U.S., Israel and Arab puppets want to “Syrianize” Iran: Prof. Entessar


September 25, 2018 – 11:9

TEHRAN – Commenting on Ahvaz attack Prof. Entessar says U.S., Israel, Saudi Arabia and UAE’s principal goal is to create chaos in Iran to disintegrate the country.

A terrorist attack during a military parade on people in Ahvaz, southwest Iran left tens of innocent civilians killed and injured.

Hours after the attack Saudi backed Al-ahvazi separatist terrorist group and ISIL claimed the responsibility for the terrorist attack.

To shed more light on the issue we reached out to Prof. Nader Entessar Emeritus of Political Science in University of South Alabama.

Following is the full text of his interview:

Q: Do you see any foreign elements behind this attack?

A: It is too early to identify the real culprits behind the recent terrorist attack in Ahvaz.  I hope that the appropriate authorities in Iran are taking this matter very seriously and conduct a thorough and professional investigation and eschew issuing contradictory and vacuous statements.  Once the investigation is completed, Iran must take swift and decisive action to respond to this heinous terrorist attack.  

Q: Saudi Arabia and UAE didn’t condemn the terrorist attack. Why?  

A: These two countries have become sworn enemies of Iran in recent years, and by that, I don’t mean just the Islamic Republic but the country of Iran.  Therefore, I was not surprised that they have not condemned the Ahvaz terrorist attack.  Besides, they may indeed be responsible for funding and organizing the terrorist attack.  Thus, they should not be expected to condemn it.

Q: How do you assess the U.S. administration’s reaction to the attack which it did not explicitly call the action as a terrorist act?  

A: I did not expect the Trump administration to call the attack a terrorist act.  If you recall, a similar attack occurred last June when a group of Takfiris gunned down innocent Iranians in the Majlis area, the Trump administration seemed to be giddy about it and intimated that Iran had it coming to it.  No terrorist act against Iran will be called a terrorist act by the U.S. administration no matter how dastardly it may be.  

Q: What can be the real goal of the attack perpetrators at this time?

A: The Ahvaz terrorist attack should not be considered an isolated incident.  Here are two interconnected axes operating against Iran today.  One is the Washington axis and the other one is the Saudi Arabia-Israel-UAE axis.  Although they may pursue different tactics against Iran, they have one overall strategy towards Tehran.  Their principal goal is to create chaos in Iran and thus hasten the demise of the Iranian government and even the disintegration of the country.  In short, these two axes want to “Syrianize” Iran by any means necessary.  At times, they may focus on economic strangulation of the country, at other times they may organize terrorist attacks inside the country, while at other times they may rely on a combination of highlighting their soft war strategy with “hard war” tactics.    


Iran: Mastermind of Ahvaz Terrorist Attack Killed in Iraq

Local Editor

Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guards Corps [IRGC] announced that a high-ranking commander of the Daesh Takfiri terrorist group, who apparently masterminded the recent deadly terror attack in the southwestern Iranian city of Ahvaz, has been killed in Iraq’s eastern province of Diyala.

The IRGC public relations department announced in a statement released on Tuesday evening that the high-profile militant, better known by the nom de guerre Abu Dhoha, was killed along with four assistants in an ambush carried out by the Iraqi pro-government Popular Mobilization Units – commonly known by the Arabic word Hashd al-Sha’abi.

On October 1, the IRGC rained surface-to surface ballistic missiles on the positions of Daesh in eastern Syria, which along with the al-Ahwazia separatist group took responsibility for the September 22 terrorist attack in Ahvaz.

The IRGC announced in a statement that the missiles were launched at 2 am local time from the western Iranian city of Kermanshah.

The statement added that drones bombarded Daesh positions after the missile strikes.

On September 22, four gunmen attacked a military parade in Ahvaz, martyring at least 25 people and wounding 69 others. A four-year-old boy was among the fallen victims.

Source: News Agencies, Edited by website team

Related Articles

Iran’s definitive account of the Iraq war: Written by a female Iraqi Kurd

Iran’s definitive account of the Iraq war: Written by a female Iraqi Kurd

by Ramin Mazaheri for The Saker Blog

On September 22nd there was a terrible terrorist attack in the Iranian city of Ahvaz which killed 25 innocent people and wounded 70 other people. This was universally reported in the West as having occurred at a “military parade”, when it was actually a parade to commemorate the 1980 start of the Western-backed, Western-funded, Western-armed invasion which used Iraq to try to destroy the democratic 1979 Iranian Revolution.

But none of those accurate adjectives can be said in the West…no, no, no – it was just a no-reason-needed military parade, as if Iran was a warmongering nation prepping its fanatical people for imperialist adventures. (Iran has not invaded a country in well-over 200 years.)

The timing of the attack was obviously (though not primarily) a way to divert the world’s attention from the deadliest conflict of the last quarter of the 20th century. Instead of talking about what disaster and death was heaped on Iran from 1980-1988, it was Iranian “militarism” which was discussed and not anyone else’s.

But ho-hum, more misreporting on Iran. In other news: the sun rose this morning. This is just life for all socialist-inspired democratic revolutions – Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam, China, etc., have all had their sufferings ignored, their mistakes amplified and their successes denied. To even raise this point makes one an unthinking “apologist”, an Islamofascist, a totalitarian commie, blah blah blah.

This is the front cover art for the book One Woman’s War: Da (Mother) written by Seyedeh Azam Hosseini. The book cover art copyright is believed to belong to Mazda Publishers.

The tragic event, and the subsequent false histories of the Western media, makes this an appropriate time to bring up what has become the most important literary reference for Iranians regarding the war – a book called Da. “Da” means mother in Kurdish, and not in Farsi. The book was written by a woman whose Iraqi Kurdish family had emigrated to Iran when she was a child.

How could the definitive account on the Iranian view of the Iran-Iraq War have been written by an Iraqi Kurd, and a female to boot?!

You would think Iranians hate Iraqis; you are certain that Iran hates women; and you assume that Iran has a war against the Kurds, just like Iraq, Turkey and Syria. If you assume everyone follows the dictates of capitalism’s identity politics, you likely would predict that this book is a litany of accusations and compiled hatreds towards Iran.

If you assume all these things it’s because you fail to realize that Iran’s 1979 Islamic Revolution was inspired by socialism, which demands a citizen and a government loudly banish racism from the public sphere. Much like this stoned surfer-dude American idiot who wrote an article titled Whoa. The Soviet Union Got Racial Equality Right Before America?, you are way, way, WAY off. (And when did America get racial equality “right”?)

For a comparison: Can anyone imagine that France’s definitive account on the Algerian War for Independence would come from a non-White? Their most famous work on Algeria is The Stranger by Albert Camus, who was an isolated-from-Algerians pied noir whose refusal to condemn French oppression was selfishly defined by the fact that he cared more for his mother’s comfort than a million dead Algerians. Heaven forbid that Madame Camus would have to relocate back to France, even if that meant ending a war and a 132-year occupation.… Camus’ view of morality is 100% rooted in Western capitalism individualism, after all, which is the reason its popularity still endures today.

But Iran had no problem making Da a huge best-seller despite the author’s Iraqi Kurdish roots; and, somehow, Iranian men took time out of their daily oppression of women to find out their thoughts and feelings on past experiences. The 700-page account of the war was read by everyone, including President Rohani.

The book is a memoir of Seyyedeh (indicating lineage from Prophet Mohammad) Zahra Hoseyni, a teenager who was living with her extremely poor but tight-knit family on the border city of Khorramshahr. The city was the first to be sneak-attacked by the Iraqis, and the massacres and devastation wrought there would be reflected by a Farsi pun on the city’s name: “City of Blood”.

A memoir of the last, worst traditional war in our modern times

The book is not an easy read, as Hoseyni recounts one tragedy after another.

Related image

In short, for those attacked by Iraq the war was one day from hell after another, with each one worse than the next. Hunger, thirst, physical exhaustion, emotional exhaustion, the nightmares of screaming planes, repeatedly watching people go insane with the pain of mourning, every weary pause only giving rise to recent tragic memories, the constant filth and lack of clean water a bombarded people must deal with, actual nightmares when sleep does come, the perpetual sound of war which then makes silent pauses totally strange, and the constant, constant guilt of being alive combined with the knowledge that death from a shell could come at any moment.

So much of the book is something like a horror hallucination of the first few weeks of an unexpected, undeserved war, combined with a recounting of the vast citizen efforts to fight back.

Each according to their abilities, of course: Hoseyni is an young lioness fighting for the cubs of the Iranian nation and Khorramshahr. She accepts responsibility after responsibility, and even refuses to back down to proud & protective Iranian men in her insistence on going to the front to help amid the bullets and bombs. She volunteers as a corpse-washer, which turned out to be a never-ending job, and which is certainly a job few would want. Her beloved father and brother die at the front, but still she endures and gives, gives, gives. Everyone is looking at her and seeing a person with an iron sense of justice, duty and faith.

What I suggest makes this memoir so compelling and successful is that, in Hoseyni’s retelling, she remembers not only that every day was a living hell but that every moment within every day was a living hell. Hoseyni repeatedly talks about the constant abyss of mourning and horror opening up inside her at every moment; seemingly dozens of times a day she is assaulted by an event/tragedy/memory/feeling which could send a normal person to a hospital for weeks of recovery and therapy. It is unlikely that a memoir by a male would admit the incredibly sad emotions which any human would go through in Hoseyni’s situation.

And yet Hoseyni appeared to all as indomitable (even after she is wounded at the front). She simply said a prayer of “Ya Hossain” and rushed towards another difficult task nobody else wanted. She was the model defender of the nation – indeed, Iran’s war “Mother” is not even a “true” Iranian, in non-socialist logic — but the book reveals that she was able to live this ideal even though her feelings were the absolute opposite of proud glory.

Saying a prayer before a difficult task can go a very long way, but it’s this juxtaposition of a public persona of revolutionary steel combined with total inner crumbling which makes the book so compelling. How she could do what she did – when she could not even bring herself to eat, nor sleep, nor mourn day after day after day – is astounding and an inspiration to anyone sanctioned by injustice.

For those who are not just uninterested in religion but who also actively detest religion, I’m sorry to objectively report that a huge part of her strength came from her religious faith – she and her family were pious people who took their title of “Seyed” as a serious injunction to be moral examples. However, the family was also extremely politically aware and active – these were true revolutionaries; they were also so poor as to come from the “correct” class to qualify as a revolutionary, although such prejudices represent antiquated notions about who can or cannot be a socialist.

There is much to learn from the war memoirs from World War I, II, or the Holocaust, but Da is exceptional in that it is from our modern times. When she recounts her rage and disbelief at BBC Radio’s totally misguided coverage of the war, we in 2018 share her shock at “fake news”.

Da should be essential reading to any war hawk advocating invasion in any foreign country which has had a socialist-inspired revolution, because you will be facing a very unique type of people. Whether it be the USSR, China, Vietnam, Korea or Iran, these are societies which cannot be divided into tribes or identities, as they have achieved socialist cultural unity:

“I saw myself as a tree with deep roots, resisting being pulled from the ground. How could I allow myself to be uprooted? Although born in Basra, I felt no attachment to the place. I loved Iran…my love for Khorramshahr overwhelmed all reason and logic.”

The Western capitalist and anti-multicultural societies of continental Europe cannot imagine that an immigrant is capable of ever feeling this way, and thus many there want immigrants expelled or at least segregated.

But the old tricks of divide and conquer, Balkanisation or the political segregation of Lebanonization will not work in socialist-inspired nations. The author recounts how Saddam Hussein tried exactly that – telling Iranian Arabs to join their Arab brother – but only the most reactionary fell for such a stupid worldview.

Hoseyni talks about the MKO/MEK terrorist group (and I am only talking about them because Western nations and their propaganda outlets keep pushing them back into the spotlight): stealing corpses to inflate their body counts for propaganda purposes, attacking people who disagreed with them at public debates, working as spies for Iraq and giving them coordinates of places to bomb, attacking ardent revolutionaries and then literally rubbing salt or pepper in their wounds out of sadism. The idea that the MKO isn’t detested by 100% of Iranians, and that they have a zero percent chance of ever being rehabilitated – much less being democratically elected into power – is totally, totally absurd to Iranians. Again, why would anyone even talk about them anymore? Oh yes, because they are propped by the West, Israel and Saudi Arabia.

She also talks about what an exceptionally politically-open society Iran was in the early days of the Revolution, and few non-Iranians know that much of this remains true today. Parliament was open to anyone to come observe and even shout disruptions, Khomeini held public audiences for two hours twice a week and received anyone and everyone, elected representatives were easily accessible and lived the common, poor lives of a nation under war. All of this is in stark contrast to the leaders of seemingly every Arab nation not named “Algeria”, and it also shows the democratic bonafides, the more-than-majority support, of the Iranian Islamic Revolution: you can shudder at the word “Islamic” all you want, but the revolution was democratic in the truest sense of the word and no matter in what country that word is uttered.

Western culture is full of ‘war porn’, but Iran is not titillated by such things

“The fall of Khorramshahr and the things I had experienced in the past weeks had made me more aware of how people suffered.”

Such are the types of wisdoms Hoseyni tosses off, but there is no doubt that they are not false cliches for her, nor for millions of other Iranians.

It reminds me of a major problem with America and the West: they are so war-crazy, and yet everything they know about it – to anyone under 85 – is totally fictitious, video-game-like nonsense.

The American view of war is truly one constant cliche, where glory appears to be a feeling to run after but which Hoseyni proves it is actually the result of living through unwanted horrors and tragedies.

It’s true that the younger generation of Iranians has little memory of the sacrifices, bombardments and war rationing, but the way Iran and the US remember their war martyrs is so very different.

Related image

Can you name one famous American solider who died in Iraq or Afghanistan? All I can think of is Pat Tillman, and that’s only because he was also an American football player (and who was killed by friendly fire). However, Iran is full of portraits and memorials to dead soldiers and even dead teenagers…one cannot even make a comparison of the psychological/emotional/human gravity of war in the minds of the average Iranian versus the average American.

My point is that, for all their fighting, ever since Vietnam Americans have essentially been hero-worshipping an empty solider’s uniform. Unless we are talking about rural Americans from their lower class, most Americans really have no personal/psychological connection to actual war, unlike Iranians.

Such people, like the 4-F Trump, grow enraged at taking anyone knee during the National Anthem to protest the undeniable mass incarceration/mass murder/mass oppression of an ethnic minority, but there is no truly human element present – their honouring is phony and faceless.

Say what you will about Iran, but you cannot say that.

Furthermore, Iranian martyrdom – where death is assured – is far, far different from the power-trip fantasies and motivations of the American solider and the American chickenhawk playing Call of Duty video games.

For Iran war is not a glory, but a horror, and whatever sacrifices the nation must make due to the Western Cold war…at least it is better than the Hot War. Befuddled Western “analysts” of Iran cannot imagine this type of logic playing such a large part in Iranian policymaking because they have zero experiences and comprehension of any war which is not just on a two-dimensional screen.

Iran fights in places like Syria, Iraq an Afghanistan because their allies, cousins and cultural-cousins are being attacked, and also because justice itself is being attacked; America fights wars because it seems like fun, because they have such neat toys to play with, and they fight without gallantry and without esteem from the locals they claim to be “fighting with”. America massacres and plunders; Iran’s forces are far closer to Mao’s Long March injunction that soldiers should not take even a pin from locals they were trying to liberate from fascism.

Image result for Ahvaz Terror Attack,

Thirty years after the end of Iran’s “War of Sacred Defense” Iran’s “military parades” are attacked, but the world still doesn’t really comprehend exactly what the West is attacking in Iran. Da is an unsparing account of a civilian Islamic socialist revolutionary in wartime – reading this memoir would certainly help Westerners understand what they remain up against as they keep trying to implode Iran’s socialist-inspired democracy.

Ramin Mazaheri is the chief correspondent in Paris for PressTV and has lived in France since 2009. He has been a daily newspaper reporter in the US, and has reported from Iran, Cuba, Egypt, Tunisia, South Korea and elsewhere. His work has appeared in various journals, magazines and websites, as well as on radio and television. He can be reached on Facebook.

From the Mediterranean to the Strait of Hormuz: A coherent axis من المتوسط إلى هرمز: محور متماسك

From the Mediterranean to the Strait of Hormuz: A coherent axis

أكتوبر 12, 2018

Written by Nasser Kandil,

It was expected that the craziness of the US President Donald Trump ignited the maximum of what is thought by Washington’s allies, which felt depressed from the policy of regression that accompanied the last two years of the era of the former US President Barack Obama. The opportunity may not come again with the presence of a US President who raised the ceilings of his positions and showed determination to wage a confrontation without considerations. The stability of the President himself may not last since he is moody. He is surrounded by contradictory considerations of the decision-making centers in America. Therefore, those who seek for strict US positions in the region, especially Saudi Arabia and Israel have to show the maximum resources of the ability to change the equations, to encourage the US President to move ahead on one hand, and to invest the highest available outcome of his escalating positions on the other hand.

It seems clear that the area extending from the Mediterranean from Syria, Lebanon, Iraq towards Iran will witness unprecedented investment in what is considered by Washington, Tel Aviv, and Riyadh as a fragile area, hoping to create new facts that will lead to new balances. The bet is not on a decisive victory rather on better negotiating balances that lead to fragile compromise that can be manipulated in its results and in its system. This was not available in the previous proposed formulas of the compromise which ensure face-saving under the ceiling of asking for the recognition of the victories of the resistance axis on one hand, and the recognition of the Russian final word in this area which extends from the Mediterranean to the Strait of Hormuz and an Iranian advanced status among the other major regional forces on the other hand.

There are five issues that formed the projects of change; In Lebanon, the bet on besieging Hezbollah internally was a priority whether through the so-called presidential settlements which tried to affect the alliance between Hezbollah and the Free Patriotic Movement through tempting the movement and its president who became a President of the Republic to somewhere far from Hezbollah through the temptation of authority. In this context there were understandings’ attempts between Al Mustaqbal Movement and the Lebanese Forces with the Free Patriotic Movement. There were clear words by Al Mustaqbal and the Lebanese Forces about this bet, which fell after the detention of the Prime Minister Saad Al-Hariri in Saudi Arabia and the demanding from him to get out of the presidential settlement, and fell by the knockout after the parliamentary elections. After the collision between the Free Patriotic Movement and its two partners in the presidential settlements, the alliance between the Free Patriotic Movement and Hezbollah seemed more coherent. Furthermore the bet was to create imbalance in the parliamentary elections after the formation of the parliament on the basis of there is no decisive majority, but the results disappointed the betters when the alliance of Hezbollah, Amal Movement, the Free Patriotic Movement and their allies scored decisive majority that is enough to form a permanent constitutional obstacle in front of any attempt of the continuous political tampering since 2005. This is showed through the possession of the resistance’s opponents and their leading party the majority in the successive parliaments’ rounds that is not affected by the delay in forming the new government or by affecting its balances. The Saudi and the Israeli recognize that the balance of the military force between the resistance and Israel is in favor of the resistance and it grows more and more.

In Syria, there are three issues that attracted the US-Saudi-Israeli efforts. First, the bet on the change of the Turkish positon in Astana path whenever the hour becomes close in Idlib. Second, the bet is on expanding the Israeli movement in the Syrian airspace by the force of the pressure on Russia, and third the bet on affecting the Russian –Iranian alliance by tempting Russia to abandon Iran in Syria in exchange for the recognition of its exclusive victory. There is no need to review the details of the three bets to conclude their disappointed ends for the hopes of that tripartite, and the emergence of facts that resolve the Turkish position in Idlib battle, the increase of the complication of the Israeli movement in the Syrian airspace to the extent of suffocating, the degree of Russian-Iranian cohesion, the sticking to the international power of Russia and the regional state of Iran in the region, and the degree of conformity between the cohesion of this alliance and the fulfillment of that achievement.

In Iraq, there are three bets; first, the bet on the Kurdish position which wants to avenge from the fall of the secession project and beholding Iran the responsibility of its fall. The second bet is on the Movement of Sadr and the inherited accumulated crisis of his relationship with Iran. while the third bet is on the effect of the direct US presence and its investment to affect the balances when necessary. The electoral entitlement and the resolving of the competition of three Iraqi presidencies were the arena. There is no need to analyze, since these issues led to presidencies. The opponents of Iran and the resistance forces say that these issues led to three presidents whom have a coordination relationship with Iran, while those who led the secession project and those who left the resistance got out disappointed.

While in Iran, there are three bets that their difficult tests were experienced over the past months, the bet on the effect of the US sanctions in  provoking political opposition as the one which was in Iran ten years ago in order to threaten  the political  stability, the bet on igniting the ethnic and sectarian strife to affect the Iranian social structure, that leads to civil security  disorders, and leads to financial suffocation due to the effect of the decision of the  strict sanctions on the Iranian oil sales. But Iran succeeded in finding a plan for the confrontation to narrow the impacts of these bets to the minimum to prevent making any difference in the balances or to cause the change of their essences. Regarding the confrontation of the political interior, Iran stuck to the unity of the bilateral of the reformists and the conservatives as a defense line in which the reformists  take over the rule, while the conservatives stood behind them contrary to what was ten years ago. The external opposition alone forms the center of tampering, but it is predetermined to failure.  In confronting the manipulation in ethnics and sects, Iran formed a strong defense line through the regional alliance on the Kurdish, Turkish, and Pakistani fronts, which are the bases for any Kurdish, Turkman, and Baloch movement. The sectarian speech of the Gulf governments has disrupted the effects of any Arab national incitement; therefore the threat becomes unable to mobilize more than the traditional extremist groups as Al Ahwaz operation showed.  Regarding oil sanctions, Iran made an international defense line that has proven its effectivity in ensuring the flow of its oil to the world, that line stretches from Europe which pledged of keeping its share of million barrels of oil per day to Russia which pledged to resell half a million barrels per day of Iranian oil. China will keep its purchases without any decrease, while Turkey refused adopting the sanctions. The Iranian military movement in the Strait of Hormuz and the Iranian missiles on the Kurdish separatist groups affiliated to America in Erbil, or those which targeted ISIS under the observation of America in Boukamal are enough to say who has the higher hand in the west of the Mediterranean towards Iran and the borders of Pakistan which were swept by the winds of change, to the borders of China which is ready for the confrontation.

Translated by Lina Shehadeh,


من المتوسط إلى هرمز: محور متماسك

أكتوبر 4, 2018

ناصر قنديل

– كان من الطبيعي والمتوقّع أن تستنهض طفرة جنون الرئيس الأميركي دونالد ترامب أعلى ما يمكن أن تفكر فيه الكيانات الحليفة لواشنطن، التي أصابها الإحباط من سياسة الانكفاء التي رافقت السنتين الأخيرتين من عهد الرئيس الأميركي السابق باراك أوباما، فالفرصة قد لا تتكرّر بوجود رئيس أميركي يرفع سقوف المواقف إلى الأعلى، ويبدي عزماً على خوض المواجهات بلا حسابات. وثبات الرئيس نفسه قد لا يستمرّ وهو المتقلب المزاج والآراء، والمحاط بتناقضات حسابات مراكز القوى والقرار داخل البيئة الأميركية، لذلك كان على الذين يسعون لمواقف أميركية متشددة في المنطقة، خصوصاً السعودية و«إسرائيل»، الذهاب إلى أقصى الحدود في تظهير مصادر القدرة على تغيير المعادلات، لتشجيع الرئيس الأميركي على المضي قدماً من جهة، ولاستثمار أعلى عائد متاح من مواقفه التصعيدية من جهة أخرى.

– بدا بوضوح أن الساحة الممتدة من واجهة البحر المتوسط التي تحتلها سورية ولبنان، ومن خلفهما العراق، وصولاً إلى إيران، ستشهد استثماراً غير مسبوق على ما تعتبره واشنطن وتل أبيب والرياض خواصرها الرخوة، أملاً بخلق وقائع جديدة تنتج توازنات جديدة. والرهان ليس على نصر حاسم، بل على موازين تفاوضية أفضل، تتيح تسوية رخوة يمكن التأسي على التلاعب بها وبنتائجها، بالعمل من داخل منظومتها، وهو ما لم يكن متاحاً في صبغ التسوية المعروضة من قبل، والتي تتضمّن مقداراً محدوداً من حفظ ماء الوجه تحت سقف المطالبة بالاعتراف بانتصارات محور المقاومة من جهة، وبتكريس المرجعية الروسية لهذا المدى الممتد من المتوسط إلى مضيق هرمز، وبمكانة إيرانية متقدّمة على سائر القوى الإقليمية الكبرى.

– خمسة محاور شكلت عناوين مشاريع التغيير، ففي لبنان احتل الرهان على محاصرة حزب الله داخلياً الأولوية، سواء عبر ما سُمّي بالتسويات الرئاسية التي قامت على فك التحالف بين حزب الله والتيار الوطني الحر، عبر اجتذاب التيار ورئيسه الذي صار رئيساً للجمهورية نحو منطقة أبعد عن حزب الله بإغراء السلطة. وفي هذا السياق كانت مساهمة تفاهمات تيار المستقبل والقوات اللبنانية مع التيار الوطني الحر، ومن يعود لأدبيات التفاهمات على ألسنة أصحابها سيجد كلاماً صريحاً للمستقبل والقوات يتحدّث بوضوح عن هذا الرهان، الذي سقط بالنقاط مع احتجاز الرئيس سعد الحريري في السعودية ومطالبته بالخروج من التسوية الرئاسية، وسقط بالضربة القاضية بعد الانتخابات النيابية، وما ظهر من تصادم بين التيار وشريكيه في التسويات الرئاسية، ليظهر حلف التيار وحزب الله أشدّ مما كان وأكثر صلابة. وكان الرهان على إحداث توازن سلبي في الانتخابات النيابية يُعيد تشكيل المجلس النيابي على قاعدة لا أغلبية حاسمة، وخيّبت النتائج آمال المراهنين بمنح تحالف حزب الله وحركة أمل والتيار الوطني الحر وحلفائهم أغلبية حاسمة واضحة، تكفي وحدها لتشكيل سدّ دستوري دائم أمام أي محاولة للعبث السياسي المستمر منذ العام 2005 عبر امتلاك خصوم المقاومة وحزبها القيادي الأغلبية في المجالس النيابية المتعاقبة، من دون أن يغير في هذا كل تأخير في ولادة الحكومة الجديدة، أو كل تلاعب بتوازناتها بصورة معاكسة للتوازن النيابي، الذي سيبقى حاكماً، وقادراً على إطاحة أي حكومة بضربة واحدة، بينما يسلّم الثنائي السعودي الإسرائيلي بأن توازن القوة العسكري بين المقاومة و«إسرائيل» كاسر لصالح المقاومة ويزداد ميله نحو الانكسار أكثر فأكثر.

– في الجبهة السورية ثلاثة محاور استقطبت الجهود الأميركية السعودية الإسرائيلية، الرهان على تبدل في الموقع التركي من مسار أستانة كلما اقتربت ساعة استحقاق إدلب، والرهان على توسيع هامش الحركة الإسرائيلية في الأجواء السورية بقوة الضغط على روسيا، والرهان الثالث كان على شق التحالف الروسي الإيراني بإغراء روسيا ببيع فروة رأس إيران في سورية مقابل الخروج بتسليم بنصرها المنفرد. ولا حاجة لاستعراض تفصيلي للرهانات الثلاثة لاستخلاص نهاياتها المخيبة لآمال الثلاثي الأميركي السعودي الإسرائيلي، وتبلور حقائق ووقائع تحسم ضبط الرمادية التركية في مسار إدلب، وتزيد تعقيد الحركة الإسرائيلية في الأجواء السورية وصولاً لحد الاختناق، وتظهير درجة التماسك الروسي الإيراني وتمسك كل منهما بالتحالف الذي رفع روسيا إلى مرتبة القوة الدولية الأولى في المنطقة، كما رفع إيران إلى مرتبة الدولة الإقليمية الأولى في المنطقة، ودرجة التلازم بين تماسك هذا التحالف وتحقيق هذا الإنجاز.

– في العراق ثلاثة رهانات، أولها على الموقف الكردي الراغب بالانتقام من سقوط مشروع الانفصال وتحميله إيران مسؤولية هذا السقوط، وثانيها على التيار الصدري وأزمة موروثة ومتراكمة لعلاقته بإيران، وثالث على تأثير الوجود الأميركي المباشر، والتلويح بتوظيفه عند الضرورة للتأثير على التوازنات. وكان الاستحقاق الانتخابي ومخاض حسم الرئاسات العراقية الثلاث ساحة النزال، ولا حاجة للتفصيل ولا للتحليل وقد انتهت المخاضات كلها، إلى رئاسات يقول خصوم إيران وقوى المقاومة أنها انتهت لصالح ثلاثة رؤساء تجمعهم علاقات التنسيق مع إيران، وخروج الذين قادوا مشروع الانفصال ومثلهم الذين قادوا مشروع الخروج من خيار المقاومة، بالخسران والخيبة.

– على الجبهة الإيرانية ثلاثة رهانات أيضا عاشت اختباراتها القاسية خلال الشهور الماضية، رهان على تأثير العقوبات الأميركية في استنهاض معارضة سياسية تشبه تلك التي ضجّ بها الشارع الإيراني قبل عشر سنوات في تجربة مماثلة وتصل لتهديد الاستقرار السياسي، ورهان على تحريك الإتنيات والعرقيات والمذهبية لتشقق يصيب النسيج الاجتماعي الإيراني يؤسس للاضطرابات الأمنية الأهلية، واختناق مالي بفعل تأثير قرار العقوبات المشددة على مبيعات النفط الإيرانية، وصولاً لجعلها حد الصفر. وقد نجحت إيران برسم خطة المواجهة بما يتيح لها تضييق هوامش تأثير هذه الرهانات إلى الحدود الدنيا وجعلها قابلة للتعايش، وغير قادرة على إحداث أثر يؤخذ في حساب التوازنات أو يغير في جوهرها، ففي مواجهة الداخل السياسي تمسّكت إيران بوحدة ثنائي الإصلاحيين والمحافظين كخط دفاع أماميّ يتولّى فيه الإصلاحيون الحكم ويقف المحافظون خلفهم عكس الحال الذي كان قبل عشر سنوات، فصارت المعارضة الخارجية وحدها محور العبث وهي محدودة الأثر ومحكوم عليها سلفاً بالفشل، وفي مواجهة التلاعب بالأعراق والقوميات شكلت إيران خط دفاع متين بالتحالفات الإقليمية على الجبهات الكردية والتركية والباكستانية. وهي الخلفيات والمتركزات لأي حراك كردي أو تركماني أو بلوشي. وتكفّل الخطاب المذهبي لحكومات الخليج بتعطيل مفاعيل أي تحريض قومي عربي ليصير التهديد عاجزاً عن استنهاض أكثر من مجموعات التطرف التقليدية كما قالت عملية الأهواز. وبوجه العقوبات النفطية أقامت إيران خط دفاع دولي أثبت فاعليته لضمان تدفق نفطها نحو العالم، والخط ممتد من اوروبا التي تعهّدت الحفاظ على نصيبها بمليون برميل نفط يومياً إلى روسيا التي تعهّدت إعادة بيع نصف مليون برميل يومياً من النفط الإيراني، والصين التي ستحافظ على مشترياتها من دون نقصان، وتركيا التي رفضت الأخذ بالعقوبات، ولعل الحركة العسكرية الإيرانية في مضيق هرمز، والصواريخ الإيرانية على الجماعات الكردية المنشقة والمقيمة تحت الرعاية الأميركية في اربيل، أو التي استهدفت داعش تحت الأنف الأميركي في البوكمال، ما يكفي للقول يدُ مَن هي العليا في شرق المتوسط وصولاً إلى إيران، وحدود باكستان التي اجتاحتها رياح التغيير أيضاً، وصولاً لحدود الصين، التي تشمّر عن زنودها استعداداً للمواجهة.


Related Videos

Related Articles


South Front

Early on October 1, the Aerospace Division of the Iranian Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) carried out a ballistic missile strike on ISIS targets in Syria’s Euphrates Valley. The IRGC launched at least six ballistic missiles, which, according to the IRGC, killed and injured a large number of terrorists in the area near al-Bukamal.

The Iranian media added that the missiles employed belonged to the Qiam and Zolfaghar families. One of the missiles shown by the media bore the slogans “Death to America, Death to Israel, Death to Al Saud” and the phrase “kill the friends of Satan”.

Following the missile strikes, the IRGC employed at least seven unmanned combat aerial vehicles to further pound what it described as the HQs and gatherings of the “mercenaries of global arrogance”. The UCAVs, which were used, seem to be the Thunderbolt type, which was developed thanks to a reverse-engineering of the US-made RQ-170 UAV.

The October 1 strike was described as a response to the terrorist attack, which had targeted a military parade in the Iranian city of Ahvaz on September 22. At least 25 people were killed and 65 others were injured in the attack claimed by ISIS. However, the Iranian leadership has gradually accused the US, Israel, Saudi Arabia and the UAE of being, at least indirectly, behind the attack.

Commenting on the missile strike, Chief of Staff of the Iranian Armed Forces Major General Mohammad Baqeri stated that it was just the first stage of the response to the Ahvaz attack vowing that “there will be other stages of revenge as well.”

It’s interesting to note that the Iranian attack took place close to the area, from which ISIS had allegedly been cleared by the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). The SDF kicked off its advance on ISIS positions in the Hajin pocket about 3 weeks ago. However, so far, the SDF has achieved only limited gains in the area, even according to its own statements.

On October 1, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that Russia will continue to fight terrorism in Syria. “The fight against terrorist organizations in Syria goes on, and we should continue this fight,” he stated that Moscow’s position on “the illegitimate presence of foreign troops and foreign armed forces in Syria” remains clear.

Meanwhile, additional details appeared on the shape of the upgraded Syrian air defense system after the delivery of S-300. Viktor Bondarev, the chairman of the Russian parliament’s upper house Defense and Security Committee stated that the air defense system will be fully centralized. This would allow coordination between Syrian and Russian means and facilities in the war-torn country to be increased.


Related Videos

Related News


Iran’s chief of staff Major-General Mohammad Bagheri after the Iranian military attack on Syria against the positions of organizers of the terrorist attack in the Iranian city of Ahvaz has promised terrorists further “retaliation.”

Reports have emerged that the Iranian military has launched ballistic missiles against the organizers of the terrorist attack in Ahvaz and against terrorist facilities on the eastern bank of the Euphrates River in Syria.

During the operation, six medium-range ballistic missiles were fired from an Iranian air base in the west of the country, and terrorist “mercenaries and criminals” were hit a full 570 kilometers away, according to an official Iranian statement.

Subsequently, seven combat drones bombed positions and shelters used to accommodate and support terrorists.

“The first phase of retaliation for the Ahvaz attack has been completed and there are going to be other phases,” said the chief of the Iranian General Staff, quoted by the Tasnim news agency.

The attack, carried out by the aerospace division of the Guardian Corps of the Islamic Revolution of Iran, caused a great number of dead and wounded among the terrorists.

On 22 September, unknown gunmen opened fire on a military parade in the Iranian city of Ahvaz, killing 28 people and leaving more than 60 wounds.

On September 24, the Iranian Intelligence Ministry announced that 22 people were arrested for alleged connection to the deadly attack. In addition, a five-member terrorist group that carried out the attack was identified.

The responsibility for the attack was assumed by the Arab Patriotic Movement of Ahvaz (Al-Ahvazia), linked to Saudi Arabia.

Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has accused the region’s “US-backed” countries of being responsible for the terrorist attack in the city of Ahvaz.

Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif also accused the “regional sponsors of terrorism and their North American lords” of organizing the attack.

The Khuzestan Terror Attack Was A Strategic Part Of The Hybrid War On Iran

By Andrew Korybko

A military parade in the regional capital of Ahvaz led by the country’s elite Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IGRC) to commemorate the Iran-Iraq War (also known as the First Gulf War) was ambushed by terrorists who ended up killing 25 people and injuring over twice as many, with a lot of the casualties being women and children. Tehran immediately blamed the US, Israel, and the Gulf Monarchies of involvement in this killing spree, and although they all denied any role in it, it didn’t help any that Trump’s lawyer Rudy Giuliani spoke at the so-called “2018 Iranian Uprising Summit” alongside the co-leader of the MEK – which was previously listed as a terrorist organization by the US up until a few years ago – on the same day as the attack and bragged about wanting to carry out regime change against the Islamic Republic.

Nikki Haley immediately clarified that he wasn’t speaking in a professional capacity representative of the US government, though it’s hard to imagine that he wasn’t channeling the highest levels of strategic in the Trump Administration. Presuming that the US does indeed want to overthrow the Iranian government through a combination of sanctions, Color Revolutions, and military defections like Giuliani implied, then last weekend’s terrorist attack undoubtedly attempts to further those plans whether America had a direct hand in carrying it out or not. Khuzestan is a minority-Arab province abutting Iraq which previously experienced a Baghdad-supported terrorist-separatist campaign during the First Gulf War, which is why the recent attack was so symbolic because the so-called “Ahwaz National Resistance” also claimed responsibility for it, too.

Daesh said the same thing but the group is known for pretending to be much stronger and widespread than it is nowadays for public relations purposes, so its claims of responsibility aren’t credible.

Proceeding from the plausible presumption that the terrorists are more likely to be self-declared separatists than Daesh, then it’s probable that this attack was meant to catalyze identity conflict in Iran between the Persian majority mostly inhabiting the center of the country and one of its minority groups in the periphery, thereby following the Law of Hybrid War which states that external provocations could exacerbate preexisting identity fault lines. That doesn’t, however, mean that this attempt will be successful, though it’ll expectedly form part of the foreign infowar on the country designed to craft the international perception that people are “rising up against the regime”, especially coming as it did on the heels of a renewed upsurge in Kurdish terrorism inside of Iran, too.

iran-terror-attack-1024x683Terror Attack on Iran Military Parade Kills at Least 29

Targeting Khuzestan was actually in hindsight a somewhat strategic action by the terrorists and their patrons because of the symbolic significance that could be extracted from this attack as it relates to perception management and infowars. A supplementary point is that it may have also been designed to provoke the security services into overreacting against the Arab minority there and thus falling into the typical anti-terrorist trap that afflicts all victimized countries in having to walk the fine line between kinetic and non-kinetic responses to these threats so as not to inadvertently catalyze the same reaction that they’re trying to suppress nor generate legitimate grievances that could then be exploited. Altogether, the recent terrorist attack was part of a devious Hybrid War strategy, but its prospects for success are limited.

The post presented is the partial transcript of the CONTEXT COUNTDOWN radio program on Sputnik News, aired on Friday Sep 28, 2018.

Iran Expediency Council Sec on Ahvaz Attack Response: This Was a Flick, Actual Blow on the Way

Local Editor

Secretary of Iran’s Expediency Discernment Council of the System, Mohsen Rezaei described the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps missile strike at terrorist headquarters on Monday as a ‘flick’ adding that the actual blow is yet to come.

In a Monday post on his Twitter account, Rezaei, who formerly led the IRGC, praised the missile strike on Twitter.

He wrote that the IRGC missile strike at headquarters of terrorists who were responsible for the Ahvaz terror attack was a mere a “flick” to these perpetrators, adding that the main and actual strike is on the way.

The IRGC fired six ground-to-ground missiles to terrorist headquarters in Syria’s eastern Euphrates on early hours of Monday, killing and injuring dozens of terrorists.

Source: News Agencies, Edited by website team

Related Videos

Related Articles

%d bloggers like this: