Sayyed Nasrallah Speech in the Israeli Eyes: Surprises and More!

February 20, 2017

Sayyed Nasrallah speaking in the ceremony held in commemoration of Hezbollah martyred leaders

“(Sayyed) Hasan Nasrallah threatens in a military speech to hit the nuclear reactor in Dimona as well as the ammonia tank in Haifa. He also determines the targets which will be hit in the upcoming war between Israel and Hezbollah,” a TV presenter in Israeli Channel 2 said on Thursday.

As Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah ended his speech during the Martyred Leaders Day ceremony, his threats were on the top of Israeli media’s news and talk shows.

In a televised speech marking the Martyred Leaders Anniversary on Thursday, Sayyed Nasrallah threatened the Israeli enemy with game-changing surprises should it launch any stupid war against Lebanon.

His eminence stressed that Hezbollah missiles will hit ammonia tank wherever it was moved across the Zionist entity, advising the Israelis to dismantle the Dimona reactor.

“Nasrallah moved to talk about events that would take place in case a war erupts between Israel and Hezbollah. He says that Hezbollah knows how to make from the Israeli nuclear arsenal a threat to Israel itself,” Ehud Yaari, Israeli analyst said during a talk show on Israeli Channel 2.

“Nasrallah also said that Hezbollah can easily target the ammonia tank wherever it was moved to as well as what he describes as the ‘Antique’ reactor, referring to Dimona reactor,” the Israeli analyst added.

The Israeli media focused meanwhile, on the other messages delivered by Sayyed Nasrallah during his speech. It tackled Hezbollah S.G.’s threat regarding the fate of Israeli elite forces in case they were engaged in a ground offensive on Lebanon.

“Hezbollah Chief (Sayyed) Hasan Nasrallah has just finished a speech in which he made many threats against Israel,” another presenter on Israeli Channel 2.

“Nasrallah wondered what the Israeli forces would do if a war erupts, recalling what happened with Golani Brigade when they tried to get into Gaza in 2014,” Ehud Yaari said.

“He also said that surprises are Hezbollah’s style and strategy, stressing that the group has surprises that Israel has no idea about,” the Israeli analyst said referring to the Lebanese resistance leader.

The enemy’s media also pointed out to Sayyed Nasrallah’s stance on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s remarks, during his meeting with US President Donald Trump, in which Netanyahu talked about an alliance between the Zionist entity and some Arab states.

Source: Al-Manar

Related Videos

israel’s concentration camps

 

On Israel’s little-known concentration and labor camps in 1948-1955

Civilians captured during the fall of Lydda and Ramle around the time of July 12, 1948 and taken to labour camps. In the July heat they were thirsty and were given a drop of water carried by a child under soldiers’ guard. (Photo: Salman Abu Sitta, Palestine Land Society)

By Yazan al-Saadi | Al-Akhbar | September 29, 2014

Much of the grim and murky circumstances of the Zionist ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in the late 1940s have gradually been exposed over time. One aspect – rarely researched or deeply discussed – is the internment of thousands of Palestinian civilians within at least 22 Zionist-run concentration and labor camps that existed from 1948 to 1955. Now more is known about the contours of this historical crime, due to the comprehensive research by renowned Palestinian historian Salman Abu Sitta and founding member of the Palestinian resource center BADIL Terry Rempel.

The facts are these.

The study – to be published in the upcoming issue of the Journal of Palestine Studies – relies on almost 500 pages of International Committee of the Red Cross’s (ICRC) reports written during the 1948 war, that were declassified and made available to the public in 1996, and accidentally discovered by one of the authors in 1999.

Furthermore, testimonies of 22 former Palestinian civilian detainees of these camps were collected by the authors, through interviews they conducted themselves in 2002, or documented by others during different moments of time.

With these sources of information, the authors, as they put it, pieced together a clearer story of how Israel captured and imprisoned “thousands of Palestinian civilians as forced laborers,” and exploited them “to support its war-time economy.”

Digging up the crimes

“I came across this piece of history in the 1990s when I was collecting material and documents about Palestinians,” Abu Sitta told Al-Akhbar English. “The more and more you dig, the more you find there are crimes that have taken place that are not reported and not known.”

At that time, Abu Sitta went to Geneva for a week to check out the newly-opened archives of the ICRC. According to him, the archives were opened to the public after accusations that the ICRC had sided with the Nazis during World War II. It was an opportunity that he could not miss in terms of seeing what the ICRC had recorded of the events that occurred in Palestine in 1948. It was there he stumbled onto records discussing the existence of five concentration camps run by the Israelis.

He then decided to look for witnesses or former detainees, interviewing Palestinians in occupied Palestine, Syria, and Jordan.

“They all described the same story, and their real experience in these camps,” he said.

One question that immediately struck him was why there were barely any references in history about these camps, especially when it became clearer the more he researched that they existed, and were more than just five camps.

“Many former Palestinian detainees saw the concept of Israel as a vicious enemy, so they thought their experience labouring in these concentration camps was nothing in comparison to the other larger tragedy of the Nakba. The Nakba overshadowed everything,” Abu Sitta explained.“However, when I dug into the period of 1948-1955, I found more references like Mohammed Nimr al-Khatib, who was an imam in Haifa, who had written down interviews with someone from al-Yahya family that was in one of the camps. I was able to trace this man all the way to California and spoke with him in 2002,” he added.

More references were eventually and slowly discovered by Abu Sitta that included information from a Jewish woman called Janoud, a single masters thesis in Hebrew University about the topic, and the personal accounts of economist Yusif Sayigh, helped to further flesh out the scale and nature of these camps.

After more than a decade, Abu Sitta, with his co-author Rempel, are finally presenting their findings to the public.

From burden to opportunity: concentration and labor camps

The establishment of concentration and labor camps occurred after the unilateral declaration of Israel’s statehood on May 1948.

Prior to that event, the number of Palestinian captives in Zionist hands were quite low, because, as the study states, “the Zionist leadership concluded early on that forcible expulsion of the civilian population was the only way to establish a Jewish state in Palestine with a large enough Jewish majority to be ‘viable’.” In other words, for the Zionist strategists, prisoners were a burden in the beginning phases of the ethnic cleansing.

Those calculations changed with the declaration of the Israeli state and the involvement of the armies of Egypt, Syria, Iraq, and Transjordan, after much of the ethnic cleansing had occurred. From that moment, “the Israeli forces began taking prisoners, both regular Arab soldiers (for eventual exchange), and – selectively – able-bodied Palestinian non-combatant civilians.”

The first camp at Ijlil, which was about 13 km northeast of Jaffa, on the site of the destroyed Palestinian village Ijlil al-Qibiliyya, emptied of its inhabitants in early April. Ijlil was predominately made up of tents, housing hundreds and hundreds of prisoners, categorized as POWs by the Israelis, surrounded by barbed wire fences, watchtowers, and a gate with guards.

As the Israeli conquests grew, in turn exceedingly increasing the number of prisoners, three more camps were established. These are the four “official” camps that the Israelis acknowledged and were actively visited by the ICRC.

The study notes:

All four camps were either on or adjacent to military installations set up by the British during the Mandate. These had been used during World War II for the interment of German, Italian, and other POWs. Two of the camps – Atlit, established in July about 20 kms south of Haifa, and Sarafand, established in September near the depopulated village of Sarafand al-Amar in central Palestine—had earlier been used in the 1930s and 1940s to detain illegal Jewish immigrants.

Atlit was the second largest camp after Ijlil, it had the capacity of holding up to 2,900 prisoners, while Sarafand had the maximum capacity of 1,800, and Tel Letwinksy, near Tel Aviv, held more than 1,000.

All four camps were administered by “former British officers who had defected their ranks when British forces withdrew from Palestine in mid-May 1948,” and the camp’s guards and administrative staff were former members of the Irgun and the Stern Gang – both groups designated as terrorist organizations by the British before their departure. In total, the four “official” camps were staffed by 973 soldiers.

A fifth camp, called Umm Khalid, was established at a site of another depopulated village near the Zionist settlement of Netanya, and was even assigned an official number in the records, but never attained “official” status. It had the capacity to hold 1,500 prisoners. Unlike the other four camps, Umm Khalid would be “the fist camp established exclusively as a labor camp” and was “the first of the “recognized” camps to be shut down… by the end of 1948.”

Complementing these five “recognized” camps, were at least 17 other “unrecognized camps” that were not mentioned in official sources, but the authors discovered through multiple prisoner testimonies.

Civilians in a labour camp in Ramleh, July 1948. (Photo: Salman Abu Sitta, Palestine Land Society)

“Many of [these camps],” the authors noted, “[were] apparently improvised or ad hoc, often consisting of no more than a police station, a school, or the house of a village notable,” with holding capacities that ranged from almost 200 prisoners to tens.

Most of the camps, official and unofficial, were situated within the borders of the UN-proposed Jewish state, “although at least four [unofficial camps] – Beersheba, Julis, Bayt Daras, and Bayt Nabala – were in the UN-assigned Arab state and one was inside the Jerusalem “corpus separatum.”

The number of Palestinian non-combatant detainees “far exceeded” those of Arab soldiers in regular armies or bona fide POWs. Citing a July 1948 monthly report made by ICRC mission head Jacques de Reynier, the study states that de Reynier noted, “that the situation of civilian internees was ‘absolutely confused’ with that of POWs, and that the Jewish authorities ‘treated all Arabs between the ages of 16 and 55 as combatants and locked them up as prisoners of war.’” In addition, the ICRC found among the detainees in official camps, that 90 of the prisoners were elderly men, and 77 were boys, aged 15 years or younger. The study highlights the statements by an ICRC delegate Emile Moeri in January 1949 of the camp inmates:

It is painful to see these poor people, especially old, who were snatched from their villages and put without reason in a camp, obliged to pass the winter under wet tents, away from their families; those who could not survive these conditions died. Little children (10-12 years) are equally found under these conditions. Similarly sick people, some with tuberculosis, languish in these camps under conditions which, while fine for healthy individuals, will certainly lead to their death if we do not find a solution to this problem. For a long time we have demanded that the Jewish authorities release those civilians who are sick and need treatment to the care of their families or to an Arab hospital, but we have not received a response.

As the report noted, “there are no precise figures on the total number of Palestinian civilians held by Israel during the 1948-49 war” and estimates tend to not account for “unofficial” camps, in addition to the frequent movement of prisoners between the camps in use. In the four “official” camps, the number of Palestinian prisoners never exceeded 5,000 according to figures in Israeli records.

Taking account of the capacity of Umm Khalid, and estimates of the “unofficial camps,” the final number of Palestinian prisoners could be around the 7,000 range, and perhaps much more when, as the study states, taking into account a November 17, 1948 diary entry by David Ben-Gurion, one of the main Zionist leaders and Israel’s first prime minister, who mentioned “the existence of 9,000 POWs in Israeli-run camps.”

In general, the living conditions in the “official” camps were far below what would be considered appropriate by international law at that time. Moeri, who visited the camps constantly, reported that in Ijlil in November 1948:

“[m]any [of the] tents are torn, that the camp was “not ready for winter,” the latrines not covered, and the canteen not working for two weeks. Referring to an apparently ongoing situation, he stated that “the fruits are still defective, the meat is of poor quality, [and] the vegetables are in short supply.”

Furthermore, Moeri reported that he saw for himself, “the wounds left by the abuse” of the previous week, when the guards had fired on the prisoners, wounding one, and had beaten another.”

As the study shows, the civilian status of the majority of the detainees were clear for the ICRC delegates in the country, who reported that the men captured “had undoubtedly never been in a regular army.” Detainees who were combatants, the study explains, were “routinely shot on the pretense that they had been attempting to escape.”

The Israeli forces seemed to always target able-bodied men, leaving behind women, children, and the elderly – when not massacring them – the policy continued even after there were low levels of military confrontation. All in all, as the Israeli records show and the study cites, “Palestinian civilians comprised the vast majority (82 percent) of the 5,950 listed as internees in the POW camps, while the Palestinians alone (civilian plus military) comprised 85 percent.”

The wide-scale kidnapping and imprisonment of Palestinian civilians tend to correspond with the Israeli military campaigns. For example, one of the first major roundups occurred during Operation Danj, when 60-70,000 Palestinians were expelled from the central towns of Lydda and Ramleh. At the same time, between a fifth and a quarter of the male population from these two towns who were over the age of 15 were sent to the camps.

The largest round-up of civilians came from villages of central Galilee who were captured during Operation Hiram in the fall of 1948.

One Palestinian survivor, Moussa, described to the authors what he witnessed at the time.

“They took us from all villages around us: al-Bi’na, Deir al-Asad, Nahaf, al-Rama, and Eilabun. They took 4 young men and shot them dead… They drove us on foot. It was hot. We were not allowed to drink. They took us to [the Palestinian Druze village] al-Maghar, then [to the Jewish settlement] Nahalal, then to Atlit.”

A November 16, 1948 UN report collaborated Moussa’s account, stating that some 500 Palestinian men “were taken by force march and vehicle to a Jewish concentration camp at Nahlal.”

Maintaining Israel’s economy with “slave labor”

The policy of targeting civilians, particular “able-bodied” men, was not accidental according to the study. It states, “with tens of thousands of Jewish men and women called up for military service, Palestinian civilian internees constituted an important supplement to the Jewish civilian labor employed under emergency legislation in maintaining the Israeli economy,” which even the ICRC delegation had noted in their reports.

The prisoners were forced to do public and military work, such as draining wetlands, working as servants, collecting and transporting looted refugee property, moving stones from demolished Palestinian homes, paving roads, digging military trenches, burying the dead, and much more. As one former Palestinian detainee named Habib Mohammed Ali Jarada described in the study, “At gunpoint, I was made to work all day. At night, we slept in tents. In winter, water was seeping below our bedding, which was dry leaves, cartons and wooden pieces.”

Another prisoner in Umm Khalied, Marwan Iqab al-Yehiya said in an interview with the authors, “We had to cut and carry stones all day [in a quarry]. Our daily food was only one potato in the morning and half dried fish at night. They beat anyone who disobeyed orders.” This labor was interspersed with acts of humiliation by the Israeli guards, with Yehiya speaking of prisoners being “lined up and ordered to strip naked as a punishment for the escape of two prisoners at night.”

“[Jewish] Adults and children came from nearby kibbutz to watch us line up naked and laugh. To us this was most degrading,” he added.

Abuses by the Israeli guards were systematic and rife in the camps, the brunt of which was directed toward villagers, farmers, and lower class Palestinians. This was so, the study said, because educated prisoners “knew their rights and had the confidence to argue with and stand up to their captors.”

What is also interestingly noted by the study is how ideological affiliations between prisoners and their guards, had another effect in terms of the relationship between them. The study, cites the testimony of Kamal Ghattas, who was captured during the Israeli attack in the Galilee, who said:

We had a fight with our jailers. Four hundred of us confronted 100 soldiers. They brought reinforcements. Three of my friends and I were taken to a cell. They threatened to shoot us. All night we sang the Communist Anthem. They took the four of us to Umm Khaled camp. The Israelis were afraid of their image in Europe. Our contact with our Central Committee and Mapam [Socialist Israeli party] saved us .… I met a Russian officer and told him they took us from our homes although we were non-combatants which was against the Geneva Conventions. When he knew I was a Communist he embraced me and said, “Comrade, I have two brothers in the Red Army. Long live Stalin. Long Live Mother Russia”.

Yet, the less fortunate Palestinians faced acts of violence which included arbitrary executions and torture, with no recourse. The executions were always defended as stopping “escape attempts” – real or claimed by the guards.

It became so common that one former Palestinian detainee of Tel Litwinsky, Tewfic Ahmed Jum’a Ghanim recounted, “Anyone who refused to work was shot. They said [the person] tried to escape. Those of us who thought [we] were going to be killed walked backward facing the guards.”

Ultimately, by the end of 1949, Palestinian prisoners were gradually released after heavy lobbying by the ICRC, and other organizations, but was limited in scale and very focused to specific cases. Prisoners of Arab armies were released in prisoner exchanges, but Palestinian prisoners were unilaterally expelled across the armistice line without any food, supplies, or shelter, and told to walk into the distance, never to return.

It would not be until 1955 that most of the Palestinian civilian prisoners would finally be released.

Forced Labour Camps Atlas. (Source: Salman Abu Sitta, Palestine Land Society)

An enduring crime

The importance of this study is multi-faceted. Not only does it reveal the numerous violations of international law and conventions of the age, such as 1907 Hague Regulations and the 1929 Geneva Conventions, but also shows how the event shaped the ICRC in the long run.

Because the ICRC was faced with an Israeli belligerent actor who was unwilling to listen and conform to international law and conventions, the ICRC itself had to adapt in what it considered were practical ways to help ensure the Palestinian civilian prisoners were protected under the barest of rights.

Citing his final report, the study quotes de Reynier:

[The ICRC] protested on numerous occasions affirming the right of these civilians to enjoy their freedom unless found guilty and judged by a court. But we have tacitly accepted their POW status because in this way they would enjoy the rights conferred upon them by the Convention. Otherwise, if they were not in the camps they would be expelled [to an Arab country] and in one way or another, they would lead, without resources, the miserable life of refugees.

In the end, the ICRC, and other organizations, were simply ineffective as Israel ignored its condemnations with impunity, in addition to the diplomatic cover of major Western powers.

More importantly, the study sheds more light on the extent of the Israeli crimes during its brutal and bloody birth. And “much more remains to be told,” as the final line of the study states.

“It is amazing to me, and many Europeans, who have seen my evidence,” Abu Sitta said, “that a forced labor camp was opened in Palestine three years after they were closed in Germany, and were run by former prisoners – there were German Jewish guards.”

“This is a bad reflection of the human spirit, where the oppressed copies an oppressor against innocent lives,” he added. The study essentially shows the foundations and beginnings of Israeli policy towards Palestinian civilians that comes in the form of kidnapping, arrest, and detainment. This criminality continues till this day. One merely has to read the reports on the hundreds of Palestinians arrested prior, during, and after Israel’s latest war on Gaza mid-summer of this year.

“Gaza today is a concentration camp, no different than the past,” Abu Sitta concluded to Al-Akhbar English.

Yazan is a staff writer for Al-Akhbar English. Follow him on Twitter: @WhySadeye

 

israel’s war on Palestine’s water supplies: UNICEF-funded water pipeline destroyed in Jordan Valley

Israeli forces destroy UNICEF-funded water pipeline in Jordan Valley

Ma’an – February 20, 2017

 

(File)

NABLUS (Ma’an) — Israeli forces demolished a water pipeline in the Jordan Valley region of the occupied West Bank on Monday, after the same pipeline was destroyed earlier this month, according to local sources.

 
Muataz Bisharat, a local official who monitors Israeli activities in the Jordan Valley, told Ma’an that Israeli bulldozers destroyed the eight-and-a-half kilometers pipeline running between the Bedouin communities of al-Hadidiya and al-Ras al-Ahmar in the northern Jordan Valley, east of the Tubas district.
He said that 47 Palestinian families depended on the pipeline as their water source.
According to Bisharat, the pipeline was funded by international humanitarian organization UNICEF, at a construction cost of 12,500 euros (approximately $13,270). He said that it was the second time this month that Israeli forces had destroyed the pipeline.
A spokesperson for Israel’s Coordination of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT), which is responsible for implementing the Israeli government’s policy in the occupied Palestinian territory, did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the incident.
Following a spate of demolitions targeting Bedouin communities in the occupied West Bank last year, which included the destruction of a new drinking water network supported by UNICEF, the UN’s Humanitarian Coordinator in Palestine Robert Piper warned of the risk of forcible transfer of Bedouin communities.
“Repeated rounds of demolitions, restrictions on access to basic services and regular visits by Israeli security personnel promoting ‘relocation plans’ are all part of a coercive environment that now surrounds these vulnerable Palestinian households,” Piper said at the time, highlighting that Palestinian communities in the Jordan Valley already suffered from extreme water scarcity.
UNOCHA documented in 2016 the highest number of demolitions in the occupied territory since the agency first began recording them.
Since the beginning of 2017, Israeli forces carried out demolitions in the Jordan Valley on at least six other occasions, in addition to seizing irrigation hoses in the region.
According to UNICEF, which manages and funds projects in the Jordan Valley to improve water and sanitation infrastructure, lack of clean water in the occupied territory forces Palestinians to make “unhealthy compromises” by trading off between household or personal hygiene.
Amnesty International estimates that up to 200,000 Palestinians in the West Bank do not have access to running water.
Meanwhile, just half of Palestinian proposals for wells and improvement projects to the water network were approved by Israel between 1995 and 2008, compared to a 100 percent approval rate for Israeli projects, according to Palestinian human rights group Al-Haq.
As a result, demolitions of Palestinian infrastructure and residences occur frequently in areas fully controlled by the Israeli military, known as Area C.
Some 88 percent of the Jordan Valley is classified as Area C , making the region’s Bedouin and herding communities particularly vulnerable to such policies.

ما المفاجآت التي خبأها السيد نصرالله..؟

السبت 18 شباط , 2017 22:41

إيهاب زكي – بيروت برس – 

لم يعد من المبهر أو الصادم اكتشاف التحالفات العربية “الإسرائيلية”، بل أصبح تخوين أصحاب هذه التحالفات بحد ذاته خيانة وطنية، كما أمست التبعية لهذا الكيان حكمة تمليها الضرورة، والفضل في الوصول لهذا الدرك يعود للنفط حصرًا، وكما تعامل الإعلام النفطي مع خطاب السيد نصرالله في يوم سادة النصر، بأنه يمثل خيانة للوطن والمواطن اللبناني، فما علاقة لبنان وما الضير الذي سيلحق بالمواطن اللبناني إن كان هناك حلف إماراتي “إسرائيلي” أو سعودي “إسرائيلي” أو عربي “إسرائيلي”. وأينما وجدت عربيًا أو مسلمًا ينادي بالتطبيع مع هذا الكيان لا بد وأن تجد أنه مدفوع نفطيًا، أو أقله ذو خلفية نفطية، فهذا مثلًا يوسف الكودة رئيس حزب الوسط الإسلامي في السودان يدعو حكومته لإقامة علاقات مع “إسرائيل”، وهو حزب سلفي لكنه يوصف بـ”السلفية المخففة”، ورئيسه خريج جامعة محمد بن سعود في أبها، وهو يعتبر أن السودان خسر ماديًا ومعنويًا من معاداة “إسرائيل”، كما رحب بزيارة الكيان إذا دعاه للزيارة، وهو يؤصل لهذه الخيانات شرعيًا وفقهيًا.

ومن هذه الأمثلة ننطلق بالقول، بأن السيد نصرالله كما يبدو وحيدًا في مواجهة هذا الإعصار الصهيوني، إلا أنه رجلٌ بأمة، فما الفائدة التي ستجنيها “إسرائيل” من كل هذه الجهات دولًا أو أفرادًا أو منظمات وتنظيمات، مقارنةً بترويعٍ واحدٍ يزرعه السيد نصرالله في عقلها وقلبها. فالسيد نصرالله بخطابٍ واحدٍ قادر على طي آلاف الصفحات الكاذبة من تطمينات حكومة العدو لجمهورها، وخطابٌ واحدٌ قادر على أن تقوم هذه الحكومة بإلقاء كل مخططاتها للعدوان على لبنان في أقرب سلة للمهملات، وفتح الخزائن والعقول لإعادة رسم مخططات تتناسب مع ما أحدثه الخطاب من ترويع، ومن المفارقات الطريفة أن هذه الخطابات تساهم باستنزاف خزائن النفط أيضًا، من خلال المساهمة في تحديث الخطط الصهيونية، وإطلاق الأقلام والألسن عبر القنوات والصحف ومراكز الأبحاث للنيل من شخص السيد نصرالله، ولكن كل هذا الإحداث اللفظي لن يساهم إلا في إشباع رغبات الغوغاء، وهذا ما لن يكون له اي تأثير على أي قدرة ميدانية قتالية أو سياسية للحزب.

وخطاب سادة النصر للسيد نصرالله دليل واضح على وهن الكيان الصهيوني، كما أنه دليل قاطع على أن السيد نصرالله يوازي بحد ذاته عشر فيالق للحرب النفسية، وأثبت أنه قادر على أن يجعل من الأمر الطبيعي مفاجأة صادمة، فكيف سيُسخّر المفاجآت الحقيقية. فقبل سنوات قال السيد نصرالله “لا توجد منطقة في فلسطين المحتلة خارج نطاق صواريخنا”، وقال أيضًا “ليعلم العدو أن الحرب القادمة في حال وقوعها، ستكون بلا سقف وبلا حدود وبلا خطوط حمراء”، ومن الطبيعي الاستنتاج من هاتين الجملتين أن مفاعل ديمونا لن يكون خارج نطاق الاستهداف، ولكن اجتماع ما يمثله السيد نصرالله من هاجسٍ مرعب في العقلية الصهيونية، مع صدقه وجرأته وقوة شكيمته، يجعل من عاديّاته مفاجآت لمجرد تغيير صياغة الجملة أو المفردات، وسيعمد العدو تحت وقع هذه الصدمة لأن يسخر كل طاقاته في محاولة لاستكشاف هول ما يحتفظ به السيد من مفاجآت، فإذا كان ما سيلي خارج نطاق المفاجآت، فما طبيعة تلك المفاجآت:
1-    استهداف حاويات الأمونيا في حيفا.
2-    استهداف السفن الناقلة لمادة الأمونيا.
3-    استهداف مفاعل ديمونا.
4-    صواريخ تطال كل نقطة في فلسطين المحتلة.
5-    إمكانية الدخول إلى الجليل.
6-    استهداف سلاح البحرية.
7-    تدمير أغلب ألوية جيش العدو في حال الدخول برًا إلى جنوب لبنان.
8-    القدرة التدميرية العالية لصواريخ الحزب.
9-    حصار بحري على كيان العدو.
10-    معادلة مطار بيروت مقابل مطار “بن غوريون” وبيروت مقابل “تل أبيب”.
ناهيك عن تلويح السيد من قبل بإمكانية امتلاك منظومة دفاع جوي، وذلك حين دعا الحكومة اللبنانية للتصدي لاختراقات سلاح الجو الصهيوني، وإلا سيكون الحزب مضطرًا للتصرف، لذلك إن سؤال المفاجأة أو المفاجآت التي يحتفظ بها الحزب دون كل ما سبق مما دخل دائرة التوقع، كفيل بقضّ مضاجع ذلك الكيان بقده وقديده.

ويبدو أنّ لهذا السؤال إجابة واحدة لا سواها، وليست هذه الإجابة تحمَّل السيد نصرالله وحزب الله ما لا طاقة لهما به، حين نقول بأنها حرب إزالة الكيان، وقد تكون المفاجأة الأولى أنها ليست حربًا ثنائية، بل ستكون حرب الجبهات المتعددة، الجبهة اللبنانية والسورية والجبهة الجنوبية في غزة مع مشاركة إيرانية، وهذا يقود إلى طبيعة المفاجأة الثانية وهي حرب الزوال، رغم أن السيد نصرالله لم يقل ذلك، وأنا شخصيًا لن تفاجئني هذه المفاجأة، حيث يبدو الكيان الصهيوني في هذه اللحظة كلاعب الشطرنج الذي يعتقد يقينًا بانتصاره لكثرة ما أطاح بأحجار الخصم، لكنه يتفاجأ بالعبارة المميتة والقاضية “كش ملك”، فـ”نتن ياهو” يتفاخر بأنّ كيانه في نظر العرب لم يعد عدوًا بل حليفًا، وهذا ما يجعله يظن بانتصاره، وكل أولئك الملوك والأمراء والرؤساء على رقعة الشطرنج العربية أصبحوا في قبضته، ولكن لا زال هناك لاعبٌ مقتدرٌ يتربص به التوقيت المناسب، ليفاجئه بـ”كش ملك” وذلك هو محور المقاومة.

 

Related Videos


Related Articles

New Military Alliance to Be Formed in Middle East

New Military Alliance to Be Formed in Middle East

PETER KORZUN | 17.02.2017 | WORLD

New Military Alliance to Be Formed in Middle East

Combining available information to get the whole picture, one can see the situation in the Middle East changing drastically, especially as the US strategy is reviewed and new alliances are formed.

The Trump administration is in talks with Middle East allies about forming a military alliance that would share intelligence with Israel to help counter Iran, according to several Middle Eastern officials.

The planned coalition would include countries such as Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait and Bahrain. Egypt and Jordan have longstanding peace treaties with Israel. For the Arab countries involved, the alliance would have a NATO-style mutual-defense component under which an attack on one member would be treated as an attack on all, though details are still being worked out. The US and Israel will cooperate without full-fledged membership. According to the Wall Street Journal, «one Arab diplomat suggested that the notion that the Trump administration might designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist group was being floated as an incentive for Egypt to join the alliance».

US President Donald Trump has assured visiting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that Tehran would never be able to build a nuclear weapon.

«The security challenges faced by Israel are enormous, including the threat of Iran’s nuclear ambitions, which I’ve talked a lot about. One of the worst deals I’ve ever seen is the Iran deal», Trump told reporters at a joint news conference with Netanyahu at the White House. Reading the statement between the lines, it becomes evident that the US is ready to go much further than warnings and sanctions to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear capability.

Russian Izvestia daily reported the US plans to substantially increase its military presence in Iraq. The newspaper cited its own sources in the U.S. Republican Party. The plans include a few thousand troops to arrive in Iraq in the coming months. The reinforcement will continue the policy of the Obama administration, which was gradually expanding the military presence in that country.

It was reported on February 16 that the Pentagon was developing proposals for sending an unspecified number of American military personnel into Syria, conventional ground forces which would augment the 500 combat advisers already there coordinating efforts to destroy the Islamic State (IS).

Military Times reports that multiple US Army sources indicated that about two thousand soldiers with the 82nd Airborne Division’s 2nd Brigade Combat Team may soon bolster other Army elements already in the region. Currently, about 1,800 paratroopers from the 2nd BCT are in Iraq participating in the US military’s train-and-advise mission. The 82ndAirborne Division is based at Fort Bragg in North Carolina. Citing an unidentified U.S. defense official, CNN indicated additional deployments could happen within weeks. Today, there are about 5,000 US troops deployed to Iraq and another 500 in Syria.

The White House indicated in January that it could task the military with establishing «safe zones» on Syrian soil. A large number of troops would be needed to defend havens, pitting them against pro-government forces as well as rival rebel groups. Without approval by UN Security Council, few nations will contribute leaving the US alone to shoulder the main burden. Hundreds of aircraft will have to be deployed to carry out the mission.

Deploying substantial forces in the Middle East risks putting the US on a slippery slope to further involvement in the war. Safe zones should not become no-fly zones to impede the operations of Russian and Syrian air forces. If the US decides to continue with the idea, it should it become an issue on the agenda for talks with Russia before any practical steps are taken to implement it.

It’s not Arab states only. Army Gen. John Nicholson, the top US commander in Afghanistan, told lawmakers on February 9 that thousands more American or NATO troops are needed to break the «stalemate» between Afghan forces and the Taliban insurgent group while the IS also remains active in the nation. The general did not specify how many additional troops were needed, but did not rule out the potential for up to 30,000.

The strategy, which relied on special forces teams and intensive operations conducted by drones, may become a thing of the past, with the U.S. returning to large-scale presence.

The terrorist activities of the IS go beyond the scope of a regional problem. There are a few options here for cooperation of the military agencies and special services of Russia and the US ranging from intelligence exchange on IS to exercising influence on the countries affected by the war with the terrorist threat.

Whatever are the plans of Trump’s administration aimed at changing the Middle East strategy, the US cannot go it alone there. It needs allies, partners, and friendly pertinent actors to coordinate activities with. This shows how important it is to speed up bilateral and multilateral discussions.

It all goes to show that Russia and the US should speed up launching regular contacts to exchange opinions on the situation in the Middle East. On February 16, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Joseph Dunford met face to face with their Russian counterparts Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Chief of General Staff General Valeriy Gerasimov in Bonn and Baku respectively. Hopefully, the first contacts will spur the process and the parties will be engaged in dialogue concerning major security issues. The volatile situation in the Middle East should be addressed without delay as part of preparations for a possible summit in Slovenia.

معادلة القرن ترامب والسيد: مَن يمنع الوهم ومَن يردع الحقيقة؟

معادلة القرن ترامب والسيد: مَن يمنع الوهم ومَن يردع الحقيقة؟

ناصر قنديل

– في الفوارق بين مدرستين في الحرب النفسية ظهرتا في حرب تموز عام 2006 جهد الباحثون والعلماء المختصون بعلوم الحرب، خصوصاً الحرب النفسية لتمييز الفوارق بين المدرستين، واحدة هي المدرسة «الإسرائيلية» التي ذاع صيتها خلال خمسين عاماً سبقت الحرب بصفتها من أقوى المدارس العالمية، حتى بدأت تدرّس في كليات الحرب الغربية بصفتها المدرسة النموذجية، التي حلّت مكان المدرسة الألمانية النازية ونجمها غوبلز الذي ذاع صيته في الحرب العالمية الثانية وكيف كانت خططه الإعلامية تنجح بإسقاط عواصم ودول بإطلاق إشاعة أو خبر، حتى صار غوبلز مدعاة سخرية بفعل الدعاية «الإسرائيلية» التي استهدفته كمنافس في علوم الحرب النفسية، ولم يبقَ من مدرسته إلا نظرية «اكذب حتى يصدقك الآخرون»، ونجح «الإسرائيليون» بتسخيف مدرسة غوبلز وتبوأوا الصدارة مكانها ما بعد الحرب العالمية الثانية. حتى جاءت المدرسة الثانية، مدرسة المقاومة في الحرب النفسية التي يمثل الأمين العام لحزب الله السيد حسن نصرالله بطلها الأول، ومؤسسها وصانع إنجازاتها، وجاء انتصارها في حرب تموز ليمنحها صفة المدرسة المتفوّقة على المدرسة «الإسرائيلية». وبدأت البحوث تسعى لتبيان الفوارق ومصادر القوة الجديدة التي نجحت بالتفوق على المدرسة التي نظر إليها العالم بإعجاب كأولى مدارس العالم المتفوقة في خوض الحرب النفسية وتحقيق النصر فيها.

– كان التفوّق الذي تختزنه المدرسة «الإسرائيلية» يقوم على فلسفة كيّ الوعي التي أطلقها مؤسس الكيان المحتلّ ديفيد بن غوريون، وقوامها اللجوء للقوة المفرطة بوحشية التدمير والقتل لتعميم ثقافة الموت كثمن لكل مَن يفكّر في مقاومة الاحتلال، ولاحقاً في استعمال كل مصادر القدرة الحربية والنارية في مناطق الألم لكل دولة تفكر باللجوء للحرب على «إسرائيل»، ومواكبة هذا السلوك الميداني بالرسائل الإعلامية والنفسية التي ترسخ فكرة العجز عن المواجهة والقدر المحتوم بالهلاك والفناء لمن يفكّر فيها أو ينوي سلوك طريقها، فيصير تصريح «إسرائيلي» صحافي كافياً لتراجع دولة عن بناء منشأة مدنية، مثل مشروع جر مياه الوزاني في لبنان عام 1964، ويصير اللجوء لإحراق طائرات شركة طيران الشرق الأوسط اللبنانيّة فوق مدرجات مطار بيروت، رسالة كيّ وعي كافية عام 1968 للقول إن كلفة الوجود الفلسطيني المقاوم لـ«إسرائيل» أكبر بكثير من كلفة مواجهته. وتنطلق حضانة لبنانية لحرب على الوجود الفلسطيني المقاوم من وحي هذه الرسالة.

– بعد ظهور المقاومة وتناميها في جنوب لبنان وصولاً للتحرير العام 2000 دخل اللاعب الجديد المنتصر في الحرب الواقعية التي حدثت فعلاً، ليصير شريكاً على ساحة خوض الحرب النفسية، بينما «إسرائيل» تواصل ما كانت عليه من دون أن تقوم بتقييم مدى صلاحية مدرستها على مواصلة الطريقة التقليدية ذاتها التي نجحت في الماضي من دون التحقق وفحص مدى صلاحيتها للحاضر والمستقبل. وقد ظهر من نتاج الحرب «الإسرائيلية» مع المقاومة أن كيَّ الوعي قد أخفق في ردع مئات من اللبنانيين صاروا ألوفاً عن تشكيل حركة مقاومة والسير بها حتى نهاية التضحيات وأعلاها كلفة، وصولاً لجعل المسار معكوساً بإيصال رسالة قوامها، «لا جدوى من مواصلة احتلالكم أرضنا»، بدلاً من لا جدوى من تفكيركم في المقاومة». وفي الواقع تلقت «إسرائيل» رسالة المقاومة وسارت في النهاية بموجبها عبر انسحابها عام 2000، فيما تعطلت الرسالة «الإسرائيلية» عن الوصول والفعل، ولم تنفع المكابرة «الإسرائيلية» والمضي قدماً في المدرسة نفسها في منع نمو المدرسة الجديدة للمقاومة، التي رسمت معادلتها الذهبية في ساحة بنت جبيل بالكلمة الشهيرة لسيد المقاومة التي لا زال صداها يتردّد «إسرائيل أوهن من بيت العنكبوت». وجاء كل شيء بعد هذا التاريخ لحرب إرادات يجب أن تحسم النتيجة لصالح تأكيد المعادلة أو نفيها، وبالتالي تثبيت أي من المدرستين أبقى. وكانت حرب تموز عام 2006 هي اللحظة التي ستحسم، كيّ الوعي أم وعي الكيّ وكيّه بوعي جديد. بعد الحرب أمكن للمقاومة أن تخرج وتقول مجدداً بلسان سيّدها، «نعم إسرائيل أوهن من بيت العنكبوت»، بعدما أضافت إلى مخزونها في الحرب النفسية معادلات من نوع، «أردتموها حرباً مفتوحة فلتكن حرباً مفتوحة»، وانتظرونا «لقد أعددنا لكم من المفاجآت ما سيغيّر وجهة الحرب».. وهكذا كان تفجير المدمّرة ساعر وسواها من المفاجآت، وصولاً إلى الرد على معادلة تدمير صواريخ المقاومة بمعادلة «حيفا وما بعد حيفا وما بعد ما بعد حيفا».

– تميّز التفوق الجوهري في مدرسة المقاومة بكونها لم تطلق معادلات تراهن على التهويل والخوف والردع النفسي في تجنيبها الاختبار العملي، بل تجنّبت إطلاق أي معادلة تخشى اختبارها الفعلي في الميدان، وربّما حرصت على جعل معادلاتها المعلنة أدنى مستوى من قدراتها الفعلية دائماً، فصارت قوة الردع النفسي مضاعفة. فعندما تقول المقاومة ما بعد حيفا لا يصل لعقل العدو التحسّب ليافا بل للنقب وإيلات، لأن المقاومة دائماً لديها مفاجآت. بينما بقيت مدرسة «إسرائيل» تقوم على توظيف ميراثها السابق من التفوق واستحضار ذاكرة أمجاد الحروب التي خاضتها لترمي معادلات أعلى من قدرتها على خوض اختبارها العملي، كما حدث مع معادلة «ما بعد الليطاني» في حرب تموز، أو «سحق حزب الله»، أو «تدمير القدرة الصاروخية وإسكاتها»، وكلها معادلات أثبتت الحرب أنها فوق قدرة «إسرائيل». بينما بدأ سيد المقاومة الحرب بمعادلة قوامها، لسنا كحركة مقاومة معنيين بالدفاع عن خط جغرافي معيّن، فقد يصل العدو إلى الليطاني وما بعد الليطاني، لكننا نعده بحرب يحمل فيها على ظهور جنوده أشلاء قتلاه ودباباته، وفرقه العشرة التي يقول إنه أعدّها لنا ستعود أشلاء مقطّعة. وانتهت الحرب عند خط الحدود وقد مُنع «الإسرائيليون» من التقدّم شبراً داخل الأراضي اللبنانية إلا كأشلاء رجال ودبابات، والخاتمة بنصر مدوٍّ لمدرسة المقاومة في الحرب النفسية.

– تظهر خطابات الرئيس الأميركي دونالد ترامب، أن المدرسة «الإسرائيلية» للحرب النفسية هي مولود من رحم المدرسة الأميركية، وأن ترامب يخوض حرباً نفسية، عنوانها كيّ الوعي، تهدف لتحقيق منجزات سياسية وميدانية بالرهان على الرعب والذعر من خروج أميركا للحرب، والرهان على التلويح بها لتحقيق أهدافها، من دون خوضها. ويبدو التركيز على إيران كقلعة لحركات المقاومة في المنطقة وسندٍ لها، هدفاً مباشراً للتحدي الأميركي الذي يسعى ترامب للتعامل معه، ويجهد مع شريكه بنيامين نتنياهو لوضعه تحت مجهر التصويب. ووفقاً لخطة مايكل فلين الذي رحل قبل أن يفرح باستقبال نتنياهو من موقعه كمستشار للأمن القومي، فالتصعيد الكلامي على إيران يجب أن ينتهي برسالة مضمونها أن على إيران أن تختار بين انسحاب حزب الله من سورية أو المواجهة المفتوحة. وهذا يعني تأمين متطلبات الأمن «الإسرائيلي» من الجبهة الشمالية الشرقية مقابل أمن الملف النووي الإيراني.

– تعاملت إيران بالتجاهل التام مع الرسائل الأميركية، وأرسل الإمام الخامنئي ردوداً من العيار الثقيل على التهديدات الأميركية، فعندما قال ترامب إنه سيلغي الاتفاق النووي، قال السيد الخامنئي إن كنتم ستلغون الاتفاق فنحن سنحرقه. وعندما قال الأميركيون إن الخيار العسكري على الطاولة ردّ السيد الخامنئي لماذا تبقونه على الطاولة هاتوه لنختبره في الميدان، ووصل تصاعد الاشتباك بمفهوم الحرب النفسية إلى الذروة، حيث لقاء نتنياهو ترامب يقترب، فخرج ترامب بمعادلة قوامها، سنمنع إيران من امتلاك السلاح النووي مهما كلّف الثمن، وهو يعلم أنه يقاتل وهماً، لأن الامتناع عن امتلاك السلاح النووي هو قاعدة الاتفاق الذي هدّد بإلغائه أولاً، ولأن الامتناع هو فعل طوعي معلَن من إيران ثانياً، ويصير التهديد الأميركي هنا كالتهديد للرئيس السوري ما لم يقبل بحلّ سياسي، وهو صاحب الدعوة الأصلية للحلّ السياسي، بينما كانت واشنطن صاحبة الدعوة للحل العسكري، ومنع المعارضة من قبول التفاوض، أو تهديد موسكو ما لم تقبل وقف التجارب النووية، وموسكو هي مَن يدعو لذلك. وهذا الحال هو التعبير عن هزال الحرب النفسية وتدنّي مفاعيل القوة إلى أدنى مستوياتها.

– في الذروة يسقط ترامب ومعه نتنياهو، وفي الذروة يخرج سيد المقاومة إلى حربه النفسية وهما يجتمعان ليقطعا اجتماعهما ويستمعا للمعادلة الجديدة، ليس على «إسرائيل» تفريغ مستودعات الأمونيا من حيفا فقط، بل تفكيك مفاعل ديمونا، لأن الحرب المقبلة ستتيح للمقاومة استعمال السلاح الكيميائي بتفجير مستودعات الأمونيا واستعمال السلاح النووي بتفجير ديمونا. والمعادلة هي أن إيران التي تقاتلونها وتهدّدونها لأجل خوفكم من دعمها لحزب الله، لأنه الواقف على الحدود وخطوط الاشتباك مع «إسرائيل»، وتريدون الشعور بالأمان إلى أنها لن تمتلك سلاحاً نووياً، وبالتالي لن يصير السلاح النووي جزءاً من معادلة الردع لدى المقاومة، فها نحن نبلغكم من الآن أن سلاحكم النووي الحقيقي، سيكون سلاحنا النووي لتدميركم به، من دون الحاجة لامتلاك سلاح نووي لا نحتاجه، ولن نحتاج لسماع تهديداتكم لمنع امتلاكنا له، فهو بين أيدينا ما دام مفاعلكم النووي في مرمى صواريخنا.

– في التوقيت والمضمون والدقة، رسم السيد معادلة الردع لترامب ونتنياهو معاً، معادلة حرب نفسية للقرن الحادي والعشرين.

(Visited 2٬245 times, 231 visits today)
 
Related Video
 




Congresswoman Betty McCollum tells Netanyahu to end abuse of Palestinian children

Source

Palestinian children protest to show solidarity with child prisoners in Israeli jails, Gaza city, January 2015.

Mohammed Asad APA images

 

A member of Congress said she had “a clear message” for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who was in Washington on Wednesday: he must respect the rights of Palestinian children.

As US President Donald Trump and the Israeli leader held a joint press conference at the White House, Representative Betty McCollum of Minnesota challenged Israel’s systematic abuses of Palestinian children in a post on Facebook.

“Israel’s military detention system arrests, interrogates and prosecutes as many as 700 Palestinian children – as young as 11 years old – every year,” McCollum says. “Abuse is rampant and children often have no lawyer or parent present during detention and interrogation.”

“Israel must end the abusive military detention of Palestinian children,” she adds. “Israeli children, Palestinian children – all children – should be able to live free of systematic, state-sponsored human rights abuses! Respecting the human rights of children is the only path to peace and security in the Middle East.”

McCollum also took to Twitter to demand accountability from Netanyahu:

     Rep. Betty McCollum

 @BettyMcCollum04

As @netanyahu visits today, Israel must respect human rights & end abusive military detention of Palestinian children. 

Breaking silence

McCollum continues to break with the vast majority of US lawmakers who refuse to challenge Israeli policy.

In June 2015, the Democrat authored a letter, co-signed by 18 other members of Congress, demanding that the Obama adminstration push Israel to end its abuses of Palestinian children.

Two months later, the lawmaker called for sanctions on the Israeli Border Police unit responsible for killing Palestinian teenagers Nadim Nuwara and Muhammad Abu al-Thahir on 15 May 2014.

The boys were shot in cold blood at a Nakba Day protest – their killings caught on video – near the Ofer military prison in the occupied West Bank village of Beitunia.

McCollum initiated another push in June 2016 urging Obama to appoint a special envoy to protect the rights of Palestinian children under Israeli occupation. Lawmakers who signed McCollum’s letter condemned Israel’s rampant use of administrative detention – incarceration without charge or trial – against Palestinian children in Israeli military jails.

Grassroots activists with the No Way to Treat a Child campaign – a joint initiative of Defense for Children International – Palestine and the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC) – have been working closely with lawmakers on the issue of Palestinian children in detention.

“Congresswoman McCollum’s leadership and integrity inspires us,” AFSC’s Jennifer Bing told The Electronic Intifada.

“Her voice is among a growing number of Congress members who are speaking up for the human rights of Palestinian children – children who face systematic oppression and denial of rights by the Israeli army,” Bing added.

Inspired by the No Way to Treat a Child campaign in the US, activists in Australia gathered the support of 49 members of Parliament last November on a letter calling for Israel to end its abuses of Palestinian children

%d bloggers like this: