Radio Row on his anti-“Great Reset” music and Covid tyranny in Australia

 Eva Bartlett

Great conversation with Radio Row the other day. Do check out his music, brilliant lyrics, very poignantly addressing the tyranny we are facing globally.

During lockdown in Sydney, Australia, Matt Austin produced his first album, “I Bloody Told You This Would Happen!”, a collection of 11 songs on the critical issues we are facing under the Covid mandates. His description:

“When people don’t understand how democracy works, democracy doesn’t work.
Hidden corruption of ‘free’ media; the lobby industry; State infiltration of activist groups; mass surveillance by government institutions and Big Tech; centralized power; Digital ID’s and a Central Bank Digital Currency; Coerced acquiescence, propaganda and censorship.

Part satire, part warning, part therapy: I Bloody Told You This Would Happen!”
https://radiorow1.bandcamp.com/album/i-bloody-told-you-this-would-happen
https://twitter.com/RadioRow1/status/1414498020926771204

[A 12th song followed, The State Of You ]

I spoke with Matt about how he came to make this album, as well as the mood in Australia, and he global growing popular dissent to Covid tyranny.

*Matt recommends Australian singer-songwriter, Ben Mitchell’s Free The Nation Music.

RELATED LINKS:


*Lithuania tyranny

*COVID19 PCR Tests are Scientifically Meaningless

*Australian Govt’s OWN WEBSITE admits Covid tests are totally unreliable
*Lies, Damned Lies and Health Statistics – the Deadly Danger of False Positives
*WHO (finally) admits PCR tests create false positives
*Twitter isn’t censoring accounts to keep users ‘safe’, it is using its power to spoon-feed the world establishment narratives

*I’ll likely only see my family on a screen from now on, because I don’t want the Covid jab. What happened to ‘my body, my choice’?
*‘It’s absolutely appalling’: Unvaccinated Canadians become social outcasts and the new persecuted minority

Mankind Must Put An End To War Before War Puts An End To Mankind

23 NOVEMBER 2021

Sonja van den Ende

Source

These are the historic words from John F. Kennedy which he spoke at the United Nations (UN) in 1961, two years before he was murdered on 22 November 1963. The murder was, as we know by now, most likely an inside job done by the CIA. Some high ranking generals and presumably his predecessor Lynden B. Johnson were also involved, but that’s another story.

We are now as a civilization on the crossroads of extinction like back in 1961, or we can make a better future for our children. It all depends which road we are going to walk. Unfortunatly, the so-called leaders of the richest countries choose the path of implementing the agenda of the deep-state, the real government, the one-world government, of President George Bush Sr., mentioned so many times  in his  speeches, his son President George Bush Jr,. was too dumb to speak about it or for that matter spoke noting about anything, he was a real warmonger and puppet. The deep-state is consisting of the large corporations, big Tech, Gun lobby, Pharma lobby, secret services around the world and most important the large institutions, like the WHO, IAEA, UN and the World Economic Forum (WEF), which is by far the most important one these days, it seems all the developed countries (rich) are under the umbrella of the WEF, from the EU to Russia  and China.

I don’t think I have to explain what the goals and agenda from the deep-state is, by now everybody is nearly awake, from north to south and east to west. Without the consent of the majority of the people on planet earth they go ahead with their treacherous plans, by locking up people, bullying them on demonstrations, even shooting them these days and conducting experiments with non-safe or poorly tested medicine like the C-19 jabs. They are not only conducting a medical experiment, but also a social experiment, by implementing a social credit system,  such a bad system, that the majority of the people are treated like cattle (as seen in the EU and Australia) , without having freedom of expression, without having anything to say and without having any freedom at all. First they used the fake pandemic and then they will use the climate to make life hell for most people (not the privileged of course, it’s their experiment), with all restrictions, they feel they are the masters of the universe, but after all they are still human, not transhuman, but maybe it’s better they will become transhuman, so that we the real inhabitants of mother earth can start a new civilization.

President John F. Kennedy was in my opinion, the last president of the “free” Western world, after that the Western world deteriorated and got involved in all sorts of “dirty” wars, from Vietnam to Syria. The numerous coup d’etats and murder of millions of people around the globe is horrendous, if you think about it. They still continue to do so even though they deny it, the robbery is  continuing also,  for their new project the implementation of Artificial Intelligence (AI),  which involves electrical cars . Lithium is needed for these cars and stolen from Congo and these days it’s clear the European Union (EU) will steal lithium from Serbia, or at least they try to, but don’t mess with the Serbian people, they have bad experiences with NATO and the EU, because of the bombing of former Yugoslavia in 1999. President Kennedy warned the US and then the “free” Western world about the escalation and the use of nuclear weapons against the then dispute with Cuba and indirectly Russia. We have two problems: the extinction with nuclear weapons and from AI.

President Kennedy delivered his famous speech at the United Nations in 1961

The problem is not the death of one man; the problem is the life of this organization (UN). It will either grow to meet the challenges of our age, or it will be gone with the wind, without influence, without force, without respect. Were we to let it die, to enfeeble its vigor, to cripple its powers, we would condemn our future.

For in the development of this organization rests the only true alternative to war — and war appeals no longer as a rational alternative. Unconditional war can no longer lead to unconditional victory. It can no longer serve to settle disputes. It can no longer concern the Great Powers alone. For a nuclear disaster, spread by winds and water and fear, could well engulf the great and the small, the rich and the poor, the committed and the uncommitted alike. Mankind must put an end to war — or war will put an end to mankind, his speech .”

Such wise words, not listened to by the elites and politicians, who continued their wars and the UN, like the EU and the IAEA, is nothing more than a playground for the privileged, politicians, diplomats and some mad scientists , they play their dirty games and intrigues without worrying, as I experienced, about people like you and me!

Thank God , he JFK, saved the world from a nuclear disaster in 1961, but who is now going to save us from bad politicians, crazy diplomats, mad scientists and the deep state? Who is going to stop  this insanity? AI will leave one billion people unemployed and on the brink of starvation. AI will be used for new “space” wars, wars with robots, drones and God knows what else. When AI will live it’s own life, of which the mad scientist of big Tech companies, already warned,  it can take over and that will be the extinction of mankind. Why  do people, politicians and most of all scientists let this happen? They know this can be the end of human life. Like back then in 1961, it was the threat of a nuclear war, throughout the Cold war it was a threat. Now we have two threats a nuclear and a war conducted through AI, the institutions like the UN or IAEA did and will do nothing to prevent it and to repeat the words of JFK “For in the development of this organization rests the only true alternative to war — and war appeals no longer as a rational alternative”. But these days, war appeals to politicians, to scientists who develop dangerous stuff for mankind. War appeals  and foremost power, power to make and break the entire world population. The next weeks and months are crucial for mankind, a world revolution has already started. The nephew of John F. Kennedy, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., has taken over the task of his uncle to expose the deep-state and try to save the world from extinction even, like he said “I have  to die for it, I will die with my boots on the ground”. He is the icon of the new world revolution, the Kennedy’s always are at the forefront for peace.

Father Elias Zahlawi: Syrian Priest’s Letters Rattle the Vatican

16 Nov 2021

Source: Al Mayadeen

Tim Anderson

Not once has the Pontiff pointed a finger at “Israel” or the USA for their roles in two decades of slaughter and ethnic cleansing, including the expulsion of Christians.

Syrian priest Father Elias Zahlawi has reportedly shaken Pope Francis over the Vatican’s vague statements on the US-driven Middle East wars. Not once has the Pontiff pointed a finger at “Israel” or the USA for their roles in two decades of slaughter and ethnic cleansing, including the expulsion of Christians.

While both men are in their 80s, Father Zahlawi has ministered in Damascus since the 1960s and, since 1975, at the Church of Our Lady of Damascus. Syrian-born, he studied in Jerusalem and founded the now famous Damascus ‘Choir of Joy’ in 1977. That huge choir has toured Europe.

Pope Francis attained the highest rank in the Catholic Church after being an Archbishop in Argentina, but he is said to be ‘haunted’ by accusations of his involvement in Argentina’s dirty war, carried out by a US-backed military dictatorship. No charge was ever laid against him but some years ago the Argentine judiciary found that the Catholic Church was “complicit in abuses”. 

According to some Syrian Christians, Father Zahlawi’s accusations over the Pope’s meaningless words – in face of the US and Israeli-led atrocities in Palestine, Syria, Iraq, and Yemen – touched a raw nerve. 

Syrian Priest Tells Al-Ahed How Hezbollah protected Christians in Qalamoun

The gentle, humble priest in Damascus, now 89 years old, wrote a series of letters to US and Syrian leaders, to the European Parliament, and to the last two Popes. But his first two letters to Pope Francis, in 2018 and 2019, were probably the most incisive. 

On 29 June 2018, Father Zahlawi asked Pope Francis:

“Why don’t you decisively and unequivocally adopt this very clear position of Saint Peter, against a western world that has spared nothing in its pursuit of total and absolute world dominance … including the systematic and continuous killing and destruction of total peoples and countries, including my homeland Syria?

“All of that is happening … either with complete media silence or worse yet, with the roaring noise of fabricated “facts”, designed to give credence to the worst obscenities, under the banner of “human rights, democracy, and freedom”.

“I have continued to read ‘with sorrow and dismay’ … the Roman Observer, hoping that one day I will find in it even one word of activism, [but] to be honest I only find in it … empty words, of the usual clerical content that we have gotten used to since the Emperor Constantine, with very rare exceptions. Yet outside the Church, in the west, there are many courageous and honorable voices.”

On 12 February 2019, he wrote again, after the Pope’s address to ROACO, the Board of the Society for Support of the Eastern Churches, where Francis was reported to have denounced the “great sin of war”, the thirst for “domination” of great “World Powers” and a refugee crisis which carries with it the risk of “eliminating Christians” from the Middle East. 

This was a more carefully thought out letter, in which Father Zahlawi raised eight points. He began by asking, gently: “I wonder if the many grave issues you raised … did not deserve a clearer stand of more commitment and responsibility?” 

His first point was to do with the Pope’s refusal to address the ethnic cleansing in Palestine:

“You say that “In the Middle East there is also a danger … of eradicating the Christians” … [but] do you believe that your audience and consequently your readers are ignorant, as your words suggest, of the countries which strive, with open insistence, and since the establishment of Israel, to totally eradicate the Christian existence in the whole Near East at the time they are about to accomplish this in occupied Palestine, which you call “the land of Jesus” and which has become the land of injustice, vengeance and death, and whose true name has been obliterated to become only ‘The Holy Land’?

In a second point he refers to the failure of the Pope’s generic words about the “pain” of the Middle East, and of land theft by ‘World Powers’, to address the US-led assault on his own country, Syria: 

“these ‘World Powers’, at the head of which is the United States of America … forced about 140 member states countries … to declare war on my home country, Syria, and drove to it, from a hundred countries … jihadis, haunted by the evil of money, blood, avarice, and power.”

Third, Father Zahlawi chastises the Pope for suggesting that the “diminishing” numbers of Christians in the region might be due to pressure from Muslims. “If you want to suggest that the Muslims are the ones who force Christians to leave ‘the land they love’ … how can you explain their emigration at a worrisome rate since the establishment of “Israel” while they [Christians] throughout hundreds of years, lived … side by side with the Muslims?” 

In his fourth point, he asks if the Pope while speaking of the Middle East as ‘the cradle of Christianity’ can possibly be ignorant that the “the Judaising of occupied Palestine …will very soon end every presence of Christians in ‘the land of Jesus’?”

Fifth, with regard to the Pope’s references to “great churches” in the Middle East, and ignoring the role of “Israel”, Father Zahlawi says “what you are practically doing … shackled by a horrific and sickly guilt complex towards the Jews” is to ignore and close your eyes to “the atrocities that are being committed openly and in flagrant violation of all laws, against all the Arabs, Muslims and Christians equally”, while even “some distinguished Jews” speak out against these crimes.

Sixth, he finds fault in the Pope’s overly general words about “the Middle East … [as] a land of death and emigration”, as the pontiff says nothing about the displacement of 12 million of the 23 million people in Syria, “without pointing an accusing finger at those who are responsible for these planned and inhuman emigrations in a country that was considered, before the so-called Arab Spring, as one of the safest countries on earth?”

In a seventh point, Father Zahlawi cites the Pope’s reference to “the grave sin … the sin of war”. But what does this mean, he asks, “without pointing, in the end, an accusing finger to countries such as the United States of America, Britain, and France, on the global scope, and at “Israel” on the scope of the Middle East, as they do not stop exploding totally unjust war … [in the name of] Freedom, Democracy and Human Rights?”

Finally, he refers to the Pope’s call that “the Middle East is a hope that we must take care of”, linking this to a revelation said to have taken place in Soufaniyeh Alley in Damascus in 2014, in the midst of the war on Syria. This revelation likens the wounds on Syria to those on Jesus. The clear, implicit message is: why has Pope Francis not denounced those who, like Judas, betrayed the people of Syria? 

Open Letter To Pope Benedict XVI From Arab Catholic Priest Father Elias Zahlawi

 April 1, 2010

By Father Elias Zahlawi
Father, Your Holiness

During these hard and critical times, which the world in general and our Orient in particular is undergoing, I would like to take the opportunity to tell you what is going on in my mind, what burdens my heart, especially being an Arab Catholic priest from Syria, concerning the invitation you kindly extended a few months ago to those responsible for the Eastern Catholic Churches, to hold a convention during October 2010 to discuss the conditions Arab and non-Arab Christians are passing through throughout the countries of the Orient.

There are three points that I would like to raise and discuss with your Holiness, from a son to his father.

The first subject is in relation to this conference.

I trust that all those who received your kind invitation had lauded this initiative.

But did anybody tell you that it came too late?

I am sure that the papers, which were put into their hands received their “admiration”.

But did anybody tell your Holiness that they do not reflect the facts on the ground in our Orient, past and present, except what the West sees and wants the rest of the world to see, whether the people of the Orient like it or not?

I am certain that the Vatican’s “specialized experts” as well as your ambassadors in the Orient try to honesty report what’s going on in it.

But would any of those attending the convention, those “experts” and “ambassadors”, see in general anything bu what those responsible for the Churches of the Orient want them to see? Or what their sphere of responsibilities allows them to see?…

Last but not least, I am certain that those who shall be attending said convention had uncovered dangerous gaps in the “important” papers submitted to them.

But did anybody tell your Holiness personally or in public during the previous convention’s meetings, that there are gaps that they did not discover? And why not, the Vatican or its many or few Western “experts” just ignored in the absence or just the small number of Arab or Oriental experts?

The second point is concerning those invited to the previous and/or forthcoming councils.

It is well known that those invited are either patriarchs, archbishops and/or heads of the various monastic orders.

May I take the permission to ask your Holiness: are you fully convinced that those who are invited do really represent Oriental Christianity, in what is for or against it, especially during these critical, not to say fateful, times?

I am afraid that the majority of them are outside what the Orient as a whole expects of them, both and equally its Christians and Muslims, which is due to their costly stances and declarations, as they have learned due to their positions and their own personal considerations to avoid or mitigate them, which exclude them for incorporeal or material reasons, which is apparent to all.

I said that this conference came late… too late. But what I am afraid of is that it shall come out to the world with phoney introductions, and hollow resolutions and decisions or wishes that shall not bring advances, but rather may delay them too much, because it could add new and heavy failures and fiascos, over and above the historical heavy and exhausting weights, wrongful Western policies and internally confusing and sometimes shameful and floundering policies.

As a result, I found that it is necessary, with your permission, to suggest expending the span of invitations extended by the Apostolic See, to cover courageous and effective voices of various Christian circles both Catholic and Orthodox, both cleric and secularist, in addition to the various Islamic circles, especially as most of the inhabitants of the Orient are Muslims, it is supposed that what is to be said in this convention or what is to be issued by it, should concern them equally much as they concern Christians.

Point three, is the span of Western churches, especially the Vatican, regarding to what takes place all over the world, and especially to the Arab and non-Arab Orient.

My first question is: Is it possible that I could be distancing myself from truth if I say that everything that is taking place all over the world in general and in the Orient in particular, was done by the West, I mean the United States, Western Europe, Canada, Australia and Russia in particular, these countries that appropriate all the wealth of our globe, and solely possess the great part of the striking force around it up till now?

My second question is: Am I distancing myself from truth if I say that most of what is now taking place, first in the Arab homeland and in the Islamic world and in the second place in the Islamic areas all around the world, is nothing but a reaction to the West’s grievances, which are reactions that started and continued in most cases, demagogic, bloody and spontaneous, then some of them continued in two modes of armed movements, first legal resistance in occupied Palestine, which was unjustly described by the European Union in September 2002 as being carried out by groups they labelled as terrorist organizations, second the fundamentalist resistance, starting first in Afghanistan against Russia and later against U.S. aggression then in Iraq and Pakistan that was the case of the Taliban and the al Qaida movements.

But, is there anybody who doesn’t know that these two movements were originally created by the United States itself?

But what is taking place in the heart of the Arab homeland, which is Palestine in particular, Palestine, which you no more call it in your Western churches other than “The Holy Land”, are not but wrongful wars and occupation that deem permissible anything: killing, imprisoning, torturing, siege and displacement against all the Palestinian Arab people, Christians and Muslims, and all of that is taking place under the eye sight of the entire world, with full support of the West, and what made Mrs. Clinton say: “Attacking Israel is equal to attacking an American city like “San Diego”, and what made Mrs. Merkel, the German Chancellor, say also shamelessly: “Attacking Tel Aviv is exactly like attacking Germany in particular…”.

But what has taken place and is still taking place against Palestinian Arabs by “Israeli” Zionist occupation!

What is the relation between what happened and what is happening to the Palestinian Arab people, for longer than sixty years, by Zionist “Israeli” hands, if compared to human rights as announced in “The Human Rights Charter”, and all international treaties, especially the Geneva Conventions, as well as hundreds of resolutions taken against “Israel” by the United Nations and its miserable Security Council? Did all the West become a slave to Zionism, to follow these dissolute double standards in the West’s relations with the Zionist entity on the one hand and the rest of the world on the other, which are the weak and deemed weak peoples, on the other hand?

With all of that, all European Churches keep silent. Yes we mean all of them, starting with the Vatican itself. It kept silent after the passing away of Pope John Paul II, with the exception of the courageous the Cardinal of Boston, Bernard Law.

I have been thoroughly and regularly reading for years the Vatican’s daily newspaper “corriereromano” http://www.websiteoutlook.com/www.corriereromano.it, and was aware that since you became Pope, its language was flattened and neutralized in relation to the Arab / Zionist conflict, and the same concerning war tragedies, hunger, diseases, poverty, exploitation, forgery and organized plundering, which are tragedies that their beastly spreading over the world is aggravating… day in and day out!

This became apparent in a grievous manner during your personal visit to occupied Palestine, I expected from you words that are at least equal in courage and trueness of that your predecessor, Pope John Paul II, the moment he laid foot on the land of Syria in 2001, as he immediately demanded the execution of United Nations resolutions for a just and comprehensive solution of the Arab / Zionist struggle!

I was also expecting from you words, which are sympathetic, strong and courageous towards the Palestinian Arab people, that Zionism had been subjugating for more than sixty years to a terrible and continuous uninterrupted “Shoah” (Holocaust), with unlimited Western support, words that are at least a little equal to the sweeping sympathy that you expressed towards the Jewish “people”, for example what you expressed during your meeting with some of its American leaders during your visit to the United States on Feb. 12th 2009, and during the visit of the leading “Israeli” Rabbis to the Vatican on March 12th 2009! As for what you said on January 1st 2010 on the memory day of the “Shoah”, which the “corriereromano” (Page 2) that expresses that what is taking place in what remains of Palestine (The West Bank and the Gaza Strip) for over sixty years is completely absent from your memory!

I regret to add that the complete silence of Western churches was expressed in wretched words written by some Catholic bishops in France, Germany and Canada after their visits to the “Holy Land”, where they equated between the Arab victim and the Zionist butcher. They also expressed their “great” disturbance for the pains both peoples are suffering, and they were always concluding their word with calling on their peoples to raise prayers for “peace”, and to give financial help to the: “Holy Lands”.

We feel as if they have lost their eyesight, and they can no more see, erased their brains and thus can no more remember the history of Palestine, the homeland of Jesus Christ, neither the old nor the contemporary, and the vital change that is taking place in this homeland in its historical landmarks. And what happened to its indigenous population, Christians and Muslims, of massacres, displacement and genocide/extermination!

Father, Your Holiness,
At last, I have six questions, that I find necessary to raise to you at the end of this letter:

1st Question: does the anti-Semitism that the West, the Church, authority and people, practiced against the Jews, justify today’s spilling the blood of the people of the Arab and non-Arab East, starting with Palestinian Arabs, for the sake of the “poor” Jewish “people”? And does it justify all Western Churches keeping silence, concerning this injustice, while they continue to request remission for the sin of anti-Semitism, that it alone committed, excluding Arabs and Muslims?

2nd Question: isn’t it clear for all the West including these Western Churches, that this situation shall end up with two formidable evils that I find no possible forgiveness for:

The first evil, is the transforming of all the “poor” Jewish “people” to become a group of killers?

The second evil, is the emptying of all the Orient from its indigenous Christians?

3rd Question: Don’t you see with me a fearful and shameful similarity between what all Western powers are doing today all over the world in general and the Arab homeland and the Islamic world in particular, and what Western powers, which invaded the American continents starting with the 15th century had done? I mean the savage and systematic extermination of about forty to fifty million people of the indigenous population as per Western researchers themselves?

4th question, in facing all these crimes against humanity, is it enough that a new Pope to come, after four hundred years, requests the forgiveness from the slaughtered peoples, as the brave Paul John Paul II did, during his extraordinary visits to the world, so as the Church would say the Church had done what it had to do?

5th question, is it not necessary for Western churches today, and before tomorrow to get out of their silence, and speak the Gospel’s words, to defend the wronged, the poor, the hungry, the sick and the prisoners of war that Jesus identified all his love for them, who are no more individuals as Matthew the Apostle’s gospel said? On the contrary, they became peoples who cover the greater part of the world? Some may hear it and we be able to liberate some of the Western, the “rich” and the “haughty”, whether those who were fully liberated from God, or those who exploited him, as what is taking place in the United States of America, so as to finish of, in his name, with the Christians and the Muslims of all the Orient, and stir the peoples against each other, through sectarian and ethnic wars that spread day after day, and shall not grant mercy to anybody?

6th Question, which is a question that I hear you forwarding to me, as many Western bishops and priests had already addressed it to me: But “is there anybody to hear?” In turn I shall tell you and the whole Western Church: You are no better then Jesus, “He came to his special people, but they didn’t accept him”. But in spite of that, he spoke, and what Jesus said, nobody had ever said it, and nobody shall ever say it!

Yes, Your Holiness, I have something else to add.

Father, Your Holiness, please, I am your son, the Arab Catholic priest from Syria, I beg you, with all the love and importunity, to take the initiative and invite the truthful elite of those responsible in Western Churches and secularists, so as to discuss with those responsible and the truthful in the Eastern Churches and the rest of the world to discuss, discuss with Christians and Muslims, during the forthcoming convention, which you called for in October 2010, about the responsibilities of what is taking place today in the Orient and the rest of the world, so as to take the required and sincere stances before it is too late.

A lot of time has passed, and days are pregnant with new tragedies, that nobody wishes upon anybody else.

God’s world is spacious, as spacious as God’s heart, so I hope that your heart shall be spacious enough to grasp my words,

You, Your Holiness,

I beg you to pray for all my brethren in the Orient, Muslims, Christians and Jews, please accept your son’s love and respect.

Father Elias Zahlawi  – 13/3/2010

Translated from Arabic by: Adib S. Kawar and revised by Mary Rizzo for Tlaxcala

This letter was published at the Palestine Think Tank on March 22, 2010

Related Videos

Related Articles

كورونا وفايسبوك: أزمات النمو أم الأفول؟

أكتوبر/ 5 تشرين الأول 2021

 ناصر قنديل

منذ سقوط جدار برلين وتقدم أميركا كصاحب نموذج للعالم تحت عنوان العولمة المستنسخة وفقاً لنظرية نهاية التاريخ، أي اعتبار النموذج الليبرالي الجديد آخر نتاج التقدم الإنساني اقتصاديا وسياسياً وثقافياً واجتماعياً، كانت الحملات العسكرية الأميركية الجزء الأقل أهمية من المشروع الأميركي العالمي، على رغم كونها أخطر وجوه المشروع وأكثرها ظهوراً وحضوراً، ولكن وقفت خلف هذه الحملات العسكرية الأميركية سواء في حرب يوغوسلافيا او أفغانستان أو العراق، مشهدية فلسفية وثقافية وتسويقية تقوم على نهاية عهد الدولة الوطنية، والمقصود نهاية عهد الدولة لحساب الشركة أولاً، ونهاية عهد الوطنية، أي الحفاظ على الخصوصيات الثقافية والسياسية للكيان الوطنية للدول لصالح نموذج عالمي، لا مكان فيه للهويات والخصوصيات، التي ترتبط عموماً بفكرة الدولة، وسيتكفل حلول الشركة مكان الدولة بالتمهيد لتكون الشركة عالمية، وتزامن استعراض التفوق العسكري الأميركي مع استعراض نماذج التفوق التكنولوجي، ومن خلالهما نموذج الشركة، ففي الحرب لم تعد الجيوش قوة وطنية تحمل مشروع بلادها، بل صارت الحرب عملاً مأجوراً تعاقدياً تنفذه الشركات، تواكبه شركات أخرى في تكنولوجيا الإعلام والاتصال، ومثلها الثورات لم يعد قائماً على فعل تاريخي معبر عن إرادة نخب تقود شعوبها نحو مشروع حالم، بل صارت الثورات مقاولة تلتزمها شركات تسمى جمعيات مجتمع مدني، وتواكبها موازنات تنفقها الشركات على وسائل التواصل والأقنية التلفزيونية، وشعارات صنعتها شركات الدعاية المتخصصة، كعملية تجارية صرفة اعتمدت فيها قواعد توصيف المنتج ودراسات الجدوى وتحديد الكلفة والأرباح المتوقعة.

جاء الاعتراف الأميركي بالفشل العسكري بنظر البعض منفصلاً عن فشل المشروع الذي جسدته أميركاً الجديدة، أي نموذج الشركة العالمية، ولذلك يذهب هذا البعض إلى الدعوة للتمهل في الحديث عن فشل المشروع أو دخوله مأزقاً بنيوياً ويتخيلون فرصة لتعديل في وجهته يتراجع خلالها العسكري لصالح الاقتصادي، الذي لا يزال الأميركي فيه أولاً إن لم يكن حاكماً، وهم بالتالي يقرأون الأزمة التي يمر بها المشروع الأميركي بصفتها واحدة من أزمات النمو لمشروع في طور الصعود على رغم الإخفاقات، ولذلك تجب معاينة المأزق العسكري للحملات الأميركية، بعدما صار الاعتراف الأميركي بالفشل علنياً ورسمياً، وصولاً للقول بسقوط إمكانية صناعة السياسة باللجوء للقوة العسكرية، كما وصف الرئيس الأميركي جو بايدن الإطار السياسي لقرار الانسحاب من أفغانستان، من دون أن ينسى أن المعيار هو سقوط الجدوى الاقتصادية لاستثمار ثلاثمئة مليون دولار يومياً، وما يزيد على تريليون دولار خلال عشرين عاماً، كتفسير للفشل، فهل كانت الحال مختلفة في مسيرة الانتقال من الدولة إلى الشركة؟

الخلاصة الأولى التي كتبتها سنوات الحروب هي تثبيت الخصوصيات والهويات على حساب نظرية الهوية العالمية القائمة على الربحية وحدها، وفق معادلة اقتلاع شجرات الزيتون لصالح التنافس على سيارة اللكزس، فنهضت أشجار الزيتون، بما ترمز إليه من هويات خصوصية، وهذا ما قاله النهوض الروسي والصعود الصيني والصمود الإيراني، ووقفت أميركا بعظمتها ضعيفة أمام شجرة زيتون الهوية الصهيونية، مؤكدة سقوط نظرية سقوط الهويات، وتراجع مشروع الشركة عن عالميته، لصالح الاكتفاء بكونه أميركياً، وصار الحديث عن الدولة العظيمة لا الدولة العظمى، وعن استعادة أميركا النموذج والمثال، ولكن الاختبارات القاسية لم تترك المجال لنظرية الشركة أن تبقى بعيداً عن تحديات إثبات أهليتها، وكانت جائحة كورونا أصعب الاختبارات الإنسانية، بينما كانت أزمة شركات تكنولوجيا المعلومات والاتصالات الفقاعة الأبرز التي وضعت الأزمة على الطاولة.

خلال جائحة كورونا ظهرت الفوضى وانكشف ضعف النظام الصحي، وانكشفت خطورة الاعتماد على منهج الربحية في عمل الشركات للإجابة على تحديات العناية بصحة البشرية ومواكبة أخطار الأوبئة، فبقيت أميركا الأولى الأشد تأثراً بالجائحة وعجزاً عن السيطرة عليها على رغم أنها الدولة الأغنى والدولة الأقوى تقيناً، والأكثر امتلاكاً لأدوات المواجهة والوقاية، وعلى رغم دخول الجائحة عامها الثالث لا تزال الإصابات والوفيات تسجل أعلى الأرقام في أميركا، على رغم أنها بقياس عدد السكان تشكل 20 في المئة من عدد سكان الصين التي نجحت بالسيطرة على الجائحة وخرجت عملياً من تداعياتها، في مواجهة عملية لنموذجي الدولة والشركة، وقبل أن تحط كورونا رحالها، انفجرت أزمة شركات الاتصالات العملاقة وتحولت إلى قضية عالمية مع الأزمة التي حلت بالشركة الأعظم التي تتحكم بيوميات نصف سكان العالم، فالأزمة التي تفجرت حول شركة فايسبوك ليست مجرد عطل تقني، ولا مجرد نقاش حول الضوابط التي يجب أن تحكم حال شركات التواصل، بل هي تعبير عن الأسئلة الكبرى التي يطرحها نموذج الشركة بدلاً من الدولة، حيث الربح هو الموجه الأول، على حساب ضمانات سلامة التشغيل وأمان المواد المتداولة وأخلاقيات استخدامها، حيث ما نشهده ليس إلا أول النقاش، كما حدث يوم الأزمة التي تفجرت عام 2008 من بوابة الرهونات العقارية، وانهيار النظام المصرفي ومن خلفه البورصة، واضطرار الدولة إلى اللجوء لتأميم بعض المصارف ووضع اليد عليها، وتقييد الباقي منها.

ليس ما تشهده أميركا مجرد أزمة، بل انفجار لنموذج، وتعبير عن أفول مشروع إمبراطوري، وهذا لا يعني أن أميركا ستزول عن الخريطة، أو أنها ستكف عن التصرف كدولة قوية ومقتدرة، أو أنها لن تحاول ترميم نموذجها ومحاولة إصلاحه، لكن كل ذلك سيجري تحت عنوان عريض هو أن الشركة العالمية فشلت كبديل للدولة الوطنية، وأن ما يجري نقاشه الآن في واشنطن هو كيفية العودة لمفهوم الدولة الوطنية القوية، بعد فشل الشركة العالمية الحاكمة.

مقالات متعلقة

فيديوات متعلقة

Hezbollah Is A Greater Threat to the US than Ever Before!

September 22, 2021 

Hezbollah Is A Greater Threat to the US than Ever Before!

By Fatima Haydar

Beirut – A month since Hezbollah Secretary General His Eminence Sayyed Nasrallah promised that no Lebanese will be humiliated in the pursuit of their everyday needs and amid the worsening economic situation in Lebanon, the Resistance group has held onto its part.

Hezbollah has broken the economic siege enforced by the United States on Lebanon. Iranian fuel transferred to the country via Iranian ships is being distributed in ALL Lebanon in a bid to ease the suffering of the Lebanese.  

However, this step has put the US in an embarrassing situation forcing it to allow the transfer of energy to Lebanon. Out of the blue, Lebanon will be receiving Egyptian natural gas and Jordanian electricity!

By bringing Iranian fuel to Lebanon and distributing it for free or low in cost to the Lebanese, Hezbollah has once again falsified the American rhetoric internal US allies were trying to sell the Lebanese.

Confidence in Hezbollah has never subsided among the group’s supporters. If this was the case, American and “Israeli” think-tanks wouldn’t have issued studies targeting social and monetary institutions belonging or linked to Hezbollah.

Now, the US is in cross hairs. It can either admit its failure in weakening the Resistance group or keep on trying relentlessly in an attempt to achieve something.

As usual, the US has a trick up its sleeve.

By failing in the economic war and its refusal to get into a military war, the US will turn to soft power and dirty diplomacy.

It will definitely use its leverage with the “Israeli” entity and put pressure on a newly formed Lebanese government that is so much in need of support.

The US, knowing that the new Najib Mikati-led government badly needs funds from the international community to prevent Lebanon from total collapse, will pressure it to succumb to American will and try to “rein in” Hezbollah.

Another thing the US will try to exploit is to make Hezbollah’s narrative of resistance void of meaning, forcing the group to disarm.

However, the group has vowed to liberate the entire Lebanese territory, including the Lebanese Shebaa Farms – a hill town at the intersection of the Lebanese-Syrian border and the “Israeli”-occupied Golan Heights – from the grip of the “Israeli” regime. A promise Hezbollah plans to keep! This being said, disarming is not an option on the table for the group.

In the meantime, the administration of US President Joe Biden will try to destabilize security in Lebanon. The “Israelis” are worried that Hezbollah can use the Shebaa Farms to spy on them.

At this point, the US will give the “Israeli” entity guarantees that the hill town would not be used by the entity’s enemies for espionage purposes.

Here, to give the entity guarantees that Hezbollah would not use the strategic location to threaten them, UNIFIL forces deployed in Shebaa should be given the right to inspect private property, thus ensuring that Hezbollah could not spy on the entity.

Still, Hezbollah has long understood something that the US and its allies haven’t: soft power.

Lebanon’s Hezbollah has always been and always will be a champion for the Lebanese, as Sayyed Nasrallah assured Lebanese will not be humiliated, saying in his speech on the 10th of Muharram, “We refuse that our people be humiliated… We refuse to be humiliated neither in a military war, nor in a political war, nor in an economic war. When we are presented with choices of this kind, the whole world knows our decision and our resolve”.

Kabul & Saigon: A Tale of Two US Failures

August 18, 2021

Source: Al Mayadeen

By Ali Hamouch

Each time the US decides to invade a country, it starts with a poorly thought-out mass mobilization and ends up dealing with disgraceful consequences.

Visual search query image
Kabul & Saigon: A Tale of Two US Failures

A new dawn is embracing Kabul today – a dawn that bears with it a load of uncertainty, bewilderment, and curiosity. What some have deemed as the fall of Kabul is seen as a rise by others, though what is certain is the massive failure of US foreign policy.

But, the real failure did not begin on the 15th of August 2021, but on the 30th of April 1975, the day the Americans lost control of Saigon, the capital of South Vietnam after 17 years of invasion, intervention, and genocides. 

Despite the constant reassurance of top US officials that the Kabul retreat would not resemble that of Saigon 46 years earlier, the opposite turned out to be true.

Indeed, both scenarios bear a lot of resemblance in time and context, offering a great history lesson for those willing to learn. 

The Big Bad Wolf 

Vietnam

Each era leading to a US invasion was shaped or contained by an internal US policy which dictated the direction of the narrative. It stresses the view of different cultures or ideologies as an “other,” always opposed to the American Dream and its (ill-defined) values. 

In the ‘50s, McCarthyism shaped the populace’s view of communism as anti-American: Named after Senator Joseph McCarthy, this strategy was the political equivalent of witch-hunting in the US. It relied on spreading terror in the hearts of those who were deemed to have communist leanings and ousting them, going as far as accusing economics professors of being communists and questioning them for the simple act of teaching Marxist economic theory. 

The FBI led much of the maligned campaign, earning the title of “the single most important component of the anti-communist crusade” by historian Ellen Schrecker. The term “crusade” will be further used to justify an unjust invasion albeit half a century later.

The employment of the “Red Scare” within the US prepared the soil for any invasion as long as it pertained to “fighting communism,” which is the reason why the Vietnam War, pre-civil rights movement, was not contested much. 

The Vietnam invasion occurred in 1958 at the height of the Cold War, where the US was determined to push back any attempt by the USSR to expand even on an ideological level. 

This approach was backed by the Truman Doctrine, named after the 33d US President Harry Truman, which stated that “The United States would provide political, military and economic assistance to all democratic nations under threat from external or internal authoritarian forces.” In reality, this doctrine was a political frontline weapon to ensure that the US would be able to expand its military influence in any region of the world without receiving much backlash from within its apparatuses.

The war was waged against the National Liberation Front of South Vietnam, commonly known as the Viet Cong, in an attempt to control the policymaking of the country.

The war went on to become the longest in the US history at the time; it was massively contested by Americans during the civil rights era, and was even challenged by the likes of Mohammad Ali who refused to enlist for the Vietnam War, voicing his rejection by saying “No Vietnamese ever called me nigger!” Simultaneously, the human and economic cost of the war kept growing at an alarming rate.

The image of the US as a liberator came to an end during the revelation of the My Lai Massacre in 1968 in which an army unit killed large numbers of unarmed civilians after raping them. 

In hindsight, the US wanted to spread “democracy” using universal values of respect and freedom as a pretext for amassing further geopolitical control of the world. All of this was planned in order to cement itself as the “Leader of the Free World.”

Afghanistan

Through what Noam Chomsky labeled as “Systematic Propaganda,” the US eventually had to change the labels of its reasons to go to war. “Anti-communism,” after the fall of the Soviet Union in 1989, became “The War on Terror.” Now, every group which espoused seemingly Islamic beliefs and did not see eye to eye with the US was deemed as “terrorist.”

But, what was peculiar about this approach and the new labeling of Taliban was the US’ support of Islamic movements from 1978 up until the end of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan – they were seen as a powerful tool in the defeat of the USSR. Afghan Islamic fighters were a powerful ally in the US war against communism, which was eventually concluded by the collapse of the Union a few years after it retreated from Afghanistan. 

Bin Laden: Once labeled as a
Bin Laden: Once a “freedom fighter,” later labeled a “terrorist.”

So what happened to this alliance? Was the US in need of a new enemy to present itself as the gatekeeper of the new century?

The invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 took place after the occurrence of the 9/11 attacks. The shock of the Twin Towers falling signaled the end of the US’ impenetrable fort and the unipolarity of the world. In an attempt to preserve the last remnants of its power status, the US announced the “War on Terror” which would begin by invading Afghanistan and destroying the Taliban, who were accused of shielding Osama Bin Laden and other key members of Al-Qaeda.

The US decision was highly questionable, notably as most of the involved in the 9/11 attacks were Saudis and not Afghans, yet Saudi Arabia was never officially investigated or pointed at as a possible associate. The victims’ families are still demanding the release of FBI documents detailing the Saudi government’s involvement in the attacks.

Furthermore, the only nations to ever consider the Taliban as a legitimate party in power were Pakistan, the UAE, and Saudi Arabia – the latter two being close allies to the US. It now becomes clear that the invasion of Afghanistan was merely a thesis statement of sorts, a declaration of hegemonic persistence despite the severity of the attack. 

However, this time, the US needed wider support to perform its next step: It forcefully enlisted the assistance of the NATO as it provided a large portion of the funding. Subsequently, the UK, Japan, and a large part of the European Union became embroiled in a war they did not comprehend. 

In an infamous speech by then-President George W. Bush, he described his country’s upcoming response as a “crusade against terrorism,” voicing similar rhetoric as the one adopted during the Cold War: That of American exceptionalism and its divine right to shape the world in its image. Only this time, it did not want to shape anything, it simply wanted to preserve the shadow of its deflating empire.

The invasion of Afghanistan came just three weeks before the implementation of the Patriot Act, which legitimizes the Orwellian surveillance state. This comes in parallel with convincing a majority of Americans about the need for relinquishing their personal data to fight terrorism. Suddenly, the safety of the US became equivalent to a complete absence of privacy and personal thoughts. Through this tactic, fending off Islamic extremism just became the most radical objective of the nation, subsequently turning it into the boogeyman of the century.

Now the US was not vying to spread its value but to simply, and bluntly, preserve its interests.

A Fall from Grace

And now to the outcome of each invasion – the fall of Saigon and the fall of Kabul – not only do they bear narrative similitudes, but also picturesque ones: People being lifted from embassy rooftops, associate workers being left behind, journalists promised a safe flight back home left stranded, and a local government backed by Washington left to collapse.

But which country does the aforementioned scenery ascribe to?

Both actually, which goes to showcase how the US has learned nothing from its mistakes in Vietnam. The US should have learned its lesson by now: Guns and funds do not fundamentally alter the social structure of a country. 

People lifted off the US embassy in Kabul (2021) and Saigon (1975).
People lifted off the US embassy in Kabul (2021) and Saigon (1975).

The Viet Cong were insurgents in the US-dominated part of Vietnam yet they persisted despite all of their enemies’ wealth and military power. The Taliban, mostly formed of Pashto groups, remained an integral part of Afghanistan’s social and political life despite attempts to uproot it and the formation of a US-backed government. 

Foreign invaders will always be seen as “others” in the same way the invader describes his victims as an “other.” The dynamic is violent, with each party trying to impose its presence through all means necessary. Yet, one of them inherently adheres to the social and cultural components of the country, and the other cannot begin to comprehend it. 

But, perhaps the worst outcome of these wars is that the mere talk about both countries becomes constantly entangled with the talk about the US invasion. In the collective mindset of the world, these nations are only defined through their years of war with the US troops and not through their culture, their aspirations, or heritage.

Both countries have been scarred, left to fend off for themselves; their resources depleted and their economy suffering.

On the other hand, the US’ retreat in both cases was a crystal clear humiliation, an inadvertent announcement of their foreign policy and military strategy failure. In Saigon, it erased the image of America as the defender of liberties, and in Kabul, it drew the picture of a nation in shambles that leaves its allies behind.

Regarding the US retreat from Afghanistan, Joe Biden said that they aimed “to deliver justice to Osama Bin Laden.” But, given that the US has assassinated him in 2011, what was the aim of remaining there for an additional 10 years?

Biden follows up with the following remark: “We did not go to Afghanistan to nation-build,” which showcases a clear dissociation with the “democracy spreading” discourse used decades earlier.

The head of German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s party, Armin Laschet, called the retreat “the biggest debacle the NATO has suffered since its founding.” British paper Daily Mail asked on its front page “What the hell did they all die for?”, showing a casket of a British soldier who died in Afghanistan.

So, after 20 years of endless battles in Afghanistan, what did they die for?

If the Viet Cong ruled all of Vietnam and the Taliban took Kabul in a matter of days, what was the point of wasting all of these taxpayers’ money, civilian lives, and the lives of soldiers on both sides?

A recent poll showcased that the US is mostly disapproving of Biden’s withdrawal strategy from Afghanistan….Though in reality, is there a best way to retreat from a country you have invaded after losing the longest war in your nation’s history? 

Taliban to Declare Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan

August 16, 2021

Source: Agencies

By Al Mayadeen

After capturing the Afghan Presidential palace and Ashraf Ghani’s resignation, a Taliban official says the movement will soon declare the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan.

Taliban militants in Afghanistan
A group of Taliban militants in Afghanistan

On Sunday, a Taliban official said that the movement would soon declare the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan from the presidential palace in Kabul.

Earlier today, the Taliban announced capturing the Afghan presidential palace and entering it in Kabul, following Afghan President Ashraf Ghani’s departure from toward Tajikistan – information not confirmed by the Afghan government.

An Afghan presidency source said today, Sunday, President Ashraf Ghani agreed to resign in light of the deteriorating situation in the country.

Two Taliban officials told Reuters there would be no transitional government in Afghanistan, adding that the group expects a complete handover of power.

The officials’ words came after the Taliban ordered its forces to enter Kabul.

A Taliban spokesperson asserted that the movement wants a peaceful transition of power, assuring foreign nationals that there is no fear for their safety.

Related Video

Related News

Video: Tulsi Gabbard calls out the US dirty war on Syria that Biden, aides admit to

Source

While Joe Biden has faced some mild Congressional pushback for bombing the Iraq-Syria border, Tulsi Gabbard says her former colleagues are ignoring the larger issue: the ongoing US dirty war on Syria.

After a decade of proxy warfare that empowered Al Qaeda and ISIS, the US is now occupying one-third of Syria and imposing crippling sanctions that are crushing Syria’s economy and preventing reconstruction. While Gabbard has been vilified for her stance on Syria, many top White House officials — including Joe Biden himself — have already acknowledged the same facts that she has called out.

Aaron Maté plays clips of Biden and some of his most senior aides admitting to the horrific realities of the US dirty war on Syria, and argues that Gabbard only stands apart in being wiling to criticize it.

Featuring video clips from: Tulsi Gabbard, former Democratic Congressmember; President Joe Biden; Brett McGurk, National Security Council coordinator for the Middle East and North Africa; Martin Dempsey, former Joint Chiefs chairman; Rob Malley, Special Envoy for Iran; John Kerry, Special Envoy for Climate & former Secretary of State; former President Donald Trump; Alena Douhan, UN Special Rapporteur on Sanctions; Dana Stroul, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Middle East; Vice President Kamala Harris.

What to Know About Lloyd Austin: Biden’s First Pick for US War Department

What to Know About Lloyd Austin: Biden’s First Pick for US War Department

By Staff

What to Know About Lloyd Austin: Biden’s First Pick for US War Department

US Army Carried out ‘Military Drill’ with ISIS Affiliate in the Syrian Al Tanf

  ARABI SOURI

US army military drill with ISIS affiliate in Al Tanf southeast of Syria

A terrorist group affiliated with ISIS carried out a joint ‘military drill’ with Trump forces in the Syrian desert area of al Tanf, the ISIS affiliate group bragged on their social media accounts.

In the ‘military drill’, US fighter jets bombed targets in the desert followed by moves of the ISIS-styled 4 x 4 machine-guns mounted SUVs shooting at the same targets.

‘Maghawir Thawra’ is an armed terrorist group affiliated with the ISIS terrorist organization, supposed to be on the US list of terrorist organizations, but instead is a beneficiary of US military aid, part of the US ‘exceptionalism’ and ‘pragmatism’ in its illegal operations worldwide.

The video is also available on YouTube and BitChute.

The spokesman for the US-led International Coalition to aid the ‘Islamist State’ ISIS, Colonel Wayne Maruto, wrote on his Twitter account on November 30 commenting on the exercises: “We will continue to work with our ‘partners’ to protect our gains against ISIS and deter any future aggression. We remain committed to the enduring #DefeatDaesh in designated areas of Iraq and Syria.”

US army officer tweet about military drill with ISIS in southeast of Syria

We’re not sure whether the officer in Trump forces knows from his seat hundreds of miles away that his ‘partners’ are in fact ISIS and he’s part of the Pentagon’s propaganda team, or he’s fooled by the CIA agents in charge of the ISIS division; we do know that top US officials like John Kerry admitted they work in ‘partnership’ with ISIS to pressure the Syrian leadership into concessions.

Trump forces are based illegally in the depth of the Syrian desert on the cross borders between Syria, Iraq, and Jordan in the Al Tanf area, they’re tasked to prevent the escape of thousands of Syrian refugees held in the infamous Rukban concentration camp in miserable conditions, also to offer logistic support to Israeli bombing against Syrian targets from the air corridor they provide, in addition to their role making sure their ‘partners’ of ISIS and its affiliates can move freely and attack Syrian remote villages, commit massacres against the Syrian farmers in their homes, and carry out terrorist attacks then retreat safely to the 55 square kilometers area protected by the US army.

Rukban Concentration Camp:

ِAmerican forces occupying Syrian territory entered the country illegally and their presence impedes efforts to restore peaceful life to the country and constitutes an obstacle to stability in southeastern Syria and causing the catastrophic conditions of the residents of al-Rukban camp who are being forcibly detained by terrorist groups controlled by the United States. A statement by the Syrian and Russian coordinating bodies on the return of the displaced Syrians.

Following video report by Syrian Sama TV:

The statement issued by the two bodies indicated that the information of the Syrian Arab Red Crescent doctors who examined people who came out of the camp shows that they have chronic diseases, some of them suffering from tuberculosis and skin diseases, while many are underweight due to hunger and in children lack of vitamins and intestinal infections and viral infection.

The statement pointed out that Syria and Russia are taking unprecedented measures to save the inhabitants of Al-Rukban, which led to the departure of 13337 people since March 23, 2019 from the camp where tens of thousands of displaced people live in catastrophic conditions and many of them do not have money to pay to terrorists in the camp to allow them to leave the camp.

Tens of thousands of Syrians who fled their homes in towns and villages, mainly in Eastern Homs countryside, upon the expansion of the US-sponsored ISIS terrorists were pushed towards the southeast of the country instead of towards the capital Damascus to their southwest.

Magahaweer Al-Thawra, among other terrorist groups, led those civilians into a makeshift supposed to be refugee camp in Al-Tanf area near the borders of Jordan and Iraq deep in the open desert. It was a trap to hold them in a very remote area and under the cover of the US-led coalition of aggressor states defying international law and against everything humanity represents. Since then, the ISIS-affiliates Maghaweer Al-Thawra under the US protection kept the civilians in dire conditions under their mercy in what’s now described as Rukban Concentration Camp in order to pressure the Syrian state into concessions.

من المحيط الهادئ حتى جبل طارق الصين وحلفاؤها يعتلون عرش العالم

محمد صادق الحسيني

كلّ ما يدور من حولنا يؤكد بما لم يعد قابلاً للشك او التردّد بأنّ مركز ثقل العالم ينتقل من الغرب الى الشرق..! وانّ محور هذا الانتقال هو العلوم التي بدأت تهيمن عليها وتتقنها كلّ من الصين وروسيا وإيران، فيما لا تزال أميركا هيكلاً ضخماً، لكنها لا تكاد تملأ جوفها إلا أوهام القوة ومحدوديتها…!

وهاجس الصين هو الشبح الذي يطارد في ما كان يسمّى يوماً الدولة الأعظم في العالم…!

وإليكم مسار هذا التحوّل التاريخي بالوقائع:

لا بدّ لأيّ محلل موضوعي ان يعود الى الجذور البعيدة، لأيّ أزمة تظهر في العلاقات الدولية في وقتنا الحاضر، وذلك من أجل سبر أغوارها، والوقوف على مدى عمق هذه الأزمة، واستشراف احتمالات تطورها، والاستعداد للتعامل مع هذه التطورات والتداعيات، بشكل يخدم المصلحة العربية العليا، وفي مقدّمتها القضية العربية المركزية، التي هي قضية فلسطين.

انّ الأزمة التي نعيش فصولها منذ أشهر، بين الولايات المتحدة والصين الشعبية، وما تخللها من حرب تجارية واقتصادية وتكنولوجية وعلمية وسياسية وغير ذلك ضدّ الصين الشعبية، لم تظهر الى العلن منذ انتشار فيروس كورونا في مدينة ووهان الصينية، بداية هذا العام، وإنما يعود تاريخ انطلاقها الى زمن أبعد بكثير.

فمنذ إعلان ضابط البحرية والخبير الاستراتيجي البحري الأميركي، ألفرِدْ ثايَر ماهان عن استراتيجيته لفرض الهيمنة الأميركية على العالم، في أواخر القرن التاسع عشر (توفي سنة 1914)، والتي استند فيها الى انّ الوسيلة الأفضل، لفرض هذه الهيمنة، هي نشر الأساطيل الأميركية في بحار ومحيطات العالم والسيطرة عليها، مبتعداً بذلك عن استراتيجية مونرو، التي كانت تركز على/ أو تدعو إلى/ بسط السيطرة على الأميركيتين فقط.

وقد نفذت الولايات المتحدة هذه الاستراتيجية، منذ سنة 1907، عندما قرّر الرئيس الأميركي الجمهوري، ذو الأصول الهولندية، ثيودور روزفلت الذي انتخب رئيساً سنة 1904، إرسال حملة بحرية عسكرية أميركية، تضمّ العديد من البوارج الحربية، في جولة حول العالم. هذه الجولة التي شكلت تدريباً عسكرياً حياً لمشاركة الولايات المتحدة، بجيوشها البحرية والبرية، في الحرب العالمية الأولى ومن ثم في الحرب العالمية الثانية، التي أدّت بنتائجها الى فرض الهيمنة على كامل بحار أوروبا و«الشرق الأوسط» وجنوب شرق آسيا، ايّ بحار اليابان والبحر الأصفر وأجزاء من بحار الصين وغرب المحيط الهادئ. إلى جانب إقامتها عشرات القواعد العسكرية، البحرية والجوية والبرية في كلّ البلدان، التي «حرّرتها» أي احتلتها خلال تلك الحرب، سواءً في غرب أوروبا او في جنوب شرق آسيا.

وبقيت الولايات المتحدة، ورغم تطور الاتحاد السوفياتي وقواته البحرية وتصدّيها للبلطجة البحرية الأميركية، في كثير من بحار العالم، خاصة في البحر المتوسط، في مواجهة الأسطول السادس الأميركي، منذ أواسط خمسينيات القرن الماضي، أو في غرب المحيط الهادئ في منطقة جزيرة غوام، القريبة نسبياً من الساحل الجنوبي الشرقي لروسيا، حيث ميناء ڤلاديڤستوك المطلّ على بحر اليابان، أو في منطقة بحر الفلبين، إلى الجنوب من بحر اليابان، علاوة طبعاً على وقوف الأساطيل السوفياتية بالمرصاد، لأساطيل الولايات المتحدة في بحار أوروبا والمحيطات الواقعة في غرب وشرق الكرة الأرضية، نقول رغم ذلك فإنّ الولايات المتحدة بقيت، تُمارس سياسات الهيمنة نفسها، بواسطة القوة العسكرية، حتى بعد هزيمتها المنكرة في حرب فيتنام، سنة 1975، وفشلها في احتلال كامل شبه الجزيرة الكورية، إبان الحرب الكورية ‪1950 – 1953، ونجاح الاتحاد السوفياتي والصين الشعبية في حماية جمهورية كوريا الديموقراطية (الشمالية) من الاحتلال الأميركي، وبقائها شامخة في وجه هذا الاحتلال حتى يومنا هذا.

وهذا يعني أنّ العقيدة العسكرية الأميركية العدوانية لم تشهد ايّ تغيّر على جوهرها، بل انها شهدت بعض التغييرات على تكتيكات وأدوات تنفيذها، على الصعد الإقليمية والدولية. وفي هذا الإطار قامت الولايات المتحدة، باختراع حجة الإرهاب، بعد تفجيرات نيويورك سنة 2001 وشنها حرباً على أفغانستان، لا زالت دائرة حتى اليوم، ثم حربها الأولى والثانية على العراق واحتلاله وتدمير الدولة العراقية، وبعد محاولتها، عبر قاعدتها العسكرية المسماة «إسرائيل»، تدمير المقاومة في لبنان (حزب الله) سنة 2006 وفشلها في ذلك، ومن ثم اختراع ادوات جديدة، خدمة لاستراتيجية الهيمنة الأميركية واقامة حائط صدّ امام جمهورية الصين الشعبية، يمتد من جزيرة غوام شرقاً وحتى جبل طارق غرباً، منعاً لاستمرار تطور الصين الاقتصادي وتوسيع تعاونها مع هذا الفضاء الجغرافي والديموغرافي الواسع.

ولكن الصين الشعبية وروسيا الاتحادية لم تكونا غافلتين عن هذه المخططات الأميركية واهدافها وعواقبها التدميرية على العالم، الأمر الذي دفعهما، منذ حوالي عقدين من الزمن الى إطلاق مشاريع استثمار عملاقة، في العلوم والمعرفة والتكنولوجيا، وهي المشاريع التي أوصلت الدولتين الى مستوىً متقدم جداً، سواءً في الصناعات العسكرية أو في الصناعات الالكترونية الدقيقة المتعلقة بقطاع الاتصالات بشكل خاص. وهو القطاع الذي يتيح المجال لمن يملك التفوّق في صناعاته المختلفة، وهي الصين وروسيا وإيران حالياً، أن يكون له الدور الطليعي في التطور الاقتصادي والتحول الى القوة الاقتصادية الأولى في العالم.

ومن الجدير بالذكر أنّ ما نقوله ليس دعاية مؤيدة للدول المذكور أعلاه او انحيازاً سياسياً. لها وإنما هو تحليل للواقع الذي نعيشه والأسباب التي أسست لتطوره. فالولايات المتحدة قامت، خلال العقود الثلاثة الماضية، بإنفاق ما يزيد على ثلاثة تريليونات دولار على الحروب وشراء السلاح (البنتاغون تشتري)، بينما لم تنفق الدول الثلاث، المذكورة أعلاه، اكثر من تريليون دولار واحد على التسلح واستثمرت بقية مواردها في التطوير العلمي والتكنولوجي، والاقتصادي بالنتيجة.

وعوضاً عن ان تتعظ واشنطن من هزائم مشاريعها وسياسات الهيمنة التي اتبعتها، عبر العقود الثلاثة الماضية بشكل خاص، عمدت، وبعد تولي ترامب رئاسة الولايات المتحدة، الى الإعلان عن استراتيجية أمنية أميركية جديدة، سنة 2018، مكونة من 14 صفحة وصادرة عن البنتاغون، أسمتها: استراتيجية الولايات المتحدة الأميركية للدفاع الوطني.

وقد حدّدت فيها نصاً أنّ الاولوية، في هذه الاستراتيجية، تتمثل في مواجهة الخطر الداهم، على الولايات المتحدة، ومصدره الصين وروسيا وكذلك التصدّي للخطر المحتمل، من قبل الدول «المارقة» مثل كوريا الشمالية وإيران، وهو الأمر الذي يجعل من الضروري الاستثمار (زيادة الاتفاق العسكري) في تطوير القدرات العسكرية الأميركية اللازمة لبلوغ تلك الأهداف (التصدي للخطر الروسي الصيني الداهم والخطر الكوري الإيراني المحتمل).

وهذا يعني، في تقديرنا، أنّ جوهر هذه الاستراتيجية الجديدة يتلخص في ما يلي:

1

ـ تخلّي الولايات المتحدة عن استخدام أكذوبة الإرهاب، داعش وغيرها، التي اخترعتها وأدارتها واشنطن طوال العقد الماضي، والتركيز او اختراع خطر جديد تسميه هذه الاستراتيجية بالخطر الصيني الروسي الداهم وذلك الكوري الإيراني المحتمل.

2

ـ إن هذه الاستراتيجية ستقود، وبشكل منطقي وموضوعي، إلى تخلي الولايات المتحدة عن دول النفط العربية، خاصة في ظل انعدام قيمة هذه المادة حالياً وانتهاء دورها الاستراتيجي (الوظيفي) في السياسة الأميركي، الذي استمر قرابة قرن من الزمن.

3

ـ وغنيّ عن القول طبعاً إن هذا يعني، وفي ظل الأزمات والمآزق الأميركية الناجمة عن انتشار فيروس كورونا، ان سحب القوات الأميركية، من المنطقة العربية وافغانستان، وكذلك تخفيف الانتشار العسكري الأميركي في مناطق اخرى من العالم، قد أصبح حقيقة واقعة برسم التنفيذ، حتى لو تأخر ذلك بعض الشيء.

4

ـ ان قيام الولايات المتحدة بنشر ثلاث حاملات طائرات، هي رونالد ريغان وثيودور روزفلت ويو إس إس نيميتس، تحمل كل منها 60 طائرة حربية، حسب تصريح قائد قيادة المحيط الهندي والهادئ، الجنرال ستيفين كولَر ، لا يتعدّى كونه استعراض عضلات لن يؤدي حتى الى استفزاز الصين، التي تعلم تمام العلم أن هذه التحركات تهدف الى تعويض العجز والتراجع الاستراتيجي، الذي تعاني منه الولايات المتحدة، سواء. على الصعيد الاقتصادي او الصعيد العسكري.

5

ـ انه، وكما يقول الكاتب، الأميركي الاسرائيلي سيث فرانتس مان ، في موضوع نشره على موقع الجروزاليم بوست الإسرائيلية وكذلك على موقع ناشيونال ريڤيو بتاريخ 25/5/202، أننا وعلى عكس ظهور الولايات المتحدة الأميركية كقوة عظمى، قبل مئة عام، فإن جائحة كورونا وما سينتج عنها من كوارث دولية، ربما ستضع الاستراتيجيين الأميركيين في مواجهة احداث، هم غير مهيأين لمواجهتها، ستفضي الى جلوس الصين على عرش قيادة النظام العالمي.

ويتابع الكاتب قائلاً: إذا ما كانت الولايات المتحدة وحلفاؤها جديون، في حماية النظام الليبرالي، فإنّ عليهم التحرك بسرعة، وإلا فإننا سنرى، خلال 25 سنة، متغيّرات سريعة شبيهة بتلك التي حصلت قبل مئة عام. ولكنها هذه المرة لن تنتهي بسيطرة الولايات المتحدة، وإنما ستنتهي بجلوس الصين الشعبية وروسيا وإيران في مقعد القيادة.

يهلك ملوكاً ويستخلف آخرين.

بعدنا طيّبين قولوا الله…

جورج فلويد… 20 دولاراً مزوّرة ثمن خراب أميركا!

د. كلود عطية

الولايات المتحدة الأميركية التي أشعلت العالم وأرهقت الشعوب بشعار الديمقراطية وحقوق الإنسان، واقتحمت بالسلاح والمال والإرهاب العقول البشرية الضعيفة علها تغيّر في مشاعرها المناهضة للسياسات الأميركية في مناطق مختلفة من العالم.. سقطت في العراق وأفغانستان، وفشلت بتركيبتها وصفقتها الصهيونية للسلام في المشرق، وتشوّهت صورتها الى الأبد بافتعالها الحرب على ما يسمّى الإرهاب، إلى جانب قضايا أخرى أبرزها تجويع الشعوب وزرع الفقر والجهل والمرض…

الولايات المتحدة التي خططت باسم الحرية لـ «الفوضى الخلاقة» وحرّكت الشوارع العربية وأخرجت الإرهابيين من السجون وسهّلت انخراطهم في أجندتها العنفية والإرهابية! الدولة التي سرقت مليارات الدولارات من الأماكن التي تواجدت فيها؛ نراها الآن تدفع ثمن جبروتها وظلمها رقماً من الدولارات قد لا يساوي قيمتها؛ 20 دولاراً مزوّرة ثمن خرابها..

هي الحرب المرتدّة على الظالم! وهي الشوارع الملتهبة بغضب الشعب الناقم على كذب السلطة الأكثر إجراماً وعنصرية في تاريخ البشرية! ملايين الأطفال والنساء والشيوخ التي انقطعت أنفاس وجودها في الحياة، وبعد رحيلها الى الموت، بفعل جرائم البيت الأبيض، تشهد على انقطاع أنفاس «جورج فلويد» الإنسان، المقتول عمداً بركبة شرطي في مدينة مينيابوليس في ولاية مينيسوتا… ليشهد العالم مجدّداً على منظومة القيم الإنسانية والأخلاقية المفقودة في الولايات المتحدة الأميركية، والتأكيد على أنّ الأزمة المفتعلة في هذا الكون هي أزمة أخلاق…

في هذا الإطار، نرى أنّ ما يحصل في أميركا قد تنبّأ به أنطون سعاده منذ أكثر من تسعين عاماً بقوله «الظاهر أنّ لمعان الدولارات قد أعمى بصيرة الأميركيين حتى أنهم أصبحوا يوافقون على الاعتداء على حرية الأمم بدمٍ بارد وعجرفة متناهية، غير حاسبين أنّ مثل هذا العمل الشائن الذي يأتونه جارحين عواطف أمم كريمة كانت تعتبر الأميركيين وتعتقد فيهم الإخلاص الذي أفلس في الغرب إفلاساً تاماً، هازئين بشعور تلك الأمم صافعيها في وجهها جزاء محبّتها لهم، وبين تلك الأمم من قد ضحّت بكثير من شبانها وزهرة رجالها في سبيل الذوْد عن شرفهم وعلمهم أثناء الحرب العالمية الهائلة التي كان المحور الذي تدور عليه الذوْد عن الحياة لا عن الشرف، عملاً معيباً. أميركا ما هي إلا بربرية مندغمة في المدنية، وسقوط أميركا من عالم الأخلاقيات»!

ما يثبت لنا أنّ القضية لا تتعلق برجل ركع فوق رقبته شرطي عنصري وهو يتوسّله بأنه لا يستطيع التنفس، وأن لا يقتله! بل هي قضية عالم بأسره يصرخ منذ زمن، وحتى الاختناق، في وجه الولايات المتحدة الأميركية، يكفي قتلاً وعنصرية وإجراماً واحتلالاً وسرقة وتدميراً…

وهنا لا نقف عند حدود العنصرية التي ما زالت متغلغلة في المجتمع الأميركي، ضدّ ذوي البشرة السوداء، بل نحن أمام إمبراطورية من القتل والإجرام والحروب العشوائية لاحتلال الأرض وإذلال الشعوب وسرقة الموارد والثروات..

وبالتالي، التاريخ لا يرحم ولا يتوقف عند انقطاع أنفاس فلويد… بل هو راسخ في ذاكرة البشرية لتاريخ الولايات المتحدة الأميركية الأسود، المكتوب بدماء الملايين من القتلى والجرحى من الجنود والأطفال والنساء والشيوخ.. من حروب وغزوات واحتلال وتدخلات خارج أراضيها، تكاد لا تسلم دولة في العالم من حقدها واستغلالها..

الولايات المتحدة الأميركية التي أشعلت فتيل ما يسمّى بـ «الثورات العربية» ودعمت الاحتجاجات والتظاهرات في الشوارع العربية، وفي سورية، تتصدّر احتجاجات شعبها اليوم عناوين الصحف العالمية. إلا أنّ هذه المظاهرات العنيفة التي تجتاح المدن الأميركيّة قد تكون موجّهة ومفتعلة. وهذا ليس بالأمر الغريب على التركيبة السياسية الأميركية، خاصة أننا أمام مجتمع سياسي أميركي منقسم على ذاته، في الخطاب السياسي؛ وفي مخاطبة الجمهور، لنرى التشابه في الثقافة الأميركية القائمة على استغلال وتوجيه طاقات شعبها بما يخدم مصالحها الداخلية. وهي الثقافة نفسها، والخطاب السياسي نفسه، الذي يستخدم في السياسة الخارجية للولايات المتحدة الأميركية. والقائم على التقسيم، وتأجيج الصراع والعنف واستغلال الشعوب واضطهادها!

من هذا المنطلق، حادثة جورج فلويد، قد لا تكتفي بإعادة فتح ملف الاضطهاد الذي يتعرّض له المواطنون السود فحسب، بل هي تسير بخطى ثابتة وسريعة لتوجيه الاتهام الأساسي لإدارة الرئيس العنصري دونالد ترامب، وخطابه العنصري اللا إنساني واللا أخلاقي الذي زرع البغض والتفرقة في عقول المواطنين الأميركيين.

من هنا، كيف يمكن مقاربة ما افتعلته الولايات المتحدة الأميركية من إحداث شغب في العالم، مع ما تشهده من غضب وردات فعل قاسية وعنيفة على مقتل فلويد، من أعمال شغب، وسرقة محال تجارية وإحراقها، وإحراق سيارات الشرطة، ومهاجمة عناصرها!

هل تشبه «الفوضى الخلاقة» التي استخدمت في العالم العربي وسورية، هذه الفوضى العارمة غير الخلاقة في الولايات المتحدة الأميركية؟ يبدو أنّ التحليل المنطقي لحقيقة ما يجري، يبيّن بوضوح أنّ هذه الاحتجاجات لا تؤكد فقط على السلوك العدائي للأميركيين أصحاب البشرة البيضاء، تجاه مواطنيهم من السود، بل تؤكد على الوجه الحقيقي للإدارات الأميركية المتعاقبة الذي افتقد للمساواة والعدالة والإنسانية واحترام حقوق الإنسان… هذه الحقوق التي لم تستطع الإدارة الأميركية تحقيقها في المجتمع الأميركي، فكيف يمكن لها أن تحققها لدول العالم؟.. ما يبيّن لنا بوضوح أنّ جورج فلويد ليس وحده الضحية، ولا المواطنين السود؛ بل نحن أمام سياسة أميركية حصدت ملايين الضحايا من كلّ الفئات المجتمعية والثقافية/ ومن كلّ مجتمعات العالم.

في النهاية، قد لا يجوز الحديث الآن عن الإرهاب في أحداث الولايات المتحدة الأميركية، باعتباره مرتدّاً على من يصنع الإرهاب ويرعاه! الا أنّ التحليل السياسي، قد يجيز لنا، أن نتوقع عودة الإرهاب الى بلده الأمّ.. ومن المتوقع أيضاً أن يجنّد البيت الأبيض المواطنين السود لمكافحته!

مدير الفرع الثالث لمعهد العلوم الاجتماعية – الجامعة اللبنانية – الشمال‎

«قيصر» الأميركي لإجهاض النظام العالمي الجديد!

د. وفيق إبراهيم

ما تتعرّض له سورية منذ 2011 من حروب متواصلة وعقوبات وغارات وسطو على ثرواتها واحتلال لمناطقها من دون توقف يتجاوز بكثير محاولة إسقاط نظام سياسي أو حتى تدمير دولة.

فهناك استثمار أميركي في الإرهاب الداعشي – القاعدي والمعارضات الداخلية وأدوار دول الخليج والاحتلال التركي والرعاية الأردنية لإرهابيي الجنوب، وغارات اسرائيلية شبه يومية وتدخل عسكري – أميركي – اوروبي وحتى اوسترالي مباشر، الى جانب قطع كل بلدان المحور الأميركي للعلاقات الدبلوماسية والسياسية والاقتصادية مع سورية، مطبقين عليها نظام عقوبات اقتصادي صارم.

لكن الأميركيين لم يكتفوا بكل هذه الوسائل، فذهبوا لمصادرة النفط السوري وتأسيس معادلة دائمة لبيعه في اسواق تركيا الى جانب تغييرات ديموغرافية موازية مع إثارة أكبر قدر ممكن من الفتن المذهبية والعرقية والطائفية بما يكشف حجم الإصرار الأميركي على تدمير سورية لأسباب تتعلق حكماً بنجاحات يريدها النفوذ الأميركي العالمي في هذه المرحلة بالذات.

لذلك فإن تدمير سورية حاجة عاجلة للجيوبوليتيك الأميركي.

لماذا؟ النفوذ الأميركي خسر معاركه في سورية وإيران واليمن، ملتزماً بهدنة في العراق.

ومتراجعاً في لبنان ما أنتج ولادة معادلة إقليمية راسخة سورية – ايرانية، ومعها حزب الله والحشد الشعبي ودولة صنعاء.

عند هذا الحد، كان بالإمكان الاستمرار في القتال الأميركي بدرجات أعلى من الأساليب المنهزمة.

لكن لسورية أهمية استراتيجية في الجيوبوليتيك الأميركي للعديد من الأسباب، يتربّع على رأسها موقفها الثابت المانع لأي تصفية للقضية الفلسطينية وموقعها في قلب المشرق العربي، خصوصاً للجهة العراقية والأردنية ما يربطها بالخليج حتى حدود المتوسط ويصلها بروسيا عبر تحالفها العميق مع ايران، وهذا يعني ربطاً بالصين ايضاً هناك. هناك أهميات ايضاً أخرى تتعلق بالتنافس الأميركي مع كل من الصين وروسيا وايران، المرتبط بالصراع على هيكلية النظام العالمي الجديد وعديد أقطابه.

فسورية هي المعبر الضروري الذي يجب على روسيا والصين، التموضع فيه للانتقال آنفاً الى فضاءات اخرى.

لذلك فإن أي ضرر يحيق بالدولة السورية يتسبّب فوراً بفرط عقد تحالف شرق أوسطي كبير وتجميد الأدوار الجيوبوليتيكية الصينية – الروسية الى اجل بعيد.

هذا تعرفه الولايات المتحدة الأميركية بشكل عميق، لكنها كانت متأكدة من ان الوسائل العسكرية والاقتصادية والسياسية والإرهابية التي استعملتها من 2011 حتى 2020 اكثر من كافية لتدمير دولة سورية وإضعاف الادوار الايرانية والروسية والصينية.

لكنها بوغِتت بصمود سوري لافت في ظروف مستحيلة لا تنجو منها عادة حتى الدول الجبارة.

إلا أن هناك عنصراً اضافياً لا يمكن إغفاله ويتعلق بارتفاع حدة الصراع الأميركي – الصيني مع ما تسبب به جائحة كورونا من تراجع كبير للاقتصاد الأميركي.

لا بد من لفت النظر الى ان الصينيين قادرون على تحمل التراجع الاقتصادي «الكوروني» أكثر من أميركيين معتادين منذ ستينيات القرن الماضي على اعلى انواع الرفاه الاجتماعي.

وهذا ما ظهر من خلال الاضطرابات الاجتماعية التي تجتاح الولايات الأميركية منذ أسبوع تقريباً. صحيح انها تشكلت كنوع من الاعتراض على مقتل مدني اسود البشرة خنقه شرطي أميركي بوضع ركبته على عنقه حتى الموت، وجسّدت رفضاً للتمييز العنصري الأميركي التاريخي، لكنها تحمل في متن اتساعها في مجمل الولايات المتحدة الأميركية تعبيراً عن قلق من الأميركيين الفقراء على وضعهم الاقتصادي في ظل كورونا وبعدها. ويصادف ان الاقلية السوداء هي التي تحتل مرتبة الأكثر فقراً على المستوى الأميركي.

هذه هي الأسباب التي دفعت الأميركي الى وضع قانون قيصر موضع التنفيذ في سورية. وهو قانون يستهدف كل حركات الاقتصاد السوري الشعبي والرسمي. وهذا هو القتل بعينه الذي تنفذه دولة بمفردها وتفرض على العالم بأسره تطبيق نصوصه بقطع كل انواع العلاقات بسورية وإلا فإنها تخضع بدورها لعقوبات مماثلة.

يتبين اذاً أن سورية مستهدفة لاسباب داخلية تتعلق بجهادية دولتها، وخارجية لكونها المحور الاساسي المعادي للنفوذ الأميركي في المشرق العربي، ولأنها الضرورة الجيوبوليتيكية للتطور الصيني – الروسي في النظام العالمي الجديد.

لذلك فإن «قيصر الأميركي» يستعمل كافة قواه ومرة واحدة للقضاء على الدولة السورية أو اسقاط نظامها واستتباعها لمنظومته.

هذا هو الهدف الأميركي؟ فماذا عن ردود الفعل عليه؟

لا شك في أن سورية لن تبخل بأي قوة تمتلكها لمجابهة الأميركيين في الداخل والعراق ولبنان والاردن، ولها من العلاقات ما يؤهلها لهذا الدور، لكنه لن يكون كافياً ويتطلّب مسارعة المستهدفين لمد يد العون بسرعة، خصوصاً من الطرفين الصيني – الروسي، لان الاستمرار في سياسات التدبّر والتعقل لن يكون الحل في هذه المرحلة بالذات، وهذه ليست دعوة للحرب، بل مطالبة للردّ على الحرب الاقتصادية القاتلة، بأدوات اقتصادية رادعة.

بما يعني أن حماية سورية من طريق تزويدها بحاجاتها الاقتصادية من الصين وروسيا، هي مسألة تاريخية حاسمة لان النجاح فيها هو تعبيد الطريق أمام نظام دولي جديد، ينتزع من الأميركيين ثلاثة مقاعد: اثنان منهما في النظام العالمي الجديد لروسيا والصين وثالث اقليمي واعد لإيران.

فهل هذه ممكن؟

إن كسر العقوبات القيصرية الأميركية على سورية تعني أيضاً إنقاذ الشرق الأوسط من تمديد الهيمنة الأميركية عليه نحو قرن جديد، وتحرير موارد الطاقة، خصوصاً من الغاز في البحر المتوسط، والمعلوم ان الدول القطبية تستند دائماً على موارد طاقة أساسية كحال الولايات المتحدة الأميركية التي بنت الجيوبوليتيك الخاص بها على اساس الهيمنة على النفط العربي وأسواق الاستهلاك فيها، فلماذا نسمح لها إعادة إنتاج معاهدات مع العرب تشبه معاهدة كوينسي التي وقعها روزفلت الأميركي مع عبد العزيز السعودي 1945.

هذا كله رهن بدعم صيني اقتصادي حقيقي لسورية، باعتبار ان روسيا ماضية وبحزم نحو تلبية الحاجات العسكرية للدولة السورية.

يتبين بالاستنتاج أن نظام الحاجات المتبادلة بين الرباعي الروسي الصيني والإيراني السوري كفيل بالقضاء على قيصر الجديد وآخر ما تبقى من أحادية قطبية أميركية، لا تزال تقاتل قبل دخولها في النزع الأخير من عمرها المندثر.

مقالات متعلقة

Why U.S. Must Be Prosecuted for Its War Crimes Against Iraq

Why U.S. Must Be Prosecuted for Its War Crimes Against Iraq

May 16, 2020

by Eric Zuesse  for The Saker Blog

The reason why the U.S. Government must be prosecuted for its war-crimes against Iraq is that they are so horrific and there are so many of them, and international law crumbles until they become prosecuted and severely punished for what they did. We therefore now have internationally a lawless world (or “World Order”) in which “Might makes right,” and in which there is really no effective international law, at all. This is merely gangster “law,” ruling on an international level. It is what Hitler and his Axis of fascist imperialists had imposed upon the world until the Allies — U.S. under FDR, UK under Churchill, and U.S.S.R. under Stalin — defeated it, and established the United Nations. Furthermore, America’s leaders deceived the American public into perpetrating this invasion and occupation, of a foreign country (Iraq) that had never threatened the United States; and, so, this invasion and subsequent military occupation constitutes the very epitome of “aggressive war” — unwarranted and illegal international aggression. (Hitler, similarly to George W. Bush, would never have been able to obtain the support of his people to invade if he had not lied, or “deceived,” them, into invading and militarily occupying foreign countries that had never threatened Germany, such as Belgium, Poland and Czechoslovakia. This — Hitler’s lie-based aggressions — was the core of what the Nazis were hung for, and yet America now does it.)

As Peter Dyer wrote in 2006, about “Iraq & the Nuremberg Precedent”:

Invoking the precedent set by the United States and its allies at the Nuremberg trial in 1946, there can be no doubt that the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 was a war of aggression. There was no imminent threat to U.S. security nor to the security of the world. The invasion violated the U.N. Charter as well as U.N. Security Council Resolution #1441.

The Nuremberg precedent calls for no less than the arrest and prosecution of those individuals responsible for the invasion of Iraq, beginning with President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of State Condoleez[z]a Rice, former Secretary of State Colin Powell and former Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz.

Take, for example, Condoleezza Rice, who famously warned “We don’t want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud.” (That warning was one of the most effective lies in order to deceive the American public into invading Iraq, because President Bush had had no real evidence, at all, that there still remained any WMD in Iraq after the U.N. had destroyed them all, and left Iraq in 1998 — and he knew this; he was informed of this; he knew that he had no real evidence, at all: he offered none; it was all mere lies.)

So, the Nuremberg precedent definitely does apply against George W, Bush and his partners-in-crime, just as it did against Hitler and his henchmen and allies.

The seriousness of this international war crime is not as severe as those of the Nazis were, but nonetheless is comparable to it.

On 15 March 2018, Medea Benjamin and Nicolas J.S. Davies headlined at Alternet “The Staggering Death Toll in Iraq” and wrote that “our calculations, using the best information available, show a catastrophic estimate of 2.4 million Iraqi deaths since the 2003 invasion,” and linked to solid evidence, backing up their estimate.

On 6 February 2020, BusinessInsider bannered “US taxpayers have reportedly paid an average of $8,000 each and over $2 trillion total for the Iraq war alone”, and linked to the academic analysis that supported this estimate. The U.S. regime’s invasive war, which the Bush gang perpetrated against Iraq, was also a crime against the American people (though Iraqis suffered far more from it than we did).

On 29 September 2015, I headlined “GALLUP: ‘Iraqis Are the Saddest & One of the Angriest Populations in the World’,” and linked to Gallup’s survey of 1,000 individuals in each of 148 countries around the world, which found that Iraq had the highest “Negative Experience Score.” That score includes “sadness,” “physical pain,” “anger,” and other types of misery — and Iraq, after America’s invasion, has scored the highest in the entire world, on it, and in the following years has likewise scored at or near the highest on “Negative Experience Score.” For example: in the latest, the 2019, Gallup “Global Emotions Report”, Iraq scores fourth from the top on “Negative Experience Score,” after (in order from the worst) Chad, Niger, and Sierra Leone. (Gallup has been doing these surveys ever since 2005, but the first one that was published under that title was the 2015 report, which summarized the 2014 surveys’ findings.) Of course, prior to America’s invasion, there had been America’s 1990 war against Iraq and the U.S. regime’s leadership and imposition of U.N. sanctions (which likewise were based largely on U.S.-regime-backed lies, though not totally on lies like the 2003 invasion was), which caused massive misery in that country; and, therefore, not all of the misery in Iraq which showed up in the 2015 Global Emotions Report was due to only the 2003 invasion and subsequent military occupation of that country. But almost all of it was, and is. And all of it was based on America’s rulers lying to the public in order to win the public’s acceptance of their evil plans and invasions against a country that had never posed any threat whatsoever to Americans — people residing in America. Furthermore, it is also perhaps relevant that the 2012 “World Happiness Report” shows Iraq at the very bottom of the list of countries (on page 55 of that report) regarding “Average Net Affect by Country,” meaning that Iraqis were the most zombified of all 156 nationalities surveyed. Other traumatized countries were immediately above Iraq on that list. On “Average Negative Affect,” only “Palestinian Territories” scored higher than Iraq (page 52). After America’s invasion based entirely on lies, Iraq is a wrecked country, which still remains under the U.S. regime’s boot, as the following will document:

Bush’s successors, Obama and Trump, failed to press for Bush’s trial on these vast crimes, even though the American people had ourselves become enormously victimized by them, though far less so than Iraqis were. Instead, Bush’s successors have become accessories after the fact, by this failure to press for prosecution of him and his henchmen regarding this grave matter. In fact, the “Defense One” site bannered on 26 September 2018, “US Official: We May Cut Support for Iraq If New Government Seats Pro-Iran Politicians”, and opened with “The Trump administration may decrease U.S. military support or other assistance to Iraq if its new government puts Iranian-aligned politicians in any ‘significant positions of responsibility,’ a senior administration official told reporters late last week.” The way that the U.S. regime has brought ‘democracy’ to Iraq is by threatening to withdraw its protection of the stooge-rulers that it had helped to place into power there, unless those stooges do the U.S. dictators’ bidding, against Iraq’s neighbor Iran. This specific American dictator, Trump, is demanding that majority-Shiite Iraq be run by stooges who favor, instead, America’s fundamentalist-Sunni allies, such as the Saud family who own Saudi Arabia and who hate and loathe Shiites and Iran. The U.S. dictatorship insists that Iraq, which the U.S. conquered, serve America’s anti-Shiite and anti-Iranian policy-objectives. “The U.S. threat, to withhold aid if Iran-aligned politicians occupy any ministerial position, is an escalation of Washington’s demands on Baghdad.” The article went on to quote a “senior administration official” as asserting that, “if Iran exerts a tremendous amount of influence, or a significant amount of influence over the Iraqi government, it’s going to be difficult for us to continue to invest.” Get the euphemisms there! This article said that “the Trump administration has made constraining Iran’s influence in the region a cornerstone of their foreign policy.” So, this hostility toward Iran must be reflected in Iraq’s policies, too. It’s not enough that Trump wants to destroy Iran like Bush has destroyed Iraq; Trump demands that Iraq participate in that crime, against Iraq’s own neighbor. This article said that, “There have also been protests against ‘U.S. meddling’ in the formation of a new Iraqi government, singling out Special Presidential Envoy Brett McGurk for working to prevent parties close to Iran from obtaining power.” McGurk is the rabidly neconservative former high G.W. Bush Administration official, and higher Obama Administration official, who remained as Trump’s top official on his policy to force Iraq to cooperate with America’s efforts to conquer Iran. Trump’s evil is Obama’s evil, and is Bush’s evil. It is bipartisan evil, no matter which Party is in power. Though Trump doesn’t like either the Bushes or Obamas, all of them are in the same evil policy-boat. America’s Deep State remains the same, no matter whom it places into the position of nominal power. The regime remains the same, regardless.

On April 29th, the whistleblowing former UK Ambassador Craig Murray wrote:

Nobody knows how many people died as a result of the UK/US Coalition of Death led destruction of Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and, by proxy, Syria and Yemen. Nobody even knows how many people western forces themselves killed directly. That is a huge number, but still under 10% of the total. To add to that you have to add those who died in subsequent conflict engendered by the forced dismantling of the state the West disapproved of. Some were killed by western proxies, some by anti-western forces, and some just by those reverting to ancient tribal hostility and battle for resources into which the country had been regressed by bombing.

You then have to add all those who died directly as a result of the destruction of national infrastructure. Iraq lost in the destruction 60% of its potable drinking water, 75% of its medical facilities and 80% of its electricity. This caused millions of deaths, as did displacement. We are only of course talking about deaths, not maiming.

UK’s Prime Minister Tony Blair should hang with the U.S. gang, but who is calling for this? How much longer will the necessary prosecutions wait? Till after these international war-criminals have all gone honored to their graves?

Although the International Criminal Court considered and dismissed possible criminal charges against Tony Blair’s UK Government regarding the invasion and military occupation of Iraq, the actual crime, of invading and militarily occupying a country which had posed no threat to the national security of the invader, was ignored, and the conclusion was that “the situation did not appear to meet the required threshold of the Statute” (which was only “Willful killing or inhuman treatment of civilians” and which ignored the real crime, which was “aggressive war” or “the crime of aggression” — the crime for which Nazis had been hanged at Nuremberg). Furthermore, no charges whatsoever against the U.S. Government (the world’s most frequent and most heinous violator of international law) were considered. In other words: the International Criminal Court is subordinate to, instead of applicable to, the U.S. regime. Just like Adolf Hitler had repeatedly made clear that, to him, all nations except Germany were dispensable and only Germany wasn’t, Barack Obama repeatedly said that “The United States is and remains the one indispensable nation”, which likewise means that every other nation is “dispensable.” The criminal International Criminal Court accepts this, and yet expects to be respected.

The U.S. regime did “regime change” to Iraq in 2003, and to Ukraine in 2014, and tried to do it to Syria since 2009, and to Yemen since 2015, and to Venezuela since 2012, and to Iran since 2017 — just to mention some of the examples. And, though the Nuremberg precedent certainly applies, it’s not enforced. In principle, then, Hitler has posthumously won WW II.

Hitler must be smiling, now. FDR must be rolling in his grave.

The only way to address this problem, if there won’t be prosecutions against the ‘duly elected’ (Deep-State-approved and enabled) national leaders and appointees, would be governmental seizure and nationalization of the assets that are outright owned or else controlled by America’s Deep State. Ultimately, the Government-officials who are s‘elected’ and appointed to run the American Government have been and are representing not the American people but instead represent the billionaires who fund those officials’ and former officials’ careers. In a democracy, those individuals — the financial enablers of those politicians’ s‘electoral’ success — would be dispossessed of all their assets, and then prosecuted for the crimes that were perpetrated by the public officials whom they had participated in (significantly funded and propagandized for) placing into power. (For example, both Parties’ Presidential nominees are unqualified to serve in any public office in a democracy.)

Democracy cannot function with a systematically lied-to public. Nor can it function if the responsible governmental officials are effectively immune from prosecution for their ‘legal’ crimes, or if the financial string-pullers behind the scenes can safely pull those strings. In America right now, both of those conditions pertain, and, as a result, democracy is impossible. There are only two ways to address this problem, and one of them would start by prosecuting George W. Bush.

—————

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of  They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of  CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.

China refutes ‘two dozen lies’ by US politicians over COVID-19 pandemic

May 10, 2020 

Source

US Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) (L) talks with Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) during a rally with fellow Democrats before voting on H.R. 1, or the People Act, on the East Steps of the US Capitol on March 08, 2019 in Washington, DC. (AFP photo)
This file photo taken on February 23, 2017 shows Chinese virologist Shi Zhengli inside the P4 laboratory in Wuhan. (Photo by AFP)
China refutes 'two dozen lies' by US politicians over COVID-19 pandemic

China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs in an article has strongly refuted two dozen “preposterous allegations” and “false claims” by some leading US politicians over its handling of the new coronavirus outbreak.

The 30-page article posted on the ministry’s website on Saturday night rebutted 24 untrue claims from the US, including calling the novel coronavirus “the Chinese virus” or “Wuhan virus” and claims that the Wuhan Institute of Virology created the virus.

The article said that all evidence shows the virus is not man-made and that the institute is not capable of synthesizing a new coronavirus.

Rejecting suggestions by US President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo that the new coronavirus should be called the “Chinese virus”, the article cited documents from the World Health Organization (WHO) to say the name of a virus should not be country-specific.

It also roundly rejected accusations by US politicians, especially Pompeo, that China had withheld information about the new coronavirus.

The piece of writing cited media reports that said Americans had been infected with the virus before the first case was confirmed in Wuhan.

The article provided a timeline of how China had provided information to the international community in a “timely”, “open and transparent” manner to rebuke US suggestions that it had been slow to sound the alarm.

The article repeated and expanded on the refutations made during the press briefings, and began by invoking Abraham Lincoln, the 19th century US president.

“As Lincoln said, you can fool some of the people all the time and fool all the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time,” it said in the prologue.

It rejected Western criticism of Beijing’s handling of the case of Li Wenliang, a 34-year-old doctor who had tried to raise the alarm over the outbreak of the new virus in Wuhan.

His death from COVID-19, the respiratory disease caused by the virus, prompted an outpouring of grief and was later named among “martyrs” mourned by China.

The ministry article said Li was not a “whistle-blower” and he was never arrested, contrary to many Western reports.

Trump has described the coronavirus pandemic as the worst attack ever on his country while pointing the finger at China, saying the outbreak has hit the United States harder than the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor during WW ll or the 9/11 attacks two decades ago, which led the country to wage two deadly wars against Iraq and Afghanistan.

China believes that the US president is trying to divert attention from his poor handling of the coronavirus outbreak in his country in order to back up his presidential bid.

Trump claimed last week that he had seen evidence linking the virus to a lab in the Chinese city of Wuhan and threatened new trade tariffs on China. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo also said there is “enormous evidence” backing the coronavirus-leak scenario.

The World Health Organization, senior US scientists and even the US intelligence community have rejected the claim despite pressure from the White House.

Below are the 24 false claims and truths listed by the Chinese Foreign Ministry.

No.1

Lie: The novel coronavirus is the “Chinese virus” or “Wuhan virus.”

Fact: The World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines have advised against giving infectious diseases names that associate them with specific countries and regions.

No.2

Lie: Wuhan is the origin of the COVID-19 outbreak.

Fact: Although the city first reported the outbreak, Wuhan is not necessarily the origin of the virus. The origin of COVID-19 is still unknown. Its source should remain a matter of science and should only be determined by scientists and medical experts based on scientific facts.

No.3

Lie: COVID-19 was created by the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

Fact: All of the evidence so far has shown that the virus evolved naturally. It is not man-made.

No.4

Lie: COVID-19 was accidentally leaked from the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

Fact: The P4 laboratory at the Wuhan Institute of Virology is a collaborative project with the French government. It is not capable of designing and producing COVID-19, and there is no evidence that any sort of virus leaked from the lab or that any staff got infected.

No.5

Lie: China could have contained the outbreak from spreading outside Wuhan, but it let the virus spread to the world by not limiting international flights.

Fact: China implemented the most restrictive prevention and control measures in the shortest possible time to prevent major outbreaks in places other than Wuhan. The statistics show that only a few imported cases are from China.

No.6

Lie: Chinese people contracted the coronavirus from eating bats.

Fact: Bats are never Chinese people’s cooking ingredients.

No.7

Lie: China reopened its wildlife market. It should close its “wet market” immediately.

Fact: China does have “wet markets.” China has completely banned the illegal hunting and trading of wild animals.

No.8

Lie: China’s initial cover-up of the outbreak has led to the virus spreading to the world.

Fact: The outbreak was caused by a new type of virus, which required time to fully understand it. China has published the related information in an open, transparent and responsible manner.

No.9

Lie: China arrested “whistleblower” Dr Li Wenliang.

Fact: Dr Li Wenliang is not a “whistleblower,” and he was not arrested.

No.10

Lie: China’s delayed report on human-to-human transmission mislead the United States and the world on how contagious and deadly the virus is, thus causing them to miss the opportunity to take early measures.

Fact: China has been updating the WHO on the severity of the virus. The US should have been crystal clear about how lethal the virus is.

No.11

Lie: China’s data on COVID-19 is not transparent. The real number of confirmed and deceased COVID-19 cases is at least 50 times more than reported.

Fact: China’s released data is completely transparent and can stand the test of time.

No.12

Lie: Wuhan’s revision of the number of COVID-19 cases and fatalities proves that China covered up the actual number of infected patients during the initial stage of the outbreak.

Fact: Data revision is a common international practice, which actually approves China is open, transparent and responsible in reporting the data.

No.13

Lie: China spreads disinformation about the outbreak.

Fact: China publishes COVID-19 data in an open and transparent way. But some US politicians and anti-China scholars have smeared China. China is a victim of disinformation.

No.14

Lie: China’s political system is the root of the problem.

Fact: The virus doesn’t distinguish ideology or social systems. The Communist Party of China and the Chinese government have played a decisive and crucial role in leading the Chinese people to prevail against the epidemic. China’s political system has effectively organized and mobilized 1.4 billion people in China’s vast territory of 9.6 million square kilometers to overcome the difficulties faced by developing countries. It unites all forces, pools all resources and provides a strong political guarantee to overcome the epidemic. It has been proven that the social system and development path chosen by the Chinese people fit China’s domestic situation, and the Communist Party of China has won firm and broad support from Chinese people. China also has no intention of exporting its political system.

No.15

Lie: China expelled US journalists to cover up the outbreak.

Fact: China’s expulsion of the US journalists is a reciprocal countermeasure against the US for its long-term suppression of Chinese media agencies in the US, especially the recent expulsion of 60 Chinese journalists. China releases information in a timely manner in an open, transparent and responsible manner.

No.16

Lie: China controls the WHO and uses money to woo the organization.

Fact: China firmly supports multilateralism. China has maintained good communication and cooperation with the WHO, but China has never manipulated the WHO. Notably, it is the US, the largest source of funding for the WHO, that has suspended funding of the international body, a move that was unanimously opposed by the international community.

No.17

Lie: Taiwan issued a warning to the WHO about the human-to-human transmission of the new coronavirus pneumonia from as early as December 31, 2019, but it was not taken seriously.

Fact: China’s Taiwan region was not issuing a warning to the WHO, but seeking additional information from the WHO after the Wuhan Health Commission filed a report on COVID-19.

No.18

Lie: China prevented Taiwan from joining the WHO and endangered the health of Taiwanese.

Fact: The truth is, Taiwan, as a part of China, has no right to participate in the WHO that only sovereign states can join. The channels of technical cooperation between China’s Taiwan and the WHO are always open.

No.19

Lie: China should be held responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic. China should be investigated and sued for compensation.

Fact: There is no legal basis for holding China responsible for the pandemic and asking for compensation. Such claims are just tricks some American politicians use to shift blame for their own political gain.

No.20

Lie: China has hoarded protective medical resources, taking advantage of the pandemic to yield huge profits. It tightened the export of virus containment resources and equipment and limited exports, especially ventilators, which led to the US not having sufficient stocks.

Fact: Although China’s own virus containment is arduous, China is still doing its best to provide anti-COVID-19 medical supplies to other countries.

No.21

Lie: China’s assistance is “political generosity.”

Fact: China’s foreign aid for fighting against the pandemic is sent to countries that supported China during the early phase of the outbreak. It is also based on the concept of a community of shared human destiny.

No.22

Lie: China is interfering in the US election, trying to prevent US President Donald Trump from being re-elected.

Fact: China has always adhered to the principle of non-interference in other countries’ internal affairs. “Attacking China” is just a smear tactic that some US politicians are attempting to use as their campaign strategy.

No.23

Lie: China recently required that enterprises that export masks, test kits, ventilators and other materials must provide customs with declaration forms, which can be seen as an attempt to ban the export of anti-COVID-19 medical supplies.

Fact: The Chinese approach aims to strengthen quality control.

No.24

Lie: China’s Guangdong Province discriminated against African nationals.

Fact: China’s prevention and control measures never discriminate between Chinese and foreign nationals. It adopts a zero-tolerance attitude toward discriminatory words and deeds.

Press TV’s website can also be accessed at the following alternate addresses:

www.presstv.ir

www.presstv.co.uk

www.presstv.tv

العقوبات الأميركيّة في زمن كورونا: جريمة ضدّ الإنسانيّة

العميد د. أمين محمد حطيط

من أجل السيطرة على العالم لا تتورّع أميركا عن استعمال أيّ وسيلة أو سلاح بصرف النظر عن مدى مشروعيته أو لاأخلاقيته أو لاإنسانيته. فالأساس لدى أميركا هو فرض السيطرة وإخضاع مَن يعارضها أو يعرقل سعيها لامتلاك قرار العالم حتى ولو تمّت هذه المعارضة في معرض ممارسة الآخر حقه بالحرية والسيادة والاستقلال واستثمار ثرواته الطبيعية.

وقد تصاعدت وتيرة استباحة أميركا لحقوق الدول والشعوب منذ أن تفكك الاتحاد السوفياتي الذي كان يقاسمها النفوذ والسيطرة على العالم ويضع بوجهها الخطوط الحمر التي تمنعها من الاستئثار بالقرار الدولي، حيث انطلقت أميركا بعد هذا الحدث بذهنية أنها القطب الأوحد في العالم الذي يجب ان تنصاع له المعمورة. وانطلقت معتبرة نفسها أنها الحاكم والقائد والشرطي والقاضي والجلاد لكلّ العالم، وأنّ حاكمها جاء بأمر إلهي وانّ العناية الإلهية اختارته ليكون الضابط والناظم لحكم المعمورة وحركتها، على حدّ ما قال جورج بوش قبل غزوه للعراق في العام 2003، “العناية الإلهية اختارتني لأنقذ العالم”، وكما ضمّن إعلانه الحرب على العراق بأنّ هدفه “نزع أسلحة العراق، وتحرير شعبه، وحماية العالم من خطر قاتم محدق”.

أطلق بوش رئيس الولايات المتحدة هذا القول رغم انّ مجلس الأمن الدولي رفض طلب أميركا غزو العراق ورفض العمل العسكري ضدّه، ورغم هذا تصرّفت أميركا فوق الإرادة الدولية خلافاً للقانون الدولي ونفذت غزوها وتصرفت بذهنية أنها قائد العالم معتبرة انّ تفكك الاتحاد السوفياتي، وعدم قيام الندّ البديل المناهض وامتلاكها القوة بكلّ أنواعها العسكرية والعلمية والاقتصادية والإعلامية، يبرّر لها إقامة نظام عالمي بقيادتها الأحادية يمكنها من السيطرة على المعمورة ويعطيها الحق بأن تلزم العالم بالخضوع والاستسلام لإرادتها او التعرّض لما يفرزه غضبها عندما تصبّه عليه ناراً وحصاراً.

فأميركا المعتدّة بقوّتها والمزهوة بجبروتها تتعامل مع العالم على أساس أنه ميدان نفوذها وأن ليس لأحد حق بالاعتراض على أرادتها، وأسندت موقفها بإطلاق نظريات جديدة كنظرية “التدخل الدولي الإنساني المتقدّم على السيادة الوطنية لأيّ دولة” و”نظرية العولمة” التي تسقط بموجبها الحدود الدولية أمام اجتياح الأقوى إلخ… وأعطت أميركا نفسها الحق بتقدير مصلحة الشعوب كما تراها هي وتعمل على فرضها وفقاً لتصوّرها، بصرف النظر عما إذا كانت هذه الشعوب تقبل هذا او ترفضه. فهي مَن يقرّر وهي مَن يتصرف وتنتظر من الآخر الانصياع وإلا كانت العقوبة التي تختار هي نوعها وحجمها ونطاقها، تفرضها بشتى صنوفها المادية وغير المادية شاملاً ذلك الحرب والقتل والتدمير والحصار والتجويع إلى حدّ الموت.

لقد عانى ويعاني العالم من الاستبداد الأميركي المطلق خاصة في العقود الثلاثة الأخيرة التي أعقبت أربعة عقود أخرى كان فيها نوع من التوازن الاستراتيجيّ الدوليّ الذي كان يقيّد او يحدّ من هذا الاستبداد، معاناة كانت بسبب ما قامت به أميركا من حروب وفتن وثورات مزيّفة بألوان أميركية متعدّدة مترافقة مع تدابير قسرية كيدية نفذتها تحت عنوان “العقوبات” التي تستهدف الدول والمنظمات والأشخاص وكلّ من يقول “لا” لأميركا، التي لم تواجهها علانية ويرفض تسلطها وسياستها العدوانية إلا قلة من المكونات السياسية والشعبية في العالم والتي تبلورت نواتها الأولى في غربي آسيا، حيث تشكلت ما عرفت بالمقاومة، ثم قام محور يقاوم الغطرسة الأميركية الاستعمارية أساسه إيران وسورية وحزب الله وبعض المكونات الفلسطينية، ثم تعاظمت ظاهرة الرفض العالمي العلني للاستبداد الأميركي حتى باتت تشمل دولاً وكيانات وشخصيات وتيارات هامة برزت الصين وروسيا في مقدّمتها.

لم تعبأ أميركا كثيراً بمعارضيها وكانت شبه واثقة بقدرتها على ترويضهم وظنت بأنّ ما تملكه من قوة وعلاقات مع شركاء او حلفاء وفقاً لتسمياتها (في الحقيقة ليس لأميركا شريك او حليف، فأميركا لا تنظر إلى الآخر إلا على أنه تابع وأداة أو عدو وخصم، وأكد بوش الابن على هذه النظرة حيث قال “من ليس معنا فهو ضدّنا”) ظنّت أنها قادرة على إخضاع من يتجرّأ على رفض إرادتها، لكنها صدمت بنتائج المواجهة خاصة نتائج العقد الأخير حيث إنها رغم كلّ ما اعتمدته من تدابير عسكرية وسياسية وغير ذلك من الأعمال القمعية الزجرية ضدّ المناهضين لسياستها، لم تحقق أهدافها في السيطرة ولم يخضع أحد من المعسكر المناهض لها رغم ما نزل بهم من أضرار وخسائر مؤلمة.

لقد نجح معسكر رفض الاستبداد الأميركي في إفشال مساعي أميركا لإقامة النظام الدولي أحادي القطبية ومنع تشكل حالة دولية تكون فيها أميركا القائد الوحيد للعالم، ونجح ذاك المعسكر في الدفاع عن حقوقه رغم أنه لم يشكل حلفاً متماسكاً او منظومة دولية متحدة خلافاً لحال أميركا مع الحلف الأطلسي الذي تمسك به وتستعمله لتنفيذ سياستها الدولية بعد أن غيّرت طبيعته من دفاعية عن أمن الأعضاء إلى هجومية عدوانية لتنفيذ المصالح والأهداف الأميركية.

في ظلّ هذه النتائج السلبية أميركياً للصراع الدولي، حلّت جائحة كورونا في الصين التي اجتاح اقتصادها العالم وتقدّمت على أميركا فيه، وظنّ في البدء أنّ الأمر قد يكون نوعاً من حرب جرثومية تشنّها أميركا ضدّ عدوها الاقتصادي وأنه حلقة من سلسلة حروب لجأت إليها في ظلّ عجزها عن النجاح في المواجهات الأخرى، حرب تترافق مع ما يُقال من تحضيراتها للمواجهة العسكرية مع الصين، ثم تعزز الظنّ هذا عندما اقتحم الفايروس إيران ليجعلها الدولة الثالثة التي يجتاحها الوباء.

لكن تطوّر انتشار الجائحة وسقوط أميركا وشركائها في الحلف الأطلسي فريسة لهذا الفايروس وتقدّمهم كلّ دول العالم في حجم الإصابات والموتى جعل مطلقي نظرية الحرب البيولوجية يتراجعون أو يُخفتون الصوت للانصراف إلى التدقيق بمسائل أخرى أفرزها الفايروس كورونا خاصة في مجال نظام الرعاية الصحية الغربي، والعلاقة بين الحلفاء أعضاء الحلف الأطلسي، وتصرّف الشرق خاصة الصين وروسيا تجاه الغرب الأطلسي، وأخيراً أداء أميركا في معرض مواجهة الوباء.

1

ـ ففي النقطة الأولى تبيّن وضوحاً كم انّ نظام الرعاية الصحية في الغرب واهن وضعيف ويفتقد إلى الجهوزية لمواجهة وباء، وثبت أنّ الذهنية الرأسمالية المادية تغلب المصالح المالية للرأسماليين على الحاجات والحقوق الإنسانية للمواطنين. ما أكد زيف تشدّق الغرب بمقولة حقوق الإنسان التي يتخذها مبرّراً للتدخل في شؤون الدول والشعوب.

2

ـ وفي الثانية فقد ظهر جلياً انّ ما يربط أعضاء الأطلسي ببعضهم هو المصالح والنفعية دون المبادئ والإنسانية، فإذا استوجبت العلاقة التضحية والعطاء فلا يكون للعلاقة أثر او وجود، وأظهر البعض من دول الغرب الأوروبي قدراً من الأنانية وضع مصير الاتحاد الأوروبي كله ومستقبله تحت علامة استفهام كبيرة.

3

ـ أما في الثالثة فقد أكدت الصين وروسيا والشرق عموماً انّ الخلافات الاستراتيجية والسياسية لا تثنيهم عن تقديم المساعدات الإنسانية حتى للخصوم والأعداء، وانّ حاجة ومصلحة الإنسان كإنسان تتقدّم على أيّ اعتبار، وبذلك قدّمت هذه الأطراف نموذجاً فذاً عن التصرّف الإنساني خلافاً للتصرّف الغربي المعادي للإنسانية.

4

ـ أما في الرابعة فقد كانت الفضيحة الكارثة، حيث انهارت صورة أميركا على وجوه ثلاثة… الأول داخلي حيث ظهر وهن الروابط الوطنية بين الولايات الأميركية ما ينذر بالتفكك، وعلى الصعيد التحالفي حيث ظهرت الخفة وعدم الاكتراث بمصائب الشركاء، أما الجريمة الكبرى فقد كانت في الأداء الأميركي ضدّ الخصوم خاصة سورية وإيران اللتين تتعرّضان لعقوبات أميركية إجرامية تفرضها أميركا خلافاً لقواعد القانون الدولي، حيث أصرّ ترامب على تشديد العقوبات بدلاً من وقفها ومنع عن إيران وسورية حاجاتهما من الدواء والمواد الأولية التي تستعمل في تصنيعه او في المجال البحثي لإنتاجه، ورأى في الوباء فرصة نادرة لتجعل العقوبات أكثر فعالية في تركيع الدولتين ما يعني أنّ ترامب انْ لم يكن هو مطلق الفايروس فهو مستثمر به بكلّ تأكيد.

لهذا نرى أنّ السلوك الأميركي في التمسك بالعقوبات على سورية وإيران، رغم الطلبات والمناشدات الدولية لرفعها وحتى من الداخل الأميركي، يُعتبر جريمة يؤدّي ارتكابها إلى منع التصدي لوباء بل يسهم في انتشاره، جريمة تتطابق عناصرها مع عناصر جريمة الإبادة الجماعية التي لا تسقط بمرور الزمن وتوجب أن لا يفلت مرتكبها من العقاب. فترامب ومن خلال إصراره على العقوبات ضدّ سورية وإيران وغيرهما رغم التهديد الوبائي الخطير الذي تتعرّضان له إنما يرتكب جريمة ضدّ الإنسانية لا يمكن اعتبارها جزءاً من حروبه ضدّ الدولتين بل تشكل ملفاً قائماً بذاته منفصلاً عن كلّ ما عداه، ملفاً بعنوان “جرائم ضدّ الإنسانية” بحق شعبي سورية وإيران، جرائم تحيل مرتكبها إلى مجرم دولي لا يستحق أن يوكل إليه شأن في قيادة العالم…

*أستاذ جامعي وخبير استراتيجي.

INTERVIEW ON GEORGE GALLOWAY’S THE MOTHER OF ALL TALKSHOWS

In London for a new round of Imperialism On Trial (February 25, info here), I was on George Galloway’s The Mother Of All Talkshows Sunday night to discuss Syria.

George gives an excellent introduction on the nature of systematic, paid-for, organized, deliberate, war propaganda on Syria, to deceive people and whitewash the nature of the heinous, criminal, actions of the terrorists dubbed by the west as “rebels” who have beheaded children, among other crimes.

He kindly points out that I and others who have been telling the truth on Syria are being vindicated on a daily basis.

During the interview, I noted the media portrayal of what is happening in Syria (incessant demonization of Syria and Russia), and that Syria has a legal right to fight terrorism, and an obligation to the Syrian people to do so. 

Later, I came across an article eloquently outlining this perfectly. Author Stephen Gowans, in his recent article on Idlib, wrote (excerpts):

Erdogan wanted to run Idlib through his Al Qaeda proxies to gain leverage in order to shape the outcome of post-conflict talks on a new political arrangement for Syria. [6] This would allow him to further his Islamist agenda in a neighboring country—he had taken numerous steps to Islamize his own country—and to acquire profit-making opportunities in Syria for Turkish business people.

Erdogan’s plans were soon brought to fruition. By February, 2018, Brett McGurk, the U.S. envoy to the US campaign against ISIS, could call Idlib “the largest al Qaeda safe haven since 9/11.” [7] The veteran foreign affairs correspondent Robert Fisk would refer to the Syrian province as a territory teeming with “the Islamist fighters of Isis, Nusrah, al-Qaeda and their fellow jihadists.” [8] In September, 2019 The New York Times’ Eric Schmitt said that Idlib province contained “a witch’s brew of violent Islamic extremist groups, dominated by the larger Qaeda-linked organization Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, formerly the Nusra Front.” [9] Hayat Tahrir al-Sham would control 99 percent of Idlib and surrounding areas. [10], creating what Cockburn dubbed an “al-Qaeda-run mini-state” [11]—behind which sat Erdogan, on the Sultan’s throne.

Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) and Al Qaeda are one and the same. After undergoing a previous rebranding as Jabhat al Nusra, Al Qaeda’s Syrian branch morphed once again, this time into HTS. As the Syrian delegate to the United Nations, Bashar Ja’afari, explained to the UN Security Council in May,

Hayat Tahrir al-Sham … is the Al-Nusra Front, which itself is part of Al-Qaida in the Levant, which in turn is part of Al-Qaida in Iraq, which in turn is part of Al-Qaida in Afghanistan. Therefore, we are all talking about Al-Qaida, regardless of its different names; all are designated by the [UN Security] Council as terrorist entities. [12]

The Washington Post described Hayat Tahrir al-Sham as “an extremist Islamist group that began as al-Qaeda’s affiliate in Syria and has tried to rebrand itself several times during the war.” [13] The New York Times says Hayat Tahrir al-Sham “is affiliated with Al Qaeda,” [14] while The Wall Street Journal lists the group as “a branch of al Qaeda.” [15]

But of Western mainstream journalists, Cockburn perhaps describes the group best. Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, he wrote in early 2019, is “a powerful breakaway faction from Isis which founded the group under the name of Jabhat al-Nusra in 2011 and with whom it shares the same fanatical beliefs and military tactics. Its leaders wear suicide vests studded with metal balls just like their Isis equivalents.” [16]

“In September 2018, Russia and Turkey brokered a cease-fire agreement for Idlib to forestall a military offensive,” explained The Wall Street Journal. “The deal required that” Al Qaeda fighters “withdraw from a demilitarized buffer zone along the front line.” [21] Rather than withdrawing, Al Qaeda expanded areas under its control. [22] while continuing to carry on its fight against the Syrian military. The jihadists attacked Syrian army positions, targeted the Russian airbase at Khmeimim, and shelled towns and villages, “killing civilians and forcing more than 10,000 to flee,” according to the United Nations. [23] Turkey stood by while its proxies violated the cease-fire, failing “to meet its commitment to disarm” its fighters. [24]

In response, the Syrian army, backed by its Russian and Iranian allies, launched an offensive to liberate Idlib. It has done this because Al Qaeda’s attacks have never stopped and because the government of Syria has an obligation to protect its citizens and control its own territory.

When Ja’afari addressed the Security Council in May he asked:

When will it be recognized that the right we are exercising is the same right others have exercised in confronting terrorist attacks against the Bataclan theatre and the offices of Charlie Hebdo in Paris, as well as terrorist acts in Niece, London, Boston and other cities? The terrorists that members have confronted in their own countries were not equipped with Turkish rocket launchers and tanks. [25]

Apart from glossing over such inconvenient facts as the true character of the “armed opposition” and Erdogan’s connection to it, the US news media have failed to address a number of key questions.

First, is it legitimate for a government to use force to recover territory occupied by an armed enemy, even if the use of force endangers civilians or sparks their flight? If the answer is no, then the Allies acted illegitimately during World War II in liberating Europe from Nazi occupation, for their project was impossible without endangering some civilians and creating refugees.

Moreover, if civilian casualties and their displacement were acceptable consequences of US forces taking Raqqa from ISIS—the US defense secretary at the time, James Mattis responded to concerns about the effect of the US siege on civilians by noting that “Civilian casualties are a fact of life in this sort of situation” [26]—how is it that they are an unacceptable in the case of Syrian forces liberating Idlib from Al Qaeda?

A still more basic question is, Is it acceptable to respond in force to attacks from an enemy? The answer is obvious, which may be why it is never asked, for if asked, Syrian military operations against continued Al Qaeda attacks would have to be accepted as legitimate, rather than falsely portrayed as acts of aggression against Syrian civilians.

Third, is Turkey’s presence on Syrian soil legitimate? The answer is categorically in the negative. The invasion of Syria by Turkey and the occupation of part of Syrian territory by Turkish forces is no different in law, politics, or morality than the Nazi invasion of Poland, France, the low countries, the Soviet Union, and so on. It is clearly illegal, and an affront to the ‘rules-based international order’ to which the United, Turkey, and other NATO countries so conspicuously and hypocritically profess allegiance. The invasion and occupation have been carried out in defense of Turkey’s Al Qaeda proxy, and to advance the interests of Turks and Islamists against the interests of Syrians and secularists. Erdogan is no hero, but a villain, whose hands are as maculated by the blood of Al Qaeda’s Syrian victims as are those of his Al Qaeda proxies.

Finally, what are the costs of Al Qaeda’s continued rule over three million Syrians in Idlib? Are they greater than the costs in civilian casualties and displacement of bringing that rule to an end? The US news media have been generally supportive of the immense costs in blood and treasure Washington has incurred to wage its war on Al Qaeda in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Yemen. While noting the civilian cost of driving ISIS from its strongholds in Iraq and Syria, the US news media have never denounced the US war on ISIS as a humanitarian horror story, a term it uses to denounce Syria’s war on Al Qaeda. Instead, ISIS itself is portrayed as a humanitarian horror story, and efforts to undermine and defeat it are welcomed. This should be true too of Syria’s war on Al Qaeda. It is Al Qaeda that is the humanitarian horror story and it is the actions of the Syrian military in undermining and defeating it that ought to be welcomed and met with approbation.

The Syrian military advance to recover Idlib and liberate it from Al Qaeda, a terrorist organization which has imposed a harsh regime of religious intolerance and Islamist despotism on three million Syrians, has not been welcomed by the US news media. Although the campaign is praiseworthy on multiple levels—it recovers national territory held by proxies of a foreign aggressor, and aims to liberate millions of people who have been tyrannized by a rule imposed on them by an organization made up of thousands of foreign fighters—US media, betraying their commitment to US geopolitical agendas, portray the commendable as indefensible. We ought to applaud the actions of the Syrian military, along with those of its Russian and Iranian allies, not deplore them. These actions are blows against reaction, oppression, and foreign aggression, and in defense of democracy on an international level, as well as in the furtherance of the welfare of the Syrian people.

RELATED LINKS:

Words of former special envoy, Brett McGurk

Liberate Syria’s Idlib, precisely for the civilians that America fakes concern over 

En route to Abu al-Duhour, Idlib (VIDEO)

American Journalist Killed in Turkey for Revealing the Truth Regarding ISIS-Daesh (Serena Shim)

Liberate Idlib and Syria: The Martyred of Mhardeh Speak Through the Ones They’ve Left Behind

Aleppo City’s Countryside Fully Secured, Syrians in Aleppo Celebrate The End of Terrorism

Aleppo MP Fares Shehabi on improved life in Aleppo since liberation (June 2017 VIDEO)

CNN recycles 2018 lies as 2020 lies on Syria

Eastern Ghouta rebuilding

How the Mainstream Media Whitewashed Al-Qaeda and the White Helmets in Syria

A Personal Reply to the Fact-Challenged Smears of Terrorist-Whitewashing Channel 4, Snopes and La Presse

Under Fire from Ukraine and Misperceived by the West, The People of the DPR Share Their Stories

Accused of Treason and Imprisoned Without Trial: Journalist Kirill Vyshinsky Recounts His Harrowing Time in a Ukrainian Prison

Eva K Bartlett Patreon

Even NATO is unwilling to touch Turkey’s Idlib mess with a ten-foot pole

Scott Ritter

By Scott Ritter | RT | February 28, 2020

is a former US Marine Corps intelligence officer. He served in the Soviet Union as an inspector implementing the INF Treaty, in General Schwarzkopf’s staff during the Gulf War, and from 1991-1998 as a UN weapons inspector. Follow him on Twitter @RealScottRitter

28 Feb, 2020 15:47 / Updated 1 day ago

Turkish Armed Forces’ soldiers continue to conduct fortification and transition activities in Idlib, de-escalation zone in Syria on February 20, 2020 © Getty Images / Ibrahim Hatib / Anadolu Agency

Having been hit by the Syrian Air Force in Idlib, Turkey has called on NATO’s protection, but as much as the alliance would like a fight with Assad and his ally Russia, it’s refused to back Ankara’s questionable adventure.

Turkey engaged NATO in Article 4 consultations, seeking help regarding the crisis in Syria. The meeting produced a statement from NATO condemning the actions of Russia and Syria and advocating for humanitarian assistance, but denying Turkey the assistance it sought.

The situation in Idlib province has reached crisis proportions. A months-long military offensive by the Syrian Army, supported by the Russian Air Force and pro-Iranian militias, had recaptured nearly one-third of the territory occupied by anti-Assad groups funded and armed by Turkey. In response, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan dispatched thousands of Turkish soldiers, backed by thousands of pieces of military equipment, including tanks and armored vehicles, into Idlib to bolster his harried allies.

The result has been a disaster for Turkey, which has lost more than 50 soldiers and had scores more wounded due to Syrian air attacks. For its part, Russia has refrained from directly engaging Turkish forces, instead turning its attention to countering Turkish-backed militants. Faced with mounting casualties, Turkey turned to NATO for assistance, invoking Article 4 of the NATO charter, which allows members to request consultations whenever, in their opinion, their territorial integrity, political independence or security is threatened.

Dangerous precedents

Among the foundational principles of the NATO alliance, most observers focus on Article 5, which declares that an attack against one member is an attack against all. However, throughout its 75-year history, Article 5 has been invoked only once – in the aftermath of 9/11 – resulting in joint air and maritime patrols, but no direct military confrontation. The wars that NATO has engaged in militarily, whether in Kosovo, Afghanistan, Libya or Iraq, have all been conducted under Article 4, when NATO made a collective decision to provide assistance in a situation that did not involve a direct military attack on one of its member states.

With that in mind, Turkey’s decision to turn to Article 4 was a serious undertaking. For additional leverage, Ankara linked the NATO talks with a separate decision to open its borders to refugees seeking asylum in Europe, abrogating an agreement that had been reached with the European Union to prevent uncontrolled migration into Europe through Turkish-controlled territory and waters. Through this humanitarian blackmail, Turkey sought to use the shared economic and political costs arising from the Syrian situation as a bargaining chip for NATO support.

A failed gamble

The best Turkey could get from its Article 4 consultation, however, was a lukewarm statement by Jens Stoltenberg, the NATO secretary general, condemning Syria and Russia while encouraging a diplomatic resolution to the fighting in Syria that focused on alleviating the unfolding humanitarian crisis regarding refugees. This is a far cry from the kind of concrete military support, such as the provision of Patriot air defense systems or NATO enforcement of a no-fly zone over Idlib, Turkey was hoping for.

The provision of military support under Article 4 is serious, involving as it does the entire weight of the NATO alliance. This was underscored by recent comments made by the Supreme Commander of Allied Forces in Europe, US General Tod Wolters, which linked NATO’s nuclear deterrence posture to current Article 4 NATO operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. At a time when NATO is focused on confronting Russia in the Baltics, opening a second front against the Russians in Syria is not something the alliance was willing to support at this time.

While the US was vocal in its desire to support Turkey at the consultations, NATO is a consensus organization, and the complexities of Turkey’s Syrian adventure, which extend beyond simple Russian involvement to include issues involving the legality of Turkey’s presence inside Syria, and the fact that many of the armed groups Turkey supports in Idlib are designated terrorist organizations, precluded a NATO decision to intervene on Turkey’s behalf. Having failed in its effort to get NATO support in Syria, Turkey is now left with the Hobson’s choice of retreating or doubling down. Neither will end well for Turkey, and both will only further exacerbate that humanitarian disaster taking place in Idlib today.

Scott Ritter is a former US Marine Corps intelligence officer. He served in the Soviet Union as an inspector implementing the INF Treaty, in General Schwarzkopf’s staff during the Gulf War, and from 1991-1998 as a UN weapons inspector. Follow him on Twitter @RealScottRitter

تحديات محور المقاومة… وتقدّم على مختلف المحاور

رأي سمير الحسن 

الخميس 27 شباط 2020

متواصلة بعناد، وبلا هوادة، عدوانية الغرب على الشرق. طاقة عدوانية غريبة باستمراريتها، وثباتها، وجبروتها، لا تلبث أن تتعدّى وتدمّر وتقتل وتخرّب، وإن خسرت فببعض ردّ فعل مقاوم من شعوب الشرق، الذي لم يغب عن لسانه طعم هذه العدوانية الشرسة على مراحل تاريخية مختلفة.

والاستعمار ليس أماً حنوناً، كما صوّره كاتبو التاريخ الحديث، ولا الإمبريالية أباً للشعوب. الأم وابنتها دمرتا الكرة الأضية، وحياة الشعوب عليها. جاء الاستعمار الفرنسي، ودخل دمشق، وأوّل ما قام به قائد القوات الفرنسية، الجنرال غورو، خلال الحرب العالمية الأولى، أنه قصد قبر صلاح الدين الأيوبي، أحد أبرز رموز هزيمة الصليبيين من الشرق، ورفسه بقدمه قائلاً: «يا صلاح الدين أنت قلت لنا إبان الحروب الصليبية: إنكم خرجتم من الشرق ولن تعودوا إليه. وها نحن عدنا فانهض لترانا في سوريا».

كرّس غورو النزعة الاستعمارية لبلاده، وللغرب برمّته؛ فالصليبية كانت أوروبية الطابع، ولم تنتمِ إلى دولة محدّدة، وقومية معيّنة. لم تكن جرمانية، تحديداً، ولا إفرنجية تحديداً، ولا أنكلو ساكسونية تحديداً. كانت كل ذلك، مع غيرها من مختلف القوميات الأوروبية. زرعت لمام شعوب من مختلف دول العالم مكان شعبٍ آخر في فلسطين، فكان الكيان الصهيوني. ثمّ تنبعث اتحاداً أوروبياً، بعد قرون طويلة على حدود الألفيتين الثانية والثالثة.

وتتجدّد العدوانية بصلافة وإصرار مع الوريث الأشرس، الإمبريالية الأميركية، فتستبيح العالم وتقتل وتدمر، ولا تكلّ عدوانيتها، كما لا يضعف إصرارها على العدوان. تغزو أفغانستان، ثم العراق، تستبيح أميركا اللاتينية بمؤامراتها، ولا تكلّ أمام هزيمة من هنا، أو ضربة من هناك، فتستعيد قوّتها، وتعيد هجومها العدواني، مستفيدة ممّا يشبه وحدانية سيطرتها وبطشها في العالم. تكرّس حضورها المباشر، وغير المباشر في سوريا والعراق ولبنان، مستهدفة تكريس سيطرتها، وكذلك محاولة مجابهة أي نهوض آسيوي، فتضع إيران في أول استهدافاتها، وتخطّط للصين منعاً لنهوض يقضّ مضاجعها.

جملة تحوّلات وانتصارات تكتيكية تُعزّز من حضور محور المقاومة في كل الساحات وتضع المنطقة في مرحلة التحرير المباشرة


لكنّ حركة التاريخ لا تعود إلى الوراء، بل تتقدم مهما كان ببطء، وفي ظل نهوض آسيوي غير منضبط، تعجز الإمبريالية الأميركية عن مجابهته، يتقدّم المحور الشرقي بتؤدة، خطوة خطوة، لا يريد للمجابهة أن تصل إلى ذروة عنفوانها، لأنه لا يريد أن ينجرّ وراء نزعة الإمبريالية الأميركية إلى تدمير الحياة البشرية على الأرض بمجابهة شاملة. وبقدر ما هي غريبة النزعة العدوانية بصلفها واستمراريتها، مستوى الرد الشرقي منضبط في الحدود المرسومة له: تقدم من دون تراجع، ولا تسرّع. يتضمن الرد في طياته قراراً نهائياً بالمجابهة حتى نهايتها، التي قد تطول تحت مؤثرات الضبط المرسومة لعملياتها على المستويات الاستراتيجية والاقتصادية والسياسية. لذلك، تطول المجابهات العسكرية المباشرة الشرسة في سوريا، واليمن، وتتخذ في العراق ولبنان منحى الحراك الشعبي.

في هذه الأجواء، نلاحظ تطورات ميدانية في سياق التحولات الاستراتيجية الواقعة في سياق مواجهة المشروع الأميركي في المنطقة. ولا بدّ من التوقف عند التطوّر العسكري على جبهتي اليمن وسوريا؛ هجومان يعبّران ضمناً عن الهجوم الشامل الذي تقوده جبهة المقاومة لدفع أميركا وحلفائها إلى مزيد من التراجع؛ فالجيش السوري دخل مرحلة متقدمة لحسم معركة إدلب. وفي اليمن، سجّل الجيش اليمني و«أنصار الله» تقدماً استراتيجياً على جبهة مأرب، والجوف، بعد النجاحات الكبيرة على جبهات نهم، وكتاف، ما يعني دخول الجيش السعودي مرحلة حرجة في اليمن.
في لبنان، قال فلتمان إذا لم تضعوا حداً لحزب الله، فسيعود لبنان إلى العصر الحجري. هي لغة الأم المزعومة بالحنون. «إما لبنان لنا، أو… لا لبنان». هكذا يريد الغرب لبنان الذي رسمه على قياس مصالحه، ومن أجل مخططاته، وواهم من لا يزال يعتمده وطناً قائماً بحدّ ذاته، موئلاً دائماً لأبنائه المقيمين فيه. وعندما حاول الحكم اللبناني التوجّه نحو الشرق، انطلقت الحركة التي يعتمدها فلتمان في استراتيجيته، إما لإعادة لبنان إلى أحضانه بالتمام والكمال، خالياً من المقاومة، أو لإعادته إلى العصر الحجري كما هدّد فلتمان، ابتداءً منذ السابع عشر من تشرين الأول / أوكتوبر المنصرم. وفي العراق، تتخذ الحركة منحًى أكثر تجذّراً، حيث تجمعت كل القوى الوطنية في المجابهة، يعزّزها الحضور الإيراني المقاوم الذي حسم قراره بإخراج الأميركي من المنطقة.

جملة تحوّلات، وانتصارات تكتيكية، تعزّز من حضور محور المقاومة في كل الساحات، عسكرياً وسياسياً، وتضع المنطقة في مرحلة التحرير المباشرة، كما تقرّبنا من الهزيمة النهائية لغورو الاستعماري، وفلتمان الإمبريالي، بانتظار تحقيق النصر الاستراتيجي، إن على المستوى العسكري أو الاقتصادي ــ وهو من أهم عناصر المجابهة ــ أو السياسي، مهما امتدت المجابهة، وطال أمدها.

*كاتب وباحث في الشؤون الاستراتيجية

Related Articles

Questions Remain Over Alleged Death of Islamic State Leader

Image result for Questions Remain Over Alleged Death of Islamic State Leader

November 1, 2019

Russia’s Ministry of Defense this week said it had not seen any credible evidence that Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of the Islamic State (IS) terror group, had been killed in northern Syria last weekend, allegedly in a daring US military operation.

US President Donald Trump boasted last Sunday that American Special Forces raided a base in Idlib Province, which purportedly led to al-Baghdadi’s death from a suicide explosion. The Pentagon said six other people were killed in the operation. In addition, two of al-Baghdadi’s children were killed when the IS leader blew himself up as American troops were closing in, according to Trump’s own dramatic telling of the event.

Curiously, Trump gave prominent thanks to Russia for its help in the logistics of carrying out the attack.

However, Russian MOD spokesman Major General Igor Konashenkov has subsequently stated that Russia was not involved in the raid, as Trump had claimed. He said that Russian flight data indicated that there were no US air strikes in the vicinity of the declared raid. The spokesman went further and remarked that there were no doubts as to whether the assassination mission even took place in the way that Washington is publicly claiming.

Another anomaly in the official US account is that the base where al-Baghdadi was purportedly hiding out is in a location known to be a stronghold for another al-Qaeda affiliate that is a sworn enemy of their perceived rival jihadists belonging to IS. Why and how then was the IS leader able to maintain a base surrounded by enemy jihadists?

According to the New York Times, it is claimed that al-Baghdadi paid $67,000 to the rival terror group, Hurras al-Din, for protection. Somehow that sounds a dubious explanation.

A glaring omission in US media coverage of the alleged killing of al-Baghdadi is the historical background as to who he was and how his former so-called caliphate came into being straddling Iraq and Syria.

There is copious evidence that Iraqi-born al-Baghdadi was recruited by American intelligence while imprisoned during the US war on Iraq in the mid- to late-2000s. He was held in the notorious Abu Ghraib US-run torture prison, but subsequently was released by the Americans despite his known jihadist past. It was around 2012 that the Obama administration was covertly mobilizing and weaponizing jihadi assets to carry out its clandestine war for regime change against the Syrian government. It is believed that al-Baghdadi was a key CIA asset for the US dirty war in Syria, even though Washington was proclaiming its involvement in Syria was to “defeat IS” and other terror groups.

It is entirely plausible that US intelligence assets are “terminated” whenever it is politically convenient and when it is calculated that their usefulness has expired.

Trump and the mainstream US media depiction of a spectacular success in exterminating a feared terror chief is almost certainly a distortion of reality and events.

The way Trump in particular has crowed about the purported operation suggests he is seeking a boost to his re-election chances next year. The thuggish rhetoric of killing the IS leader “like a dog” smacks of Trump trying to project an image of a tough president.

More generally, the event has afforded US media to proclaim the virtue of American military power in apparently bringing a notorious renegade “to justice”.

The timing could not be more important. The nearly eight-year war in Syria has exposed the criminality of Washington and its NATO partners for fueling carnage. By contrast, the Syrian government and its Russian and Iranian allies have been vindicated in their long-held claims that a criminal US-backed aggression using terrorist proxies has been thwarted.

When Trump abandoned the Kurdish militants last month, the move was condemned for throwing Syria into further turmoil. It was Russia’s deft diplomacy which managed to contain the situation. At that point, Washington’s international credibility was scraping the barrel of duplicity and malign responsibility for conflict and chaos in Syria.

Hence, a sensational operation resembling “a movie” – as Trump put it – was a timely public relations remedy for Washington’s badly tarnished image. Ostensibly, “taking out” a terrorist leader gives the US the means to renew its propaganda narrative that it is “fighting against terrorism” rather than the reality of using terrorism for its regime-change wars and other imperialist objectives.

Was Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi killed last weekend? It is not the first time his “death” has been reported by US forces who have made similar claims in past years. There are too many questions and discrepancies to take Washington’s version of events as accurate. More plausibly, it was a carefully contrived propaganda stunt to burnish Washington’s disgraced image.

One thing for sure, however, is that the US will continue to use terror proxies and assets into the future in order to achieve its pernicious geopolitical aims. There are plenty more “al-Baghdadis” to be cultivated and orchestrated by Washington as it sows chaos and destruction in the Middle East and beyond for its selfish interests.

The views of individual contributors do not necessarily represent those of the Strategic Culture Foundation.
%d bloggers like this: