في 25 أيار 2000 تغيّر وجه العالم

مايو 25, 2019

ناصر قنديل

– لا يحتاج المرء للدلالة على مكانة «إسرائيل» في المنظومة الغربية التي كانت تحكم العالم حتى العام 2000، عندما كان الاتحاد السوفياتي قد تفكك وروسيا تلتقط أنفاسها من غيبوبة عشر سنوات، وعندما كانت واشنطن قد أحكمت قبضتها على أوروبا الشرقية ووصلت حدود روسيا بثوراتها الملوّنة، ولا يحتاج المرء لإثبات أن مكانة «إسرائيل» في المنظومة الغربية كجدار حماية في المنطقة الأهم من العالم، حيث خطوط التجارة وموارد النفط والغاز، قد أصيبت بزلزال في 25 أيار عام 2000 عندما أجبرت على الانسحاب من جنوب لبنان بالقوة، دون تفاوض ودون قيد أو شرط.

– يقول باتريك بوكانن القيادي في الحزب الجمهوري الأميركي الذي نافس جورج بوش على الترشّح للرئاسة داخل الحزب عام 2000، في مقالة له عشية الغزو الأميركي للعراق، إن أميركا وجدت نفسها بعد السقوط المدوّي لجدار القوة الإسرائيلي معنية بالحضور المباشر إلى المنطقة، لاحتواء القوتين الصاعدتين، إيران وسورية وتطويقهما، باحتلال العراق وافغانستان أملاً بردّ الاعتبار لقدرة «إسرائيل» وتمكينها من شنّ حرب تمسح عار هزيمتها وتحول دون نشوء معادلة جديدة في المنطقة. وتقول الوقائع التي جرت بعد ذلك، خصوصاً في حرب تموز 2006 إن هذا ما حدث، وإن واشنطن أعلنت مسؤوليتها عن هذه الحرب ووصفتها بالفرصة لاستيلاد شرق اوسط جديد، لكن النتائج كانت عكسية، وغرقت أميركا و»إسرائيل» في بحر الفشل.

– حاولت واشنطن إدخال المنطقة في حروب الفوضى أملاً بأن تنهار سورية في قلب هذه الحروب، وتتعدل الموازين، فجاءت روسيا إلى المنطقة وزادت قوة إيران وتنامت قدرات حزب الله بصفته القوة المحوريّة في المقاومة التي صنعت انتصارَيْ 2000 و2006، ونهضت مقاومة في فلسطين فرضت المزيد من الإصابات في قدرة «إسرائيل» على الاحتلال والردع معاً، وما تشهده المنطقة من تصعيد ليس إلا من التردّدات التي لا زالت تتفاعل منذ ذلك الزلزال في 25 أيار عام 2000، الذي بات ثابتاً أنه حدث أكبر من الهزيمة الأميركية في حرب فييتنام، واكبر من الفشل في حربي العراق وأفغانستان، وان محاولات محو آثاره لا تزال القضية التي تقلق الأميركيين والإسرائيليين، وقد تعمّم القلق معهما ليصيب حكام الخليج، فإذ بالذهاب لحرب اليمن ينتج نظيراً مقاوماً يسير على خطى حزب الله وينمو ويخلق المزيد من المعادلات، بينما جرى اختبار استجلاب تنظيم القاعدة لخوض حرب بالوكالة في سورية وكانت النتيجة الفشل المضاعف.

– عقدة 25 أيار 2000 تلاحق الأميركيين، وهم يحاولون المستحيل اليوم للتملّص منها، وقليل من التدقيق سيكشف أن قضيتهم مع إيران ليست ملفها النووي، وأن قضيّتهم مع سورية ليست نظام الحكم فيها، فماذا لو قبلت إيران وسورية بقدر من المرونة مع متطلبات واشنطن في الأمن الإسرائيلي، بل ماذا لو قبلت سورية وإيران وقف دعم المقاومة، الذي يشكل دائماً البند الأول في دفتر الشروط الأميركي منذ حمله كولن باول إلى الرئيس السوري بعد دخول الدبابات الأميركية إلى بغداد؟ والجواب معلوم، لا تبقى مشكلة مع إيران في ملفها النووي ولا مشكلة مع سورية في نظام الحكم فيها، وتصير إيران ضامناً لأمن المنطقة وتصير سورية رأس اللائحة في الدول الديمقراطية.

– في 25 أيار قال التاريخ كلمة فاصلة، ولن تعود عقارب الساعة إلى الوراء، لقد كتب المقاومون مستقبل العالم ووقعوا بدمائهم. ومَن يعشْ يرَ!

Related Videos

Related News

Advertisements

The AngloZionist Empire: a Hyperpower with Microbrains and No Cred Left

MAY 17, 2019

THE SAKER 

Last week saw what was supposed to be a hyperpower point fingers for its embarrassing defeat not only at Venezuela, which successfully defeated Uncle Shmuel’s coup plans, but also at a list of other countries including Cuba, Russia, China and Iran. It’s is rather pathetic and, frankly, bordering on the comically ridiculous.

Uncle Shmuel clearly did not appreciate being the laughingstock of the planet.

Eviction Notice of the USSS
Eviction Notice of the USSS

And as Uncle Shmuel always does, he decided to flex some muscle and show the world “who is boss” by…

… blockading the Venezuelan Embassy in Washington, DC.

But even that was too much for the MAGA Admin, so they also denied doing so (how lame is that!?)

Which did not prevent US activists of entering the embassy (legally, they were invited in and confirm it all).

Now the US Secret Service wants to evict the people inside the building.

So much for the CIA’s beloved “plausible deniability” which now has morphed into “comical deniability”.

If you think that all this sounds incredibly amateurish and stupid – you are 100% correct.

In the wonderful words of Sergei Lavrov, the US diplomats have “lost the taste for diplomacy“.

But that was not all.

In an act of incredible courage the US, which was told (by the Israelis, of course!), that the Iranians were about to attack “somewhere”, Uncle Shmuel sent two aircraft carrier strike groups to the Middle-East. In a “daring” operation, the brilliant USAF pilots B-52 bombers over the Persian Gulf to “send a message” to the “Mollahs”: don’t f*ck with us or else…

The “Mollahs” apparently were unimpressed as they simply declared that “the US carriers were not a threat, only a target“.

The AngloZionists apparently have also executed a false flag operation to get a pretext to strike Iran, but so far this seems to have gotten rather little traction in the region (so far – this might change).

Lavrov reacting to the latest US threats
Lavrov reacting to the latest US threats

Now let’s leave this “Kindergarten level of operations” and try to make some sense from this nonsense.

First, while the American can pour scorn on the Iranians, call them ragheads, terrorists, Mollahs, sand-niggers or confuse them with Iraqis or even think that Iranian are Arabs (as, apparently, are the Turks, at least by the US common standard of ignorance), the truth is that the Iranians are world-class and most sophisticated players, especially their superb analytical community. They fully understand that a B-52 anywhere near the Iranian airspace is a sitting duck and that if the Americans were planning to strike Iran, they would pull their aircraft carrier far away from any possible Iranian strikes. As for the B-52, they have long range cruise missiles and they don’t need to get near Iran to deliver they payloads.

In fact, I think that the proper way to really make the Iranians believe that Uncle Shmuel means business would be to flush any and all US ships out of the Persian Gulf, to position the B-52s in Diego Garcia and to place the carriers as far away as possible to still be able to support a missile/bomb attack on Iranian targets. And you can bet that the Iranians keep very close tabs on exactly what CENTCOM aircraft are deployed and where. To attack Iran the US would need to achieve a specific concentration of forces and support elements which are all trackable by the Iranians. My guess is that the Iranians already have a full list of all CENTCOM officers down to the colonel level (and possibly even lower for airmen) and that they already know exactly which individual USAF/USN aircraft are ready to strike. One could be excused to think that this is difficult to do, but in reality is is not. I have personally seen it done.

Second, the Americans know that the Iranians know that (well, maybe not Mr MAGA, but folks at the DIA, ONI, NSA, etc. do know that). So all this sabre-rattling is designed to show that Mr MAGA has tons of hair on his chest, it’s all for internal US consumption. As for the Iranians, they have already heard any and all imaginable US threats, they have been attacked many times by both the US and Israel (directly or by proxy), and they have been preparing for a US attack ever since the glorious days of Operation Eagle Claw: they are as ready as they can be, you can take that to the bank. Finally, the terrorist attack by the USN on a civilian Iranian airliner certainly convinced the Iranians that the leaders of the AngloZionist Empire lack even basic decency, nevermind honor. Nevermind the use of chemical warfare by Iraq against Iran with chemicals helpfully provided by various US and EU companies (with the full blessing of their governments). No – the Iranians truly have no illusions whatsoever about what the Shaytân-e Bozorg is capable of in his rage.

Third, “attacking embassies” is a glaring admission of terminal weakness. That was true for the seizure of Russian consular buildings, and this is true for the Venezuelan embassy. In the real (supra-Kindergarten) world when country A has a beef with country B, it does not vent its frustration against its embassy. Such actions are not only an admission of weakness, but also a sign of a fundamental lack of civilization.

This issue is crucial to the understanding of the United States. The US is an extremely developed country, but not a civilized one. Oscar Wilde (and George Clemanceau) had it right: “America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between“. There are signs of that everywhere in the US: from the feudal labor laws, to the lack of universal healthcare, to absolutely ridiculous mandatory criminal sentences (the Soviet Penal Code under Stalin was MUCH more reasonable and civilized than the current US laws!), to the death penalty, to the socially accepted torture in GITMO and elsewhere, to racial tensions, the disgusting “food” constituting the typical “SAD” diet, to the completely barbaric “war on drugs”, to the world record of incarcerations, to an immense epidemic of sexual assaults and rapes (1/5 of all women in the US!), homosexuality accepted as a “normal and positive variation of human sexuality“, 98 percent of men reported internet porn use in the last six months, … – you can continue that list ad nauseam. Please don’t misunderstand me – there are as many kind, intelligent, decent, honorable, educated, compassionate people in the US as anywhere else. This is not about the people living in the US: it is about the kind of society these people are living in. In fact, I would argue the truism that US Americans are the first victims of the lack of civilization of their own society! Finally, a lack of civilization is not always a bad thing, and sometimes it can make a society much more dynamic, more flexible, more innovative too. But yeah, mostly it sucks…

By the way, the US is hardly unique in having had degenerate imbeciles in power. Does anybody remember what Chernenko looked like when he became the Secretary General of the CPSU? What about folks like Jean-Bédel Bokassa or Mikheil Saakashvili (this latter case is especially distressing since it happened in a country with a truly ancient and extremely rich culture!). And while we can dislike folks like George Bush Senior or James Baker – these were superbly educated and extremely intelligent people. Compare them to such psychopathic ignoramuses like Pompeo, Bolton or Trump himself!

So this latest US “attack” on the Venezuela is truly a most telling symptom of the wholesale collapse of US power and of the moral and intellectual bankruptcy and lack of civilization of the Neocon ruling elites.

The big question is obvious: will they attack Venezuela or Iran next?

In the very first article I ever wrote for my blog, as far back as 2007, I predicted that the US would attack Iran. I still believe that the Israelis will never cease to try to get the US to do their dirty work for them (and let the goyimpay the price!). What I am not sure about is whether the Israelis truly will have the power to push the US into such a suicidal war (remember, if Iran cannot “win” against the US, neither can the US “win” against Iran – thus Iran will win simply by surviving and not caving in – which they will and they won’t). The good news is that US power has been in sharp (and accelerating!) decline at least since Clinton and his gang. I would even add that the last two idiots (Obama and Trump) did more damage to the US power than all their predecessors combined. The bad news is that the collective IQ of US leaders has been falling even faster than US power. We can hope that the first will hit zero long before the second, but there is no guarantee.

Truly, nobody knows if the US will or will not attack Iran and/or Venezuela next. The Neocons sure want that, but whether they will make it happen this time around or not depends on so many variables that even the folks in the White House and the Pentagon probably don’t really know what will happen next.

What is certain is that the US reputation worldwide is basically roadkill. The fact that most folks inside the US are never told about that does not make it less real. The Obama-Trump tag team has truly inflicted irreparable damage on the reputation of the US (in both cases because they were hopelessly infected and corrupted by the Neocons). The current US leaders appear to understand that, at least to some degree, this is why they are mostly lashing out at “easy” targets like free speech (on the Internet and elsewhere), Assange, the Venezuelan Embassy, etc. The real danger comes from either one of two factors:

  1. The Neocons will feel humiliated by the fact that all their threats are only met with indifference, disgust or laughter
  2. The Neocons will feel buoyed by the fact that nothing terrible happened (so far) when they attacked a defenseless target

Either way, in both cases the outcome is the same: each “click!” brings us closer to the inevitable “bang!”.

By the way, I think I should also mention here that the current state of advanced paranoia in which the likes of Pompeo point their fingers left and right are also signs of terminal weakness: these are not so much ways to credibly explain the constant and systematic failures of the Israelis and the Americans to get anything actually done as they are a way to distract away from the real reasons for the current extreme weakness of the AngloZionists.

2006: The people of Lebanon celebrate the victory which turned the tide of AngloZionist imperialism
2006: The people of Lebanon celebrate the victory which turned the tide of AngloZionist imperialism

I concluded my last article by speaking of the terrified Venezuelans who refused to be afraid. I will conclude this one by pointing at the first instance when a (comparatively) small adversary completely refused to be frightened even while it was the object of a truly terrifying attack: Hezbollah in 2006. Even though they were outnumbered, outgunned and surrounded by the Israelis, the members of the Resistance in Lebanon simply refused to be afraid and, having lost the fear too which so many Arabs did succumb to before 2006, they proceeded to give the Israelis (fully backed by the US) the worst and most humiliating thrashing in their country’s (admittedly short) history.

I urge you to read al-Sayyid Hassan’s famous “Divine Victory” speech (you can still find the English language transcript here and here) – it is one of the most important speeches of the 20th century! – and pay attention to these words (emphasis added):

We feel that we won; Lebanon won; Palestine won; the Arab nation won, and every oppressed, aggrieved person in this world also won. Our victory is not the victory of a party. I repeat what I said in Bint Jubayl on 25 May 2000: It is not the victory of a party or a community; rather it is a victory for true Lebanon, the true Lebanese people, and every free person in the world. Don’t distort this big historic victory. Do not contain it in party, sectarian, communal, or regional cans. This victory is too big to be comprehended by us. The next weeks, months, and years will confirm this.

And, indeed, the next weeks, months and years have very much confirmed that!

Any US attack on Iran will have pretty similar results, but on a much, much bigger scale.

And the Iranians know that. As do many in the Pentagon (the CIA and the White House are probably beyond hopeless by now).

Conclusion: good news and bad news

The good news first: Pompeo and Lavrov had what seems to be a meaningful dialog. That is very, very good, even if totally insufficient. They have also announced that they want to create study groups to improve the (currently dismal) relations between the two countries. That is even better news (if that really happens). Listening to Pompeo and Lavrov, I got a feeling that the Americans are slowly coming to the realization that they have an overwhelming need to re-establish a meaningful dialog with the other nuclear superpower. Good. But there is also bad news.

Finally some meaningful discussions between the two nuclear superpowers!
Finally some meaningful discussions between the two nuclear superpowers!

The rumor that the strategic geniuses surrounding Trump are now considering sending 120,000 troops to the Middle-East is really very bad news. If this just stays a rumor, then it will be the usual hot air out of DC, along the lines of Trump’s “very powerful armada” sent to scare the DPRK (it failed). The difference here is simple: sending carriers to the Middle-East is pure PR. But sending carriers AND 120,000 troops completely changes that and now this threat, if executed, will become very real. No, I don’t think that the US will attempt to invade Iran, but 120,000 is pretty close to what would be needed to try to re-open the Strait of Hormuz (assuming the Iranians close it) while protecting all the (pretty much defenseless) CENTCOM facilities and forces in the region. Under this scenario, the trip of Pompeo to Russia might have a much more ominous reason: to explain to the Russians what the US is up to and to provide security guarantees that this entire operation is not aimed at Russian forces. IF the US really plans to attack Iran, then it would make perfect sense for Pompeo to talk to Lavrov and open channels of communications between the two militaries to agree on “deconfliction” procedures. Regardless of whether the Russians accept such deconfliction measures or not (my guess is that they definitely would), such a trip is a “must” when deploying large forces so near to Russian military forces.

So far Trump has denied this report – but we all know that he suffers from the “John Kerry syndrome”: he wants better relations with Russia only until the Neocons tell him not to. Then he makes a 180 and declares the polar opposite of what he just said.

Still, there are now rumors that Trump is getting fed up with Bolton (who, truth be told, totally FUBARed the Venezuelan situation!).

As for the Iraqis, they have already told the US to forget using Iraqi territory for any attack. This reminds me of how the Brazilians told the US that Brazil would not allow its territory to be used for any attacks. This is becoming a pattern. Good.

Frankly, while an AngloZionist attack on Iran is always and by definition possible, I can’t imagine the folks at the Pentagon having the stomach for that. In a recent article Eric Margolis outlined what the rationale for such an attack might be (check out his full article here). Notice this sentence: “The Pentagon’s original plan to punish Iran called for some 2,300 air strikes on Day 1 alone“. Can they really do that? Yes, absolutely. But imagine the consequences! Margolis speaks of “punishing” Iran. 2,300 air strikes in one day is not something I would call a “punishment”. That is a full scale attack on Iran which, in turns, means that the Iranians will have exactly *ZERO* reasons to hold back in any way. If the AngloZionists attack Iran with 2,300 air strikes on Day 1, then you can be sure that on Day 2 all hell will break loose all over the Middle-East and the AngloZionists will have absolutely *NO* means of stopping it.

This will be a real bloodbath and nobody will have any idea as to how to stop it.

And you can be darn sure that the Iranians will show much more staying power than the imperialists, if only because they will be fighting in defense of their country, their faith, their liberty, their friends and their families. To expect the Iranians to cave in or surrender in any way would be the most stupid notion anybody could entertain.

Could they really be THAT stupid in Washington DC?

I don’t know.

But what I do know is this: any such attack will be extremely costly and very, very dangerous. Obviously, the Neocons don’t give a rats ass about costs, financial or human. They just want war, war, war and more war (remember McCain’s “bomb, bomb, bomb – bomb, bomb Iran“?). But the Neocons are only a tiny fraction of the US ruling elites (even if the most powerful one) and my hope is that the sane elements will prevail (which, indeed, they have so far).

As for right now, we are still okay. But if the US actually beings sending large forces to the Middle-East, then all bets are off.

أنصار الله القوة الإقليمية الصاعدة

مايو 17, 2019

ناصر قنديل

قدّمت تجربة أنصار الله من الصمود والذكاء الاستراتيجي والإبداع التكتيكي ما يجعلها ظاهرة تستحق الدراسة، وها هي تتقدم إلى مصاف القوة الصانعة للسياسة والتوازنات الجديدة في منطقة الخليج، لتتقدّم كقوة إقليمية صاعدة في زمن التقهقر للقوى التقليدية في الخليج، بصورة تشبه ما صنعه حزب الله في منطقة المشرق، وبدرجة تقارب وتضاهي في إنشاء موازين ردع بوجه السعودية كما أنشأ حزب الله الموازين الرادعة بوجه «إسرائيل». وتأتي عمليات أنصار الله في التأثير على أسواق النفط العالمية لتمنحهم صفة القوة الإقليمية التي لا يمكن الحد من تأثيرها بغير التفاهمات السياسية معها، لأن إثبات القدرة كان كافياً للقول إن الذهاب إلى المواجهة مع أنصار الله، بعد الفشل في تحجيم ما أظهرته قوتهم في مواجهة حرب عالمية استهدفتهم في اليمن، إنما يعني تعريض سوق النفط العالمية لأضرار لا يحتملها العالم، دون ضمان بلوغ النتائج المرجوة بإضعاف انصار الله أو تحجيم تأثيرهم على مفاصل حساسة في سوق النفط، أظهروا إتقان التعامل معها في الزمان والمكان والإعلان وعدم الإعلان.

نمت تجربة أنصار الله في ظروف جغرافية تشبه تلك التي تعيشها غزة في ظل الحصار الإسرائيلي براً وبحراً وجواً، حيث تمسك السعودية بكل ما يحيط باليمن، وتمكّن أنصار الله رغم ذلك من بناء قدرات صاروخية متقدمة تميّزت بالتطويرات التقنية المذهلة، وتميّزوا بإتقان أشد تأثيراً وفاعلية في سلاح الطائرات المسيرة، فصارت طائراتهم بدون طيار سلاح جو حقيقياً، يعبر أجواء المنطقة ويضرب حيث يشاء مثبتاً القدرة على التملص من وسائل الدفاع الجوي والرادارات المنتشرة في اليمن والخليج، تحت إدارة الخبراء الأميركيين مباشرة، وأظهروا قدرة على التقاط اللحظة الاستراتيجية بطريقة تحاكي ما فعلته قوى ودول وحركات مقاومة متمرسة بقوانين الحرب وخوض غمارها، فدخولهم على خط القلق العالمي تجاه أسواق النفط أثناء تصاعد الاشتباك الأميركي الإيراني، واستهدافهم للمنشآت النفطية للدول المتورطة في العدوان على اليمن، جعلهم شريكاً حكمياً في أي تسوية جزئية أو كلية تطال هذا النزاع، أو تسعى لتحييده عن أسواق النفط على الأقل، وتمهيدهم لذلك ببراعة تكتيكية تمثلت بمبادرة في ميناء الحديدة قدّموها بالتنسيق مع الجهات الأممية دون التشاور مع قوى العدوان، مثل قمة المهارة في إمساك خطوط وخيوط لعبة الحرب والسلم والمناورة.

السلفة الاستراتيجية التي قدّمها أنصار الله لإيران في المواجهة، لم تتمّ على حساب وطنيتهم اليمنية التي تنزف تحت ظلم وجرائم العدوان اليومي السعودي الإماراتي المدعوم بوضوح لا لبس فيه وشراكة لا تحتمل الاشتباه لإدارة الرئيس الأميركي دونالد ترامب، فقدّموا دون إعلان استثماراً مشتركاً يجعلهم شركاء في التسويات في معادلة دولية كبرى من جهة، ويمنح الحليف الإيراني موقع قوة في التفاوض من جهة أخرى، وبذلك ترجموا فهماً عميقاً وذكياً ناضجاً لمفهوم التحالفات، يشبه ما فعله حزب الله في استثماره في حرب تموز 2006 وحربه الدفاعية عن سورية، استثمار لا يبتعد عن مقتضيات الهوية الوطنية، بل يلبي حاجاتها المباشرة، لكنه لا يتردّد في دخول المسرح الإقليمي والدولي بتعزيز مكانة الحلفاء، والتقدّم بشجاعة إلى المسرح المباشر للصراعات الكبرى، ومن خلفها المفاوضات الكبرى، التي ترسم توازنات الإقليم والعالم.

يقول أحد قادة المقاومة، لقد أدهشنا أنصار الله اليمنيون دائماً، وكوادر المقاومة الذين كانوا على احتكاك مع التجربة اليمنية يحملون آثارها في أدوارهم اللاحقة ويتخذونها مثالاً في مخاطبة المتدربين والمحيطين، ويتحدثون بانبهار وإعجاب عن ميزات كالصبر والثقة بالنصر والمثابرة والتحمّل، واليقين بأن الوقت الصعب سيمرّ، وأن زمناً ليس بعيداً سيحمل التغيير الكبير، والأهم أنهم لا يتوقفون عن إضافة الجديد والمبتكر، سواء في مجال التقنيات أو التكتيكات القتالية أو الحرب النفسية، وهم ربما يكونون مثالاً يُحتذى في مجال الانضباط والتنظيم، رغم قسوة الحرب والظروف وقلة الموارد.

أيها الحوثيون، يا أنصار الله ورجاله، أنتم فخر أمتنا، تُرفع لكم القبعة، مبارك لكم أنكم في الطليعة تصنعون معادلات جديدة لشعبكم وأمتكم، وتدركون أن صفقة القرن التي تستهدف فلسطين تسقط من باب المندب ومياه بحر عمان وخط أنابيب ينبع – الدمام، كما تسقط بالمسيرات المليونية التي تتقدّم في شرق غزة والصواريخ التي تسقط قرب تل أبيب، لأن الصفقة تحتاج قوة الحليفين في تل أبيب والرياض، وتسقط بتمريغ خرافة قوتهما بوحول مجبولة بدماء الأبطال المقاومين، وليس غريباً أنكم كنتم دائماً تتسببون بالحرج لكل عربي حر صادق مع فلسطين بحجم حضوركم السخي في الساحات تحت قصف الطيران لتهتفوا لفلسطين في كل مناسبة تخصّها، فتكونون الأوائل، وهكذا أنتم اليوم، يمنيّون يدافعون بشراسة عن اليمن، وعرب أقحاح يلتزمون فلسطين بوصلة وميثاقاً، ومقاومون في الخطوط الأمامية لمحور يتكامل فعلاً وقولاً من أقصى الشمال إلى أقصى الجنوب ومن شرق الشرق إلى حيث الغرب.

ترامب ينتظر اتصالاً إيرانياً على رقم هاتف ساخن خاص وضعه لهذا الغرض وراح ينتظر، ومستشاروه اليوم ينصحونه بالسعي للحصول على رقم هاتف يخصّ أنصار الله لضمان استقرار أسواق النفط، التي لا تجدي فيها قواته وحشوده ولا حكومات يتوزع قادتها الألقاب الفخمة، والأموال الطائلة، والأسلحة المكدّسة، لكنهم لا يملكون بعضاً يسيراً من الروح التي تملكون، فتنتصرون بأرواحكم على كل ما بين أيديهم، وقد هزمت فيهم الروح، فتثبتون أن صناعة التاريخ والحرب تبدأ، كالنصر والهزيمة، بالروح وبالروح فقط. مبارك صيامكم وقيامكم، وتتبعكم المذهل لكلمات سيد مقاومتكم السيد عبد الملك الحوثي، الذي أدهش العالم بما قدم مع شباب وكهول صنعوا أحد النماذج الفريدة للمقاومة والفكر والنصر.

Related Videos

Related News

The Israeli and the Palestinian tracks المساران «الإسرائيلي» والفلسطيني

The Israeli and the Palestinian tracks

أبريل 9, 2019

Written by Nasser Kandil,

Few days ago before the missiles fell on Tel Aviv and the heroic qualitative Salfit operation, one of the settlers in the courtyard of the Al Aqsa Mosque described the Palestinians as cowards made of sugar and that they did not go to the Al Aqsa Mosque for fear of solving by rain, few days later those made of sugar bombed Tel Aviv with missiles that transcended the iron dome, and few days later a Palestinian youth stabbed a Zionist soldier and disarmed him, then he shot him with that weapon along with number of soldiers and killed three of them. The Palestinian and the Israeli tracks seem contradictory comparing with the past decades. In the past the big talk was by the Palestinians while the big act was done by the Israelis, now the big talk is by the Israeli rulers and settlers while the big acts are done by the Palestinians.

In the past two decades, since the year 2000 the Palestinian and the Israeli tracks were opposite, When Israel was obliged to withdraw without return or negotiation from the South of Lebanon, and the uprising of Al Aqsa Mosque the track was upward in favor of the Palestinians versus a declining Israeli track. Then the liberation of Gaza Strip in 2005 and the Israeli failure in the war of July 2006 occurred. Now, we are in the post – international and regional failure stage which Israel was a part of it through the war on Syria and the growing capacities of the resistance axis. Despite the inability of going to wars Israel went to the philosophy of the wall. Therefore, the announcement of a Jewish state through the expression of the philosophy of wall and the transformation of the US Embassy to Jerusalem form an announcement of the inability to go on in any negotiating project that leads to a political settlement, and the inability to go to wars. So although this has been seen as a sign of power but it is a sign of weakness.

Despite the big division, the Palestinians seem closer to each other politically in the consensus on refusing the negotiation, the American role, and the project of the Deal of the Century although these reasons were never been reasons of political or popular division before, despite the understandings between Fatah and Hamas Movements and their partnership in the elections and the formation of the government, while the Israelis despite their apparent difference in the levels of escalation they seem aware of the existential dilemma of their entity represented in the inability to go to war or to make any compromise. All the fronts are close and the tampering in them is expensive as the compromises which are not less expensive.

There have been major transformations in the region, Israel lost the lead, the Palestinians supported by forces, governments, and the resistance axis obtained more elements of initiative, the open clash with the occupying army and the settlers is as the negotiating path; there is no choice among which the Palestinians divide, the Arab and Western ability to revive the negotiation is declining. Therefore, the resistance option is the only way and it proved its ability to get achievements. It is enough to observe the Israeli escape from the involvement in response to Gaza missiles over Tel Aviv to know how the situations changed. After Israel was creating events as pretexts to go to wars it eases the threat of challenges to justify its flee from the confrontations and wars.

Translated by Lina Shehadeh,

المساران «الإسرائيلي» والفلسطيني

مارس 18, 2019

ناصر قنديل

– قبل أيام على صواريخ تل أبيب وعملية سلفيت النوعية البطولية، خرج أحد المستوطنين في تسجيل من باحة المسجد الأقصى يصف الفلسطينيين بالجبن، باعتبارهم مصنوعين من سكر ولم يخرجوا إلى المسجد الأقصى بسبب المطر خشية الذوبان، وبعد أيام قليلة كان المصنوعون من سكر يقصفون بصواريخ تتخطّى القبة الحديدة وتسقط في تل أبيب، وبعدها بأيام يقوم شاب فلسطيني بطعن جندي صهيوني وتجريده من سلاحه، وإطلاق النار بواسطة هذا السلاح على مجموعة من الجنود فيقتل ثلاثة منهم ويتوارى. ويظهر المساران الفلسطيني والإسرائيلي متعاكسين، يتبادلان الحال العربية الإسرائيلية قبل عقود، يوم كان الكلام الكبير للعرب والفعل الكبير للإسرائيليين، ليبدو اليوم أن الكلام الكبير للإسرائيليين حكاماً ومستوطنين، بينما الأفعال الكبيرة للفلسطينيين.

– خلال العقدين الماضيين، ومنذ العام 2000 سلك المساران الفلسطيني والإسرائيلي اتجاهين متعاكسين، فمنذ إجبار «إسرائيل» على الانسحاب دون مقابل أو تفاوض من جنوب لبنان، ومقابلها اندلاع انتفاضة المسجد الأقصى، بدأ المسار التصاعدي لحساب الفلسطينيين، ومقابله مسار الانحدار الإسرائيلي، وتلاها تحرير غزة عام 2005 والفشل الإسرائيلي في حرب تموز 2006، وها نحن اليوم في مرحلة ما بعد الفشل الدولي والإقليمي الذي كانت «إسرائيل» جزءاً عضوياً منه في الحرب على سورية، وتنامي قدرات محور المقاومة، ذهبت «إسرائيل» نحو تصعيد فلسفة الجدار، رغم كل الصراخ عن القدرة على خوض الحروب، فشكل الإعلان عن دولة يهودية تعبيراً عن فلسفة الجدار، ومثله نقل السفارة الأميركية إلى القدس، إعلاناً عن العجز على السير في أي مشروع تفاوضي نحو تسوية سياسية يعادل العجز عن خوض الحروب، ولو رآه البعض علامة قوة فهو ليس إلا دليل ضعف.

– رغم الانقسام الفصائلي الحاد يبدو الفلسطينيون أقرب سياسياً لبعضهم في الإجماع على رفض التفاوض والدور الأميركي ومشروع صفقة القرن، بصورة لم يسبق أن شكل الموقف من التفاوض ومن نسخ التسوية المعروضة ومن العلاقة مع واشنطن، أسباباً دائمة للانقسام السياسي والشعبي، رغم وجود تفاهمات بين حركتي فتح وحماس وتشاركهما حينها في الانتخابات وتشكيل الحكومة، بينما يبدو الإسرائيليون رغم ظاهر تفرقهم في مستويات الخطاب التصعيدي انتخابياً، مدركين حجم المأزق الوجودي الذي يعيشه كيانهم، والمتمثل بفقدان قدرة الذهاب للحرب أو قدرة الذهاب للتسوية، فالجبهات كلها مقفلة ومخاطر العبث معها مكلفة، والتسويات لا تقل كلفة، وليس في الكيان من يجرؤ على المخاطرة في الاتجاهين.

– ثمة تحولات كبرى جرت في المنطقة، فقدت خلالها «إسرائيل» الإمساك بزمام المبادرة، ومقابلها حدثت تحولات معاكسة امتلك خلالها الفلسطينيون ومن ورائهم قوى وحكومات محور المقاومة، المزيد من عناصر القدرة على المبادرة، حيث الاشتباك المفتوح مع جيش الاحتلال وقطعان المستوطنين، وطريق التفاوض مقفل كخيار يقسم الفلسطينيين، والقدرة العربية والغربية على إنعاش مسار التفاوض تتراجع، وخيار المقاومة يصير طريقاً حتمياً وحيداً، وقد أثبت قدرته على تحقيق الإنجازات، ويكفي النظر في كيفية التهرّب الإسرائيلي من التورط في الرد على صواريخ غزة على تل أبيب لمعرفة تبدل الأحوال الذي نعيش في ظله، بعدما كانت «إسرائيل» تصنع أحداثاً لتتخذها ذرائع لشن الحروب يوم كانت قادرة عليها، صارت تهوّن من خطورة التحديات لتبرير الهروب من المواجهات والحروب، لأنها فقدت هذه القدرة.

Related Videos

Related Articles

This is Nasrallah in Hebrew

Mustapha Khazem

“We devote this evening to Hassan Nasrallah, not for the love of him; but because he is our toughest enemy, and the most wonderful of all. Hassan Nasrallah turned Hezbollah into one of the strongest and richest ‘terrorist’ organizations in the world. There is no Arab enemy who inhabits the “Israeli” public like Hassan Nasrallah. He has received our attention like no other other leader of an Arab state. And we, the “Israelis” listen to him and believe him. The Secretary General of Hezbollah knows this and exploits it in an excellent way to instill fear in us to the extent of terror.” With these words, Guy Zohar presented ‘The Analysis of Nasrallah’ documentary.

From an underground location, using a state of the art camera and shifting between the studio and documented scenes of the Secretary General of Hezbollah in the open, “Israel’s” Channel 11 aired the documentary. Those being interviewed were dressed in black with a dominant dark background. Meanwhile, the historic scenes of Hezbollah’s secretary general varied in time, background and occasion. The selection of the segments showed courage, strength and the firmness in his stance as well as the extent of the depth of his Eminence’s words and positions in the consciousness of the Zionists, contrary to what the producers of the documentary intended to show.

Ehud Olmert, Ehud Barak, Moshe Ya’alon, media specialists as well as military and security experts all agreed that Sayyed Nasrallah knows the most accurate details of their usurper entity. He employs events to deduce the accuracy of his opinion and logic using excerpts from the aforementioned officials themselves.

Olmert and Falling into Nasrallah’s Trap

The first person interviewed following the introduction was former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, the most prominent loser in the Second Lebanon War and a convict serving a prison sentence on corruption charges.

“We fell into Nasrallah’s media trap. We made a mistake broadcasting his speeches during the 2006 war as if he was our foreign minister and our prime minister, allowing him to instill doubt in us,” Olmert said.

This statement follows several “Israeli” surveys. Those surveyed confirmed that they believed Sayyed Nasrallah more than the leaders of the entity because he always tells the truth.

Olmert also spoke of Sayyed Nasrallah following-up on events. He referred to Sayyed’s famous Spider Web speech on the occasion of the 2000 liberation in the town of Bint Jbeil.

“The disillusioned and disorganized withdrawal from Lebanon in 2000 was the basis of the Spider Web speech delivered by (Sayyed) Nasrallah,” Olmert said.

Then one of the experts involved in the investigation explained that, “Nasrallah succeeded in appearing before the Arabs as the one who expelled the occupation from his land in 2000. He was the greatest victor.”

Barak: Nasrallah Should Not Be Underestimated

According to former “Israeli” Prime Minister, Minister of War and the one defeated in Lebanon in 2000, Ehud Barak, “Nasrallah, without a doubt, represents another kind of enemy for “Israel”. He is a leader with good political skills and should not be underestimated.”

The former Northern Corps commander, Eyal Ben Reuven, echoed Barak’s sentiments saying, “He is a bitter and harsh enemy. He is worthy of appreciation. He is a bookish man (educated). He studies us and knows us.”

Yaalon on Sayyed and Hezbollah being Lebanese

Former “Israeli” War Minister Moshe Yaalon dealt with Sayyed Nasrallah’s personality in terms of identity, belonging and action. He focused on Sayyed’s achievements in gaining international legitimacy as well as legitimacy in Lebanon for resistance’s operations against “Israel”. He also talked about the strategy Sayyed used to confirm this identity saying, “Nasrallah firmly stigmatized our presence in Lebanon as an occupation and continued repeating this description … occupation .. occupation.”

He also referred to the special capabilities His Eminence possesses.

“Certainly, when we were in the security belt, we realized that he is an enemy that understands us more than others. He is intelligent. He knows how to exploit our disadvantages to his advantages. He works admirably. He is intelligent in all fields,” Yaalon added.

The Zionist experts continued to talk about Sayyed’s creativity in guiding the media in how to “broadcast fighting scenes. No organization has reached the level that Hezbollah did in this area.”

As for Sayyed not sending his martyred son, Sayyed Hadi, to university, this point was intended to be disgraceful. However, it turned to Sayyed’s favor. Sayyed Hadi’s martyrdom in the field discredited all other narratives about his fate. One commentator said, “Nasrallah is not a leader who sent his son to foreign universities, but he sent him to the battlefield.”

The Zionist experts did not reveal anything new about Sayyed Nasrallah’s knowledge of the usurper entity, its structure and the ways its leaders think. Colonel (Res) Ronen Cohen, the head of the so-called Terror Arena in the production division of the Intelligence Directorate, revealed that, “there is no one who studied the enemy the way he did.”

“If you wanted to be victorious, you have to know the points of weakness and study them from all sides,” he said.

This is another confirmation that what bothers the Zionists is an Arab superiority over them. This is different from the image of the Arabs in the “Israeli” media and consciousness.

As for what Sayyed Nasrallah thinks about the future of the usurper entity, the deputy commander of the Northern Corps in the reserves unit, Chico Tamir, exclaimed that “Nasrallah had a great understanding that victory would not be achieved in the valleys of southern Lebanon. He will be triumphant in the consciousness.”

In this context, the experts addressed what the enemy’s media called the excess of power in the resistance society, noting that Sayyed Nasrallah “worked to build a strong society and rose with it.”

They revealed that at a time when Sayyed knew everything about them, “we did not know anything about Nasrallah.” Writer and expert on Arab affairs, Avi Issacharoff, added: “Nasrallah is the biggest threat to “Israel” today in the Middle East.” The presenter of the program Zohar concludes, “With time we understood the power of this person!”

Related Videos

Related Articles

«Israeli» Channel Airs Documentary on Sayyed Nasrallah: No one knew «Israel» as He Did

By Staff

The “Israeli” entity’s Channel 11 broadcasted a documentary on Hezbollah Secretary General His Eminence Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah whom the “Israeli” public consider credible and trustworthy.

In the documentary, various “Israeli” officials and analysts gave their remarks, unanimously agreeing that Sayyed Nasrallah possesses unique traits and skills, as he poses an utmost threat to the entity.

The officials and analysts interviewed spoke of Sayyed Nasrallah’s awareness with respect to the “Israeli” leadership and the entity’s history.

According to an “Israeli” general, “No Arab leader has read or understood ‘Israel’s’ history like Sayyed Nasrallah who managed to emerge in 2000 as a victorious, forcing the occupation out of his country.”

He went on to say, “In the era of Sayyed Nasrallah, Hezbollah reached an unprecedented level – a level no other organization

Sayyed Nasrallah’s speeches, as believed by the “Israeli” public, always turn out to be the top news in the entity’s media outlets.

Elsewhere in the documentary, another “Israeli” official admitted that “Israel” “misread his [Sayyed Nasrallah’s] speeches during the 2006 War as if he were our foreign minister and the head of our government.”

Related Videos

Related  News

Is the UK pushing a false narrative on Hezbollah?

Arzu Merali is a writer and researcher based in London. She is one of the co-founders of Islamic Human Rights Commission (http://www.ihrc.org.uk) and co-authored its recent study “Environment of Hate: The New Normal for Muslims in the UK” with Saied Reza Ameli.
Ban on Hezbollah will criminalise dissent and become part of a gamut of law and policy the state uses to silence criticism

Supporters of Hezbollah wave the Palestinian national flag during a demonstration in the village of Meiss al-Jabal on the border with Israel on 16 December 2018 (AFP)

In 2006, there was a war – another onslaught by the invincible Israeli war machine.

Despite a media bias so palpable that even the BBC found itself guilty in a review of its coverage of Israel-Palestine affairs, people did not care for the aggressors.

They did care – in large numbers, on the streets of the UK and around the world – for the dead, injured and dying children who were collateral damage in what was supposed to be the annihilation of Hezbollah in Lebanon.

Once again, at the hands of Hezbollah, the group responsible for more than a decade of guerrilla resistance that saw the Israeli army literally run out of South Lebanon in 2000, the Israelis lost.

Israel’s psychology in this defeat was so much worse because people hoisted banners around the world proclaiming: “We are all Hezbollah.” With the banner came the flag, carried by young Muslims, old Muslims, middle-aged English ladies and anti-Zionist rabbis. It was pervasive, and it has stayed.

Converging interests

This psychology is important towards understanding the UK government’s recent decision to proscribe Hezbollah under the Terrorism Act 2000. The Labour Party has raised concerns, while analysts have explored the convergence of the hard-power interests of the US, Israel and Saudi Arabia with Home Secretary Sajid Javid’s decision, which many see as an attempt to raise his star in the run-up to a Tory leadership contest.

Amal Saad, a British-Lebanese professor at the Lebanese University, has highlighted the lack of justification within the context of the Terrorism Act’s own flawed raison d’etre, the UK’s attempts to work with Hezbollah to maintain stability, and the vested interests in Javid’s decision vis-a-vis another attack on Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn.

Amal Saad@amalsaad_lb

Javid justifies his position by claiming Hizbullah is “destabilizing” the region, knowing full well that a British ban on the party that aims at delegitimizing it politically, is highly destabilizing for Lebanon which only recently formed a government after a long impasse

Amal Saad@amalsaad_lb

It’s clear this bill is a bludgeon against Corbyn, but its effects on Lebanon will not be insignificant. It will also complicate things for the UK: how will it deal with the Lebanese president who is a staunch Hizbullah ally, or the Lebanese army which coordinates with Hizbullah?

It is perhaps no surprise that a nervous, Brexit-unready country seeks validation from the US and Israel and money from the Saudis. But at the same time, there is a bizarre and truly shameful connection between hatred on the streets of London against pro-Palestinian activists and the British government.

Al-Quds Day

This is due to the link between this latest decision and a two-year campaign by a crew of fascists and pro-Israel media to shut down pro-Palestinian solidarity. This campaign has focused on the growing popularity of al-Quds Day demonstrations in London, which have increased in size over the years since the 2006 war.

Many powerful banners proclaim messages of solidarity, interfaith and inter-community harmony, and political and religious diversity in support of Palestine.

Muslims, Jews and Christians, along with people of other faiths or no faith, take part. It differs from other demonstrations in that it looks to the long-term issue: the original usurpation of Palestine and ongoing injustices. It is not reactive only when another large-scale atrocity is taking place.

People participate in an al-Quds Day march in Lebanon (AFP)

People participate in an al-Quds Day march in Lebanon (AFP)

The far-right rages against it on social media every year. The trope of new anti-Semitism has been levelled against the march, alongside chants of “terrorists off our streets” and op-eds about flying a “terrorist flag” in reference to Hezbollah flag. The grassroots group North West Friends of Israel petitioned London’s mayor to ban the event, saying: “After the terrible recent terrorist events in Manchester and London this display of extremism has no place on the streets of the UK.”

To characterise an event where rabbis stand alongside imams, Palestinians and Israeli activists speak on the same platform, and women, men and children gather from around the UK, in such a way is offensive.

But words can definitely hurt: after Darren Osborne drove a van into worshippers in Finsbury Park in 2017, news broke that his original target might have been the al-Quds Day demonstration.

Whose side are you on?

This egregious narrative has been validated further by Javid. It is a truly perverse moment, where those targeted for acts of terrorism now face the prospect of incarceration should they continue flying the flag of resistance against racism.

Is the government really beholden to this bunch of right-wing groups? Has the state really taken what is essentially a hearts-and-minds debate around human rights, racism and justice for Palestinians and all oppressed peoples from the streets of London to the corridors of Whitehall?

Like the ricin plot that didn’t exist, yet was used at the UN to justify a war on Iraq, or the trope of humanitarian aid necessitating intervention in Venezuela, this is flimflam that only the most misguided could believe.

‘Whose side are you on’ is the key question that will define those willing to resist oppression

Alongside the various banners hoisted each year on al-Quds Day, one stands out. It was painted during the Second Intifada and depicts the martyred 14-year-old Faris Odeh throwing a stone at an Israeli tank. It reads simply: “Whose side are you on?”

A toxic marriage

London Mayor Sadiq Khan has chosen his: an Islamophobic narrative demonising al-Quds Day via his tweet on the ban. Bizarrely, he talks about a ban under anti-terrorism laws in the context of anti-Semitism and hate crimes.

It’s ludicrous, and this is the same thing we said when the law came into being two decades ago. This will criminalise dissent and become part of a gamut of law and policies the state uses to silence criticism.

That toxic marriage of racism, legal instruments and those interest groups committed to chauvinism mirrored in the state’s own hierarchical and supremacist institutions is what any and all progressives – with all their differences – are up against.

Britain’s ban on Hezbollah is hypocritical and unhelpful
Edward Wastnidge

Read More »

“Whose side are you on?” is the key question that will define those willing to resist oppression and work for the betterment of this world, versus those who will continue with their racist policies and discourses and plough into crowds of worshippers/Palestinians/anti-fascists worldwide.

I know which side I am on.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.

Related Videos

Related Articles

%d bloggers like this: