or has an interest in overthrowing their host government, but just that some of the most well-known names in this field such as Greenpeace have a history of engaging in political disturbances and then propagating the authorities’ response to them as alleged ‘proof’ of the given country’s ‘undemocratic nature’ and ‘lack of free speech’, all of which in turn is predicated on stoking more anti-government resentment.
As for those INGOs which are directly a part of Color Revolution destabilizations, the prevailing trend has been for them to flirt with Unconventional Warfare and urban terrorism by lobbing deadly Molotov cocktails at law enforcement officers, as well as committing crimes such as attacking civilian bystanders and vandalizing public and private property. Whenever the INGOs desire to launch a concerted ‘public action campaign’, as they euphemistically call it, and gather as many people together as they can to protest for or against whatever the carefully selected item of agitation may be, they’re in reality working to assemble a crowd in order to manipulate the inevitable mentality that’s associated with large masses of angry individuals and channel it into a ‘hive mind’ of easily guidable “activists”. These individuals are then subtly encouraged or outright goaded into sparking a confrontation with the authorities, usually by breaking municipal law in marching on a location which they weren’t legally permitted to assemble around and then violently resisting arrest.
The whole point in these sorts of stunts is to prompt situations where edited footage can then be acquired by social media “activists” or sympathetic (collaborationist) mainstream media organizations in portraying the government as the “anti-democratic aggressor” and the “protesters” as the “peaceful victims”. As it relates to Hybrid War, this is intended to strengthen the domestic and international pressure on the authorities and introduce an implicit blackmail scenario whereby the government realizes that it must back down in the face of the incipient “protest” movement otherwise it risks aggravating already high tensions and falling under increased international (Western) condemnation. The perception of the masses has already been influenced to a degree whereby some apolitical individuals begin to sympathize with the “activists” and question whether they may indeed be right after all in accusing the government of “anti-democratic and human rights abuses”. Depending on the course of the destabilization and the decisiveness of the authorities’ response to it, some of the INGO members will then break off from the larger group and form their own urban terrorist cells, at times even dangerously using the unaware apolitical crowd of sympathizers surrounding them as de-facto human shields in warding off police countermeasures such as batons and tear gas.
The self-sustaining and auto-synchronous cycle is apparent, and the escalation ladder suggests that the disorganized urban terrorists will eventually coalesce into more disciplined terrorist formations the longer that the Hybrid War is being waged, such as what happened in Syria up until the present day and in rural Western Ukraine right before the coup. If it were not for INGOs and the crowd mentality schemes that they engage in, it would be much more difficult for these actors to destabilize their host governments and promote regime change scenarios. It should be reminded, however, that many of the civilians gathering around the INGO core are usually unaware of the larger goals being pursued by the “protest” organizers. This is a convenient fact which is exploited by these groups to maximum effect in proselytizing their “official” public message to the masses and then steering their converts in the physical direction of being nearby the police’s response to the core provocateurs’ illegal actions, hoping that any ‘collateral damage’ that occurs to law-abiding civilians during this time can galvanize their incipient anti-government attitudes.
The Future Of INGOs In Egypt And Tunisia
It’s not likely that INGOs will continue to enjoy the same operational freedom under Sisi as they previously had during the last days of Mubarak, and this is simply owing to the experience that the Egyptian state has since received in terms of how these groups are used for regime change purposes. There’s also the very real threat that some INGOs are working with the outlawed Muslim Brotherhood terrorist group, which the US is slavishly sympathetic to, so national security must be considered by all responsible decision makers in Egypt when deciding on the future of INGOs. Concerning Tunisia, however, the country has historically been the most liberal of the North African states, and it doesn’t look like they’ll enact the necessary legislation needed to properly protect themselves from the regime change threat that INGOs are now associated with. Another reason is that they have the globally renowned reputation as being the ‘birthplace’ of the “Arab Spring”, which is still celebrated in the West as a “democratic uprising against totalitarianism”. Even though many Western observers have since wised up to the destabilizing consequences of these transregional Color Revolutions, Tunisia has been the least severely affected by them, which is why it’s still “officially” lionized in the Mainstream Media as the ‘birthplace of modern-day Arab democracy’.
Like it was mentioned in an earlier response, INGOs have also developed a new trend of operating through ‘shell companies’ in order to obscure their foreign nature and more adeptly deceive the domestic audience that they’re trying to target. Instead of the “Open Society Foundation” directly funding whatever ‘NGO’ it is that they envisage promoting their political agenda, for example, they’ll fund a ‘shell NGO’ first and then use that entity to spread their seed funding all throughout the country. There has yet to be any legislation implemented anywhere in the world prohibiting this arrangement from happening or formally decreeing the recipients of the ‘shell NGOs’ laundered largesse as being foreign agents, which is a critical oversight that must be legally remedied as soon as possible by all countries concerned about foreign ‘NGO’-driven Hybrid War destabilizations. While North Africa probably won’t be the first place where this loophole is closed, Egypt might follow the predictable lead of Russia and/or China in likely doing so sometime in the future, and Tunisia might also be compelled to mirror this as well if it begins to once more suffer from INGO destabilization (perhaps with Muslim Brotherhood-sympathetic Western ‘NGOs’ funding violent in-country counterparts).
Varoufakis As Soros’ EU INGO Ringleader
Hybrid War researchers and national security services must keep an eye on George Soros, Gene Sharp, and Yanis Varoufakis. The first one is globally notorious for expending tens of millions of dollars on Color Revolutions and anti-government INGOs all across the globe, while the second one runs the Albert Einstein Institute and is the strategic-tactical architect for “people’s power” unrest. The third one isn’t commonly grouped in the same category as Soros and regime change, though he very well should be considering his links to the billionaire Color Revolution financier as openly evidenced through Varoufakis’ regular contributions to Soros’ “Project Syndicate” website.
This online platform is known as a gathering place for ‘revolutionaries’ and those who desire to catalyze “change” in their societies, which is what Varoufakis now seeks to do. He launched a radical leftist-liberal organization at the beginning of 2016 called DiEM25, which he thenceforth described on “Project Syndicate” as being the beginning of a “Progressive International” which aims to defeat, among others, President Putin, who he intimates is part of a “nationalist international – a classic creature of a deflationary period – united by contempt for liberal democracy and the ability to mobilize those who would crush.” He also since said that Putin is a “war criminal” who “justifies his stranglehold over his own people”, which clearly proves that he’s in opposition to the Russian President and closely echoes what many of Moscow’s regime change opponents have falsely alleged. Given that DiEM25 hopes to become a continental-wide “Progressive International”, it must accordingly be seen as a far-reaching Color Revolution threat which ultimately aims to affect political change in Russia and cause public disruptions to Moscow’s investment deals and partnerships in the EU (per the aforementioned organizational tactics outlined in a previous answer).
Varoufakis’ extreme left-liberal “revolutionary” views could become dangerously attractive to many European and Russian youth, and the Greek demagogue’s connections with George Soros – the man behind the banned Open Society Institute – should be enough cause for Russian decision makers to worry about his intentions and responsibly contemplate preventive action. As Russia continues its post-communist transformation in becoming a conservative civilization-state, one of its greatest enemies might turn out to be the “SecularWahhabism” that Varoufaki and his Soros-supported ilk represent.
As the Syrian crisis drags on and hopes of a peaceful resolution or, at the very least, a return to relative normalcy in Libya seem very distant, Algeria should, by now, begin suspecting that it might soon find itself in the Anglo-American crosshairs. There is now rapidly growing evidence that Algeria is doing just that.
Having survived an attempted destabilization during the Western-inspired and Western-orchestrated “Arab Spring” color revolution, Algeria has been doing whatever it can to increase security in, on, and around its borders. For this reason, it has increased cooperation with its neighbor Tunisia, which has been the target of terrorists backed by the West and GCC nations.
Having acted quickly and with an iron fist, any attempt to disrupt the functioning of the Algerian government was quashed during the stream of U.S.-engineered color revolutions and destabilizations. Yet, even though the “Arab Spring” style protests were short-lived and ineffective, Algeria has not simply rested on its laurels in the aftermath. In fact, Algeria has moved to increase security, improve its military capabilities, and work with its neighbors to ensure that they do not fall prey to destabilizations or color revolutions in the future.
Algeria has also moved to deepen its ties with Russia and those countries that are part of an unofficial but growing and obvious anti-NATO bloc. In other words, Algeria is moving closer to joining the multi-polar collection of nations attempting to act as a counterforce to the NATO powers.
Two notable instances of increased cooperation between Algeria and the anti-NATO alliance are therecent provision of 40 attack helicopters by Russia to Algeria and the recent diplomatic visit to Syria by the Algerian government.
The helicopter, known as the “Night Hunter” in Russia, is reported to be one of the best in the world, and it is capable of carrying out its missions in both day and night as well as in adverse weather conditions. The helicopter comes with a MI-28NE modification capability that allows the ship to be flown from the pilot’s cockpit and the operator pilot’s cockpit.
The delivery of the Russian helicopters to Algeria is nothing new. In 2005-2006, Russia provided Algeria with 28 Su-30MKA, 16 Yak-130 jet trainers and 185 T-90S tanks. In 2015, a contract was signed for the delivery of 14 Su-30MKA fighters in 2016-2017. The transfer of the MI-28 helicopters is the result of a bilateral agreement between Russia and Algeria.
“The Algerian military is satisfied with the quality of Russian weapons, which has proven itself well in the specific conditions here, namely the desert with its extremely high temperatures and sandstorms. So there are good prospects for continuing close cooperation in the military-technical area on a wide nomenclature of supplies,” Alexander Zolotov, Russian Ambassador to Algeria, told RIA Novosti in an interview.
Yet, while the deliveries are not newsworthy in and of themselves, the context in which they occurare worth discussing.
Algeria, of course, is becoming concerned with increasing amounts of ISIS activity in the region, notably in Libya and Tunisia and is focusing on policing its borders with the two embattled countries as well as with Niger and Mali for that reason. The Algerian government, which has reacted quickly to terrorist threats in the past, is perhaps worried that ISIS attacks may eventually begin to take place inside its borders, particularly as a result of Western targeting of the governmental structure in the future.
In February, Algeria and Russia embarked upon a plan to deepen bilateral military and economic cooperation.
In regards to Syria, Monday April 25, 2016 marked the first official visit to Syria since 2011 by any Algerian official, signaling a growing tendency to increase ties and cooperation with the embattled nation despite the crying and screaming of the United States, EU, and NATO. Earlier, in March, Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Mu’allem paid a visit to the Algerian capital where the stated goal of the visit was to deepen and strengthen economic ties between the two countries.
Syria is not only no longer safe for IS, it has become a grave in which IS is being buried alive. This is thanks not to a successful anti-terror campaign waged by Washington and its allies, but by swift and successful operations carried out by Moscow, Tehran, and their allies in Damascus. Indeed, with IS supply lines being cut from their source in Turkey and their forces being pushed back across Syrian territory, liquidation of their assets in Syria is well underway. Likewise in Iraq, feigned US operations to stop IS have given way to an increase in cooperation between Baghdad, Tehran, and Damascus.
What started out as an attempt to divide and destroy Iran’s arc of influence across the region has galvanized it instead.
Moving the mercenary forces of IS out of the region is instrumental in ensuring they “live to fight another day.” By placing them in Libya, Washington and its allies hope they will be far out of reach of the growing coalition truly fighting them across the Levant. Further more, placing them in Libya allows other leftover “projects” from the “Arab Spring” to be revisited, such as the destabilization and destruction of Algeria, Tunisia and perhaps even another attempt to destabilize and destroy Egypt.
IS’ presence in Libya could also be used as a pretext for open-ended and much broader military intervention throughout all of Africa by US forces and their European and Persian Gulf allies. As the US has done in Syria, where it has conducted operations for now over a year and a half to absolutely no avail, but has managed to prop up proxy forces and continue undermining and threatening targeted nations, it will likewise do so regarding IS in Libya and its inevitable and predictable spread beyond.
Indeed, Gunnar summarizes much of what Algeria knows and fears in relation to IS and the NATO/Anglo-American scheme for world hegemony. For this reason, Algeria is preparing for the potential shift in the Western focus in terms of specific battlefields, moving from Syria to Libya and Westward from there.
While not earth-shattering news, Algeria’s growing fondness for the Russian bloc of nations is yet another sign of Washington’s loss of influence across the world and the increasingly bankrupt position held by the U.S. and NATO.
The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) has finally had it its way. A meeting held last month of GCC and other Arab Foreign Ministers has condemned Iran for the attack on the Saudi Embassy incident, and the Lebanese Foreign Minister Basil; from the 8th of March Coalition pro-Hezbollah camp, abstained from voting. As a result, Lebanon was punished by Saudi Arabia as the latter decided to renege on the $4bn aid promise to the Lebanese Army and Internal Security.
And then just a few weeks later, the Arab Interior Ministers convened in Tunis and declared Lebanon’s Hezbollah a terror organization (1&2). Lebanon’s Interior Minister Mashnouk, a 14th of March Hariri man, also abstained from voting.
The debauched Saudi royals, the same lazy criminals who die from obesity and self-inflicted diabetes whilst they are starving and bombing Yemen, the same people who poured billions upon billions of dollars to kill Syrians in an attempt to create an Islamic state in lieu of its secular government, that scourge of a family that rules with an iron fist wreaking havoc and creating wars between Arabs and Muslims and never once fired a single bullet at Israel, they actually had the audacity to call the shots and had Hezbollah declared as a terrorist organization. Strange days indeed.
What is of significance here is the almost utter silence about this development in Western media. Try to Google this milestone event using any key words, and you will not find any references in the well-established highly-read mainstream Western news agencies. Interesting indeed.
What is even more interesting here as an observer is that quite often Western media go abuzz with what they believe is taking the Arab World by storm, but in reality, no one in the Arab World would be talking about it or least concerned.
The issues of Saudi military land intervention in Syria and their alleged ownership of nuclear weapons for example, are hardly ever discussed in the Levant and the whole Middle East. They are seen as some kind of bad-taste jokes. Such topics seem to only make news headlines in the West.
Back to the Tunis decision. The Arab states that did not vote in favour of the motion are Lebanon, Tunisia, Algeria and Iraq. I wonder if the readers are missing something here….Palestine, as represented by Abbas’s Palestinian Authority (PA), has in fact voted for declaring Hezbollah as a terror organization.
Whilst Hamas is not acknowledged as a representative of the Palestinian people, Ismail Haniyye, who is entirely in Qatar’s pocket, would probably also vote in favour had he been asked to vote. Mahmoud Zahhar, a prominent Hamas leader, has however condemned the decision. This is not surprising given that Zahar went against his rank when Hamas leaders went cahoots with Qatar against Syria. Zahhar had always been the voice of reason in Hamas. The Palestinian Islamic Jihad, the PFLP and the PFLP General Command have also condemned the decision, but Mahmoud Abbas is quite silent. He is probably feeling too sheepish to make any comments. Even if his heart is with Hezbollah, he cannot go against the Saudi dictates.
The Palestinian position is not taking keen observers by surprise. After all, earlier on, Hezbollah pioneered the tunnel technology and passed on the information to Hamas leaders in order to help with their fight against the Israelis in Gaza. When the “War On Syria” started and Hamas decided to align itself with Qatar against Syria and her people, Hamas passed on this technology to the terrorists. All the tunnels around greater Damascus, and especially in the Jobar region, were built by technology and information that was passed on to the terrorists by Hamas. So for Hamas a would-be vote against Hezbollah is not impossible to imagine.
Hezbollah is receiving quite a bit of support from progressive Arab parties, especially, and whilst its officials made quite a few verbal responses to the Saudis, it seems that Hezbollah is not trying to escalate the situation with the PA. In an Arabic article published on Al-Manar of the 3rd of March 2016 (3) and titled: “The Palestinian Authority And The “Terrorist”
Decision Against Hezbollah), the author (Islam Al-Rawashda) opens his article by saying that it is not surprising to see the Saudis go after Hezbollah. In his next paragraph however, he is questioning how did the PA allow itself to join the “gang” and endorsed the decision against Hezbollah. Isn’t Hezbollah engaged in fighting Israel? Did it not liberate Arab land from occupation? Does is not support Palestine? These are the kind of questions he asked. But the official Hezbollah spokespeople seem to unwilling to engage in making anti-PA statements. Clearly, they don’t want to give their adversaries more ammunition and do not want to be seen standing against Palestinians; not even their corrupt pro-Saudi authority.
The schism inside the Arab World is reaching unprecedented levels. The pro-Western camp represented by Saudi Arabia and its followers has stooped to levels previously seen as unimaginable.
Even as Saudi Arabia is down on its knees financially, bogged down in a war it cannot win in Yemen and losing all control over the “War On Syria”, it still has a few billions stashed here and there to draw from and use to continue to buy friends.
And whilst it continues to spend billions on its terror campaigns and on destabilizing the region, whilst it is supporting all the fundamentalist Madrasas all over the globe, it withheld its promised gift to the Lebanese Army under the pretext that the Lebanese Government and Lebanese Army have become tools in the hand of Hezbollah and Iran.
As the Arab Saudi camp is becoming more audacious, audacious enough for the PA to vote against Hezbollah; the only army that disturbs Israel’s security, the only Arab organization that has taken back land from Israel militarily, the only Arab army that has actually threatened the depth of Israel, then no one should expect any good from other Arab pro-Saudi states that are distant geographically from Palestine. If the Palestinians themselves do not know who their enemies and friends are in standing up against Israel, why should the Moroccans?
And if the Palestinian people did not like what their government has done, why did they not take to the streets in protest? There are some reports of minor dissent, but nothing serious.
There is one word to describe the Palestinian reaction, and the word is “disgusting”, but in this literary context, I shall stick to the word “appalling”.
If we wind the clock back a bit, just a few years earlier, we can clearly remember how both the PA and Hamas have sided against the Syrian government. Here we ought to remember that had it not been for the Syrian government and its support to the different Palestinian organizations in the 1970’s onwards, they would have vanished.
After all, the official Hamas HQ was actually in Damascus for many years, and it was in Syria where Khaled Mashaal operated until he moved to the Five Star Hotels of Qatar and Istanbul.
Palestinians have a great cause, but for a major part, their leaders have been nothing but rascals, ungrateful rascals. And how can we forget what happened to Lebanon?
It was because virtually half of the Lebanese have supported the Palestinian cause that the already existing political/religious division in Lebanon expanded and took the country to Civil War in 1975. The Palestinians played a huge part in pouring oil over fire, and their only objectives were what they could get out of it, and did not give a damn about the destruction that was inflicted upon Lebanon as a result.
And the whole breakdown between Arafat and Assad father in 1976 onwards was based on Arafat’s insistence on the so-called “Palestinian Decision”. Assad tried in vain to convince him that the Arab-Israeli conflict is much bigger than what the Palestinians can handle. He tried to convince him that this matter is as important for Syria as it is for Palestine.
He reminded him that Palestine is the southern region of Syria, but to no avail. Arafat wanted to be the master of his decisions even if this screwed up the entire Arab World around him.
Half a century or so later, Palestinian leaders are not so much as dogmatic and indoctrinated as Arafat was. They are simply up for sale. The PA leaders have grown to love Saudi and other oil money, and Hamas leaders are up for sale and rent by any Sunni Muslim money.There is no difference between the two.
But as the Arab Saudi camp continues to stoop lower and lower,the resistance camp is growing more organized, more powerful, more successful and closer to victory.
Which day in history has marked the biggest day of shame for the Arabs? Arguably, it has always been said that Arab states reached their lowest point in history on June the 5th 1967 during the Six-Days War. The 3rd of March 2016 decree of the Arab interior ministers in Tunis is by far a much lower point, and one wonders if they are poised to stoop even lower. Shame on them.
Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah asserted on Sunday that the Zionist entity and all the allied Arab regimes will fall all together, noting that the Arab people have stressed that ‘Israel’ will keep their enemy.
Delivering a speech during Hezbollah ceremony to mourn martyr commander Hajj Ali Fayyad, aka Alaa of Bosnia, Sayyed Nasrallah said that the party highly appreciates all who supported the Resistance against the Gulf decision to label it as a terrorist group.
His eminence noted that the recent tension which struck the Lebanese-Saudi relations is attributed to KSA’s 5-year catastrophic failure and disappointment in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Bahrain.
Sayyed Nasrallah added that the Saudi regime had expected that few weeks would be enough to defeat their opponents in Yemen and Syria even if the successive rulers were the terrorist groups, which denies KSA’s anti-terrorist claims.
In this context, Sayyed Nasrallah wondered, “what would have happened in Lebanon if the terrorists had achieved victory in Syria?”
Sayyed Nasrallah explained what happened in one of the care houses few days ago in Yemen’s Aden where the terrorists stormed the building and killed a number nuns, Muslim elders and Indian nurses, considering that they are disbelievers.
We understand the rage of the Saudis who wanted to blame Hezbollah for all their failures in the entire region, according to Sayyed Nasrallah who emphasized that the Resistance feels proud for being viewed as the party who can frustrate the Saudi schemes.
Accordingly, the Saudi blacklisted Hezbollah as a terrorist groups, Sayyed Nasrallah pointed out.
His eminence went on to underline the popular reaction in a number of Arab countries to the GCC’s decision against Hezbollah, considering that it indicates the sublime position of the Resistance in the view of the Arab people “who have kept the Palestinian cause as a priority.”
“The Arab popular reaction challenged the political, takfiri, media and financial pressures in the region.”
Sayyed Nasrallah considered that the popular reactions in a number of Arab countries sent a clear message to Israel that the Zionists can never be the guards of the Sunni Muslims.
“The message also stresses that the Israeli existence in the region can never be normalized despite all the attempts on the Zionist officials and some Arab leaders.”
“The Bahraini regime jails the Muslims clerics and receives a Zionist Rabbi to highlight its relations with Israel.”
On the contrary, Sayyed Nasrallah cited the instance of the Egyptian parliament where one MP beat his colleague with his shoes for receiving the Israeli ambassador in his house, what stresses the real attitude of the Egyptians towards the Israelis despite Camp David agreement.
None of the Arab regimes will be able to normalize its relation with the Zionist entity, Sayyed Nasrallah said.
“O’ Zionists, if any Arab regime supports you, it will fall along with you.”
Saudi will soon discover that it has lost its battle in the entire region, according to Sayyed Nasrallah.
Hezbollah leader tackled the various stages of the martyr commander Hajj Ali fayyad’s life, stressing his fight against the Zionists in southern Lebanon, against the Serbian army in Bosnia and against the terrorists in Syria and Iraq.
Sayyed Nasralah highlighted that Hajj Alaa joined Hezbollah during 1980’s as a fighter when he was young, believing in the autonomous capabilities of the Resistance to confront the Israeli occupation regardless of the Arab official support.
“Martyr Ali Fayyad, then, turned to be a main sacrificing commander that established Hezbollah Special Force and contributed to 2000 and 2006 victories.”
Sayyed Nasrallah hoped that the Arab countries halt troubling the Resistance as they did during 2006 war, adding that the Arab regimes, including mainly the Saudis, have always worked to protect ‘Israel’ in order to keep their thrones by stirring the Sunnite-Shiite seditions.
“Hajj Alaa and his brethren did not wait for the Arab league to conclude an Arab consensus and a unified strategy in order to fight the Israelis.”
We have resorted to the resistance path in order to liberate our territories and defend our country against the Israeli enemy, and the Arab countries that are blacklisting Hezbollah nowadays have not had anything to do with the Resistance, according to Sayyed Nasrallah.
“The people-army-resistance formula has always protected Lebanon against the Israeli threats, not the Arab league.”
“The Saudi regime schemes conspiracies against all who try to confront the Zionist entity.”
Sayyed Nasrallah said that Hezbollah sent a group of his fighters and commanders toBosnia during the nineties, including Hajj Alaa, to defend the Muslims, wondering if this act can be considered as terrorist.
Sayyed Nasrallah asked, “For those who accuse Hezbollah of sectarianism, are the Muslims in Bosnia Sunnites or Shiites?.”
Sayyed Nasrallah added that Hajj Alaa went to defend the Sunni Muslims in Bosnia, sacrificing martyr Ramzi Mahdi, for the sake of Holy God.
On the contribution of Hajj Alaa in Iraq, Sayyed Nasrallah clarified that after ISIL terrorist group invaded in 2014 Mosul, Anbar, parts of Salaheddine and Kirkuk and reached areas near Baghdad, and entire Iraq became in danger; the Iraqi leadership asked us to send a number of commanders and military trainers to help the local forces defend their country.
“Hajj Alaa was one of the first Hezbollah commanders who joined the Iraqi forces to fight against ISIL.”
“Thanks to the religious reference in Najaf, represented by Grand Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Sistani, dozens of thousands of Iraqis joined the Popular Mobilization Forces that have changed the formula in the entire country.”
Addressing the Saudis, Sayyed Nasrallah said, “You have formed a coalitions that is composed of 70 countries, yet it has failed to reach any battlefield advance against ISIL.”
“What is ironic is that Saudi has formed an Islamic coalition, but that US leads it!”
“It would be misleading to think that we would wait for the Arab League approval in order to help the Iraqis against ISIL. We were fighting in Iraq under an Iraqi leadership, and if we were fighting under an American leadership, they would not label us as terrorist,” he added, referring to the GCC resolution.
To the Gulf countries, Sayyed Nasrallah said, “If it had not been for the Popular Mobilization forces in Iraq, ISIL would have been now in your palaces and it would have been killing you and enslaving your women.”
“Arab chivalry is when every Arab goes to Iraq to defend the dignity and holy sites of the Iraqis, not to label those defending Iraq as terrorists,” Hezbollah Secretary General went on to say.
“ISIL would have destroyed the holy shrines in Iraq if it had not been confronted.”
Sayyed Nasrallah tackled martyr commander Ali Fayyad’s role in Syria, saying that Hajj Alaa was also one of the first Hezbollah military commanders who joined Syria fight against the terrorist groups, adding that he was injured several times, but that he rejected to stop fighting in Syria till martyrdom.
Hezbollah is completely convinced that his role in Syria is constructive, according to his eminence who added that no one can prevent the Resistance from doing what it considers as suitable, nor can others force it to carry out any step if it rejects.
“Hezbollah gained a religious approval from the Supreme Leader Sayyed Ali Khamenei to fight in Syria, but his eminence did not oblige the party to intervene in the Syrian fight.”
The Resistance will keep the Umma’s hope of defeating the enemies, if God wills, Sayyed Nasrallah concluded.
Hezbollah Secretary General started his speech by offering condolences and congratulations to the family of martyr commander Ali Fayyad on his martyrdom, hailing the long and historic sacrifices of Hajj Alaa on the path of the Resistance for the sake of Holy God.
His eminence also condoled and congratulated the families of all Hezbollah martyrs who embraced martyrdom recently in Syria.
Sayyed Nasrallah’s speech was during the ceremony that Hezbollah organized to mourn martyr commander Ali Fayyad in his home town, Ansar, in southern Lebanon.
The ceremony started with a recitation of Holy Quran verses before a footage that shows glimpses of the martyr’s achievements and contributions was displayed.
Then, Hajj Alaa’s son, Hadi, delivered a speech to eulogize his father, stressing that he will would stick to the martyr’s path.
Source: Al-Manar Website
06-03-2016 – 17:46 Last updated 06-03-2016 – 21:24
The leader of En-Nahda Islamic movement in Tunisia Rached Ghannouchi asserted on Saturday that it is impossible to label Hezbollah as a terrorist group because of the his historic achievements in liberating Lebanon and protecting it from the Zionist aggressions.
Although Hezbollah’s role in Syria is controversial, we cannot generalize any label against the party, Ghannouchi added.
Meanwhile, a number of political parties in Tunisia demanded that the government withdraw from the Saudi-led coalition in the region over the decision to blacklist Hezbollah.
In Egypt, the founder of the Popular Current Hamdeen Sabahi greeted Hezbollah and his Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah for confronting the Zionist occupation, noting that who has blacklisted the Resistance aims at stirring the Shiite-Sunnite sedition in the region.
Source: Al-Manar Website
06-03-2016 – 13:17 Last updated 06-03-2016 – 13:20
Syrian Presidential Media and Political Advisor Dr. Bouthaina Shaaban has affirmed that the announcement of the ceasefire agreement in Idleb is approved by Syria and Russia and it has nothing to do with rapprochements between other countries.
Nevertheless, el-Sisi’s violent overthrow of Morsi can be seen as a reactionary restoration of the old regime. Like Tunisia, today Egypt resembles much of the status quo as before the 2011 uprisings.
This text is slightly modified from an interview that Andrew Korybko gave to a Moscow-based PhD student specializing in the “Arab Spring” regime change events.
The leader of En-Nahda Islamic movement in Tunisia Rached Ghannouchi asserted on Saturday that it is impossible to label Hezbollah as a terrorist group because of the his historic achievements in liberating Lebanon and protecting it from the Zionist aggressions.
