Dr Bouthaina Shaaban: a decade of dirty war on Syria

May 8, 2021

ناصر قنديل في تجربة اعلامية فريدة جديدة .. تعالوا نتحاور

 2021/05/01 

نارام سرجون

خاص الشرق برس كتب النائب السابق ورئيس تحرير جريدة البناء ناصر قنديل  :أرواحهم في رقابكم فلتحملوا عبء الدماء! – Elsharq Press الشرق برس

أكثر مايعجبني في الاستاذ ناصر قنديل هو انه لايتوقف عن اجتراح الافكار ويكون سباقا فيها .. له عين الباحث في الاعلام وفن مخاطبة الجمهور .. في كل يوم يبحث عن جديد ويجرب أفكارا ويعدل فيها .. يرصد نجاح الفكرة او تقدمها النسبي او تراجعها النسبي .. ولكنه دوما متأكد ان الناس ليسوا بضاعة لمستثمر يبحث عن طرق للغش كي يسرقها او يشتريها بثمن بخس .. وليسوا قطيعا من البهائم يساق الى التسمين في المراعي قبل ان يساق الى الذبح كما يفعل اعلام الجزيرة والعربية واعلام الاسلاميين واعلام الاخوان المسلمين الذي اسثتمر في أجساد المسلمين وارواحهم .. وقدم لهم علفهم من الاسلاميات حتى سمنوا ثم ساقهم كالقطعان الى الموت في معارك اميريكا .. نحرهم في العراق وفي سورية وقدمهم قرابين في ليبيا واليمن وافغانستان .. ولايهمه كم يموت .. فآلته الاعلامية الجهنمية قوية وهي تفرم اللحم العربي والاسلامي وتطعم به فم اميريكا التي لاتشبع .. وتهدي لاسرائيل وجبات لاتنتهي من أشلاء شباب العرب الذين يموتون بعيدا عن فلسطين ..


لايتوقف ناصر قنديل عن اضافة رؤية جديدة في ظل ضعف الاعلام المقاوم ليكون قيمة مضافة ثمينة .. ولايتوقف عن اجتراح الافكار عندما تصبح الافكار عتيقة ومملة ..

كان أول من خرج في الحرب السورية بفكرة توب نيوز التي رد فيها على فكرة شاهد العيان الزور والمراسل الشعبي المأجور .. واول من استعمل اليوتيوب لا ليبث مشاهد القتل والتعذيب المقززة التي كانت وسيلة الثورجيين العرب في الربيع العربي لترويع الناس .. بل ليبث الامل وروح النقاش والتفكير .. فصمم برنامجه الغني ( 60 دقيقة) يقدمه مرتين في كل اسبوع يخاطب به الناس ويقويهم ويصارحهم حتى جذب الناس الذين كانوا يبحثون عن كلام نقي كالماء ومليء بالاكسجين .. بعد ان تلوث الماء والهواء في دنيا العرب والمشرق .. بالدخان الاعلامي وروائح النفط والغاز والدم واللحى المتعفنة .. والافواه التي تتجشأ رائحة القيء العثماني ..
كان يراجع تجربة 60 دقيقة ويطورها كي تتناسب مع الحرب وظروفها ويومياتها .. يعدلها أو يضيف اليها .. لانه كان يدرك ان مهمة التنوير ليست عادية وليست سهلة .. وان الناس لايلامون اذا ماتاهوا احيانا تحت ضغط الكذب والتكذيب كما حدث في الربيع العربي .. بل يلام المثقفون الذين يتكئون على الارائك الفكرية المخملية ولايخالطون الناس ولايجتهدون في تغيير الكلمة وتنشيطها وحقنها بالحياة ونقل الدم والجراحات والتقنيات الجديدة كي تقاتل مع الحقيقة ..فحتى الكلمة تحتاج الى تدريب كي تقاتل وتحتاج الى سلاح هو العدسة التي تحملها والخطاب الذي يصقلها الى ماسة ..

في الربيع العربي صمت كثير من المثقفين .. ونأوا بالنفس .. وناموا ملء جفونهم وكأنهم كانوا ينتظرون نهاية المعركة ليقرروا موقفهم للتزلف من المنتصر وليسوقوا الثقافة في اتجاه آخر .. وبعضهم مزق كتبه وكتاباته وبعضهم اغتال عقله وبعضهم عذب عقله وبعضهم باعه وبعضهم اعطاه منوما وبعضهم تعطل عقله وصدق كذبة الربيع العربي والثورة السورية .. كان هؤلاء لايحاولون ان يستعملوا ضميرهم ولا شجاعتهم ولااقلامهم وتركوا الناس ضحايا للنصابين والاميين الذين يرتدون ثياب الثقافة والفلسفة والاعلام مثل محطة الجزيرة وأخواتها التي كانت تجمعات للأميين والمهرجين والنصابين والبياعين والخونة والجواسيس والمؤلفة قلوبهم وابناء الطلقاء .. وأسوأ ماانجبته الامم من النخب المنخورة العفنة الذين كانوا يذبحون العقول وينحرونها كما يذبح انصارهم الاعناق .. وهؤلاء للاسف كانوا يتصرفون وكأنهم أساتذة الامة وفلاسفتها وأنبياؤها ..

مثقفو الامة والشرق – الا ثلة قليلة – كانوا في معظمهم في الربيع العربي أكثر جهلا من الجهلاء .. يجلسون كسالى او مبهورين او مذعورين يكتبون كما يريد الناس الذين تاهوا .. فصار المثقفون الكسالى هم من يحتاج الى التثقيف والى التنوير وهم من يجب ان تلقى الشجاعة في قلوبهم وأن تسقى اقلامهم حليب السباع .. بدل بول البعير .. لانهم صاروا يخافون الجهل والجهلاء ويخضعون لابتزازهم او سحرهم وشعوذتهم او دولاراتهم .. وصاروا احيانا منظرين للعنف والذبح وآباء روحيين ومحامين للارهاب والقتلة .. وكان ناصر وأمثاله مثل الراحل انيس النقاش ورفيق نصرالله والراحل بهجت سليمان ونبيل صالح ونبيل فياض ووو .. يتصدون لهؤلاء النصابين .. ويسقطونهم ..

أفكار اعلامية وثقافية تنويرية لم يتوقف ناصر عن اختراعها .. من فكرة النقاش التفاعلي والرسالة التفاعلية بين المثقفين الى فكرة منتدى (سوراقيا) .. وغيرها من الافكار التحريضية للأمة والنخب ..

اليوم يخوض ناصر قنديل تجرية جديدة فذة مستوحاة من تجربة الاغلاق في الكورونا حيث تحول كل شيء الى التخاطب عبر الشاشات والتواصل المباشر بدل لقاء الكف بالكف والوجه للوجه .. حيث يدعو الى منصة حوارية مباشرة مع الناس .. وهي تجربة جديرة بالمتابعة والتقدير .. تقول يجب ان نستغل كل جديد .. وان نجد في كل تغير طريقة للابداع لا وسيلة لخلق الاعذار ..

اليوم سنكون مع الناصر ناصر قنديل

==========================

دعوة للمشاركة على تطبيق زوم – حلقة من منتدى ستون دقيقة – السبت 1 ايار التاسعة ليلا منتدى ستون دقيقة مع ناصر قنديل

مواضيع الحلقة :

قراءة في مفاوضات فيينا – صاروخ ديمونا – الموقف من سقوط الجسر بالمستوطنين – الموقف من ترسيم الحدود البحرية في لبنان – قراءة سريعة في كلام ولي العهد السعودي عن ايران – ماذا عن الاهتمام الروسي بلبنان?

قواعد المشاركة :- الحلقة اسبوعية وستسجل ويتم بثها ومن لديه مشكلة بالظهور يبقي الكاميرا مقفلة ولا يظهر اسمه على جهازه- مدة المشاركة 2-3 دقائق ليتاح المجال امام اوسع عدد من المشاركين-طلب الكلام يتم بواسطة رفع الكف الاكتروني او رفع اليد او تسجيل طلب على شات المحادثة- الميكروفون مغلق ولا يفتح الا بمنح حق الكلام- للادارة الحق بحذف اي مشارك يخرج عن الاصول- التشدد ناتج عن التحسب لتسلل اشخاص للمشاغبة بحكم ان الدعوة تتم عبر مشاهدة فيديو ستون فنعتذر سلفا


للمشاركة ارسال طلب عبر :
البريد الالكتروني nasserkandil@gmail.com
رسالة واتساب للرقم 009613328887


منتدى 60 دقيقة – 1-5-2021 – مفاوضات فيينا – صاروخ ديمونا – مواقف ولي العهد السعودي – الترسيم البحري

After 10 Years of Civil War in Syria, US (Quietly) Declares Defeat but Won’t Go Home

March 25th, 2021

By Alan Macleod

Source

Syria Media Bias
After a decade of bombing, invasions, exoduses and economic strife, it is clear that there are precious few winners in the Syrian Civil War — or from the rest of the Arab Spring, for that matter.

DAMASCUS, SYRIA — This March marks the 10-year anniversary of the Arab Spring and the protests that rocked Syria, which were a starting point for the ongoing civil war. That conflict has led to over half a million deaths and nearly 13 million people displaced, according to some estimates.

Now, after 10 years of attempts to topple the government of President Bashar al-Assad, it appears that many in the U.S. government and media are quietly conceding defeat.

“We tell Syria’s human stories so that the ‘victors’ don’t write its history,” ran the headline of a CNN article marking the anniversary. Who the victors are is not spelled out explicitly, although it is clear that the reference is to the Syrian government. In explaining the reasons for the violence, the article tells us:

The Assad regime gunned down those who called for a peaceful transition to democracy. Gulf countries sent in suitcases of cash with a wink and a nod towards more religiously conservative fighting units. Assad let former al-Qaeda members and other criminals out of jail. The U.S., at the peak of its involvement, half-heartedly trained some ‘moderate’ rebels, many of whom went on to join the ranks of extremist groups.

Thus, Assad is presented as an ally of al-Qaeda, while forces the U.S. and its allies “half-heartedly” supplied and trained register merely as “religiously conservative fighting units” and “moderate rebels,” inverting reality on its head.

The New York Times was less cryptic in its description of the outcome of the conflict, its headline reading “Having Won Syria’s War, al-Assad Is Mired in Economic Woes.” While accepting military defeat in Syria, the U.S. appears to be using its economic power to make sure there can be no clear victory for Assad, enacting waves of sanctions that have crushed the country’s economy, leading to power outages, food shortages, inflation and falling wages.

In its article covering a potential change in Syria policy by the Biden administration, the Minneapolis Star Tribune quoted one former Obama official who said the international take-home message is that “the Syria war is over, Assad has won, Assad will be in power as long as he is breathing oxygen.”

Those in the current administration are more tacit in their acceptance of the situation on the ground. A joint statement from Secretary of State Antony Blinken and his European counterparts last week asked for a nationwide ceasefire, promising that they were not “abandoning” the conflict or Syria’s people, whatever it might look like. The statement also condemned the fast-approaching presidential elections as neither free nor fair, historically a very good indicator that they expect the result to go against their interests. “It’s clear that the regime will leverage the upcoming presidential elections in May to unfairly claim Assad’s legitimacy,” said the United States’ acting deputy ambassador to the UN, Jeffrey DeLaurentis, last week. “The United States will not recognize these elections unless they are free, fair, representative of Syrian society, and supervised by the United Nations,” he added.

The prospect of holding a proper election in a country destroyed by ten years of constant war is indeed very dim. With food prices rising, millions displaced, and millions more having fled abroad, just surviving is a task enough for many. Last month the World Food Program warned that a record 12.4 million Syrians — more than half of the population — are currently food insecure. This is an increase of around 4.5 million from last year. Over the past 12 months, the price of basic foodstuffs has increased by an average of 236%. Some of this is down to U.S. sanctions, with Washington apparently deciding that — as in Venezuela, Cuba and other nations — if the U.S. cannot overthrow the government, it will fall back on starving the country as a punishment.

Ten years of violence

While the conflict is universally described as a civil war, from the outset it has been dominated by foreign groups. March 15, 2011 saw the Arab Spring spread to Syria, with large demonstrations against Assad’s rule in many major cities. However, this unrest was quickly overtaken by armed groups whose goal was to take the country by force. In July of that year, the Free Syrian Army was established, quickly receiving considerable Western backing. Almost immediately, the country of 21 million people became a proxy war for various regional and world powers, including Turkey, the United States and its European allies, Russia, Iran and Saudi Arabia. At one point, the CIA was spending almost $1 billion per year training and fielding an army of jihadists. Fighters came from as far afield as Libya and Xinjiang province in China to join their ranks.

A U.S.-backed anti-government fighter mans a heavy automatic machine gun, left, next to an American soldier as they take their positions at Tanf, a border crossing between Syria and Iraq (Hammurabi’s Justice News/AP)
A US-backed anti-government fighter mans a heavy machine gun next to a US soldier in al Tanf. Hammurabi’s Justice News | AP

The bitter fighting and terrible violence on all sides led to a refugee crisis for a country that had historically been a haven for victims of war in the region. The famously secular nation also became a stronghold for the Islamic State. With the help of Russian forces, ISIS was beaten back, but to this day, a number of foreign powers continue to occupy the country militarily. One of them is the United States, which last month launched a strike on a town on the Syria/Iraq border, dropping 1.75 tons of explosives and reportedly killing 22 people. Between 2014 and 2019, the U.S. and its allies dropped at least 118,000 bombs and missiles on Iraq and Syria. The U.S. also continues to militarily occupy Syria’s oil fields, hamstringing the nation’s efforts to recover economically.

A short spring, a long winter

Unfortunately, Syria is far from the only country that has been left in a much worse state than what it was in ten years ago. In 2011, the Arab Spring sparked hope across the Middle East, capturing the world’s attention for months as, one after another, movements arose challenging the power of undemocratic governments. Yet few, if any, can be said to have succeeded.

Egypt was the centerpiece of the uprising, as hundreds of thousands of people poured into Tahrir Square in Cairo. Dictator Hosni Mubarak was forced to resign and Mohamed Morsi was elected president in a democratic election. Yet barely a year later many were in the streets again, begging the military to overthrow him. The resulting coup brought General Abdel Fattah el-Sisi to power, establishing a dictatorship every bit as brutal as Mubarak’s. Sisi has signalled his intent to remain in power until at least 2034, which, considering his age, is effectively a lifetime appointment.

In Libya, protests against Colonel Muammar Gaddafi’s rule were used as a pretext by NATO for regime change, sparking a bitter civil war, Gaddafi’s assasination, and the rise of Al-Qaeda and other jihadist forces that turned the once-rich country into a failed state, replete with slave markets.

Meanwhile, Yemen is now commonly described as the “world’s worst humanitarian crisis,” where 24 million people need assistance, including 20 million with little or no access to clean water. Yesterday, Oxfam warned that the country is reaching a tipping point, amid a massive spike in COVID-19 cases and a feared outbreak of cholera. The cause for the crisis is clear: the Saudi-led onslaught against the country, which, in turn, has its roots in the constitutional crisis sparked by the Arab Spring protests.

Few remember that the Arab Spring actually started in Western Sahara. But over the past 10 years, the country is being progressively eroded, as Morocco continues to occupy it militarily, building a succession of walls and annexing its most valuable land. As a result, the fortunes of the Sahrawi people are as bad as ever.

After a decade of bombing, invasions, exoduses and economic strife, it is clear that there are precious few winners in the Syrian Civil War — or from the rest of the Arab Spring, for that matter. There are, however, millions of losers. Chief among them are the people of Syria, who have seen their country torn apart as foreign powers, great and minor, wrestle for control of their nation. While the U.S. and its media might be tacitly conceding defeat, few are proclaiming victory.

Bernays and Propaganda – Propaganda Continues Unabated – Part 5

March 11, 2021

Source

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JiwezzcRguQ/YEp45-gJKXI/AAAAAAAAQJM/NNbnWtFJlMYFTa2HWBzrOl9pvKfxPey2wCLcBGAsYHQ/w640-h480/statue-of-liberty-1617617_960_720.jpg

In most nations, when a particular criminal conduct reaches epidemic proportion, the government finally acts decisively to eradicate it. Not in America; they solve the problem by legalising it. They did this with influence-peddling (lobbying) and drugs, the same now occurring with domestic propaganda which has been against the law for a very long time to protect citizens from psychological manipulation and control by their own government. The law has always been ignored, but Congress is now dispensing with the pretense in repealing two major laws, the 1948 Smith-Mundt Act (1) (2(3) (4) and the 1987 Foreign Relations Authorization Act, so as to permit the authorities to disperse false and misleading propaganda and campaigns of misinformation against its own people. Of course, the government has always done this surreptitiously, sometimes to an overwhelming extent as in the case of war marketing, but it has always been illegal. After this, it won’t be. One Pentagon official claimed this new provision will have “No checks and balances. No one will know if the information is accurate, partially accurate, or entirely false”. In an article in USA Today, it was quoted that the US military (Pentagon) already spends about $4 billion per year on propaganda to sway public opinion, much of that directed domestically. (5) (6) (7)

We now have the sock puppets, (8) (9) the fake social media personas on the Internet, used by the US military and intelligence agencies to affect and lead public opinion in many countries, usually with the intent of inciting civil unrest and revolution. It has been obvious for some time that these tactics have been used domestically as well, the new legislation simply legalising the process. Many US government agencies have obtained this software that permits them to flood the social media with fake people making fake posts in support of government positions and discrediting those who hold contrary views or are critical of the government. The software is extremely detailed, providing extensive backgrounds for these fictitious people, permitting a single human to assume the identities of as many as 1,000 fake people, and make them appear to actually be in a certain physical place or even attending an actual event. They control the IP address, making it impossible to detect that a single person in one location is orchestrating all that activity. The program manual states, “There is a variety of social media tricks we can use to add a level of realness to all fictitious personas”. The contract requires “virtual private servers” located in and outside the US, to give false locational information, and also requires what it calls “traffic mixing”, blending the persona controllers’ internet usage with the usage of people outside Centcom in a manner that offers “excellent cover and powerful deniability”.

This “Persona management software” is now being used to manipulate public opinion on key issues, with unlimited numbers of virtual people regularly flooding US social media with pro-government propaganda in attempts to manage public perception and kill political activism. This is called “counter-messaging” and the Pentagon has made no secret of its activities in promulgating “black propaganda” – which means knowingly spreading lies to mislead and misinform the public for the purpose of stifling political dissent. In its increasing fear of political activism, the US government has labeled the Internet as a “breeding ground for domestic terrorists”, and appears to include in this category anyone who questions the government’s version of events. This is all part of a massive program to intimidate, manipulate, and crush all public dissent, and to control not only domestic discussion but also to actively manipulate worldwide opinion. Their activity is becoming common in China where, on the occurrence of an event containing useful propaganda fuel, we often see a flood of commentary on Weibo supporting the American position, these ostensibly being posted by native Chinese but almost inevitably originating in Fort Langley, Virginia.

The government has used these in smear campaigns (10) (11) (12) against reporters and other high-profile individuals who criticise US government policy, to the extent of creating fake Facebook and Twitter accounts in their names, containing fake posts meant to be personally damaging, and have even created fake websites and Wikipedia pages purporting to belong to an individual, all for the purpose of discrediting “dissidents”. When a Taiwanese scientist aired his research identifying the 5 haplotypes of COVID-19 and proving America had to be the original source since these types existed only in the USA, the VOA harassed the man so badly online that he closed all his social media accounts and went dark.

The US government performs surveillance and infiltration in attempts to control the public dialogue in many nations, creating Twitter-like social media platforms in other countries, ostensibly local but all monitored and controlled by US agencies. Most are the work of USAID. The Americans innocently proclaim the purpose as “encouraging open political discussion” (in every nation but the US), but it’s a ‘discussion’ they mean to control entirely and skew to satisfy their agenda of inciting unrest and revolution. One such platform in Cuba was widely ridiculed when knowledge of it became public in early 2014, and was killed. (13) (14) (15) Even the Associated Press reported that it “was set up to encourage political dissent”, but White House officials claimed they wanted only “to provide Cubans with a platform to share ideas and exchange information”, claiming it was used to “share cricket scores” and by farmers to “share market prices”. Maybe, but it was used primarily for political destabilisation. The State Department and USAID actively pushed for these platforms after their successes in causing the uprisings in Egypt, Tunisia and Iran. The State Department also provided several million dollars to a team of American hackers to develop a system known as a mesh network to enable US-sponsored dissidents in Cuba to communicate more freely and securely, with USAID committing yet another several million to the same cause. This is precisely what the US has been doing in Hong Kong for many years now.

The real owners and controllers of Google are reading from the same script. Google is not actively propagandising, but functions as an information gateway with all searches heavily censored and prioritised so that we see only what the secret government wants us to see and receive only the information they want or permit us to have. (16) Facebook and Twitter are not better. (17) Wikipedia is different, being one of the most criminally-dishonest active propagandists in the world. (18) There is surprisingly little in Wikipedia that is not either censored or outright false. If you want to know the number of protons in a Cesium atom, you will find the correct answer, but in any area related to history, politics, wars, government, the Jews, Israel, Arabs, ‘Axis of evil’ members, crimes of governments and corporations, the truths of the European bankers and their ravaging of the world, Wikipedia is 95% sanitised misinformation. And this propaganda is intense; Wiki has tens of thousands of ‘volunteers’ constantly scouring all the page entries to find items requiring editing or deleting. Many people have reported correcting an obviously false entry only to discover moments later that their corrections had been deleted and the page locked. Perhaps the biggest laugh is Wiki’s claim that “Content Requires Verifiable Data”. Maybe, but only from you.

The final pillar of this social engineering is the Jewish-owned and/or controlled media and entertainment industries which have long since abandoned the dissemination of truth and information and wholeheartedly adopted the primary task of propagandising the public mind. Today, the topics are different than the war marketing of Bernays, but – and this is very important to understand – the intensity remains the same. Just as Bernays once flooded every possible media channel with war-mongering hatred, today those same channels are directed to nations other than Germany (China, Russia, Iran, Iraq, Libya Cuba, Syria, Venezuela), to the instillation of fear (the war on terrorism) which is easily manipulated to achieve astonishing measures of social control, and to detail-less information to maintain public ignorance and confusion on all important issues. Paul Craig Roberts wrote that “The American media does not serve the truth. It serves the government and the interest groups that empower the government. The function of the “mainstream media” is to sell products and to brainwash the audience for the government and interest groups.” (19) That is precisely correct.

The book publishers are also onside in this vast propaganda campaign. The content of educational texts especially is heavily controlled by the disparate elements of the propaganda machine, with countless topics and theories proscribed. Howard Zinn was a notable exception in having some of his “radical” (i.e. accurate) history books published, but today, only shortly after his death, all his books are being removed from school libraries and destroyed. During the past two or three generations it has become increasingly difficult, and now almost impossible, to publish books on topics that would pose a threat to the activities of the secret government, and more than a few individuals have been killed for trying. The concentration of media and publishing power is not an accident, but part of a plan to eliminate information contradictory to the best interests of Bernays’ invisible people. Today, many publishers and authors will testify that Amazon actively suppresses many books while pretending to sell them.

Neal Gabler, author of An Empire of Their Own: How the Jews invented Hollywood, (20) (21) wrote “What is amazing is the extent to which they succeeded in promulgating this fiction throughout the world. By making a ‘shadow’ America, one which idealized every old glorifying bromide about the country, the Hollywood Jews created a powerful cluster of images and ideas so powerful that, in a sense, they colonized the American imagination. Ultimately, American values came to be defined largely by the movies the Jews made.”

The US movie industry is the worst of all media for fictionalising history and reality and replacing them with fabricated mythology. A recent example is Steven Spielberg’s unforgivably distorted portrayal of Lincoln and slavery and the American civil war. It was the Rothschild’s Barings Bank that financed the slave trade, and a great many if not most of the slave traders were Jewish. Furthermore, we have adequate documentation that it was European Jewish bankers who stimulated the slavery-related rift in American society to instigate the civil war. In this context, Spielberg’s movie is an especially offensive false and mythical portrayal of the true facts. As one columnist noted, Spielberg’s movie “had too many negroes and too few Jews”. The upshot is that tens of millions of gullible Americans will take with them to their graves a totally and absolutely false understanding of a critical period in their nation’s history.

That is the real issue, and that brings us back to Bernays who wrote: “The American motion picture is the greatest unconscious carrier of propaganda in the world to-day. It is a great distributor for ideas and opinions. The motion picture can standardize the ideas and habits of a nation.” It also begins very early to indoctrinate little minds.

“The American Jews have always used their films as an active propaganda channel to transmit not only their own political agenda but the fiction of US culture, values and way of thinking to people in other nations, these films containing an outpouring of individualism or struggles in pursuit of freedom or the realisation of the American Dream. They have always portrayed an idealised society intended to evoke in others a kind of yearning for America and the things it appears to be. All is cleverly arranged, with meticulous attention paid to the smallest details of setting, with the American flag so often prominent and Americans always portrayed as leaders of the world. All of this is a large and persistent attempt at a kind of cultural colonisation of the world, the Jews excelling at the presentation of a superficial layer of intense audio and visual effects that are “so image rich and content poor that they manipulate our emotions and short-circuit our reason”.”

The great objection to all this is that the presentation is totally false, the US being nothing like the mythical movie presentations, and the values promulgated and unconsciously accepted are not actually held by Americans, and certainly not by the nation’s leaders. Like everything similar emanating from the US, American movies are stimulating, high-quality lies, which is why many nations restrict American content.

All of the above, radio, television, newspapers, magazines, the advertising industry, Hollywood movies and TV programs, book publishing and book selling, Wikipedia, and the social media, are controlled by Jews. Their control over information is almost complete, giving them the power to directly influence people’s thoughts and behavior and to alter the course of events. All of these follow the same inescapable propaganda script. (22) (23) (24) They are not apologetic about this control; Philip Weiss wrote an article in Mondoweiss titled, “Do Jews Dominate in American Media? And So What If We Do?”. (25) I can think of several objections.

Control over the mass media and of the movie industry have always been central to the dissemination of propaganda in the US, with the media presenting the narrative to be adopted and the movies glorifying the propaganda myths disguised as entertainment. The US is the one nation most thoroughly saturated by the media, Americans being bombarded daily with thousands of images on what is essentially political ideology, guiding popular opinion in a predefined direction. The media themselves and many branches of the government spend hundreds of millions of dollars annually in the art of public propaganda directed at the bewildered herd, this mass media bombardment daily shaping the American view of reality. American author Gore Vidal wrote:

“You cannot get through the density of the propaganda with which the American people, through the dreaded media, have been filled and the horrible public educational system we have for the average person. It’s just grotesque. The corporate grip on opinion in the United States is one of the wonders of the Western world. No First World country has ever managed to eliminate so entirely from its media all objectivity, much less dissent.” (26)

All of the so-called values that Americans hold so dear and appear so determined to inflict on all other nations, have their origin in the propaganda disseminated by Bernays’ invisible government through this tightly-held media cartel. Dr. Nancy Snow, an assistant professor of political science, wrote “Propaganda is most effective when it is least noticeable. What the American people don’t know is that American propaganda is hidden, and its characteristics, integrated into communications and entertainment, convince people that they are not being manipulated. Propaganda is not supposed to be part of an ‘open society’. Much of our media now are so image rich and content poor that they just serve to capture the eye, manipulate our emotions, and short-circuit our reason. The propaganda and advertising industries therefore function increasingly like adult obedience industries. They instruct their audiences in how to feel and what to think, and increasing numbers of people follow and accept the cues without question.”

Snow described one of her previous jobs as being a “propagandist” for the US Information Agency. She said, “In the US, we don’t think of ourselves as a country that propagandises, even though to the rest of the world we are seen as really the most propagandistic nation”. According to her, the US has more PR professionals than news reporters, and the global reach of what Bernays called Public Relations is just a euphemism for propaganda that involves the entire US media. One example of this was the appointment of an advertising professional as Undersecretary of State for public diplomacy and public affairs. In an article in the LA Times, Naomi Klein wrote that “[Charlotte Beers] had no previous State Department experience, but she had held the top job at both the J. Walter Thompson and Ogilvy & Mather ad agencies, and she’s built brands for everything from dog food to power drills, and that her task now was to work her magic on the greatest branding challenge of all – to sell the United States and its war on terrorism to an increasingly hostile world”. (27) (28) (29) Secretary of State Colin Powell actively defended this: “There is nothing wrong with getting somebody who knows how to sell something. We are selling a product. We need someone who can re-brand American foreign policy, re-brand diplomacy.” (30)

I wrote elsewhere of the fake stories the US military produced for its invasions of Iraq and Libya, with fabricated video of locals apparently cheering the American invaders as liberating heroes. You may have wondered why ‘protestors for freedom’ in many foreign nations (Iraq, Libya, Jugoslavia, Iran, Ukraine) inexplicably seem to create all their protest signs in English; they are all fake, meant for an American audience. Here is some background for you, from a speech given at the US Air Force Academy by John Rendon, a PR consultant employed by the US military. Rendon said, “I am not a national security strategist or a military tactician. I am a politician, an information warrior and a perception manager”, at which point he reminded his audience that when US troops entered Kuwait City during the first Persian Gulf war, they received a wildly enthusiastic greeting from hundreds of Kuwaitis waving US flags. He then asked, “Did you ever stop to wonder how the people of Kuwait City were able to get American flags? Well, you now know the answer. That was one of my jobs then”. (31) (32) It is interesting that Americans boast so openly about their perverted manipulation of the world’s peoples. This was Pompeo boasting, “We lied, we cheated, we stole.” And the American people cheered.

American propaganda foolishness knows no bounds. Some years ago, prior to President Bush’s helicopter landing in a public downtown park on his visit to Italy, I watched dozens of Secret Service agents with cans of paint, spray-painting all the grass a lovely shade of green so Bush would look prettier on TV. When a US President or State Secretary speaks to an empty hall at the United Nations, the media obligingly cut and paste an audience from another speaker’s talk to make Americans proud that their leader was enthusiastically applauded by a full house.

Today, every part of America is all about marketing the brand, selling the sizzle instead of the steak. The operating philosophy is termed “perception management”, the attempt to substitute a utopian fictionalised version of events for reality. Great efforts are made to determine which actions or attitudes or sentiments to portray to the American public and the world, which items of information should be denied to the public, and which “indicators” are necessary to convey to audiences to influence their emotions and dull their objective reasoning. This perception management combines some facts, some unrelated truths, a great deal of deception, all wrapped in layers of what is termed “psychological operations”, and used to sell patriotism, wars, capitalism, fear and fascism. This is the legacy of Lippman and Bernays: an entire nation has degraded to the point where product substance is irrelevant and brand perception is everything.

The picture in Americans minds of their own country consists of a vast array of misinformation, falsehoods and myths, covering every facet of the human experience and which they fervently, and even belligerently, believe to be true. The reason I have dwelt on the topic of propaganda to the extent I have done, is to demonstrate the equal truth that the picture foreigners hold in their minds of the US also consists of the same vast array of lies, misinformation, falsehoods and myths, their understanding of the US equally as flawed as that of the Americans themselves. Almost everything we read, see and learn about the US is mythical propaganda far removed from reality. We are buying the sizzle without the steak, paying for the brand without understanding or even receiving the product.

Bernays’ secret government has been taking control of the ideological foundations of all of America, the propaganda onslaught including the political, corporate, banking, foreign policy, military, media, and academic sectors of the nation, attempting to force all into a single cohesive mental state. It isn’t simply information or misinformation. By controlling the sources and so deciding what you can and cannot see or learn, they plan to decide how you feel and what you think, and ultimately who has or does not have a voice. This is what led CIA Director William Casey to state, “We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.” (33)

The world finally appears to be awakening to the fictional foolishness that is America today. The Pew Research Center has done several recent studies which document a growing distrust of everything American in most countries (34), including China and Western Europe. At the same time, it notes that American citizens are receiving an increasingly narrow view of important world issues, exacerbating their already fabled ignorance. Pew also note that while the American people receive limited information reduced to child-like sound bytes lacking breadth, depth and context, this deliberately fabricated ignorance also increases the ease of propagandists to make false claims that appear real and are difficult to question.

One recent example was the political coup in the Ukraine, the second time the US has overthrown an elected government in that nation. The Americans first instigated a mini-revolution and installed Julia Tymoshenko as their puppet president, this queen’s reign terminated prematurely when she was imprisoned for massive fraud, embezzlement and murder. The Americans then invested – by their own admission – more than $5 billion to destabilise the country with an impressive amount of violence in a second attempt to take control. This disintegrated when most of Eastern Ukraine, especially the Crimea, objected to the US effort and voted to separate from the Ukraine and rejoin Russia. For background, the Crimea had always been part of Russia but was only recently ‘given’ to the Ukraine as a peace measure; its citizens are virtually all ethnic Russians and wanted to return home.

However, the US media carried only the news and video of riots, omitting the fact that they were all US-inspired and financed and that the CIA had a huge contingent resident in Kiev that was masterminding the events from the US Embassy. They specifically omitted video of the “democratic protestors” returning to the US Embassy compound afterward to collect their pay. The riots were attributed to Russia’s “meddling” and presented as cries for freedom by the Ukrainian people, and the secession vote by the Crimean residents which was entirely self-initiated, was described in the US media as a “Russian invasion” of the Crimea. It is in this context that the US climbs on its hypocritical moral white horse and pretends to “warn” Russia about “interfering in Ukraine’s elections”, filling American hearts with pride in their nation’s fight for truth and freedom. With this heavily-propagandised false picture flooding the US media, most Americans believe they clearly understand the situation in the Ukraine and that Russia is indeed “the evil empire”. In fact, they understand nothing clearly and what little they know is wrong, but when a nation’s government so thoroughly controls the media and the narrative, and is a pathological liar, what hope is there for the people?

This ‘perception management’ marketing of the US brand is not limited to US soil; even more time and money are spent on managing perceptions in other nations, one of these being China. The US spends more than $300 million in China each year on marketing their productless brand. It isn’t only obvious outlets like the Voice of America; the Americans make Herculean efforts to plant pro-American messages in newspapers, magazines, social media Weibo and WeChat, in the topic outline of speeches, placing visiting professors in schools and universities in China, and in thousands of other sources that reach the public. This is entirely a psychological warfare operation and is described by the Americans in these terms. The aim of this huge effort is simply to employ all manner of lies and misinformation to make China’s government look bad in the eyes of its people (and the world).

As one example, the U.S. Consul-General in Guangzhou, Jim Levy, filled the internet with outright false or badly-twisted information about sudden racial discrimination against blacks in China. For background, all visas expired during the COVID-19 epidemic, requiring foreign nationals to return home and wait for approval of new visas. Many Africans, in China to purchase low-cost goods to ship home, and reluctant to lose their income source, failed to comply, essentially hiding underground. As health officers were making the rounds to test foreigners and obtain health codes, there were many stories of Africans jumping out of windows (hopefully first-floor windows) to escape the medical authorities and avoid the necessary quarantines. Finally, the police had to instruct apartments and hotels to not provide accommodation to anyone lacking a valid visa, but the US Consulate filled Chinese social media and foreign airwaves with stories titled, “African nations, US decry racism against blacks in China”. (35) (36) My opinion of Levy is not high, especially since he was using his American diplomatic post to further the political aims of his Jewish masters. In a similar manner, Alan Dershowitz, another American Jew, this one from Harvard, not long ago gave a speech to AIPAC, the Godzilla of Jewish influence in the US, where he asked all Jews to create as much pressure as possible on China’s imaginary human rights violations in Tibet, to take the world’s attention off the Jewish atrocities in Palestine. International politics supported by propaganda, i.e. “perception management”, is a dirty business.

Hong Kong today is saturated with CIA and other US-based media control, their long-term propaganda campaign being the entire source of the Western-oriented political agitation and the persistently negative views of China that originate there. George Soros, another American Jew, finances the seditious “China Media Project” at Hong Kong University, creating a massive anti-China campaign and responsible for much of the violence there. The violence and chaos in Tibet and Xinjiang all have the same source. Philip Agee, a former CIA agent (37), wrote that the US has been conducting this illegal interference in Tibet since prior to the 1950s and 1960s, claiming that his duties in the CIA involved attempting to penetrate and manipulate the institutions of power, infiltrating and manipulating political parties, trade unions, youth and student movements, intellectual, professional and cultural societies, religious groups, women’s groups and especially the media. He details how he paid journalists to publish American propaganda as if it were the journalists’ own information, and how the CIA spent huge sums of money intervening in foreign elections to promote and elect an American puppet candidate. The NYT had very little nice to say about Agee in their obituary. (38)

Jonathan Power told us of one highly-placed British diplomat who stated, “One reads about the world’s desire for American leadership only in the United States. Everywhere else one reads about American arrogance and unilateralism”. (39) (40) Power wrote further that “America Is Sadly In The Grip Of ‘Exhausted Ideas’”. (41) And as Naomi Klein noted, nations don’t generally object to America’s so-called ‘values’, but to the fact that the US never adheres to them. Critics see only US unilateralism, defiance of all international laws, great wealth disparity, and increasing unjustified crackdowns and violations of civil rights. She wrote that America’s problem “was not with the brand but with the product”, and that the great and increasing international anger – and it is anger – arises “not only from the facts but also from a clear perception of false advertising”. In other words, American hypocrisy, the Utopia Syndrome I wrote of earlier. However, Americans seem oblivious to these realities and are redoubling their efforts to propagandise not only all Americans but the world.

Introduction – If America Dissolves…  https://thesaker.is/if-america-dissolves/

Bernays and Propaganda – Part 1 of 5 — https://thesaker.is/bernays-and-propaganda/

Bernays and Propaganda – Part 2 of 5 — The Marketing of War — https://thesaker.is/bernays-and-propaganda-the-marketing-of-war/

Bernays and Propaganda – Part 3 of 5 –– Democracy Control – http://thesaker.is/bernays-and-propaganda-democracy-control/

Bernays and Propaganda – Part 4 of 5 –The Transition to Education and Commerce – http://thesaker.is/bernays-and-propaganda-the-transition-to-education-and-commerce-part-4/

Bernays and Propaganda – Part 5 of 5 — Propaganda Continues Unabated — You are now here.


Mr. Romanoff’s writing has been translated into 30 languages and his articles posted on more than 150 foreign-language news and politics websites in more than 30 countries, as well as more than 100 English language platforms. Larry Romanoff is a retired management consultant and businessman. He has held senior executive positions in international consulting firms, and owned an international import-export business. He has been a visiting professor at Shanghai’s Fudan University, presenting case studies in international affairs to senior EMBA classes. Mr. Romanoff lives in Shanghai and is currently writing a series of ten books generally related to China and the West. He is one of the contributing authors to Cynthia McKinney’s new anthology ‘When China Sneezes’.

His full archive can be seen at https://www.moonofshanghai.com/

and http://www.bluemoonofshanghai.com/

He can be contacted at: 2186604556@qq.com

*

Notes

(1) https://www.congress.gov/bill/112th-congress/house-bill/5736

(2) https://www.congress.gov/bill/112th-congress/house-bill/5736/text

(3) https://newswithviews.com/smith-mundt-act-of-1948-and-the-coup/

(4) https://www.rt.com/usa/smith-mundt-domestic-propaganda-121/

(5) https://jonathanturley.org/2012/05/20/how-about-some-government-propaganda-for-the-people-paid-for-the-people-being-propagandized/

(6) https://www.usatoday.com/story/nation/2013/06/27/afghanistan-propaganda-military-contractors/2463739/

(7) https://www.usatoday.com/story/nation/2013/07/08/pentagon-propaganda-post-somali/2498339/

(8) https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy-operation-social-networks

(9) https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2014/04/18/military-sock-puppets-nsa-trolls-cia-shills/

(10) https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2021/01/03/never-forget-how-the-msm-smeared-assange-notes-from-the-edge-of-the-narrative-matrix/

(11) https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2019/03/03/how-and-how-not-to-beat-a-smear-campaign/

(12) https://thegrayzone.com/2020/08/18/us-government-funded-coda-story/

(13) https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/u-s-created-cuba-twitter-sow-unrest-reports-ap

(14) https://apnews.com/article/904a9a6a1bcd46cebfc14bea2ee30fdf

(15) https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/apr/03/us-cuban-twitter-zunzuneo-stir-unrest

(16) https://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2016-06-22/google-is-the-worlds-biggest-censor-and-its-power-must-be-regulated

(17) https://nypost.com/2021/01/04/ted-cruz-twitter-most-brazen-and-google-most-dangerous/

(18) https://www.serendipity.li/cda/censorship_at_wikipedia.htm

(19) https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2021/01/24/the-media-destroyed-america/

(20) https://www.amazon.com/Empire-Their-Own-Invented-Hollywood/dp/0385265573

(21) https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/118657.An_Empire_of_Their_Own

(22) https://researchlist.blogspot.com/2011/06/jewish-ownership-of-big-media.html

(23) http://tapnewswire.com/2015/10/six-jewish-companies-control-96-of-the-worlds-media/

(24) https://www.simpletoremember.com/articles/a/jews-in-the-media-hollywood/

(25) https://mondoweiss.net/2008/02/do-jews-dominat/

(26) https://www.latimes.com/la-bk-gore-vidal-1989-08-04-story.html

(27) Naomi Klein | The Spectacular Failure of Brand USA; https://naomiklein.org/spectacular-failure-brand-usa/

(28) http://www.pbs.org/pov/borders/2006/de_sellingamerica.html

(29) https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2003-mar-04-fg-beers03-story.html

(30) https://www.alternet.org/2002/03/brand_usa/

(31) https://nexus23.com/warfare2/the-rendon-group-reloaded/

(32) http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=The_Pentagon%27s_Information_Warrior

(33) https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/01/03/the-dangers-of-privatized-intelligence/

(34) https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2019/07/22/how-americans-see-problems-of-trust/

(35) https://abcnews.go.com/International/foreigners-black-people-unwelcome-parts-china-amid-covid/story?id=70182204

(36) https://www.aol.com/article/news/2020/04/11/african-nations-us-decry-racism-against-blacks-in-china/23975666/

(37) http://www.philipagee.com/

(38) https://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/10/obituaries/10agee.html

(39) https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/7021898632.pdf

(40) https://www.globalissues.org/article/163/media-in-the-united-states

(41) https://www.eurasiareview.com/22042020-america-is-sadly-in-the-grip-of-exhausted-ideas-oped/

حماس تجتاز نصف طريق العودة إلى دمشق

أحمد الدرزي

المصدر: الميادين نت

حماس تجتاز نصف طريق العودة إلى دمشق
حماس تجتاز نصف طريق العودة إلى دمشق


بذلت طهران والضاحية جهوداً كبيرة لإصلاح العلاقة بين دمشق وحركة “حماس” بقياداتها الجديدة، التي رفضت التورط في الحرب السورية، وحافظت على قنوات الاتصال مع طهران والضاحية، وهو أمر يحتاج اكتماله إلى عودة العلاقة مع دمشق

تميّز وضع غزة عن بقية الأراضي الفلسطينية من الناحية الجغرافية والتاريخية بأنها كانت نقطة التقاء وادي النيل مع بلاد الشام، ما انعكس على علاقاتها مع الطرفين عبر التاريخ، وهو ما أظهرته في تاريخها المعاصر بشكل كبير وواضح المعالم، وخصوصاً بعد انطلاق العمل العسكري لحركة “فتح” في العام 1965 وبقية فصائل المقاومة الفلسطينية، التي اصطدمت بصعوبات العمل الفدائي فيها بفعل طبيعة الالتزام الديني ودور حركة الإخوان المسلمين التي ترتبط عضوياً بشكل كبير بالحركة الأم التي تأسَّست في مصر في العام 1928، الدولة الأقرب والأكثر عراقة كدولة مركزية في المشرق العربيّ، والتي كانت ترى في إصلاح المجتمع أولوية على أيّ عمل عسكري، وفقاً للمنظور الإخواني.

أحدثت الثورة الإسلامية في إيران في العام 1979 زلزالاً عنيفاً في الأفكار والمفاهيم على مستوى العالم الإسلامي، وفرضت على كل القوى إعادة قراءة أبجدياتها السياسية وإعادة ترتيب أولوياتها وفقاً لتصورات جديدة، وخصوصاً بعد تحويل السفارة الإسرائيلية في طهران إلى سفارة فلسطين، وإطلاق شعار “اليوم إيران وغداً فلسطين”، ما دفع ثلّة من الفلسطينيين المقيمين في القاهرة، وفي مقدمتهم طبيب الأطفال فتحي الشقاق، إلى تشكيل حركة “الجهاد الإسلامي”، كرد فعل متجاوب مع ما حصل في إيران في العام 1979.

رغم ذلك، استمرَّ الإخوان المسلمون المتجذّرون في مصر في سياساتهم الإصلاحية لبناء المجتمع وتصحيح مساراته إلى حين اندلاع الانتفاضة الفلسطينية الأولى التي قادها أبو جهاد، خليل الوزير، من تونس في العام 1987، ما دفع “إسرائيل” إلى غضّ النظر عن تشكيل حركة المقاومة الإسلامية “حماس” في قطاع غزة وفلسطين، لمواجهة حركة “فتح”، الأقوى بين المنظمات، وإزاحة حركة “الجهاد” التي تبنّت نهجاً مقاوماً بعيداً عن أية مطامع في بناء سلطة فلسطينية،

See the source image

ولكن مسارات الحركة لم تكن كما ترغب تل أبيب، بل فاقت كلّ المنظمات الفلسطينية في مواجهتها الكيان الإسرائيلي، وخصوصاً بعد العمليات الاستشهادية التي هندسها المهندس يحيى عياش، بوجود قيادات مقاومة صلبة، في مقدمتها الشيخ أحمد ياسين، الذي قاوم بشلله الكيان الإسرائيلي، والشيخ صلاح شحادة، وعبد العزيز الرنتيسي، وغيرهم من القيادات المؤسّسة، بخلاف ما قدّمته المقاومة المشلولة بفعل هواجسها في الوصول إلى أيّ سلطة، مهما كانت محدودة، ولو على حساب فلسطين من البحر إلى النهر.

كان من الواضح من المقدمات أنَّ هناك تناقضاً خفياً في حركة “حماس” بين أن تنزع نحو المقاومة لتحرير فلسطين كاملة وأن يكون هدف هذه المقاومة هو إثبات مدى جدارتها، لتكون بديلاً سلطوياً من “منظمة التحرير الفلسطينية”، التي ذهبت بعيداً بعنوان استقلال القرار الفلسطيني نحو إيجاد أية بقعة من فلسطين بأي شكل من الأشكال وبناء سلطة فلسطينية.

See the source image

رغم ذلك، إنَّ دمشق التي خرجت من تجربة دموية ومأساوية في صراعها مع الإخوان المسلمين في سوريا، بعد الأحداث الدموية التي بدأت بسلسلة اغتيالات للكوادر العسكرية والعلمية قام بها تنظيم “الطليعة المقاتلة”، مجموعة “مروان حديد”، وخصوصاً الشخصية العلمية الكبيرة محمد الفاضل في منتصف العام 1977، وانتهت بعد أحداث حماه في العام1982 ، استطاعت الفصل بين الإخوان المسلمين السوريين وإخوان حركة “حماس” التي تعود بأصولها إلى حركة الإخوان المسلمين، رغم انتماء الطرفين إلى التنظيم العالمي، وقدّمت الملاذ الآمن لرئيس مكتبها السياسي خالد مشعل بعد محاولة اغتياله في الأردن من قبل الموساد الإسرائيلي في العام 1997، بطلب من الأمين العام للجبهة الشعبية لتحرير فلسطين أحمد جبريل، وتحوّلت إلى ملاذ آمن للقيادات السياسية والعسكرية لحركة “حماس”، وأكثر من ذلك، إلى درجة أن تكون ممراً ومصدراً للأسلحة المهرّبة إلى قطاع غزة، الذي أفشل العدوان الإسرائيلي في نهايات العام 2007 وبدايات العام 2008.

See the source image

مع بدايات “الربيع العربي” المرقّط وصعود حركة الإخوان المسلمين كمعتمدين للإدارة الأميركية في بناء شرق أوسط إسلامي كبير يمتدّ من حدود الصين وحتى المغرب، مع دور تركي واضح بقيادة حزب “العدالة والتنمية” التركي ورئيسه رجب طيب إردوغان، انقسمت حركة “حماس” على نفسها بين تيارين أساسيين، الأول بقيادة خالد مشعل الذي أظهر أولوياته بالانتماء إلى حركة الإخوان المسلمين الساعية إلى السلطة بأي شكل من الأشكال، بالاصطفاف مع المشروع الأميركي بعنوان التمكين ثم الانقلاب، ما دفعها إلى حضور المؤتمر الذي عقدته مؤسّسة “راند” الأميركية العائدة إلى البنتاغون في قطر في العام 2012، ضمن إطار “أميركا والعالم الإسلاميّ”، لتقريب وجهات النظر بين الطرفين، ما دفعه إلى الانقلاب على دمشق وطهران والضاحية الجنوبية، والاصطفاف مع تركيا وقطر اللتين تقودان تنفيذ المشروع الأميركي، وهو ما دفعه إلى الانخراط في سفك الدم السوري ونقل الخبرات العسكرية التي تلقّتها مجموعات من “حماس” في العواصم الثلاث إلى المجموعات العسكرية السورية التي تمرّدت على دمشق.

Image result for المقاومة الإسلامية محمد ضيف

في المقابل، بقيت مجموعات عز الدين القسام بأغلبيتها الساحقة في غزة، بقيادة رئيس أركان المقاومة الإسلامية محمد ضيف، إضافة إلى عضو المكتب السياسي في الحركة محمود الزهار، رافضين أي تدخل عسكري في سوريا، ومعتبرين أنَّ الأولوية للمقاومة، وليست للمشروع السياسي الذي سيذهب إلى الاستسلام لـ”إسرائيل” بعنوان التصالح والتسوية والسلم. واعتبروا أنه لا يمكن التفريط في محور المقاومة الذي استطاع تحقيق إنجازات متتابعة في لبنان وغزة والعراق والخروج منه، وأنَّ الأولوية للمقاومة، وليست لبناء سلطة هشة لا مقومات لوجودها وبقائها ضمن المشروع الأميركي.

بعد الانكسار الواضح للمشروع الأميركي في مصر بعد سقوط حكم محمد مرسي على يد الجيش المصري بفعل انتفاضة 30 تموز/يوليو، وفي سوريا بعد سقوط منطقة القصير وبروز التحالف الروسي الإيراني السوري في مواجهة المجموعات المسلحة المدعومة أميركياً وتركياً وخليجياً، تراجعت الأحلام الإخوانية في السيطرة على المنطقة العربية، وبقيت الأطماع التركية لتحقيق الميثاق الملِّي.

استطاع الجناح المقاوم في غزة إزاحة خالد مشعل وفريقه عن قيادة الحركة، والإتيان بإسماعيل هنية رئيساً للمكتب السياسي، ويحيى السنوار قائداً سياسياً وعسكرياً لقطاع غزة، في انتخابات 2017، وبدأت عملية إعادة التموضع من جديد في إطار المحور الذي كان السبب الأساس بدعم بقاء الجناح السياسي والعسكري الرافض لأية تسوية، وبأي عنوان، مع الكيان الإسرائيلي.

See the source image

بذلت طهران والضاحية جهوداً كبيرة لإصلاح العلاقة بين دمشق وحركة “حماس” بقياداتها الجديدة، التي رفضت التورط في الحرب السورية، وحافظت على قنوات الاتصال مع طهران والضاحية، وهو أمر يحتاج اكتماله إلى عودة العلاقة مع دمشق إلى حالتها الأولى كمسألة استراتيجيّة في المواجهة مع المشروع الغربي الإسرائيليّ، لكن دمشق المكلومة لم تستطع تجاوز الجرح الكبير الذي سبّبه تدخّل جزء من “حماس” في الحرب على سوريا والمحور، وأصرّت على التريّث لحين وضوح الصورة الانتخابية للحركة، وهي تعلم طبيعة البيئة العشائرية والعائلية للانتخابات في غزة، التي تستطيع تقرير قياداتها السياسية والعسكرية، كما أنها تنتظر اعتذاراً واضحاً وصريحاً من الحركة عما قام به بعض قياداتها وأبنائها. في المقابل، تتخوف قيادات الحركة من الاعتذار وعدم وجود صدى إيجابي من قبل دمشق، وخصوصاً أن بعض الإشارات الإيجابية الأولية منها لم تلقَ صدى إيجابياً من بعض المسؤولين السوريين، وربما كان صداها سلبياً.

جرت الانتخابات الأخيرة في غزة، والتي تترقبها دمشق وتعتمد عليها في تحديد قرارها تجاه الحركة، في ظل تجاذبات دولية شديدة التعقيد، وخصوصاً بعد استعادة الدولة العميقة سيطرتها على كل مفاصل السياسة الداخلية والخارجية للولايات المتحدة بعد تولي جو بايدن الرئاسة فيها، ما ترك ظلاله على طبيعة الاصطفافات الإقليمية، ودفع أعداء سوريا والمحور إلى إعادة الاصطفاف من جديد بعد تفرقهم إثر سقوط القصير وتراجع دور الولايات المتحدة أكثر وأكثر في عهد دونالد ترامب.

وهو ما ترك آثاره في طبيعة الانتخابات في غزة، ما دفع تركيا وقطر والسعودية والإمارات إلى الاجتماع على دعم تيار خالد مشعل ذي البعد الإخواني العالمي وبين تيار محمد ضيف ويحيى السنوار وبقية قادة القسام الذين يَرَوْن أولوية المقاومة على أي مشروع سياسي لا يملك أية ضمانات بالاصطفاف مع الدول التي لا تستطيع الخروج عن إرادة واشنطن، وخصوصاً أن الحركة وقعت في مجال الحرج الشديد بعد الهرولة الواضحة نحو التطبيع مع “إسرائيل”.

إذ إن حركة “النهضة” في تونس منعت تجريم التطبيع في البرلمان التونسي. وفي المغرب، ذهب حزب “العدالة والتنمية” المغربي إلى التوقيع باسم رئيس الوزراء مع الكيان، وسعى الرئيس التركي الذي يعتبر الزعيم الروحي السياسي لكل الإخوان في العالم نحو تعميق العلاقة مع “إسرائيل”، وتوسّطت قطر في ذلك، وذهب حزب “الإصلاح” اليمني بعيداً في قتال “أنصار الله”، بالتحالف العميق مع المملكة العربية السعودية والإمارات و”القاعدة” و”داعش” بغطاء أميركي إسرائيلي.

مع نجاح السنوار في الانتخابات وتبوّئه قيادة غزة، فإن الطريق أصبحت أكثر سهولة لاستمرار إسماعيل هنية رئيساً منتخباً للمكتب السياسي للحركة. ويبقى الدور الأساسي لغزة في تحديد مساراتها، والأهم من كل ذلك، كيف تستطيع أن تحفظ نفسها من التجاذبات الإقليمية والدولية المتناقضة بشكل صارخ، وهو ما لا يمكن أن يتمّ إلا بالانفصال عن التنظيم العالمي للإخوان المسلمين، الذي تورّط في المشروع الأميركي الذاهب إلى الانكسار، والتحوّل إلى حركة مقاومة من دون أي مشروع سياسي مختلف عليه، وفي ذلك قوة لها ولدمشق ولكلّ المحور الذي رسّخ نفسه كلاعب أساسي لا يمكن تجاوزه في غرب آسيا، فهل تفعل ذلك؟

فيديوات ذات صلة

اخبار ذات صلة

How Britain and U.S. Killed the Bahrain Revolution

Former editor and writer for major news media organizations. He has written extensively on international affairs, with articles published in several languages

Finian Cunningham

February 17, 2021

Britain and the United States worked together to kill the Bahrain revolution of 2011 and its people’s long-held aspirations for democratic governance.

Ten years ago this week, the Bahraini people launched a daring, peaceful uprising against a despised and despotic monarchial regime. During the next four weeks, the Al Khalifa regime was rocked to its shaky foundations as hundreds of thousands of Bahrainis took to the streets of the Persian Gulf island state.

What followed, however, was a crucial – if despicable – intervention by Britain and the United States which unleashed a wave of brutal repression – a repression that continues to this day. Without this British and American operation, the Bahraini regime would have fallen to a popular uprising.

At stake for London and Washington was not just the tiny island of Bahrain itself but the stability of the entire chain of Persian Gulf monarchies, principally Saudi Arabia. The Gulf sheikhdoms are essential for maintaining the geopolitical interests of the Western powers in the Middle East, for propping up the petrodollar system which is paramount to American economic sustenance, and prolonging lucrative trade for British and American weapons manufacturers.

If Bahrain were to succumb to a democratic uprising by its people demanding free and fair elections, independent rule of law, more equitable economic governance, and so on, then the Gulf monarchies would be “threatened” by example. Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Oman are the other Gulf states which are ruled over by monarchs. They are all clients of Western powers, facilitating American and British military bases across the region which are vital for power projection, for example prosecuting wars and confronting designated enemies like Iran. Bahrain hosts the U.S. Navy Fifth Fleet base as well as a new British naval base that was opened in 2016. In short, Bahrain could not be allowed to attain democracy as that would have a domino effect across the entire region jeopardizing U.S. and British interests.

The democratic aspirations of the Bahraini people are poignantly apposite. The majority of the indigenous population are followers of Shia Islam with many cultural connections to ancient Iran which lies to the north across the narrow Gulf sea. The Bahraini rulers descend from a colonial settler tribe which invaded the island in the 18th century. The Khalifa tribe hailed from the Arabian Peninsula originally. Their occupation of Bahrain was one of conquest and pillage. Unlike most Bahrainis the usurpers professed to following Sunni Islam and held the native population in contempt, lording over them and imposing arbitrary, extortionate levies under pain of death. But the British Empire constructed the new rulers into a monarchy in 1820 in order to perform a sentinel duty over the island in a key waterway leading to Britain’s imperial jewel in the crown, India. The British Empire had similar protectorate arrangements with all the other Gulf Arab territories.

Down through the centuries, British colonial officers and soldiers were relied on to enforce the Khalifa regime in Bahrain. Uprisings by the people would recur periodically and would be violently suppressed by British security forces.

The pattern was repeated during the 2011 Arab Spring revolts which swept across North Africa and the Middle East. Some of these revolts were manipulated or fomented by Western powers for regime change, such as in Syria and Libya. But in Bahrain, it was a truly democratic impulse that galvanized the Shia majority to once again demand their historic rights against what was viewed as an imposter, despotic regime.

Such was the regime’s shaky hold on power that the tide of popular uprising nearly swept it aside during the four weeks following the beginning of the Bahrain uprising on February 14, 2011. This author was present during this tumultuous time which saw up to 500,000 people take to the streets – nearly half the population. Pearl Roundabout in the capital, Manama, became a de facto “Republic of Bahrain” with peaceful encampments and daily throngs defiantly telling King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa that it was “game over” for his crony regime. It was a heady time and the regime’s imminent perilous fate was palpable. Plunging the people into a bloodbath would be the escape route for the rulers and their Western sponsors.

On March 14, 2011, thousands of troops from Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates invaded Bahrain and began a bloody repression against unarmed protesters. People were rounded up for mass-detention and torture. Young men were shot dead at point-blank range. The vicious repression that began a decade ago continues to this day – albeit ignored by Western news media. All of the Bahraini pro-democracy leaders languish in prisons without due process. Several prisoners have been executed for alleged terrorist crimes after “confessions” were beaten out of them.

Only days before the Saudi-Emirati invasion of Bahrain, on March 9, 2011, the regime was visited by senior British and American security officials. On the British side were Sir Peter Ricketts, the national security advisor to then Prime Minister David Cameron, as well as General Sir David Richards, the head of British military. In a second separate meeting, on March 11, three days before the onslaught, the Khalifa regime was visited by then U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates. We don’t know the details of those discussions but media reports stated at the time that the British and Americans were “offering their support for the royal family”.

Britain and the United States worked together to kill the Bahrain revolution of 2011 and its people’s long-held aspirations for democratic governance. The repression goes on with British and American officials frequently visiting Bahrain to express support for the Khalifa regime. Former U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo visited the island in August 2020 and fawned over the regime for its support to Washington’s policy of normalizing ties with Israel. There is no sign of the new Biden administration taking a more critical position towards Bahrain. Indeed it was the Obama administration in which Biden was vice president that colluded with Britain in the slaughter of the Bahraini revolution back in 2011.

Thus, when Britain and the United States talk about promoting democracy and human rights in places like Hong Kong, Venezuela, Russia, or anywhere else, just remember their bankrupt credibility as proven by Bahrain. Western news media – despite their claims of freedom and independence – also deserve condemnation. Those media have steadfastly ignored the plight of Bahrainis in deference to their government’s geopolitical interests.

A follow-up commentary on the Arab Spring events 10 years ago will look at how the United States and Britain hypocritically and disingenuously moved to intervene in Libya and Syria at the very same time that these powers were suppressing the legitimate pro-democracy movement in Bahrain.

A Decade on Bahraini Uprising, Protesters Rally against Al Khalifah Regime

Source

b62b9179-22df-477e-a46a-a9a6b118e7c2

A decade ago today, as pro-democracy uprisings raged across the Middle East, tens of thousands of protesters in Bahrain began their own rallies.

10 Years on Revolution: Bahrainis Continue to Protest Al-Khalifa Brutality

Bahrainis have taken to the streets across the tiny Persian Gulf kingdom to mark the tenth anniversary of a popular uprising against the ruling monarchy. Demonstrators carried pictures of the uprising’s leaders and martyrs as well as placards vowing resistance until victory.

Bahrain’s main opposition group, the al-Wefaq National Islamic Society, posted the pictures of the rallies on its Twitter account.

The protesters chanted slogans against the Al Khalifah regime and King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifah and held handwritten posters with messages of solidarity with the families of the martyrs and condemnation of the regime’s repression.

Additionally, the Coalition Youth of 14 Feb Revolution in a statement called on all Bahraini groups and masses to close ranks in order to change the ruling political regime in Manama.

Demonstrations in Bahrain have been held on a regular basis ever since the popular uprising began on February 14, 2011.

The protesters demand that the Al Khalifah regime relinquish power and allow a just system representing all Bahrainis to be established.

They have also been complaining about widespread discrimination against the country’s Shia majority.

Related

Problems of the new US foreign policy (4) إشكاليات السياسة الخارجية الأميركية الجديدة (4)

 Researcher and political economist and 
former Secretary General of the
 Arab National Congress

 Ziad Hafez

Part four : Some files in the Arab world

We will enter here to some of the intertwined files related to the Arab world though each separate file has its own reasons. But the intertwining of history and geography makes it difficult to approach the files independently of one another. The new administration, like all previous administrations, looks at the various arenas from a geostrategic perspective and not as separate files, although in some cases it is necessary to divide the matter because of the difficulties facing US politics.

The files of Palestine, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Libya and Lebanon are what concern us in the first degree because they are the arenas of the ongoing struggle in the region. The question we are asking is what can the United States do? In this context, it must be recalled that the line of the American role is a regressive line. After the failure of direct military engagement in the region through the faltering American project in Iraq and the emergence of the Baker-Hamilton Committee, which imposed a reconsideration of the way in dealing with the countries of the region, the Barack Obama era had launched the theory of smart force or proxy war. The exploitation of the Arab peoples’ resentment against their rulers was through the so-called Arab Spring. The bet was that changing the regimes in the countries loyal to the United States and enabling moderate Islamic groups from Turkey to Morocco to establish a solid base for an American century in the Arab world. But the stubbornness in dealing with Syria, contributed to the stumbling of the project in Egypt, led to the global war, still going against Syria. However, the steadfastness of the Syrian Arab Army and the people gathered around its leadership thwarted the American project in Syria.

The Trump era was an extension of Obama’s policy, with his repeated calls for the withdrawal of American forces, which the deep state had opposed. The statements of the former US envoy in charge of the Syrian file, James Jeffrey, acknowledge that US President Donald Trump was defrauded to thwart the attempts to withdraw American forces from eastern and northeastern Syria. Today, Jeffrey, in an article in « Foreign Affairs », calls on President Biden to continue the policy of sanctions and starvation against Syria and to make Syria a swamp to drain Russia, as happened in Afghanistan in the eighties of the past century. The goal was and remains to overthrow the regime and topple President Assad. So the law of Caesar, to strangle Syria economically and prevent the re-reconstruction. But all of this did not lead to the desired results . So what next?  If the direct engagement has failed to achieve its goals despite the occupation of Iraq and the overthrow of the regime, and if the United States global war on Syria failed  by proxy, what remained in the American arsenal ? More of force, or review of that policy?  The steadfastness of the Syrian people, gathered around their leadership and army, was not taken into consideration. 
In our estimation, we do not believe that the new administration will be able to frustrate the will of the people to withstand and reject the military dictates. The day will also come for the conviction of the various ruling elites in the Arab world that what the US administration wants or does has no value. What is important is what Arab societies do, and the focus is on what they want without concern for the opinion of others.

Biden backs down in front of Syria as Obama?

The tendency of the nominated officials to put more pressure on Syria through supporting the fanatic armed groups, and the “SDF” is not new and the balance of power in the field negates the effectiveness of that policy. Moreover the severe internal division, the United States cannot justify direct involvement as compensation for the failure of the proxy war.

In this context, we refer to an interview conducted by Secretary of State Anthony Blinken with Michael Morrell, former Director-General of the Central (CIA) on the program “Intelligence Matters” (Intelligence Matters) broadcast by the American “CBSB” station (which confirms the organic relationship between intelligence and corporate media!. This interview, conducted in late 2020, reflect the biblical role of the United States in preserving the empire and manifested destiny that confirms its exceptionalism. In that interview, he said that there is a need not to directly implicate US forces in what he called “permanent wars,” but this does not prevent “limited operations” carried out by the Special Forces to support local agents in their implementation of the required agendas. Here, the “SDF” will receive military support from the United States. What supports Blinken’s position is the statement of Trey McGurk, who succeeded James Jeffrey. Terry McGurk resigned in 2019 from his duties in following up the Syrian file, when Trump expressed his desire to withdraw the American forces from Syria. McGurk wants more American military presence in Syria. In recent weeks, we have witnessed the return of ISIS cells in the Badia, the attempts to sabotage reconciliation in southern Syria, and the provocative operations of the “SDF” forces in the northeast of Syria. All of this happened after the presidential elections and before Biden assumed the reins of power, but these measures have the approval of Secretary of State Blinken and are indicative of their continuation. On the other hand, and in the context of trying to polish the image of the United States, there is talk in the American corridors about the possibility of an implicit understanding for Russia to hand over the Syrian file to ensure the security of the Zionist entity. If the Russian initiative succeeds in securing the entity’s security, that means not supporting the strategy and objectives of the Axis of Resistance, then this is a gain for the United States and the entity. And if those efforts falter, then for every incident there is a talk and the implicit understanding is disavowed. In our opinion, all these attempts only indicate the inability of the United States to initiate and change its backward trend in the region. There is no evidence that Russia will accept the “mission,” nor is there any indication that the Syrian state will respond to this initiative. The question becomes of able to bear more attrition? The American bet is that the endurance of the Syrian state is limited, and thus it will resort to making “concessions” to stop the economic and social deterioration, and these “concessions” will bring about the “desired change” by the Americans and Zionists. On the other hand, however, the new administration cannot change the balance of power on the ground if the Syrian state proceeds to complete the restoration of the occupied territories in the north and east. Syria has allies who were and still committed to defending Syria defend Syria .

There are those who believe that any settlement with Iran will inevitably lead to “breakthroughs” in the Syrian file, without specifying what the breakthroughs are. They may think that it is due to some amendments to the constitution and the change in the top of the pyramid, but all of this are just wishes that are not based on material facts. Syria is not an instrument of the Islamic Republic, but an ally of it, and it has its own independent decision. Syria, which rejected the dictates of Colin Powell at the height of the American arrogance in the occupation of Iraq, will not bow to America, which hit the weakness and is on the threshold of decline because of the division of internal and because of the lack of ability to Expansion and impose its hegemony .

Do you return Rumsfeld’s theory ?

The Syrian, Libyan, Yemeni and Iraqi tension was the work of the Obama administration, in which Biden was a key partner. Does the latter pursue a different policy? Evidence to date indicates that Donald Rumsfeld’s theory is what controls the minds of the American elites, including the new administration: If force fails to achieve the goals, the solution is more power. During their tenure in the Obama administration, the nominated officials in the new administration had criticised Barack Obama for not using more force. The named officials are Zionists and thus their priority is the entity. The new president declared his Zionism, even though he was not a Jew, but a Catholic.

However, the balance of power on the ground neutralised all the means used to achieve the goals of the American administration. So what is “more power”? Despite declaring its commitment to the Zionist entity, the administration is not able to impose on the US Congress new war options in Syria in favour of the entity because the general mood in the turbulent atmosphere at home does not allow foreign adventures without guaranteed results, especially since Syria is no longer alone, but rather is part of a strong axis. The experience of 2013 indicates that at that time the balance of power was not in USA favour in launching a direct aggression against Syria, so was the Russian mediation and the solution to dismantling the chemical system. Today, the balance of power is more favourable to Syria than it was in 2013, so what remains for the United States is either to retreat or reduce the ceiling of the confrontation and be content with linking a conflict. What concerns the Syrian state is the exit of the American forces from the east of the Euphrates, and this is possible because the number is small and the logistical support for them is difficult, especially if they are completely removed from Iraq.

Regarding Iraq, we must not forget that Biden, since the presidency of Bush Jr., has been considering the division of Iraq. Here, too, the balance of power governs the administration’s policies, as the capabilities have become limited. The Iraqi political forces supporting the American presence could no longer call for that after the assassination of Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, along with Qassem Soleimani. The bombings in central Baghdad on the first day of Biden’s mandate will not lead to the maintenance of the US forces under the pretext of the return of ISIS, which the United States claimed that it “defeated”! In fact, the opposite may happen. Understanding with the Iraqi government may contribute to facilitating the easy exit of US forces from Iraq, because the alternative to that is to repeat the scene of the forces leaving Vietnam.

Theater ready to stop war Yemen

With regard to Yemen, the theatre is set in the US Congress to stop the war and give the UN a role after instructing Saudi to stop the aggression. It has become clear that the Biden administration will cancel the designation imposed by the Trump in its last days. However, there are forces within the ruling coalition in the United States that will seek to maintain tension in Yemen. The American armament company Raytheon supplies weapons to the Saudis and the Gulf states. New Defence Minister Lloyd Austin is a member of the company’s board of directors. It is not clear who can decide the US position, and what we want to point out is the contradiction of interests within the coalition of forces supporting Biden, as we explained in the first part of this series.

As for the relationship with Saudi Arabia, the mood in the new administration is, until now, negative towards the crown prince and the style of government. The repeated statements of the new US president about the need to hold officials in Saudi Arabia accountable for the assassination of Jamal Khashoggi are evidence of this. It is an indication of the nature of the expected relations between the new administration and the leadership in Saudi Arabia. On the other hand, the administration will stick to the “Abrahamic agreements” and may develop them after “changes” are implemented in Saudi Arabia. But the crown prince is not as weak as some imagine and that the administration’s options are limited here as well. But in any case, the relationship between the two capitals will not be a quiet relationship, at least in the first phase of Biden.

Most of the foreign policy team are Zionists

Regarding the Palestinian file, the president-elect declared his commitment to the two-state solution, but he did not disclose what was the fate of the settlements in Palestine or the fate of the capital. He will adhere to the decision to move the embassy (not forgetting that the decision was taken by the Congress in Clinton State) and will return to communication with the P-authority and facilitate financial transfers of the authority. On the other hand, the new administration’s commitment to the security of the entity is one of the constants of the ruling elites in America, but this commitment will not be dragged into adhering to Netanyahu, who we believe is on the way out of the political stage. All these measures are of a formal nature, because the new administration cannot provide anything radical, given that pressure is mounting within the Democratic Party to recognise the rights of the Palestinian people. But we must not forget that most of the foreign policy team of the new administration are Zionists, who will not allow any substantive “concession” towards the Palestinians. There is no justification for betting on new positions in the administration to give some impetus to the negotiation policy that has proven fruitless.

As for Libya, the disaster that struck it was the work of the Obama administration, especially Hillary Clinton. The administration’s new foreign affairs officials were in the Obama administration and were still defending their policies at the time. It is not clear what the administration can offer, as there is no statement or writing for any of them about the complex Libyan file internationally and regionally. But we must point out that the delegate named to represent the United States in the United Nations and the Security Council, Linda Tomas Greenfield, is a long-standing diplomat of African descent. She was removed from the State Department in Trump’s state.  Prior to that, she held several positions in Africa such as Nigeria and Liberia. She stated some time ago, according to “Sputnik”, that all parties to the conflict, locally and internationally, should reduce the ceilings of demands and work to find a solution. It is not clear if this statement was a personal opinion or a reflection of a change in the US administration.

What role does Robert Malley have?

The last file is the Lebanese file. Until the preparation of this approach, no official in the new administration issued any position regarding Lebanon. Thus, what can be presented is based on Jeffrey Feltman’s statement more than a year ago before the Congressional Foreign Relations Committee. The new administration could adopt the approach of Feltman, who knows Lebanon well. We also have to take into account that the United States looks at the Lebanese file from the standpoint of the security of the Zionist entity and from the angle of interconnections with the various files in the region. The conclusion of Jeffrey Feltman’s approach is that pushing Lebanon over the abyss will not result in a positive outcome for the interests of the United States and the Zionist entity. Consequently, the pressures exerted on Lebanon must be reconsidered and accommodation as was the case in the Obama era with the resistance, as there is no allied regional power that can disarm the resistance in accordance with Security Council Resolution 1702. Linking the dispute may raise the veto on the participation of the party in one form or another in the government. It could also contribute to supporting the French initiative to financially rearrange the internal situation. But there is no sign that the new administration officials share that view.

On the other hand, there is a proliferation of talk in the American corridors about the major role of Robert Malle in approaching the Iranian, Palestinian and Lebanese file. Robert Malle is very close to Anthony Blinken. If it is proven that the talk in the  corridors is serious, then this means that diplomacy will play a major role in approaching the hot files in the region, which may be reflected in a solution, albeit limited, towards the Lebanese scene, especially since the tools of the United States have proven their disastrous failure repeatedly, and that there is no point in escalating the situation that may topple what remains. From the influence of the American role.

However, during the first 100 days of Biden’s term, the true directions of the new administration will be clearly seen. We believe it will not be too far from the approach we presented above.

These are some of the expectations in the hot files awaiting the administration, and we do not expect any change from the previous policies, whether only in style or tone. It is incapable of change and unable to continue. This is its dilemma, and the world’s countries are not responsible for solving the American impasse. The shifts in the field will produce the facts that will govern American policy, which one day becomes useless. It has no ability to wage new wars, even if its desire to do so is certain, and it has no ability to make concessions to reach settlements. The break-up of the American empire may coincide with the dissolution of the republic. At best, what the new administration will do is connect a conflict without solutions and without wars. At worst, it is a question of its existence as a superpower. The only danger lies in the continuation of the state of denial and consequently the committing of follies that accelerate their demise and the consequent loss of life.

Previous Parts

(4) إشكاليات السياسة الخارجية الأميركية الجديدة

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is Untitled-14.png
باحث وكاتب اقتصادي سياسي والأمين العام السابق للمؤتمر القومي العربي

زياد حافظ

الجزء الرابع: بعض الملفات في الوطن العربي

ندخل هنا إلى بعض الملفّات المتعلّقة بالوطن العربي والمتشابكة وإنْ كان لكلّ ملفّ على حدة حيثياته الخاصة. لكن التشابك الناتج عن التاريخ والجغرافيا يجعل من الصعب مقاربة الملفّات بشكل مستقلّ عن بعضها البعض. والإدارة الجديدة كسائر الإدارات السابقة تنظر إلى مختلف الساحات من منظور جيواستراتيجي وليس كملفّات مستقلّة عن بعضها وإنْ اقتضى الأمر في بعض الحالات تجزئة الموضوع بسبب الصعوبات التي تواجهها السياسة الأميركية.

ملفات فلسطين وسورية والعراق واليمن وليبيا ولبنان هي ما تعنينا في الدرجة الأولى لأنها ساحات الصراع القائم في المنطقة. السؤال الذي نطرحه هو ماذا تستطيع ان تفعل الولايات المتحدة؟ في هذا السياق لا بدّ من التذكير بأنّ الخط البياني للدور الأميركي هو خط تراجعي. فبعد فشل الانخراط المباشر العسكري في المنطقة عبر تعثّر المشروع الأميركي في العراق وبروز لجنة بيكر هاملتون التي فرضت إعادة النظر في الطريقة في التعامل مع دول الإقليم، كانت حقبة باراك أوباما قد أطلقت نظرية القوّة الذكية أو الحرب بالوكالة. فكان استغلال نقمة الشعوب العربية على حكّامها عبر ما سُمّي بالربيع العربي. الرهان كان أنّ تغيير الطقم الحاكم في الدول الموالية للولايات المتحدة وتمكين مجموعات إسلامية معتدلة متواصلة من تركيا إلى المغرب لتثبيت قاعدة متينة لقرن أميركي في الوطن العربي. لكن الاستعصاء كان في التعامل مع سورية ساهم في تعثر المشروع في مصر فكانت الحرب الكونية التي قادتها الولايات المتحدة على سورية وما زالت حتى الساعة. لكن صمود الجيش العربي السوري والشعب الملتفّ حول قيادته أفشل المشروع الأميركي في سورية.

حقبة ترامب كانت امتداداً لسياسة أوباما مع مطالبته المتكرّرة بسحب القوّات الأميركية التي عارضته الدولة العميقة. تصريحات المبعوث الأميركي السابق المولج بالملف السوري جيمس جيفري تقر بأنه تمّ التحايل على الرئيس الأميركي دونالد ترامب لإفشال محاولات سحب القوّات الأميركية من شرق وشمال شرق سورية. واليوم يدعو جيفري في مقال له في مجلّة «فورين أفيرز» الرئيس بايدن إلى الاستمرار بسياسة العقوبات والتجويع ضدّ سورية وجعل سورية مستنقعاً لاستنزاف روسيا كما حصل في أفغانستان في الثمانينيات من القرن الماضي. فالهدف كان وما زال قلب النظام والإطاحة بالرئيس الأسد. أضف إلى ذلك فإنّ قانون قيصر الذي تمّ بموافقة الحزبين الديمقراطي والجمهوري هدفه خنق سورية اقتصادياً ومنع إعادة إعمارها وذلك لتعزيز النقمة الداخلية وفرص انتفاضة على نظام الحكم. لكن كلّ ذلك لم يؤدّ إلى النتائج المرجوة. فماذا بعد؟ فإذا كان الانخراط المباشر قد فشل في تحقيق أهدافه رغم احتلال العراق وقلب النظام وإذا فشلت الحرب الكونية على سورية بالوكالة عن الولايات المتحدة فماذا بقي في الترسانة الأميركية؟ المزيد من القوة والضغط أم مراجعة لتلك السياسة؟ فصمود الشعب السوري الملتفّ حول قيادته وجيشه لم يكن في الحسبان وأفشل كلّ المحاولات. وفي تقديرينا لا نعتقد أنّ الإدارة الجديدة تستطيع أن تحبط من عزيمة الشعب في الصمود ورفض الإملاءات العسكرية. كما سيأتي يوم تترسّخ القناعة عند مختلف النخب الحاكمة في الوطن العربي أنّ ما تريده الإدارة الأميركية أو تقوم به لا يعنيها ولا قيمة لها. المهمّ هو ما تقوم به المجتمعات العربية والتركيز هو على ما تريده دون الاكتراث إلى رأي الآخرين.

بايدن يتراجع أمام سورية كما أوباما؟

آراء المسؤولين المسمّين لتولي السياسة الخارجية توحي أنّ الميل سيكون إلى المزيد من الضغوط على سورية والدفع نحو التقسيم. ذلك سيكون عبر دعم المجموعات المسلّحة وإنْ كانت من جماعات التعصّب والغلوّ والتوحّش يضاف إليهم مجموعة «قسد». لكن موازين القوّة في الميدان تنفي فعالية تلك السياسة. وليس بمقدور الولايات المتحدة في ظلّ الانقسام الحادّ الداخلي إمكانية تبرير تورّط مباشر تعويضاً عن فشل الحرب بالوكالة. ونشير في هذا السياق إلى مقابلة أجراها وزير الخارجية أنطوني بلينكن مع مايكل موريل المدير العام السابق بالوكالة لوكالة الاستخبارات المركزية (سي أي آي) على برنامج «قضايا استخبارية» (انتليجنس ماترز) الذي تبثّه محطة «سي، بي، أس» الأميركية (ما يؤكّد العلاقة العضوية بين الاستخبارات والإعلام الشركاتي!). جاء في هذه المقابلة التي أجريت في أواخر 2020 والتي لم تخلُ من العبارات التي تؤكّد النظرة التوراتية لدور الولايات المتحدة في الحفاظ على الإمبراطورية لأنّ ذلك قدرها المتجلّي الذي يؤكّد استثنائيتها. وفي تلك المقابلة قال إنّ هناك ضرورة لعدم توريط مباشر للقوات الأميركية في ما سمّاه بـ «الحروب الدائمة» ولكن هذا لا يمنع من «عمليات محدودة» تقوم بها القوّات الخاصة لدعم عملاء محلّيين في تنفيذهم للأجندات المطلوبة. هنا تحضر «قسد» التي ستتلقّى دعماً عسكرياً من الولايات المتحدة. وما يدعم موقف بلينكن تصريح المسؤول الجديد القديم عن الملفّ السوري تري مكغورك الذي خلف جيمس جيفري. فتري مكغورك كان قد استقال سنة 2019 من مهامه في متابعة الملف السوري عندما عبّر ترامب عن رغبته بسحب القوّات الأميركية من سورية. ومكغورك يريد المزيد من التواجد العسكري الأميركي في سورية. وشاهدنا في الأسابيع الماضية عودة خلايا داعش في البادية ومحاولات تخريب المصالحة في جنوب سورية والعمليات الاستفزازية لقوّات «قسد» في الشمال الشرقي لسورية. كلّ ذلك حصل بعد الانتخابات الرئاسية وقبل تسلم بايدن مقاليد السلطة، غير أنّ هذه الإجراءات تحظى بموافقة وزير الخارجية بلينكن وتدلّ على استمرارها.

من جهة أخرى، وفي سياق محاولة تلميع صورة الولايات المتحدة هناك حديث في الأروقة الأميركية عن إمكانية تفاهم ضمني لتسليم روسيا الملف السوري لضمان أمن الكيان الصهيوني. فإذا نجحت المبادة الروسية في تأمين أمن الكيان، يعني عدم دعم استراتيجية وأهداف محور المقاومة، فهذا مكسب للولايات المتحدة والكيان. وإذا تعثرت تلك الجهود فلكلّ حادث حديث ويتمّ التنصّل من التفاهم الضمني. في رأينا، كلّ هذه المحاولات لا تدلّ إلاّ على عجز الولايات المتحدة في المبادرة وتغيير المنحى التراجعي لها في المنطقة. وليس هناك من دليل أنّ روسيا ستقبل بـ «المهمة» كما ليس هناك من مؤشر أنّ الدولة السورية ستتجاوب مع تلك المبادرة. المسألة تصبح من يستطيع أن يتحمّل أكثر الاستنزاف؟ الرهان الأميركي هو أنّ قدرة التحمّل للدولة السورية محدودة وبالتالي ستلجأ إلى تقديم «تنازلات» لإيقاف التدهور الاقتصادي والاجتماعي وهذه «التنازلات» ستأتي بـ «التغيير المنشود» أميركياً وصهيونياً. ولكن في المقابل لا تستطيع الإدارة الجديدة تغيير موازين القوّة على الأرض إذا ما أقدَمت الدولة السورية على استكمال استعادة الأراضي المحتلة في الشمال والشرق. فلسورية حلفاء كانوا وما زالوا ملتزمين في الدفاع عن سورية.

وهناك من يعتقد أنّ أيّ تسوية مع الجمهورية الإسلامية في إيران ستؤدّي حتماً على «انفراجات» في الملّف السوري دون تحديد ما هي الانفراجات. ربما يعتقدون أنها تعود إلى بعض التعديلات في الدستور والتغيير في رأس الهرم، ولكن كلّ ذلك مجرّد تمنّيات لا تستند إلى وقائع مادية يمكّنها من تحقيقها. فسورية ليست أداة للجمهورية الإسلامية بل حليفة لها ولها قرارها المستقلّ. وسورية التي رفضت إملاءات كولين باول في ذروة الغطرسة الأميركية في احتلال العراق لن ترضخ لأميركا التي أصابها الوهن وهي على عتبة الأفول فالانهيار بسبب الانقسام الداخلي وبسبب عدم قدرتها على التوسّع وفرض هيمنتها.

هل تعود نظرية رامسفيلد؟

التوتّر السوري والليبي واليمني والعراقي من صنع إدارة أوباما الذي كان بايدن شريكاً أساسياً فيها. فهل ينتهج الأخير سياسة مغايرة؟ الدلائل حتى الساعة تفيد أنّ نظرية دونالد رامسفيلد هي التي تتحكّم في عقل النخب الأميركية بما فيها الإدارة الجديدة: إذا فشلت القوّة في تحقيق الأهداف فالحلّ هو المزيد من القوّة. المسؤولون المسمّون في الإدارة الجديدة كانوا قد وجّهوا خلال عملهم في إدارة أوباما انتقاداتهم لباراك أوباما لعدم استعمال المزيد من القوّة. والمسؤولون المسمّون هم من الصهاينة وبالتالي أولويتهم الكيان. والرئيس الجديد أعلن عن صهيونيته وإن لم يكن يهودياً بل هو كاثوليكيّ.

لكن موازين القوّة على الأرض حيّدت كافة الوسائل المستعملة لتحقيق أهداف الإدارة الأميركية. فما هو «المزيد من القوّة»؟ ليس بمقدور الإدارة رغم إعلان التزامها بالكيان الصهيوني أن تفرض على الكونغرس الأميركي خيارات حرب جديدة في سورية لصالح الكيان لأنّ المزاج العام في الأجواء المضطربة في الداخل الأميركي لا يسمح لمغامرات خارجية غير مضمونة النتائج خاصة أنّ سورية لم تعد بمفردها بل هي جزء من محور قوي يستطيع إيقاع الخسائر الفادحة بالمصالح الأميركية والصهيونية في المنطقة. كما أنّ تحالفات سورية الدولية تمكنها من تحييد العمل الانفرادي الذي قد تقدم عليه الولايات المتحدة. فتجربة 2013 تشير إلى أنّ آنذاك لم تكن موازين القوّة لصالح الولايات المتحدة في شنّ عدوان مباشر على سورية فكانت الوساطة الروسية وحلّ تفكيك المنظومة الكيمياوية. اليوم، موازين القوّة أكثر ميلاً لصالح سورية مما كانت عليها سنة 2013 فما يبقى للولايات المتحدة إما التراجع وإما تخفيض سقف المواجهة والاكتفاء بربط نزاع. ما يهمّ الدولة السورية هو خروج القوّات الأميركية من شرق الفرات وهذا ممكن لأنّ العدد قليل واللوجستية الداعمة لها صعبة خاصة إذا ما تمّ إخراجها كلّياً من العراق.

في ما يتعلّق بالعراق، لا يجب أن ننسى أنّ بايدن منذ ولاية بوش الابن ينظّر لتقسيم العراق. هنا أيضاً موازين القوّة تحكم سياسات الإدارة حيث أصبحت الإمكانيات محدودة. والقوى السياسية العراقية المؤيّدة للوجود الأميركي لم يعد باستطاعتها الدعوة إلى ذلك بعد اغتيال أبي مهدي المهندس ومعه قاسم سليماني. والتفجيرات في وسط بغداد في أوّل يوم من ولاية بايدن لن يؤدّي إلى إبقاء القوّات الأميركية بحجة عودة داعش التي ادّعت الولايات المتحدة أنها «هزمتها»! بل العكس قد يحصل. فالتفاهم مع الحكومة العراقية قد يساهم في تسهيل الخروج الميسّر للقوات الأميركية من العراق لأنّ البديل عن ذلك هو تكرار مشهد خروج القوّات من فيتنام. ستحافظ الإدارة الأميركية على علاقات وثيقة مع إقليم كردستان غير أنّ كلّ ذلك لن يمنع تكريس الانكفاء من العراق وسورية. لكن هذا لا يعني أنّ الساحة العراقية ستنعم بالهدوء بل العكس كما تبيّن من الانفجارات الأخيرة. المسألة ستكون في ضبط الإيقاع بين التوتر والتفاوض والكرة في ملعب القيادات العراقية.

المسرح مهيّأ لوقف حرب اليمن

في ما يتعلّق باليمن فالمسرح مهيّأ في الكونغرس الأميركي لإيقاف الحرب وإعطاء الدور للأمم المتحدة بعد الإيعاز لبلاد الحرمين بوقف العدوان. وبات واضحاً أنّ إدارة بايدن ستنظر في موضوع تصنيف الحوثيين كمجموعة إرهابية وإلغاء التصنيف الذي فرضته إدارة ترامب في أيامها الأخيرة. لكن هناك قوى داخل التحالف الحاكم في الولايات المتحدة ستسعى للحفاظ على التوتر في اليمن. شركة التسليح الأميركية رايثيون تورّد أسلحة لبلاد الحرمين ودول الخليج ووزير الدفاع الجديد لويد اوستن عضو مجلس إدارة الشركة. ليس من الواضح من يستطيع حسم الموقف الأميركي، وما نريد أنّ نشير إليه هو تناقض المصالح داخل تحالف القوى الداعمة لبايدن كما أوضحناه في الجزء الأول من هذه السلسلة.

أما العلاقة مع بلاد الحرمين فالمزاج السائد في الإدارة الجديدة سلبي حتى الساعة تجاه ولي العهد وأسلوب الحكم. التصريحات المتكرّرة للرئيس الأميركي الجديد حول ضرورة مساءلة المسؤولين في بلاد الحرمين حول اغتيال جمال الخاشقجي دليل على ذلك. انها مؤشر عن طبيعة العلاقات المرتقبة بين الإدارة الجديدة وقيادة بلاد الحرمين. في المقابل ستتمسّك الإدارة بـ «الاتفاقات الابراهيمية» وربما قد تطوّرها بعد إنجاز «تغييرات» في حكومة بلاد الحرمين. لكن ولي العهد ليس بالضعف الذي يتصوّره البعض وأنّ خيارات الإدارة الأميركية محدودة هنا أيضاً. لكن في مطلق الأحوال، لن تكون العلاقة بين العاصمتين علاقة هادئة على الأقلّ في المرحلة الأولى من ولاية بايدن.

معظم فريق السياسة الخارجية من الصهاينة

بالنسبة للملف الفلسطيني أعلن الرئيس المنتخب التزامه بحلّ الدولتين لكنه لم يفصح عما هو مصير المستعمرات في فلسطين ولا مصير العاصمة. سيتمسّك بقرار نقل السفارة (لا ننسى أنّ القرار اتخذ من قبل الكونغرس في ولاية كلينتون) وسيعود التواصل مع السلطة وتسهيل الحوالات المالية للسلطة. في المقابل التزام الإدارة الجديدة بأمن الكيان من ثوابت النخب الحاكمة في أميركا ولكن لن ينجر هذا الالتزام إلى التمسّك بنتنياهو الذي نعتقد أنه على طريق الخروج من المسرح السياسي. فكلّ هذه الإجراءات طابعها شكلي لأنه لا تستطيع الإدارة الجديدة تقديم أيّ شيء جذري علماً أنّ الضغوط تتصاعد داخل الحزب الديمقراطي للإقرار بحقوق الشعب الفلسطيني. لكن لا يجب أن ننسى أنّ معظم فريق السياسة الخارجية للإدارة الجديدة من الصهاينة الذين لن يسمحوا بأيّ «تنازل» جوهري تجاه الفلسطينيين. فليس هناك ما يبرّر المراهنة على مواقف جديدة في الإدارة ليعطي دفعاً ما لسياسة المفاوضات التي أثبتت عقمها.

بالنسبة لليبيا فإنّ الكارثة التي حلّت بها من صنع إدارة أوباما وخاصة من صنع هيلاري كلنتون. المسؤولون الجدد في الإدارة للشؤون الخارجية كانوا في إدارة أوباما وما زالوا يدافعون عن سياساتهم آنذاك. ليس من الواضح ما يمكن أن تقدم عليه الإدارة فليس أيّ تصريح أو كتابة لأيّ منهم حول الملف الليبي المعقد دولياً وعربياً وإقليمياً. لكن لا بدّ لنا من الإشارة إلى أنّ المندوبة المسمّاة لتمثيل الولايات المتحدة في الأمم المتحدة ومجلس الأمن ليندا تواماس غرينفيلد ديبلوماسية عريقة منحدرة من أصول أفريقية. وكانت قد أقصيت من وزارة الخارجية في ولاية ترامب. قبل ذلك شغلت مناصب عدة في أفريقيا كنيجيريا وليبيريا. صرّحت منذ فترة وفقاً لموقع «سبوتنيك» أنّ على كافة الأطراف المتنازعة محلّياً ودولياً تخفيض سقوف المطالب والعمل على إيجاد حلّ. ليس من الواضح إذا ما كان ذلك التصريح رأياً شخصياً أم انعكاساً لتغيير ما في الإدارة الأميركية.

أيّ دور لروبرت مالي؟

الملف الأخير هو الملف اللبناني. حتى إعداد هذه المقاربة لم يصدر أيّ موقف عن أيّ مسؤول في الإدارة الجديدة حول لبنان. وبالتالي ما يمكن عرضه مبني على مواقف سابقة للإدارة الديمقراطية وإفادة جيفري فيلتمان منذ أكثر من عام أمام لجنة العلاقات الخارجية في الكونغرس. ويمكن أن تتبنّى الإدارة الجديدة مقاربة فيلتمان الذي يعرف لبنان جيّداً. كما علينا الأخذ بعين الاعتبار أنّ الولايات المتحدة تنظر إلى الملف اللبناني من زاوية أمن الكيان ومن زاوية الترابط بالملفات المتعدّدة في الإقليم. خلاصة مقاربة جيفري فيلتمان هي أنّ دفع لبنان إلى الهاوية لن يأتي بمردود إيجابي لمصالح الولايات المتحدة والكيان الصهيوني. وبالتالي يجب إعادة النظر في الضغوط التي تمارس على لبنان والتساكن كما كان في عهد أوباما مع المقاومة حيث لا توجد أيّ قوّة إقليمية حليفة تستطيع نزع سلاح المقاومة وفقاً لقرار مجلس الأمن 1702. التساكن قد يرفع الفيتو على مشاركة الحزب بشكل أو بآخر في الحكومة. كما يمكن أن يساهم في دعم المبادرة الفرنسية لإعادة ترتيب الوضع الداخلي من الناحية المالية. لكن ليس هناك من أيّ دلائل أنّ المسؤولين الجدد في الإدارة يشاطرون ذلك الرأي.

من جهة أخرى تكاثر الكلام في الأروقة الأميركية عن دور كبير لروبرت مالي في مقاربة الملف الإيراني والفلسطيني واللبناني. وروبرت مالي مقرّب جدّاً من انطوني بلينكن. إذا ثبت أنّ الكلام الجاري في الأروقة جدّي فهذا يعني أنّ الدبلوماسية ستلعب دوراً كبيراً في مقاربة الملفات الساخنة في المنطقة قد تنعكس بحلحلة ولو محدودة تجاه المشهد اللبناني خاصة أنّ أدوات الولايات المتحدة أثبتت فشلها الذريع تكراراً، وأن لا جدوى من تصعيد الموقف الذي قد يطيح بما تبقّى من نفوذ للدور الأميركي.

على كلّ حال، خلال المئة اليوم الأولى من ولاية بايدن سيتبّن بشكل أوضح التوجهات الحقيقية للإدارة الجديدة. ونعتقد أنها لن تكون بعيدة عن المقاربة التي عرضناها أعلاه.

هذه بعض التوقّعات في الملفات الساخنة التي تنتظر الإدارة والتي لا نتوقع أيّ تعديل عن السياسات السابقة سواء فقط في الأسلوب واللهجة. فهي غير قادرة على التغيير وغير قادرة على الاستمرار. هذا هو مأزقها وليس مسؤولة دول العالم حلّ المأزق الأميركي. التحوّلات في الميدان ستفرز الوقائع التي ستحكم السياسة الأميركية التي تصبح يوماً بعض يوم غير ذي جدوى. فلا قدرة لها على شنّ حروب جديدة وإنْ كانت رغبتها في ذلك مؤكّدة ولا قدرة لها على تقديم تنازلات لعقد تسويات. فانفراط الإمبراطورية الأميركية قد تتلازم مع انحلال الجمهورية. في أحسن الأحوال ما ستقوم به الإدارة الجديدة هو ربط نزاع دون حلول ودون حروب. في أسوأ الأحوال بالنسبة لها مسألة وجودها ككيان لدولة عظمى. الخطورة تكمن فقط في استمرار حالة الإنكار وارتكاب بالتالي حماقات تسرّع في زوالها وما سيرافق ذلك من خسائر في الأرواح.

Previous Parts

The American riots: A vertical trench in process

By Abir Bassam

January 11, 2021 – 10:28

On Wednesday evening, it was not the first time that Americans poured into the streets in protest. However, a long time has not passed since the world has witnessed that rioters and demonstrators assaulted the symbol of American democracy: The Capitol. 

It is an irony! When the riots filled the Arab streets in several countries, they were identified as the “revolutionaries”. The rioters were assaulting governmental buildings and national symbols of the states, but it was portrayed under the name of democracy and freedom of speech by the Wild West. While the American riots were immediately branded by Europe and Western officials as chaotic anti-democratic behavior. 

During the last 10 years, the rioters have filled the Arab streets and attacked government buildings, stolen documents, and burned them, especially in Syria and Libya. The two countries were initially targeted by the Wild West to change regimes and the system in the name of “democracy” and the West was anticipating the moment to attack like a predator. 

The same irony brings back the role played by the media, in particular Al-Jazeera and Al-Arabiya, and many others. The media has played a major role in advocating for the rioters and demonizing the opponents of radical behaviors. This role was also perfectly executed by the Western media in supporting the riots against the government institutions in the Arab countries. In reverse, the same American media is pushing towards demonizing their incumbent president and its supporters because they attacked the Capitol, the temple of the American democracy. And now they are pushing towards the impeachment of their president for instigating it.

The impeachment of Trump looks as humiliating as the impeachment of president Gaddafi in the same media, with the exception that in the U.S. the riots on the Capitol were a real version of what was going on, whereas the scenes that were transmitted by Al-Jazeera and many others were costume made. 

The American media is now promoting more than 200 bills waiting to be examined by Congress. All of them were set to criminate Trump and isolate him. Trump was always identified as silly, shallow, and arrogant, even though the American media role is best described as an attempt to bully the man and his partisans. Whether we like the man or not, Trump was supported by around 75 million Americans in the elections, who believed that it was about time to make America great again.

 After all, he is just another American president that led the American policy to the best interest of the American lobbies that enabled him to reach his position. Electing Trump in 2016 was the beginning of the end to the American system and democracy as we know it. Accordingly, the attack on the Capitol is a sign that the temple is about to fall down! 

American democracy is proved to be a masquerade beyond doubt.  Our region has been suffering from it, as well as different countries in the world, especially Latin America. The Americans worked excessively on toppling down elected governments that did not match their policies.  

In addition, it seems that the situation is going to be escalated in the coming days. Even though Trump is no longer able to tweet on social media, his partisans are tweeting for another rally during Biden’s inauguration ceremony as the U.S. president. Besides, the U.S. media are promoting the impeachment of the president. 

There is a miscomprehension of the danger of the impeachment on the American society, which is now vertically divided. After the impeachment, the vertical crack will become deeper and weaken America furthermore. For this reason, the Wall Street Journal has accused Nancy Pelosi, the speaker of the House of Representatives, of planning a coup against the president by demanding the chief of staff to refuse to execute Trump’s orders. The journal was wondering “what if the U.S. was under nuclear attack?”

In addition, the radical right-wing groups are calling for more escalation and plan to attend the demonstrations with their guns. What would this lead to? Actually, to one of two following results: the first one would be intimidating other national groups whether they were the middle or the left wings. Secondly, clashing with the authorities, if they try to stop them or arrest them for disturbing the peace.

In either way, this would mean that the U.S. is on the verge of civil war.

Over the last ten years, there have been several calls for separation from different American states. They have even gone to federal courts, but they have failed. Hence the intent to divide America is present in the Americans’ minds. This cry for division shows how much incohesive the American social tissue is, even before Trump. Add to that that racism is rising within American society but in reverse.

Nowadays, there is a rising sense of unfairness among the White Anglo Saxon Protestants [WASPs], who initially immigrated to America believing that it was the Promised Land, which was once again occupied by the inferior subjects that the WSPs had imported in the first place as their servants and slaves. It seems that the inferior subjects proved to be smart and hard-working and reached the highest positions leaving God’s chosen people behind.

Therefore, the slogans made during Trump’s campaigns that “Let us make America great again”, or in his declaration that he will go national instead of international, were most appealing to Trump’s partisans, amongst them the WASPs that constitute the majority. However, the slogans went against the deep state’s goals, especially the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and transnational corporations, and many others. The latter was highly affected by the economic sanctions applied by Trump. 

It is clear that Trump’s slogans and behavior were an embarrassment for his vice president Mike Pence and the Republican Party. However, they betrayed him. Many of Trump’s partisans, who elected them to the House of Representatives, feel that they were betrayed as well. Accordingly, the Republicans will need to work harder than ever to gain the trust of their voters again. Therefore, the announcement by Donald Trump junior that now they need to reconstruct the Republican Party again, is a serious message to be considered, since the impeachment of Trump will not go without consequences in the American streets. And his partisans are unlikely to slow down.
 

RELATED NEWS

Gen. Soleimani led Russia-Syria-Iran-Iraq-Hezbollah coalition against terrorism: Venezuelan ambassad

Source

January 4, 2021 – 17:50

TEHRAN – The Venezuelan ambassador to Tehran describes the coalition created by Russia, Syria, Iran and Iraq, which also includes the Lebanese Hezbollah resistance movement, as one of the most capable alliances in the war against terrorists groups in Syria and Iraq. 

Carlos Antonio Alcala Cordones says this coalition was led by Lieutenant General Qassem Soleimani, who was assassinated in a U.S. drone strike near Baghdad’s international airport on January 3, 2020. 

“One of the most important coalitions, led by Martyr Qassem Soleimani, was the Russia-Syria-Iran-Iraq (RSII) coalition, which was later renamed as 4+1 due to the joining of the Lebanese Hezbollah resistance group. The military coalition was formed to deal with the conflicts in Syria and Iraq,” Ambassador Antonio Alcala Cordones tells the Tehran Times as Iran is marking the martyrdom anniversary of General Soleimani. 

The ambassador also says the United States and its allies have launched a “hybrid war” against Iran which includes both economic sanctions and acts of terrorism.

 “We should mention the hybrid war waged by the United States and its allies through economic sanctions and terrorist attacks against Iran,” the top Venezuelan diplomat to Iran notes.

In the newest act of state terrorism against the Islamic Republic, Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, a top Iranian nuclear expert, was assassinated in a road outside Tehran on November 27. Iran has said Israel is directly responsible for the terrorist act. 

Analysts believe the assassination was a joint project by Israel and the United States. Professor Hossein Askari, who teaches international business at George Washington University, says he is “almost sure” that the assassination of Fakhrizadeh was a joint project carried out by the Israeli prime minister the U.S. president. 

Following is the text of interview with the Venezuelan ambassador: 

Q: Given the specific geopolitical situation in West Asia and the crises that have intensified in the region in recent years, how do you assess Iran’s role in the fight against terrorism in the region?

A: The regional situation regarding the fight against terrorism and the participation of the Islamic Republic of Iran in it is undoubtedly a very complex issue, and in the analysis that we can do, it is important to consider the geopolitical, religious and ideological issues.

In my view, there are various elements that the Islamic Republic of Iran has strongly defended in its foreign policy, which influence its strategies with allied countries and countries with which it is in conflict. First, its effort to achieve the economic development and growth of its nation. Second, defending its territorial integrity as enshrined in the country’s constitution and Islamic principles. Third, defending its religious and ideological beliefs reflected in the confrontation with Israel, Saudi Arabia and the United States, whose scenario is one of the constant dangers. And finally, the implementation of a strong internal structure that has allowed it to introduce itself as the main hero and guarantor of regional order. All of these elements, in addition to its constant anti-imperialist approach toward the international system, have led Iran to engage with actors associated with its ideology, such as its relationship with Lebanon’s Hezbollah and Shiite groups, and strengthen its influence in the region, through traditional actors such as Syria and Russia.

Support for other strategic actors for which religious tendencies prevail over ideological beliefs, such as Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, are other elements that should be considered in the analysis. It is important to note that Iran has increased its political weight in the region since the Iraq war and is now seen as a direct threat by its enemies, turning this classic hostility through supporting actors in various conflicts in the region into an indirect confrontation.

To this analysis is added the historic struggle for supremacy in a conflict-ridden region whose heroes are precisely Iran and Saudi Arabia. As noted, the Arab Spring changed the regional context by reconfiguring the geopolitical map. The two countries have a clear internal cohesion because their religious populations, mainly Shiites and Sunnis, are also found in other regional countries and have significant military, ideological, cultural and economic capabilities, in a way that both countries have acted in countries with domestic divisions such as Syria, Iraq, Bahrain, Lebanon and Yemen through actors; and in the case of Iran, this has led to a ground gain in the region.

“It (Iran) supports the struggle of the oppressed against the oppressors everywhere in the world. This acts as a basis for the Islamic Republic of Iran’s fight against terrorism.”On the other hand, Saudi Arabia also plays an important role, as its foreign policy towards the region is more focused on its neighbors in the Persian Gulf and with a horizontal axis, especially in the Persian Gulf Cooperation Council (PGCC), with the aim of isolating Iran and prevent its growing influence in the region.

Another important element that has reshaped the geopolitical chessboard and should be considered is the revitalization of Iran through the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which was signed on July 14, 2015 in Vienna, under which it was agreed that Iran’s nuclear program be limited for a decade in exchange for the lifting of international economic sanctions. This allowed Iran to maintain its position in the Middle East (West Asia) and seek to secure the role of discourse while expanding its territory in strategic areas. But that fact is changing, as on May 8, 2018, President Trump announced that the United States would withdraw from the JCPOA and reinstate U.S. nuclear sanctions against the Islamic Republic of Iran and once again put Iran in a very difficult position.

These points represent two opposing models domestically and internationally: a revolutionary, anti-imperialist model represented by Iran versus a conservative, pro-Western model represented by Saudi Arabia.

On the other hand, the competition between Iran and Saudi Arabia in the geo-strategic field of energy is expanding. Therefore, it is a valuable point to control the exploitation of resources, maritime traffic and international oil trade via the Strait of Hormuz, through which 17 million barrels cross each day. The Saudi crude oil reserves are located in an eastern province, which has the largest Shiite population. Saudi Arabia has the money to build oil and gas pipelines from the east coast to the west, which will facilitate its outflow from the Red Sea, which is seen as a way to expand its trade to the Mediterranean. Similarly, from the Red Sea, Saudi Arabia supplies oil to Asian countries, its main customers in the region (China and Japan). This is a longer way to go, but it prevents a confrontation with Iran in the Strait of Hormuz, which is a strategic passage in international maritime navigation, because Iran has the longest coastline in the Persian Gulf, and enjoys the opportunity to penetrate these waters in the above-mentioned strait.

It is noteworthy that since the Islamic Republic of Iran’s declaration of existence in 1979, the Iranian government has been accused by the United States of financing terrorists, and providing them with equipment, weapons, training, and shelter, and Iran has been described as a “sponsor of terrorism”. They have described the country as the most important threat to the security of the Middle East (West Asia) and one of the most hostile countries in the international system and they have sought to isolate it.

Recall that the U.S. State Department currently identifies 60 groups as international terrorist organizations, including al-Qaeda, the Islamic State, Hamas, Al-Fatah, the Muslim Brotherhood, and Hezbollah. And last April, Trump labeled the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) as a “foreign terrorist organization” and this is the first time the United States has taken action against another country’s military. According to an old saying, “One person’s terrorist is another person’s freedom fighter.”

It should be noted that in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks on the Twin Towers, the United States implemented the Patriot Act which was a response by Congress against terrorism and international organized crime. This is an extraterritorial law that includes international powers and is based on international treaties and bilateral agreements, but we all know that the United States systematically fights and acts with the aim of stigmatizing and harassing, under the name of “fighting terrorists” against Islam and to the detriment of various Muslim organizations, which are characterized by anti-terrorism and have connections with the popular, patriotic and social struggles.

But if we ask ourselves why there is violence in the region, we can quote some of the remarks made by Foreign Minister Dr. Zarif, in which he notes that “the increase in violence in the Middle East is rooted in the constant presence of foreign forces, and also in their interference in the internal affairs of regional countries to reshape the structure of the region.” And this is what the interventionist policy of the North American empire constantly states. Likewise, we should mention the hybrid war waged by the United States and its allies through economic sanctions and terrorist attacks against Iran.

The phenomenon of terrorism and its consequences must be discussed and identified on the basis of the reasons that led to its development, or through the intensification and exploitation of religious dogmatism, as in the case of the Islamic State and its intention to incite sectarian tensions with the goal of unifying all the majority Muslim countries under one state and by one caliphate and through jihad, which is still a concern of the international community.

Finally, terrorism has directly or indirectly affected a large portion of humans, because the emergence of terrorism, in addition to increasing drug use and drug trafficking and organized crime networks, intensifies human rights violations, fatal migrations, and also famine.

Q: Iran has been the victim of large and small terrorist acts since the victory of the Islamic Revolution. As a country that has suffered greatly from this ominous phenomenon and has gained valuable experience in the fight against terrorism at the national and regional levels, how do you assess Iran’s efforts to build a consensus among regional countries to fight terrorism?

A: The Islamic Republic of Iran has suffered severe blows since the beginning of the Islamic Revolution, including the assassination of four Iranian nuclear scientists between 2010 and 2012, and the recent terrorist attack on nuclear scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh. In addition to an in-depth look at security systems, this incident has created a scenario of confrontation and tension, given that technological advances have changed the ways in which conflicts have escalated and changed the nature of threats.

“It is also important not to politicize campaign against terrorism, and all countries should unite in this battle, regardless of political or diplomatic relations among them.”Today, the use of artificial intelligence intensifies cyber, physical, and biological attacks, making them more selective and at the same time more anonymous, facilitating these attacks by reducing or even eliminating the need for the physical involvement of humans. This scenario is no longer a concern for human beings. Let us recall the terrorist attack in Iraq against the great martyr, Qassem Soleimani, the hero of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps, whose absence is irreparable for the Islamic Republic of Iran.

It is difficult to reach a consensus on this issue with several countries in the region, but Iran’s efforts to advance strategies that help combat terrorism are significant, such as the success in reducing the global terrorism index in the governments that it works in, especially because Iran is a country that has the power to challenge the interests of the great powers and has an excellent political, scientific, technological and military platform that supports its foreign policy.

It is also important not to politicize campaign against terrorism, and all countries should unite in this battle, regardless of political or diplomatic relations among them.

Q: In recent years, under the pretext of fighting terrorism, coalitions have been formed with the participation of countries outside the region (and even outside Asia). Alliances whose main goal, according to many political and military experts, is the political and economic exploitation of the current crises in West Asia. Some experts even believe that these countries themselves are the cause of such tensions. Do you think such coalitions can help resolve crises or defeat terrorism?

A: Undoubtedly, the formation of coalitions creates a very complex scenario because different elements are interconnected according to the potential of their constituent countries. As I mentioned earlier, we are currently talking about cooperation in the fields of science, technology, and military, in addition to the political and diplomatic relations between each of the countries.

One of the most important coalitions, led by Martyr Qassem Soleimani, was the Russia-Syria-Iran-Iraq (RSII) coalition, which was later renamed as 4+1 due to the joining of the Lebanese Hezbollah military group. The military coalition was formed to deal with the conflicts in Syria and Iraq in the Middle East and currently supports Lebanon’s Hassan Nasrallah.

The coalition consists of the Russian Armed Forces and the Axis of Resistance (the IRGC, Syrian Armed Forces, Iraqi Armed Forces, and Hezbollah forces). The importance of this coalition is that it was created as a counterweight to the U.S.-led international coalition against ISIL, although the RSII’s military objectives are not limited to destroying the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), also dismantling other jihadist groups such as Jabhat al-Nusra and al-Qaeda, as well as closing the Iraqi-Syrian borders, which are used as strategic corridors for the entry and exit of militants.

Coalitions should serve to resolve crises, not to promote terrorism, but the situation is not always favorable and has a history of unexpected turns that upset the balance of the intended goal.

Q: Given the need to form a coalition of countries in West Asia to fight terrorism in the region, what role can Iran play in creating such a coalition?

A: In the international context, the unity that countries can create is very important and one of the precise principles of Iran’s foreign policy is the promotion of these alliances, of course through respect and non-interference in the internal affairs of other nations and as stated in Chapter 10, Article 154 of the Constitution, it supports the struggle of the oppressed against the oppressors everywhere in the world. These elements act as a basis for the Islamic Republic of Iran’s fight against terrorism.

Undoubtedly, Iran has played an important unifying role, and this has earned the respect of the countries of the region for it. Therefore, it is expected that a great unity will be created in the future, whose common interests are the fight against the plague of terrorism in all its forms.

RELATED NEWS

Why Israel is now delighted about the Arab Spring

تسريبات هيلاري كلينتون تفضح تطبيع إخوان ليبيا بأوامر من محمد بديع مع  إسرائيل... #محمد المقريف - YouTube
Click the Pic

Source

The self-styled ‘only democracy in the Middle East’ was never comfortable with pro-democracy protests. But the autocratic counter-revolution that followed gave it new friends

A Palestinian boy walks past a section of Israel’s separation wall and a billboard that reads in Arabic “The Arab Spring Coffee Shop” in the West Bank village of Al-Ram in 2012 (AFP)By 

Lily Galili in Tel Aviv, IsraelPublished date: 1 January 2021 09:10 UTC | Last update: 

“Unintended consequences” is the best way to describe the impact the Arab Spring has had on Israel.

Ten years after the pro-democracy protests that swept the Arab world, Israeli analysts agree that December 2020 is the unexpected outcome of December 2010’s events.

They may differ in the interpretation of recent developments and assessment of their future impact – but all look back at the beginning of the decade as the starting point of a process that has led to a growing list of Arab and Muslim countries normalising relations with Israel. 

All agree that the Arab Spring (a term coined by the West) is not a fait accompli; that the undercurrents are still very much there and can still change the landscape of the future.

Israeli political and public reaction to these historic uprisings was confused right from the start.

Public opinion was divided between those who believed that Israel’s situation worsened in face of the developments and those who saw the Arab Spring as a positive change for the country. As Israel heads to elections, nothing is different but everything has changed

Even the term “Arab Spring” was up for debate, sometimes replaced by “Arab Winter” or a term officially coined by Israeli Military Intelligence, “Taltala”, a Hebrew word for “shake-up”. “Egyptian Plague” was one of many terms reflecting the profound confusion and derision.

If the Israeli discourse reflected public bewilderment, contradictory statements by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu were reflections of confused policy.

The premier, who had preached in his own books that the lack of democracy in Arab states was the main obstacle to peace, openly avoided any reference to the democratic aspect of the Arab Spring.

“The Middle East is no place for the naive,” he stated in a speech delivered at the Israeli parliament on 23 November 2011, referring sarcastically to those who saw something positive in the unfolding events.

Yet, on the international arena, he adopted a more lenient approach, making statements like: “Israel is a democracy that encourages the promotion of free and democratic values in the Middle East and the promotion of such values will benefit peace.”

In a paper published in January 2013 by Mitvim – The Israeli Institute for Regional Foreign Policies, analyst Lior Lehrs quotes “government sources in Jerusalem” as explaining that “Netanyahu felt he had to narrow the gap between him and the international community”.

“The PM, as the leader of the only democracy in the Middle East, understood he cannot ignore international criticism of [Egyptian President Hosni] Mubarak and therefore this time addressed the issue of promoting democracy in the region,” Lehr wrote.

In the years following this statement, the leader of a country that wrongly describes itself and prides itself as “the only democracy in the Middle East” befriended a long series of authoritarian regimes in the region.

From spring to normalisation

The “linkage” between the Arab Spring and the normalisation of relations between Israel and the UAE, Bahrain, Sudan, Morocco and likely more countries to come, was one of main themes of a conference dedicated to the decade by BESA, the right-wing-orientated Begin-Sadat Centre for Strategic Studies at Bar-Ilan University.

“The Arab Spring is the death certificate of Arab nationalism as we knew it in the Levant, and the rise of more dictatorship-like regimes,” Ehud Yaari, Israeli political commentator and analyst, told Middle East Eye.

“The collapse of central capitals like Cairo and Damascus spurred Arab peripheral countries to re-arrange the arena. The capital moved to the UAE, a more modern one, despite its modest size. This is a given of historical dimension not bound to change in the visible future. A whole new nation ball game in the Middle East.”

At the Begin-Sadat Centre conference on 23 December, Yaari briefly told attendees what he believed would be the “nightmare scenario” for Israel – the collapse “inwards” of Egypt.

Yaari later told MEE that while Iran and Turkey compete with each other over dominance in Levantine Arab states, the peripheral countries reached a conclusion that the answer to their growing threat is to establish a new partnership, supported by the US.

Yaari said Netanyahu’s “bragging” about annexation gave Abu Dhabi’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed an opportunity for normalisation. The September deal was inked with the promise that Israeli annexation of the occupied West Bank had been shelved.Meet the man Netanyahu has picked to lead Israel’s Mossad

“They wouldn’t do it for a supply of F-35 aircrafts; they aim at a kind of military-security covenant. Others will follow. Even Qatar will not stay behind long after Saudi Arabia joins. Then Muslim states like Niger, Mali and more will follow,” he said.

“The Arab Spring was a cry of those my Arab friend calls the ‘helpless, hopeless and jobless’, and not a vehicle for regime change. Yet many of the countries involved remained on a map only.”

According to his scenario, Israel becomes an integral part of the region by joining regional alliances like “the Red Sea forum”, a new Saudi initiative being discussed.

Menachem Klein, political scientist and adviser to Israeli negotiation teams in 2000 and 2003, believes that all normalisation agreements come as a result of the Arab Spring and the “dissolution” of the Arab League.

Once, the Arab League united states against Israel. When governments began attacking their people in 2011, those countries began turning on one another.

In this new constellation, Israel has become another factor in the fine fabric of alliances and rivalries in the Arab world. Donald Trump in the Middle East: A story of big winners and bigger losers

“Israel integrated into the Arab fabric not just via those normalisation agreements but as an active player in the intricate labyrinth of contradictory interests of countries of the Middle East,” he told MEE.

“A long time ago, the late Shimon Peres dreamt of Israel as member of the Arab League; what he did not dream of is a broken region with a practically non-existent League.”

Klein is very much aware of the complexity of the new reality.

The upside, he believes, is Israel is accepted as a fact, even if the circumstances of its establishment are still illegitimate in the eyes of many. The downside, according to Klein, is that in the eyes of many in Arab societies, Israel is still perceived as the long arm of the United States, one that can be used for protection and arms, as well as a pipeline to Washington.

Israel, Palestine and domestic policy

Though Yaari and Klein both agree that the Arab Spring and normalisation deals have impacted the Palestinian cause, they do not reach the same conclusion as to how.

“I believe that the normalisation that stemmed from the Arab Spring will impose more restraint on any Israeli government, be it even ultra-right wing. No more annexation, no more Israeli construction plans in the controversial E1 area. Israel has too much to lose,” said Yaari.

“The Palestinians, on the other hand, finally realised they have no one to lean on, they are bound to change direction.”

Since Palestinian nationalism ceased to be an all-Arab issue, and now the Palestinians have been abandoned by Arab countries and in the reality subject to de-facto annexation, it has in fact become an Israeli internal domestic issue

According to this plan carefully crafted over a few years, Israel will take over control of the West Bank and divide it into segments like ‘greater Nablus’, ‘greater Jenin’, and so on

Klein does not agree with that conclusion nor with that scenario. The most dangerous repercussion of the decade that changed the Middle East is, according to him, the Palestinian issue.

“Since Palestinian nationalism ceased to be an all-Arab issue, and now the Palestinians have been abandoned by Arab countries and in the reality subject to de-facto annexation, it has in fact become an Israeli internal domestic issue,” Klein said.

“It is now more a question of domestic policy than of foreign policy. That twist just makes the situation more acute in the absence of external enforcement leading to a solution. Any explosion in the occupied territories can now easily lead to chaos.”

Klein knows of an Israeli military plan to deal with such an explosion. According to this plan carefully crafted over a few years, Israel will take over control of the West Bank and divide it into segments like “greater Nablus”, “greater Jenin”, and so on.

Each divided region will be under the control of a military governor. The Israeli military’s central command, Klein tells MEE, has already practiced the plan.

It is more than about controlling riots: this is the plan to dismantle one ruling authority – the Palestinian Authority – and thus smash the political entity of Palestinian nationality.

Unlike Yaari, Klein believes that the “shake-up” that skipped the occupied territories ten years ago is about to arrive.

Read more

Where is Palestine in the “Muslim Brotherhood” constants from Egypt to Tunisia, Turkey and Syria? أين فلسطين في ثوابت “الإخوان المسلمين” من مصر إلى تونس وتركيا وسوريا

**Please scroll down for the English Machine translation**

أين فلسطين في ثوابت “الإخوان المسلمين” من مصر إلى تونس وتركيا وسوريا؟

المصدر: الميادين


من حركة حماس إلى حركة مجتمع السلم في الجزائر، إلى الحركة الدستورية في الكويت، إجماعٌ على وصف موافقة العدالة والتنمية على تطبيع المغرب خيانةً وطعنةً في الظهر.

 محافظ الرباط يرحب بكوشنر ومستشار الأمن القومي الإسرائيلي بعد وصولهما إلى المغرب (أ ف ب).
محافظ الرباط يرحب بكوشنر ومستشار الأمن القومي الإسرائيلي بعد وصولهما إلى المغرب (أ ف ب).

وقعّت الرباط وتل أبيب وواشنطن اتفاقاً ثلاثياً تضمن عدة مذكرات تفاهم  لإقامة علاقات بين المغرب و”إسرائيل”، وصفه وزير الخارجية المغربي ناصر بوريطة بأنه “خريطة طريق سيعمل الأطراف الثلاثة عليها خلال المرحلة المقبلة”.

صادمة كانت صور رئيس الحكومة المغربية وهو يوقّع على اتفاق التطبيع مع الاحتلال الإسرائيلي.

صدمة كانت أشد وأقسى لدى الأحزاب الإسلامية التي تحمل فكر الإخوان المسلمين. ذلك أن حزب العدالة والتنمية الذي يرأَس الحكومة في المغرب هو أيضاً أحد أحزاب الإسلام السياسي التي وصلت الى الحكم بعد ما عُرف بـ “الربيع العربي”.

لا شك في أن الحركات الإسلامية تعاني انقساماً في الموقف حول التطبيع، لكنّ السؤال يتعلّق بمن وصل إلى الحكم من الإخوان المسلمين في مصر وتركيا وتونس عمّا فعله لفلسطين؟ كيف يمكن أن يبرّر حزب سياسي إسلامي، خيانة أقدس قضايا الأمة من أجل البقاء في السلطة؟

ففي المنطقة خياران في التعامل مع الكيان المحتل. الأول يبادر إلى إنقاذ الاحتلال من أزماته ومشاكله التي وصلت داخلياً إلى مراحل خطرة، من خلال مشاريع تطبيعٍ مجانية.

والثاني اختار المقاومة خياراً استراتيجياً لتحرير الأرض والإنسان، ويتحضّر للمواجهة ويستعدّ لكل نزال، هذه المرة عبر مناوراتٍ مشتركةٍ لفصائل المقاومة في فلسطين تقام للمرة الأولى.

وتعليقاً على التطبيع المغربي وموقف الحركات الإسلامية منه، قال الباحث في الشؤون الاجتماعية والسياسية طلال عتريسي إن الحركات الاسلامية تمر بمنعطف تاريخي يتصل بالتعامل مع فلسطين، مؤكّداً وجود صدمة كبيرة من موقف حكومة المغرب من التطبيع مع الاحتلال.

واعتبر عتريسي في حديث لـ الميادين أن النموذج التركي يعني حكماً إسلامياً على علاقة مع “إسرائيل” يكون عضوا في الناتو، وقال إنه كان “على حكومة العثماني بالحد الأدنى الاستقالة عند توقيع التطبيع مع الاحتلال”.

وأشار إلى أن المناورة المشتركة لفصائل المقاومة وجهت رسالة بأن الجهوزية عالية، والتطبيع لم يؤثر على المقاومة.

وقال الكاتب السياسي كمال بن يونس في هذا السياق إن “كل الاحزاب العقائدية عدّلت مواقفها من قضايا عدة منها النضال ضد الامبريالية”، معتبراً أن من أسباب خسارة الاحزاب الاسلامية الحكم في تونس ومصر دعمهم لفلسطين.

بن يونس أكّد في حديث لـ الميادين أن “توقيع رئيس الحكومة في المغرب على اتفاق التطبيع سيعود بالضرر على حزب العدالة والتنمية، وأن من أخطاء الاحزاب الاسلامية التمسك بعمقها الاسلامي مع التحالف مع الفاسدين والاستعمار”.

من جهته، قال الباحث في الشؤون الامنية محمد أبو هربيد “لم نصل بعد إلى تشابك حقيقي لتكون القضية الفلسطينية هي الأولوية، مؤكّداً أن المقاومة الفلسطينية هي العقبة الأساسية التي تواجه الاحتلال الإسرائيلي.

أبو هربيد اعتبر في حديث مع الميادين أن “الهروب من واقع المقاومة دفع بعض العرب والإسرائيليين للذهاب إلى التطبيع، وأن الدول العربية لم تذهب إلى التطبيع من موقع القوة.

وأكد أن المناورات المشتركة تحمل رسائل تطمين للشعب الفلسطيني، ورسالة لكل منظومة التطبيع ان المقاومة مستمرة.

يذكر أن الغرفة المشتركة لفصائل المقاومة الفلسطينية أعلنت اليوم الأربعاء جهوزيتها لتنفيذ مناورات عسكرية مشتركة للمرة الأولى تنشر تفاصيلها وتوقيتاتها وفق مقتضيات الميدان.

 Where is Palestine in the “Muslim Brotherhood” constants from Egypt to Tunisia, Turkey and Syria?

Source:Al-Mayadeen


From Hamas to the Society for Peace movement in Algeria, to the constitutional movement in Kuwait, there is a consensus that the Justice and Development agreed to normalise Morocco as a betrayal and a stab in the back.

 محافظ الرباط يرحب بكوشنر ومستشار الأمن القومي الإسرائيلي بعد وصولهما إلى المغرب (أ ف ب).
The Governor of Rabat welcomes Kushner and Israel’s national security adviser after their arrival in Morocco (AFP).

Rabat, Tel Aviv and Washington signed a tripartite agreement that included several memorandums of understanding to establish relations between Morocco and Israel, which Moroccan Foreign Minister Nasser Borita described as “a road map that the three parties will work on during the next phase.”

Shocking was the pictures of the Moroccan prime minister signing the normalization agreement with the Israeli occupation.

The shock was even more severe for the Islamist parties carrying the ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood. The Justice and Development Party (PJD), which heads the government in Morocco, is also one of the political Islamist parties that came to power after what was known as the “Arab Spring”.

There is no doubt that Islamist movements are divided in the position on normalisation, but the question is related to the Muslim Brotherhood who came to power in Egypt, Turkey and Tunisia, what did they do for Palestine? How can an Islamic political party justify betraying the nation’s holiest cause in order to stay in power?

The region has two options in dealing with the occupying entity. The first takes the initiative to save the occupation from its crises and problems, which have reached dangerous stages internally, through free normalisation projects.

The second option chose the resistance as a strategic choice for the liberation of the land and the people, and prepares for confrontation and prepares for each fight, this time through joint exercises of resistance factions in Palestine held for the first time.

Commenting on Moroccan normalisation and the position of Islamic movements on it, Talal Atrisi, a researcher in social and political affairs, said that Islamic movements are at a historic juncture related to dealing with Palestine, stressing that there is a great shock to the Moroccan government’s position on normalisation with the occupation.

Atrisi said in an interview with Al-Mayadeen  that the Turkish model means Islamic rule on the relationship with “Israel” to be a member of NATO, and said that “the Ottoman government should have at a minimum resigned when signing normalisation with the occupation.”

He noted that the joint manoeuvring of the resistance factions sent a message that readiness is high, and normalisation has not affected the resistance.

“All ideological parties have adjusted their positions on several issues, including the struggle against imperialism,” political writer Kamal Ben Younis said, adding that one of the reasons for the Islamic parties losing power in Tunisia and Egypt is their support for Palestine.

“Morocco’s prime minister’s signing of the normalisation agreement will hurt the PJD, and it is a mistake for Islamic parties to stick to their Islamic depth with the alliance with the corrupt and colonialism,” Ben Younis told Al-Mayadeen.

For his part, security researcher Mohammed Abu Harbid said, “We have not yet reached a real entanglement so that the Palestinian issue will be the priority, stressing that the Palestinian resistance is the main obstacle facing the Israeli occupation.

  “The escape from the reality of resistance prompted some Arabs and Israelis to go to normalisation, and the Arab countries did not go to normalisation from the position of force,” he said.

He stressed that the joint exercises carry messages of reassurance to the Palestinian people and a message to the entire normalisation system that the resistance continues.

It is worth mentioning that the Joint Chamber of Palestinian Resistance Factions (PDT) on Wednesday announced its readiness to carry out joint military exercises  for the first time, publishing its details and timings in accordance with the requirements of the field.

Ten years on the lie of the Arab Spring! عشر سنوات على أكذوبة الربيع العربيّ!

Ten years on the lie of the Arab Spring!

See the source image

Dr. D.Mohammed Sayed Ahmed

I know that the title of the article may be a clash with some hardliners who do not accept a negative word on the so-called Arab Spring,  who always describe it as a revolution,  especially in Tunisia and Egypt. 

In order to comfort these people from  the beginning, I confess to them that I  personally was one of the  participants  in the events of January 25th in Egypt and I was one of those opponents of Mubarak’s policies and successive governments. In January, I did not accept  reform,  I was a hardliner who wanted to bring about a radical change in the structure of society, and I saw that the structure  of Egyptian society  had suffered a lot of social,  economic, political and cultural damage, and that it was time for change.

However, far from emotions and through a scientific and objective view, it was necessary to assess  what happened 10 years after the outbreak of the so-called Arab Spring, and through a review of the research heritage that has taken place over the past 10 years it is clear that the majority of  researchers and scholars from different disciplines (politics, economy, sociology, media) have given a preliminary judgement on the events that took place in some Arab countries  (Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen,  Libya, Syria)  at the end of 2010 and the beginning of 20111 as revolutions. It is strange that many  of these studies have put the concept of revolution in the title of the study, and thus have been  issued as required from the beginning, and the researcher himself, although researchers and leading scholars, did not bother to try to verify these events; did he actually live up to the revolution or not?  We did not find a single study that tried to answer this question. Are the events and interactions  witnessed by some Arab countries amounting to a revolution?

Here it must be emphasised that the revolution, as the majority of literature in the social  sciences see it,  is «to bring about a positive radical change in the social, economic, political and  cultural structure  of  society.  This scientific definition of the revolution leads us to the conclusion  that revolutions are not judged by their causes and motives or through their events and interactions,  but by their consequences. If society does not see a radical positive change in its social,  economic,  political  and cultural structure, the events and interactions that have paved the way for the causes and motives that  we cannot describe as revolution, but must seek another concept, especially since there are many  concepts  that may overlap and resemble the concept of revolution in terms of causes,  motives, events  and  interactions, but differ in terms of results such as the concept of popular  uprising, mass  movement, protest movement and others.

Therefore, it is clear that the majority of studies carried out over the past 10 years have  recognised  that what happened is an Arab Spring and Arab revolutions that have accelerated governance  through causes, motives, events and interactions without waiting to judge according to the results.  In each society is different from what the other society has seen, each society has its own structural and historical specificity and it is not permissible to mix papers and generalise.

Montage photo qui exprime le dégoût des Tunisiens à l'égard de ce mercenaire du Qatar et agent du sionisme.
Montage photo qui exprime le dégoût des Tunisiens à l’égard de ce mercenaire du Qatar et agent du sionisme.

In a recent study we monitored the results of this so-called spring, the  results in Tunisia say that the  social, economic, political and cultural  impact of the mass movement witnessed in Tunisia at the end of 2010  was  negative on the structure of society and did not reflect positively on the vast majority of  citizens.

See the source image

The results in Egypt were very similar, and the  January 25  movement did not  make a  positive change  in the  structure  of society, and the situation  of  the vast majority  of citizens did not  improve,  but their  living conditions  deteriorated  from what they  were under Mubarak.

In Yemen, events have destroyed the structure of society, civil and regional strife prevailed,  external aggression has occurred, people have been displaced and diseases and epidemics have spread, and Yemen has become vulnerable to division.

See the source image

The results in Libya indicate that what happened is an external  aggression that coveted the wealth of the  Libyan people, which ultimately destroyed the structure  of society, and Libya entered a  crisis  that  had been  internationalised, and there was no glimmer of hope to resolve it soon, and in deeds  the idea of partition was perpetuated.

The results confirm that Syria has been subjected to an external conspiracy, which led to a global war  with states that brought terrorist elements to the proxy war, which led to the destruction of the structure of Syrian society, displacement, asylum and the migration of millions of people.

See the source image
 McCain’s ‘Moderate Rebels’ in Syria ARE ISIS

The results in its entirety indicate that the radical positive change in the social, economic, political and cultural structure of society caused by the revolutions has not been witnessed by any Arab society  from the five societies that witnessed the events, so the precise scientific characterisation says  that  what happened in Egypt and Tunisia is by no means up to the level of the revolution, what  happened in  Egypt and Tunisia popular uprisings did not achieve their objectives, what happened in Yemen a power  struggle turned into a civil war and external aggression, what happened in Libya is an  external  aggression, and what happened in Syria is an external conspiracy to undermine its foundations.

Thus, we can say that the so-called Arab Spring is a lie promoted through the colonial media machine,  what has happened is the implementation of the new Middle East plan aimed at dividing and fragmenting our societies and of course exploiting some internal reasons and motives to move the popular masses, so the Arab public opinion must wake up and realise that the project is not finished  and the plans of the American and Zionist enemy will remain in place, but are now being developed  through the so-called peace and normalisation agreements.

عشر سنوات على أكذوبة الربيع العربيّ!

د. محمد سيد أحمد

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is Untitled-304-780x470.png

تحلّ علينا خلال أيام الذكرى العاشرة لأحداث الربيع العربي المزعوم، وبالطبع أعلم أنّ عنوان المقال قد يكون صداماً لبعض المتشدّدين الذين لا يقبلون كلمة سلبية على هذه الأحداث ودائماً ما يصفونها بالثورة خاصة في تونس ومصر. ولكي نريح هؤلاء منذ البداية أعترف لهم أنني شخصياً كنت أحد المشاركين في أحداث 25 يناير في مصر وكنتُ أحد المعارضين لسياسات مبارك وحكوماته المتعاقبة. وفي يناير لم أكن أقبل بالإصلاح فقد كنتُ من المتشددين الذين يرغبون في إحداث التغيير الجذري في بنية المجتمع، وكنت أرى أن بنية المجتمع المصريّ قد أصابها الكثير من العطب على المستوى الاجتماعي والاقتصادي والسياسي والثقافي، وأنه قد حان وقت التغيير.

لكن بعيداً عن العواطف ومن خلال نظرة علمية وموضوعية كان لا بد من تقييم ما حدث بعد مرور عشر سنوات على اندلاع شرارة الربيع العربي المزعوم، ومن خلال مراجعة التراث البحثي الذي تم خلال العشر سنوات الماضية يتضح أن غالبية الباحثين والعلماء من تخصصات مختلفة ( سياسة – اقتصاد – اجتماع – إعلام) قد أصدروا حكماً مبدئياً على الأحداث التي شهدتها بعض الدول العربية ( تونس – مصر – اليمن – ليبيا – سورية) في نهاية العام 2010 وبداية العام 2011 بأنها ثورات. ومن الغريب أن كثيراً من هذه الدراسات قد وضع مفهوم الثورة في عنوان الدراسة، وبذلك يكون قد صادر على المطلوب منذ البداية، ولم يكلف باحث نفسَه، رغم أنهم باحثون وعلماء كبار، أن يحاول التحقق من هذه الأحداث؛ وهل بالفعل ترقى لمستوى الثورة أم لا؟ فلم نجد دراسة واحدة حاولت الإجابة على هذا السؤال. هل ما شهدته بعض الدول العربية من أحداث وتفاعلات يرقى لمستوى الثورة؟

وهنا يجب التأكيد على أن الثورة كما ترى غالبية الأدبيات في العلوم الاجتماعية هي «إحداث تغيير جذري إيجابي في بنية المجتمع الاجتماعية والاقتصادية والسياسية والثقافية». وهذا التعريف العلميّ للثورة يقودنا إلى استنتاج يقول إن الثورات لا يحكم عليها من خلال أسبابها ودوافعها ولا من خلال أحداثها وتفاعلاتها بل يحكم عليها بنتائجها. فإذا لم يشهد المجتمع تغييراً جذرياً إيجابياً في بنيته الاجتماعية والاقتصادية والسياسية والثقافية، فإن الأحداث والتفاعلات التي مهدت لها أسباب ودوافع لا يمكن أن نقوم بتوصيفها بمصطلح الثورة بل يجب البحث عن مفهوم آخر، خاصة أن هناك مفاهيم كثيرة قد تتداخل وتتشابه مع مفهوم الثورة من حيث الأسباب والدوافع والأحداث والتفاعلات، لكنها تختلف من حيث النتائج مثل مفهوم الانتفاضة الشعبية والحراك الجماهيري والحركة الاحتجاجية وغيرها.

ومن هنا يتضح أن غالبية الدراسات التي تمّت عبر العشر سنوات الماضية وسلّمت بأن ما حدث هو ربيع عربي وثورات عربية قد تسرّعت في الحكم من خلال الأسباب والدوافع والأحداث والتفاعلات من دون الانتظار للحكم وفقاً للنتائج، لذلك كان من الضروري الآن وبعد مرور عقد من الزمان على هذه الأحداث طرح السؤال التالي: هل ما حدث في بعض المجتمعات العربية يرقى بالفعل لأن نطلق عليه مصطلح ثورة أو أن نطلق عليه إعلامياً أنه ربيع؟ والإجابة على هذا السؤال تتطلب بحثاً دقيقاً فيما أفضت إليه الأحداث في كل مجتمع عربي على حدة، فما حدث في كل مجتمع يختلف عما شهده المجتمع الآخر، فلكل مجتمع خصوصيته البنائية والتاريخية ولا يجوز خلط الأوراق والتعميم.

وفي دراسة حديثة لنا قمنا برصد النتائج التي أفضى إليها هذا الربيع المزعوم، فجاءت النتائج في تونس تقول إن المردود الاجتماعي والاقتصادي والسياسي والثقافي للحراك الجماهيري الذي شهدته تونس في نهاية العام 2010 جاء سلبياً على بنية المجتمع ولم ينعكس بشكل إيجابي على الغالبية العظمى من المواطنين.

وجاءت النتائج في مصر متشابهة إلى حد كبير فلم يحدث حراك 25 يناير تغييراً إيجابياً في بنية المجتمع، ولم تتحسن أوضاع الغالبية العظمى من المواطنين، بل تدهورت أحوالهم المعيشية عما كانت عليه في عهد مبارك.

وفي اليمن أدّت الأحداث لتدمير بنية المجتمع وساد الاحتراب الأهلي والمناطقي، وحدث العدوان الخارجي، وتشرّد الشعب وانتشرت الأمراض والأوبئة، وأصبح اليمن عرضة للتقسيم.

وتشير النتائج في ليبيا إلى أن ما حدث هو عدوان خارجي طمعاً في ثروات الشعب الليبي، أدى في النهاية إلى تدمير بنية المجتمع، ودخول ليبيا في أزمة تم تدويلها، ولا يوجد بصيص أمل في حلها قريباً، والواقع يكرّس فكرة التقسيم.

وتؤكد النتائج أن سورية قد تعرضت لمؤامرة خارجية، أدّت إلى نشوب حرب كونية مع دول جلبت عناصر إرهابية للحرب بالوكالة، وهو ما أدّى لتدمير بنية المجتمع السوريّ، ونزوح ولجوء وهجرة ملايين من أبناء الشعب.

والنتائج في مجملها تشير إلى أن التغيير الجذري الإيجابي في بنية المجتمع الاجتماعية والاقتصادية والسياسية والثقافية التي تحدثها الثورات لم يشهدها أي مجتمع عربي من المجتمعات الخمسة التي شهدت الأحداث، لذلك فالتوصيف العلمي الدقيق يقول إن ما حدث لا يرقى بأي حال من الأحوال لمستوى الثورة، فما حدث في مصر وتونس انتفاضات شعبية لم تحقق أهدافها، وما حدث في اليمن صراع على السلطة تحول لحرب أهلية وعدوان خارجي، وما حدث في ليبيا عدوان خارجي استعماري، وما حدث في سورية مؤامرة خارجية لتقويض دعائم مشروعها المقاوم.

وبذلك يمكننا القول إن ما يُطلق عليه الربيع العربي هو أكذوبة يتم الترويج لها عبر الآلة الإعلاميّة الاستعماريّة، فما حدث هو تنفيذ لمخطط الشرق الأوسط الجديد الذي يستهدف تقسيم وتفتيت مجتمعاتنا وبالطبع استغل بعض الأسباب والدوافع الداخلية لتحريك الجماهير الشعبية، لذلك يجب أن يفيق الرأي العام العربي ويدرك أن المشروع لم ينته وستظل مخططات العدو الأميركي والصهيوني قائمة، بل يتم تطويرها الآن عبر اتفاقيات السلام والتطبيع المزعومة، اللهم بلغت اللهم فاشهد.

The Smearing of Robert Fisk…Now That He Can’t Defend Himself

DECEMBER 3, 2020

Jonathan Cook: the View from Nazareth - www.jonathan-cook.net
Jonathan Cook is a Nazareth- based journalist and winner of the Martha Gellhorn Special Prize for Journalism [ MORE ]

BY JONATHAN COOK

Something remarkable even by the usually dismal standards of the stenographic media blue-tick brigade has been happening in the past few days. Leading journalists in the corporate media have suddenly felt the urgent need not only to criticise the late, much-respected foreign correspondent Robert Fisk, but to pile in against him, using the most outrageous smears imaginable. He is suddenly a fraud, a fabulist, a fantasist, a liar.

What is most ironic is that the journalists doing this are some of the biggest frauds themselves, journalists who have made a career out of deceiving their readers. In fact, many of the crowd attacking Fisk when he can no longer defend himself are precisely the journalists who have the worst record of journalistic malpractice and on some of the biggest issues of our times.

At least I have the courage to criticise them while they are alive. They know dead men can’t sue. It is complete and utter cowardice to attack Fisk when they could have made their comments earlier, to his face. In fact, if they truly believed any of the things they are so keen to tell us now, they had an absolute duty to say them when Fisk was alive rather than allowing the public to be deceived by someone they regarded as a liar and fantasist. They didn’t make public these serious allegations – they didn’t air their concerns about the supposedly fabricated facts in Fisk’s stories – when he was alive because they know he would have made mincemeat of them.

Most preposterous of all is the fact that the actual trigger for this sudden, very belated outpouring of concern about Fisk is a hit-piece written by Oz Katerji. I’m not sure whether I can find the generosity to call Katerji a journalist. Like Elliot Higgins of the US government-funded Bellingcat, he’s more like an attack dog beloved by establishment blue-ticks: he is there to enforce accepted western imperial narratives, disguising his lock-step support for the establishment line as edgy, power-to-the-people radicalism.

Anyone who challenges Katerji’s establishment-serving agenda gets called names – sometimes very rude ones. Fisk is just the latest target of a Katerji hatchet job against any journalist (myself, of course, included) who dares to step outside of the Overton Window. That these “serious” journalists think they can hang their defamation of Fisk on to anything said by Katerji, most especially the thin gruel he produces in his latest article, is truly shameful. If their concerns really relate to journalistic integrity and reliability, Katerji would be the very last person to cite.

Katerji’s prime area of western narrative enforcement is the Middle East – perhaps not surprisingly, as it is the place where there is an awful lot of oil that western states and corporations are desperate to control. But one should not ignore his wide-ranging efforts to boot-lick wherever he is needed on behalf of western establishment narratives.

Here he is desperately trying to breathe life into two fairytales: that the election of the leftwing Evo Morales as Bolivia’s president was fraudulent, and that Morales was forced to resign last year rather than that he was ousted in a CIA-backed military coup. Notably, Katerji was clinging to these discredited story lines as late as last month, long after even the liberal corporate media had abandoned them as no longer tenable.

Katerji was also, of course, an enthusiastic recruit to evidence-free establishment smears that Labour was overrun with antisemitism under the leadership of the leftwing Jeremy Corbyn, the very same anecdotal claims promoted by the entire corporate media.

Not only that, but he even had the gall to argue that he was speaking on behalf of Palestinians in smearing Corbyn, the only leader of a major European party ever to champion their cause. Labour’s new leader Keir Starmer, like most other politicians in the wake of the Corbyn episode, has all but disappeared the Palestinians from the political agenda. Katerji must be delighted – on behalf of Palestinians, of course.

But Katerji’s beef with Fisk derives chiefly from the fact that the Independent’s foreign correspondent broke ranks with the rest of the western press corps over an alleged chemical weapons attack in Syria.

Katerji is part of what – if we were being more brutally honest about these things – would be called the west’s al-Qaeda lobby. These are a motley crew of journalists and academics using their self-publicised “Arabhood” to justify the intimidation and silencing of anyone not entirely convinced that ordinary Syrians might prefer, however reluctantly, their standard-issue dictator, Bashar al-Assad, over the head-chopping, women-stoning, Saudi-financed jihadists of Islamic State and al-Nusra, the al-Qaeda franchise in Syria; or who question whether the western powers ought to be covertly funding and backing these extremists.

Exercise any doubt at all on either of these points and Katerji will lose no time in calling you an “Assadist”, “war crimes denier”, “antisemite”, “9/11 truther” and worse. Then in yet more evidence of a circle jerk, those establishment blue ticks, even ones beloved by much of the left, will cite his smears as proof that you are indeed an Assadist, war crimes denier, and so on.

Here are just a few examples of Katerji engaging with those critical of the imperial western narrative on Syria, so you get the idea:

Back in 2011 and 2012, in what looked like the possible eruption of an Arab Spring in Syria, the arguments of Katerji and co at least had an air of plausibility. But their real agenda – one that accorded with western imperialism rather than an Arab awakening – became much clearer once local protests against Assad were subsumed by an influx of jihadi fighters of the very kind that had been labelled “terrorists” by the western media everywhere else they appeared in the Middle East.

Inevitably, anyone like Fisk who adopted a position of caution or scepticism about whether the majority of Syrians actually wanted a return to some kind of Islamic Dark Age incurred the wrath of Katerji and his cohorts.

But Fisk infuriated these western al-Nusra lobbyists even further when he visited the town of Douma in 2018 and raised serious questions about claims made by the jihadists who had been ruling the town that, just before Assad’s forces drove them out, the Syrian military had bombed it with chemical gas, killing many civilians. The story, which at that stage was based exclusively on the claims of these head-chopping jihadists, was instantly reported as verified fact by the credulous western media.

Based solely on claims made by the al-Qaeda franchise in Douma, President Donald Trump hurriedly fired off missiles at Syria, in flagrant violation of international law and to cheers from the western media.

Fisk, of course, knew that in discrediting the evidence-free narrative being promoted by the western press corps (who had never been in Douma) he was doing himself no favours at all. They would resent him all the more. Most of his peers preferred to ignore his revelations, even though they were earth-shattering in their implications. But once the official watchdog body the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) issued its report into Douma many months later, implicitly backing the jihadists’ version of events, Fisk’s earlier coverage was snidely dismissed by fellow journalists.

Sadly for them, however, the story did not end there. Following publication of the OPCW’s Douma report, a number of its senior experts started coming forward as whistleblowers to say that, under pressure from the US, the OPCW bureaucracy tampered with their research and misrepresented their findings in the final report. The evidence they had found indicated that Assad had not carried out a chemical attack in Douma. More likely the jihadists, who were about to be expelled by Assad’s forces, had staged the scene to make it look like a chemical attack and draw the US deeper into Syria.

Of course, just as the corporate media ignored Fisk’s original reporting from Douma that would have made their own accounts sound like journalistic malpractice, they resolutely ignored the whistleblowers too. You can scour the corporate media and you will be lucky to find even an allusion to the months-long row over the OPCW report, which gained enough real-world prominence to erupt into a major row at the United Nations, including denunciations of the OPCW’s behaviour from the organisation’s former head, Jose Bustani.

This is the way frauds like Katerji are able to ply their own misinformation. They sound credible only because the counter-evidence that would show they are writing nonsense is entirely absent from the mainstream. Only those active on social media and open-minded enough to listen to voices not employed by a major corporate platform (with, in this case, the notable exception of Peter Hitchens of the Daily Mail) are able to find any of this counter-information. It is as if we are living in parallel universes.

The reason why Fisk was so cherished by readers, and why there was a real sense of loss when he died a month ago, was that he was one of the very few journalists who belonged to the mainstream but reported as though he were not beholden to the agenda of his corporate platform.

There were specific reasons for that. Like a handful of others – John Pilger, Seymour Hersh, Chris Hedges among them – Fisk made his name in the corporate media at a time when it reluctantly indulged the odd maverick foreign correspondent because they had a habit of exposing war crimes everyone else missed, exclusives that then garnered their publications prestigious journalism awards. Ownership of the media was then far less concentrated, so there was a greater commercial incentive for risk-taking and breaking stories. And these journalists emerged in a period when power was briefly more contested, with the labour movement trying to assert its muscle in the post-war decades, and before western societies were forced by the corporate elite to submit to neoliberal orthodoxy on all matters.

Notably, Pilger, Hersh and Hedges all found themselves struggling to keep a place in the corporate media. Fisk alone managed to cling on. That was more by luck. After being forced out of Rupert Murdoch’s Times newspaper for breaking a disturbing story in 1989 on the US shooting down of an Iranian passenger plane, he found a new home at Britain’s Independent newspaper, which had been recently founded. As a late-comer to the British media scene, the paper struggled not only to make money but to create a distinctive identity or gain any real visibility. Fisk survived, it seems, because he quickly established himself as one of the very few reasons to buy the paper. He was a rare example of a journalist who was bigger than the outlet he served.

Readers trusted him because he not only refused to submit to his peers’ herd-think but endlessly called them out as journalistically and intellectually lazy.

Those now trying to tarnish his good name are actually inverting the truth. They want to suggest that support for Fisk was cultish and he was hero-worshipped by those incapable of thinking critically. They will say as much about this piece. So let me point out that I am not without my own criticisms of Fisk. I wrote, for example, an article criticising some unsubstantiated claims he made during Israel’s massive bombardment of Lebanon in 2006.

But my criticism was precisely the opposite of the blue-tick crowd now traducing him. I questioned Fisk for striving to find an implausible middle ground with those establishment blue ticks (before we knew what blue ticks were) by hedging his bets about who was responsible for the destruction of Lebanon. It was a rare, if understandable, example of journalistic timidity from Fisk – a desire to maintain credibility with his peers, and a reluctance to follow through on where the evidence appeared to lead. Maybe this was a run-in with the pro-Israel crowd and the corporate journalists who echo them that, on this occasion, he did not think worth fighting.

The discomfort Fisk aroused in his peers was all too obvious to anyone working in the corporate media, even in its liberal outlets, as I was during the 1990s. I never heard a good word said about Fisk at the Guardian or the Observer. His death has allowed an outpouring of resentment towards him that built up over decades from journalists jealous of the fact that no readers will mourn or remember their own passing.

Fisk’s journalism spoke up for the downtrodden and spoke directly to the reader rather than, as with his colleagues, pandering to editors in the hope of career advancement. In the immediate wake of his death, his colleagues’ disdain for Fisk was veiled in weaselly language. As Media Lens have noted, the favourite term used to describe him in obituaries, even in his own newspaper, was “controversial”.

“It turns out that the term ‘controversial’ is only applied in corporate media to political writers and leaders deemed ‘controversial’ by elite interests.

“This was unwittingly made clear by the big brains at the BBC who noted that Fisk ‘drew controversy for his sharp criticism of the US and Israel, and of Western foreign policy’. If Fisk had drawn ‘controversy’ from China, Iran or North Korea, the ‘weasel word’ would not have appeared in the Beeb’s analysis…

“In corporate media newspeak, ‘controversial’ can actually be translated as ‘offensive to power’. The term is intended as a scare word to warn readers that the labelled person is ‘dodgy’, ‘suspect’: ‘Handle with care!’ The journalist is also signalling to his or her editors and other colleagues: ‘I’m not one of “them”!’”

The journalists who now claim Fisk was a fraud and fantasist are many of those who happily worked for papers that readily promoted the gravest lies imaginable to rationalise an illegal attack on Iraq in 2003 and its subsequent occupation. Those publications eagerly supported lies supplied by the US and British governments that Iraq had WMD and that its leader, Saddam Hussein, was colluding with al-Qaeda – claims that were easily disprovable at the time.

Journalists now attacking Fisk include ones, like the Guardian’s Jessica Elgot, who have been at the forefront of advancing the evidence-free antisemitism smears against Corbyn. Or, like the Guardian’s Hannah Jane Parkinson, have engaged in another favourite corporate journalist pastime, ridiculing the plight of Julian Assange, a fellow journalist who puts their craven stenography to shame and who is facing a lifetime in a US super-max jail for revealing US war crimes in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Even the Guardian’s Jason Burke, who claims to have experienced Fisk’s lying first-hand while working for the Observer newspaper in 2001 (as was I at that time), has been unable to come up with the goods when challenged, as the pitiable Twitter thread retweeted here confirms:

Noticeably, there is a pattern to the claims of those now maligning Fisk: they hurry to tell us that he was an inspiration in their student days. They presumably think that mentioning this will suggest their disillusionment was hard-earned and therefore make it sound more plausible. But actually it suggests something different.

It indicates instead that in their youthful idealism they aspired to become a journalist who would dig out the truth, who would monitor centres of power, who would comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. To do, in fact, exactly what Fisk did.

But once they got a footing on the corporate career ladder, they slowly learnt that they would need to adopt a more “nuanced” approach to journalism – certainly if they hoped to progress up that ladder, earning the right to their blue tick, and gaining a big enough salary to cover the mortgage in London or New York.

In other words, they became everything they despised in their student days. Fisk was the constant reminder of just how much they had sold out. His very existence shamed them for what they were too cowardly to do themselves. And now in death, when he cannot answer back, they are feasting on his corpse like the vultures that they are, until there is nothing left to remind us that, unlike them, Robert Fisk told uncomfortable truths to the very end.

Jonathan Cook won the Martha Gellhorn Special Prize for Journalism. His latest books are “Israel and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East” (Pluto Press) and “Disappearing Palestine: Israel’s Experiments in Human Despair” (Zed Books). His website is http://www.jonathan-cook.net/

Syrian Foreign Minister Muallem Was A Multipolar Visionary

Andrew Korybko (@AKorybko) | Twitter

By Andrew Korybko

American political analyst

18 NOVEMBER 2020

Syrian Foreign Minister Muallem Was A Multipolar Visionary
In order to appreciate his legacy, the reader must understand the complex circumstances in which he worked.

Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem passed away earlier this week, but his multipolar vision will be remembered forever. The Arab Republic’s top diplomat previously served as his country’s Ambassador to the US from 1990-1999 prior to becoming Assistant Foreign Minister in 2000, Deputy Foreign Minister in 2005, Foreign Minister in 2006, and even Deputy Prime Minister in 2012. He was also Syria’s Minister of Expatriates too. In order to appreciate his legacy, the reader must understand the complex circumstances in which he worked.

The US became the world’s unipolar superpower after the end of the Cold War right when Mr. Muallem became the Syrian Ambassador to that country. He was charged with managing Damascus’ changing relations with the world during that very difficult time. It was during that period that both countries attempted to normalize their formerly hostile Cold War-era relations. Although extremely challenging, Mr. Muallem succeeded as best as he could with his very important task.

Just before becoming Foreign Minister, Syria militarily withdrew from neighboring Lebanon in response to the domestic political changes that took place there during its Cedar Revolution after the assassination of Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. Damascus was blamed for that crime but vehemently denied it, and Mr. Muallem provided plenty of evidence in defense of his country to the United Nations. That was his first real challenge in his new post. The year after, in 2007, Israel bombed a suspected nuclear reactor in Syria, which caused a brief crisis.

Mr. Muallem also had to contend with the increasingly aggressive US military presence in neighboring Iraq. Washington had accused Damascus of supporting anti-American militias, and some voices were even urging the Pentagon to go to war against the Arab Republic. Thankfully nothing ever came out of those hawkish cries, but that’s largely the result of Syria’s diplomatic success in standing strong against this bullying. Syrian-American relations then thawed for a short period of time after Secretary of State Kerry visited Damascus in 2010.

It was after the onset of the regional regime change operation popular described as the so-called “Arab Spring” in 2011 that Mr. Muallem became a globally recognized diplomatic figure even though he arguably deserved this distinction earlier for the aforementioned reasons. Syria was victimized by an externally waged hybrid war of terror which included foreign sponsorship of terrorist groups, crippling Western sanctions, and several false accusations that Damascus used chemical weapons against its own people.

The most dramatic of the latter occurred in late 2013 and almost led to the US launching a conventional all-out war against Syria like it had against Libya just two years prior. Mr. Muallem played a leading role in resolving this global crisis, which resulted in Syria surrendering its chemical weapons stockpile to the international community. Two years later, Russia launched a game-changing anti-terrorist military intervention in Damascus’ support to help defeat ISIS, which Mr. Muallem also played an integral role in organizing behind the scenes.

All the while, he simultaneously helped Syria react to several Turkish military interventions without escalating them to the point of a larger war, the same as he did whenever Israel launched literally hundreds of strikes against his country in the proceeding years as well, to say nothing of the US-led anti-ISIS coalition’s attacks too. It took exceptional patience and restraint to avoid overreacting to those provocations like others in his position elsewhere might have done, but he kept his cool and thus helped manage those destabilizing developments.

It should also be mentioned that Syria retained its historic alliance with Iran that preceded Mr. Muallem’s tenure as Foreign Minister by several decades. He masterfully balanced between that Mideast country and Syria’s other Russian ally without playing either off against the other unlike other smaller- and medium-sized states in similarly difficult positions had historically attempted in the past with different partners. Importantly, Mr. Muallem also oversaw the improvement of Syrian-Chinese relations during this time as well.

China, Russia, and Iran are completely different countries but are all united in spirit because of their belief in a multipolar world order, which Syria also supports. Mr. Muallem proved that countries such as his can successfully bring all three of them together to synergize their efforts in pursuit of this vision. The example that he set in this respect, among the many others that were mentioned in this analysis, will ensure that he’s remembered the world over as one of the greatest diplomats of the 21st century.

President Assad Speech to the Int’l Conference on Refugees Return

The video is also available on BitChute 

November 11, 2020 Arabi Souri

President Bashar Assad addressing Refugees Return Conference in Damascus

Damascus is hosting the International Conference on the Return of the Syrian Refugees with the participation of a number of countries in person or through video conference.

The camp led by the United States of America, the usual hypocrites for humanity, boycotting the conference and preventing the return of the Syrian refugees.

President Bashar Al Assad addressed the attendees of the International Conference on the Return of the Syrian Refugees that started today with the following speech.

Transcript of the English translation of President Assad speech:

Ladies and gentlemen, representatives of the countries participating in the conference,

I welcome you in Damascus dear guests, welcome in Syria which although, it has bled from long years of war, the cruelty of the siege, and the criminality of terrorism, it still cheers for meeting its true lovers and those who are truly loyal and who bear in their hearts, minds, and conscience the cause of humanity in every time and place.

In the beginning, I thank our Russian friends for their great efforts in supporting the convening of this conference despite all international attempts to foil it.

I also thank the Iranian friends for their efforts in this regard and for their true support which have contributed to easing the repercussions of the war and the impacts of the blockade.

I highly appreciate your coming to Damascus and your participation in this conference, and I mainly thank the states which have received Syrian refugees and embraced them, and whose people have shared their livelihood and job opportunities with the Syrians despite the economic suffering in those countries.

Dear participants, some states embraced the refugees based on ethical principles while other states in the West and in our region also are exploiting them in the ugliest way through transforming their humanitarian issue into a political paper for bargaining, in addition to making them as a source for money quenching their officials’ corruption without taking into consideration the real suffering lived by the Syrians abroad.

Instead of the actual work to create the appropriate conditions for their return, they forced them to stay through temptation sometimes or through exerting pressures on them or intimidating them, and this isn’t surprising as those governments have worked hard for spreading terrorism in Syria which caused the death of hundreds of thousands of its people, and displaced millions of them, those states can’t be logically the same ones which are the reason and the road for their return to their homeland, and their rejection to participate in this conference is the best evidence on that, the conference that seeks the goal for which they are crying falsely, which is the return of refugees.

If the issue of refugees according to the world is a humanitarian issue, it is for us, in addition to being a humanitarian issue, it is a national issue, we have managed over the past few years in achieving the return of hundreds of thousands of refugees, and today, we are still working relentlessly for the return of every refugee who wants to return and to contribute to building his/her homeland, but the obstacles are large as in addition to the pressures exerted on the Syrian refugees abroad to prevent them from returning, the illegitimate economic sanctions and the siege imposed by the US regime and its allies hinder the efforts exerted by the institutions of the Syrian state which aim to rehabilitate the infrastructure in the areas which had been destroyed by terrorism so as the refugees can return and live a decent life in normal conditions, and this is the main reason for the reluctance of many of them to return to their areas and villages due to the absence of the minimum basic requirements for life.

Despite all of that, the overwhelming majority of Syrians abroad today more than ever want to return to their homeland because they reject to be a ‘number’ on the political investment lists and a ‘paper’ in the hand of regimes which support terrorism against their homeland.

The issue of the refugees in Syria is a fabricated issue as Syria’s history and from centuries ago hasn’t witnessed any case of collective asylum, and despite that Syria, throughout its ancient and modern history, has suffered from successive occupations and continuous disturbances till the sixties of the last century, yet it has remained the place to which those who flee the disturbances and different crises resort, especially since the beginning of the twentieth century and the Ottoman massacres till the invasion of Iraq in the year 2003, and all of that history hasn’t mentioned any wars among the Syrians for ethnic, religious or sectarian reasons, neither before nor after the establishment of the Syrian state.

And as the objective conditions don’t lead to the creation of a situation of asylum, it was necessary for the Western regimes led by the American regime and the states which are subordinate to it from the neighboring countries, particularly Turkey to create fabricated conditions to push the Syrians to collectively get out of Syria, to find a justification for the interference in the Syrian affairs, and later to divide the state and transform it into a subordinate state that works for achieving their interests instead of the interests of its people.

Spreading terrorism was the easiest way, and it started by establishing the Islamic State terrorist organization in Iraq in the year 2006 under the patronage of the US which during the war on Syria joined other terrorist organizations such as the Muslim Brotherhood, Jabhat al-Nusra, and others, and they destroyed the infrastructure and killed the innocent people, in addition to paralyzing the public services intimidating the Syrians and forcing them to leave their homeland.

In the year 2014, and when the Syrian state seemed to be on its way to restore security and stability, these countries mobilized ISIS terrorist group with the aim of dispersing the armed forces and enabling terrorists to control a large part of the Syrian territory, the largest part of which has been restored thanks to the sacrifices of our national army and the support of our friends, this support which had played a great role in defeating terrorists and liberating many areas.

Today we are facing an issue which consists of three interconnected elements; millions of refugees who want to return, destroyed infrastructure worth hundreds of billions and which were built throughout decades, and terrorism which is still tampering with some Syrian areas.

The Syrian State institutions have managed to achieve acceptable leaps compared with their potentials in dealing with such a big challenge, along with the continued war against terrorism, it has offered facilitation and guarantees for the return of hundreds of thousands of refugees to their homeland through several legislations such as delaying the compulsory military service for a year for the returnees, in addition to issuing a number of amnesty decrees from which a number of those who are inside the homeland or abroad have benefited.

In parallel with and despite the illegal siege, the Syrian state has been able to restore the minimum of the infrastructure in many areas such as water, electricity, schools, roads, and other public services to enable the returnees from living even with the minimum necessities of life.

The more the potentials increase, these steps will be faster certainly, and their increase is connected to the receding in the obstacles represented by the economic siege and the sanctions which deprive the state of the simplest necessary means for the reconstruction and leads to the deterioration of the economic and living conditions in a way that deprives citizens of the decent livelihood and deprives the refugees of the chance to return due to the decrease in the job opportunities.

I am confident that this conference will create the appropriate ground for cooperation among us in the upcoming stage for ending this humanitarian crisis which was caused by the largest barbaric Western aggression which the world has ever known in modern history. This crisis, which at every moment affects every home in Syria and the conscience of every honest person in the world, will remain for us as Syrians a deep wound which will not be healed until all those who were displaced by the war, terrorism, and siege return.

I wish for the activities of the conference success through reaching recommendations and proposals which directly contribute to the return of the Syrians to their homeland so as Syria will become, by them and by those who stayed and remained steadfast over ten years, better than ever.

Again, thank you for attending, and God bless you.

End of the transcript.
Credit: Syria news agency SANA staff contributed to the translation.

The conference is attended by 27 countries and boycotted by the USA and its stooges who do not want to relieve the Syrian refugees suffering, they want to continue to invest in that suffering by blackmailing the Syrian government to give away concessions, mainly to recognize Israel, to decrease its cooperation with Iran and Russia, to abandon the Lebanese and Palestinian people’s right for resistance and return to their homelands, and to join the US camp of aggressors against other sovereign countries, and to achieve that, the USA and through its regional stooges want to either replace the Syrian leadership and Syrian government with a puppet regime or at least install its agents in decision-making posts in the Syrian government, and those are exactly what the Syrian people refused to do and have stood up for the USA and its camp of evil satellite states and has paid and still paying a hefty price for stopping the aggressors and reversing the domino effect of the anti-Islamic Muslim Brotherhood-led colored revolutions in the Arab world dubbed the ‘Arab Spring’.

During the conference, Russia pledged 1 billion dollars to help rehabilitate Syria’s electricity and basic services, Iran suggested to establish a fund for helping Syria rebuild its infrastructure, and Lebanese ministers cried of the economic pressure the Syrian refugees have caused on their economy, yet the Lebanese Minister of Foreign Affairs through a video call from Beirut and the Lebanese Minister of Labor from within the conference hall in Damascus failed to mention the criminal contribution of former Lebanese governments and Lebanese warlords in facilitating the terrorist attacks against Syria and abusing the Syrian refugees suffering in their country.

To help us continue please visit the Donate page to donate or learn how you can help us with no cost on you.
Follow us on Telegram: http://t.me/syupdates link will open Telegram app.

Related Videos

Related News

Holes in the History Wall Tales, Biden Horses Snicker in Washington

November 10, 2020 Arabi Souri

Biden Masked
Holes in the History Wall Tales, Biden Horses Snicker in Washington
Written by Naram Serjoon (source in Arabic)

Marx was not mistaken when he said that history has a scientific movement that makes predicting its journeys like unveiling the unknowns of a mathematical equation, the study of history enables to predict the location of its steps and the direction of its journey.

But Marx’s discovery was used for something else, not just to study history and predict events, we have reached the time of making the history in America, everything at this time has become manufactured or prefabricated, the days and months are poured into mixers and the wall of American time that surrounds us and imprisons us in the prisons of Facebook, the Internet and Instagram is made of them. Seconds, minutes, and hours are melted down to make the stage for events, therefore, the movement of history is apparently governed by the one who holds the bridle of the horse that time uses to ride past us. This is what the United States of America is trying very hard, opposing the natural movement of history, and wants us to believe in the end of history because it has managed the secrets of history-making and analyzed its genetic material. If America manufactures airplanes, bombs, technology, cloning cells, and humans, then why does it not make history as well? America thinks everything can be made if you know its genotype, code, and equations!

Therefore, let us peek behind the holes in the events whose stories and narratives have turned into impermeable walls that do not allow us to see beyond them of the secrets of the date rigging machine that prints the path of the dateline and its breaks just as dollars are printed for us on paper without gold backing. That is, the history that America makes are illusions, like its dollars without value.

When we see the solid walls of history, we must look for cracks or holes through which we see the hidden and the concealed.

For example, among the holes of history, we used to see a wall called the Balfour Declaration, and in that ‘promise’ there were small holes from which we looked and knew that the date of the promise was not a coincidence and a moment of clarity decided by His Majesty’s government, rather, that promise was coupled on that date with the strike of German ammunition workers, the stopping of factories, the cessation of funding for the German army, and after the Germans were on the way to victory in the war, everything turned in 1917, the date of the Balfour Declaration … and the date of the introduction of the first chemical weapon in history to the British army by the Jewish chemical scientist Chaim Weizman, who became one of the founders of Israel later.

What is this coincidence between the Balfour Declaration and the defeat of Germany on the same date?

Among the large holes through which we look at the secrets of Turkey’s history, one of the holes takes us to look at a delusional contempt moment when suddenly the Turkish army allowed the Islamists in Turkey to come to power before the arrival of the Islamist Arab Spring. What is this coincidence if this was not carefully coordinated and arranged?

Yes, what is this coincidence between the arrival of the Islamists and Erdogan to power and the arrival of the Islamist wave led by NATO Turkey to the Middle East?

All stories of history are full of holes, and we should only look boldly and with a critical eye, looking through these holes.

We will know how Kennedy’s assassination was preceded by his powerful statements about the profound forces and capital that govern America and control its decision, which must be curbed.


And we will learn from among the holes how the Watergate scandal began in Damascus when Henry Kissinger was sitting with his boss Nixon and listening to him as he spoke with the late President Hafez Al-Assad about ways to end the conflict in the Middle East in a fair way, and how he was the one who imposed the framework of the debate on his boss. As soon as Nixon returned, he found Watergate waiting for him.

What is this coincidence between Nixon’s talk in Damascus and Watergate, which was waiting for him within days of his arrival?

Today, some holes began to appear in the narration of events, so if we look through some of the holes that appeared in the wall of the American novel about Coronavirus and the defeat of Trump, we might be able to know the itinerary of the next American trip in Biden’s time. Suddenly, through a sudden announcement that the Coronavirus vaccine had been successfully developed in the “Pfizer” laboratories, I tripped over a question that my eyes stumbled upon and it was walking adrift. The question asked: What is this coincidence in the emergence of the treatment or vaccine immediately after the end of the American elections and the securing of Trump’s departure? And why is the world talking that the return to normal life will take place next spring in 2021, that is, with the beginning of Biden’s assumption of power? Today, he says that his team devised an elaborate plan to get rid of the virus and defeat it. It will appear as if Biden is the one who defeated Coronavirus and will assume the presidency without Coronavirus or a dead Coronavirus, and economic activity will return to the same state as it was.

The question that I stumbled upon stumbled upon another question by itself, which is whether China was involved with the Democrats in fabricating the Coronavirus crisis and launching the novel in Wuhan, China because it made a deal with the Democrats who secretly went to it, like what they did in the Vietnam War, and offered a deal to the Vietnamese, urging them to refuse to compromise with the Republican administration in order for it to fail in the elections, so the Democrats present the Vietnamese with a much better offer to end the war.

This correlation between launching the virus story from China and ending and toppling Trump’s rule is possible because it is in the interest of both parties to get rid of Trump’s next project heading to China? China is concerned about Trump’s tendency against it and his trade war, and therefore it may have accepted the Democrats’ offer? Why was the virus absent from China and remained in America eating from the economy of Trump and the West until Trump was overthrown, and then the vaccine appeared two days after the elections? Is this the reason for the resentment against Anthony Fauci among the Trump administration to the point that someone asked to behead him?

Today, if we want to see how Biden’s new cowboy horses will go, the study of history says that whoever makes the next history and forces it to move in the direction they want will be the US Military-Industrial Complex represented by Biden, Hillary Clinton, and the war elite. The danger of this Complex is that it has an American economy that wants to rise quickly after Coronavirus and the strong blow it received. The only way to revive the economy is to sell arms and reproduce wars. Therefore, it got rid of Trump, who wants to run an economy that competes with China in everything, while the Military-Industrial Complex is only meant to establish the war economy, the huge arms trade, and successive wars.

The battlefields that will be conducted in the time of Biden are vast to saturate the insatiable hunger of the Military-Industrial Complex, but it is not thought that the same old battlefields will be attractive. A war arena like Syria can no longer be returned to it with the presence of Russia and the crushing of the Islamist groups that suffered a very violent blow in that war. It will not satisfy the need for the Military-Industrial Complex, insatiable for widespread wars. But will Iran be its battlefield, Turkey, or Russia’s periphery? Each battlefield has its own attraction.

Biden wars - Military Industrial Complex

It also appears that the temporary truce with the Americans ended in eastern Syria with the announcement of the deaths of four Americans in eastern Syria. While Biden awaits the day of his coronation, the movement to uproot the American army and its allies in eastern Syria will have been organized, and this was announced in the first resistance operation that killed four American soldiers in the Syrian Jazira (northeast) region.

A very accurate and calculated timing, not by chance, after the announcement of Biden’s arrival (winning), who received the bloody message from eastern Syria that a safe exit from Syria is better than stubbornness. And that this arena is no longer an arena for the American army and American adventures, and that it must hasten to get rid of the burden of being in eastern Syria in order to turn to the wars that are drawn for it according to the agenda of the Military-Industrial Complex in the rest of the world.

Nothing happened by chance these days, and I do not think that the presidential conversation between the People’s Palace (Syria’s Presidential Palace) and the Kremlin was also a coincidence at this time that announces Biden’s arrival at the White House.

It is a conversation that I do not think is far from catching the American bull’s horns before it slips and becomes difficult to control, and perhaps eliminating its last terrorist warehouse in Idlib before Erdogan reopens and leases his goods to Biden in exchange for relief.

I hear the neighing of our horses in the Jazira (Hasakah, Der Ezzor, and Raqqa) and Idlib, but no one will see what will happen except those who pierce the wall of time with the beam of their eyes, and who pierces the wall of American stories with his steel questions and breaks the wall of time with his horse’s neighing.

To help us continue please visit the Donate page to donate or learn how you can help us with no cost on you.
Follow us on Telegram: http://t.me/syupdates link will open Telegram app.

ثقوب في جدار حكايات التاريخ .. خيول بايدن تحمحم في واشنطن ..

Posted on 2020/11/10 by naram.serjoonn

لم يخطئ ماركس عندما قال ان للتاريخ حركة علمية تجعل التنبؤ بمسيرته مثل كشف مجاهيل معادلة رياضية .. فدراسة التاريخ تمكن من توقع مكان خطواته واتجاه رحلته .. ولكن اكتشاف ماركس تم استخدامه لشيء آخر ليس لمجرد دراسة التاريخ والتنبؤ بالاحداث .. بل وصلنا الى زمن صناعة التاريخ في اميريكا .. فكل شيء في هذا الزمان صار مصنوعا أو مسبق الصنع .. فالأيام والشهور تجبل في خلاطات ويصنع منها جدار الزمن الأمريكي الذي يحيط بنا ويسجننا فيه في سجون الفيسبوك والانترنت والانستغرام .. وتصهر الثواني والدقائق والساعات لتصنع منها منصات الاحداث .. ولذلك فان حركة التاريخ محكومة على مايبدو بمن يمسك بلجام الحصان الذي يرحل عليه الزمن .. وهذا ماتحاوله جاهدة الولايات المتحدة الامريكية التي تعاند حركة التاريخ الطبيعية وتريد ان نؤمن بنهاية التاريخ لأنها تمكنت من أسرار صناعة التاريخ وحللت مادته الوراثية .. فاذا كانت اميريكا تصنع الطائرات والقنابل والتكنولوجيا واستنساخ الخلايا والبشر فلماذا لاتصنع التاريخ أيضا .. فكل شيء يمكن صناعته كما تعتقد اذا عرفت تركيبه الوراثي وشيفرته ومعادلاته؟؟


ولذلك دعونا نسترق النظر من خلف ثقوب في الاحداث التي تحولت قصصها وسردياتها الى جدران كتيمة لاتسمح لنا برؤية ماوراءها من أسرار ماكينة تزوير التاريخ التي تطبع مسار خط التاريخ واستراحاته كما تطبع لنا الدولارات على ورق من غير رصيد ذهبي .. اي ان التاريخ الذي تصنعه اميريكا وهم مثل دولاراتها لارصيد له ..

عندما نرى الجدران الصلبة للتاريخ يجب ان نبحث عن شقوق او ثقوب نرى من خلالها المخبوء والمخفي .. فمثلا من بين ثقوب التاريخ كنا نرى جدارا اسمه وعد بلفور وفي الوعد ثقوب صغيرة نظرنا منها وعرفنا ان تاريخ الوعد لم يكن مصادفة ولحظة صفاء قررتها حكومة صاحب الجلالة .. بل اقترن ذلك الوعد في ذلك التاريخ باضراب عمال الذخيرة الالمان وتوقف المصانع وتوقف تمويل الجيش الألماني وبعد ان كان الالمان في طريق الانتصار في الحرب انقلب كل شيء عام 1917 .. تاريخ وعد بلفور .. وتاريخ تقديم السلاح الكيماوي الأول في التاريخ للجيش البريطاني من قبل العالم الكيميائي اليهودي حاييم وايزمن الذي صار من مؤسسي اسرائيل لاحقا ..فماهذه الصدفة بين وعد بلفور وهزيمة ألمانيا في نفس التاريخ؟؟


ومن بين الثقوب الكبيرة التي نسترق النظر من خلالها الى أسرار تاريخ تركيا يأخذنا أحد الثقوب لنطل على لحظة فاصلة مخاتلة عندما سمح الجيش التركي فجأة للاسلاميين في تركيا بالوصول الى السلطة قبل وصول الربيع العربي الاسلامي.. فماهذه الصدفة لو لم يكن هذا منسقا ومرتبا بعناية؟؟ نعم ماهي هذه الصدفة بين وصول الاسلاميين واردوغان الى السلطة ووصول الموجة الاسلامية التي تقودها تركيا الناتوية الى الشرق الاوسط؟؟

كل قصص التاريخ ملأى بالثقوب وماعلينا الا أن ننظر بجرأة وبعين ناقدة فاحصة من خلال تلك الثقوب .. وسنعرف كيف سبق اغتيال كينيدي تصريحاته القوية عن القوى العميقة ورؤوس الاموال التي تحكم اميريكا وتتحكم بقرارها والتي يجب لجمها .. وسنعرف من بين الثقوب كيف ان فضيحة ووترغيت بدأت في دمشق عندما كان هنري كيسنجر يجلس مع رئيسه نيكسون ويستمع اليه وهو يتحدث مع الرئيس الراحل حافظ الاسد عن طرق انهاء الصراع في الشرق الاوسط بطريقة عادلة .. وكيف انه كان هو الذي يفرض اطار النقاش على رئيسه .. وماان عاد نيكسون إلى واشنطن الا ووجد ووتر غيت في انتظاره .. فما هذه الصدفة بين حديث نيكسون في دمشق وبين ووترغيت التي كانت بانتظاره فور وصوله بأيام ؟؟ ..


اليوم بدأت بعض الثقوب تظهر في رواية الاحداث فاذا مانظرنا من خلال بعض الثقوب التي ظهرت في جدار الرواية الامريكية عن كورونا وهزيمة ترامب فربما تمكنا من معرفة خط سير الرحلة الأمريكية القادمة في زمن بايدن .. ففجأة ومن خلال اعلان مفاجئ عن ان لقاح كورونا قد تم تطويره بنجاح في مختبرات “بفايزرز” وقعت على سؤال تعثرت به عيني وكان يسير على غير هدى .. السؤال قال: ماهي هذه المصادفة في ظهور العلاج او اللقاح فورا بعد انتهاء الانتخابات الامريكية وضمان رحيل ترامب ؟؟ ولماذا صار العالم يتحدث عن ان عودة الحياة الى طبيعتها ستكون مع الربيع القادم عام 2021 أي مع بداية تسلم بايدن مقاليد الحكم .. وهو اليوم يقول ان فريقه وضع خطة متقنة للتخلص من الفيروس ودحره .. وسيظهر كأن بايدن هو الذي هزم كورونا وسيتسلم الرئاسة من غير كورونا او بكورونا ميت ويعود النشاط الاقتصادي الى حاله كم كان ..


السؤال الذي تعثرت به تعثر هو نفسه بسؤال آخر هو ان كانت الصين متورطة مع الديمقراطيين في افتعال ازمة كورونا واطلاق الرواية في ووهان الصينية لأنها أجرت صفقة مع الديمقراطيين الذين توجهوا سرا اليها كما فعلوا في حرب فييتنام وعرضوا صفقة على الفييتناميين يحثونهم فيها على رفض التسوية مع الادارة الجمهورية كي تسقط في الانتخابات فيقدم الديمقراطيون للفييتناميين عرضا أفضل بكثير لانهاء الحرب ..


هذا الترابط بين اطلاق حكاية الفيروس من الصين وبين انهاء حكم ترامب واسقاطه وارد لأن من مصلحة الطرفين التخلص من مشروع ترامب القادم نحو الصين ..؟ فالصين قلقة من نزعة ترامب ضدها وحربه التجارية ولذلك فانها ربما قبلت العرض الديمقراطي؟ فلماذا غاب الفيروس عن الصين وبقي في اميريكا يأكل من اقتصاد ترامب والغرب حتى تم اسقاط ترامب ثم ظهر اللقاح بعد يومين من الانتخابات؟؟وهل هذا هو سبب النقمة على انتوني فاوتشي بين ادارة ترامب الى درجة ان هناك من طلب قطع رأسه؟؟


اليوم اذا اردنا ان نرى كيف ستسير خيول راعي البقر الجديد بايدن فان دراسة التاريخ تقول ان من يصنع التاريخ القادم ويرغمه على التحرك في الاتجاه الذي يريده سيكون مجمع الصناعات العسكرية الامريكية الذي يمثله بايدن وهيلاري كلينتون ونخبة الحروب .. وخطورة هذا المجمع هو ان لديه اقتصادا امريكيا يريد النهوض بسرعة بعد كورونا والضربة القوية التي تلقاها .. والطريقة الوحيدة لانهاض الاقتصاد هو في بيع السلاح واعادة انتاج الحروب .. وهو لذلك تخلص من ترامب الذي يريد ادارة اقتصاد ينافس الصين في كل شيء فيما المجمع الصناعي الحربي لايعنيه الا ان يقيم اقتصاد الحرب وتجارة السلاح الضخمة .. والحروب المتتالية ..


ساحات الحروب التي ستدار في زمن بايدن واسعة كي تشبع نهم مجمع الصناعات العسكرية ولكن لايظن ان الساحات القديمة ذاتها ستكون جذابة .. فساحة حرب مثل سورية لم يعد بالامكان العودة اليها مع وجود روسيا وسحق الجماعات الاسلامية التي تلقت ضربة عنيفة جدا في تلك الحرب .. وهي لن تفي بحاجة المجمع الصناعي العسكري النهم للحروب الواسعة .. ولكن هل تكون ايران ساحتها ام تركيا ام محيط روسيا؟؟ فلكل ساحة جاذبيتها ..


ويبدو أيضا ان الهدنة المؤقتة مع الامريكيين انتهت في الشرق السوري باعلان سقوط اربع قتلى امريكيين في الشرق السوري .. وفيما ينتظر بايدن يوم التتويج ستكون حركة اقتلاع الجيش الاميريكي وحلفائه في الشرق السوري قد انتظمت وتم الاعلان عن ذلك في اول عملية مقاومة قتلت اربعة جنود امريكيين في الجزيرة .. توقيت دقيق جدا ومحسوب وليس بالصدفة بعد اعلان وصول بايدن الذي وصلته الرسالة الدامية من الشرق السوري .. من ان الخروج الآمن من سورية أفضل من العناد .. وان هذه الساحة لم تعد ساحة للجيش الامريكي وللمغامرات الامريكية وان عليه ان يستعجل التخلص من عبء التواجد في الشرق السوري كي يلتفت الى حروبه المرسومة له وفق اجندة المجمع الصناعي العسكري في بقية العالم ..

لاشيء حدث صدفة في هذه الايام .. ولاأظن ان الحديث الرئاسي بين قصر الشعب والكرملين كان أيضا صدفة في هذا التوقيت الذي يعلن وصول بايدن الى البيت الابيض .. وهو حديث لاأظنه بعيدا عن الامساك بقرون الثور الامريكي قبل ان ينفلت ويصبح ضبطه صعبا .. وربما تصفية أخر مخازنه الارهابية في ادلب قبل ان يعيد اردوغان افتتاحه وتأجير بضاعته لبايدن مقابل التخفيف عنه .. انني اسمع صهيل خيولنا في الجزيرة وادلب .. ولكن لن يرى ماذا سيحدث الا من يثقب جدار الزمن بشعاع عينيه .. ومن يثقب جدار الحكايات الامريكية بأسئلته الفولاذية .. ويخرق جدار الزمن بصهيل جياده ..

Erdogan Terrorists Bombed the Outskirts of Ain Issa with Artillery

November 2, 2020 Arabi Souri

Erdogan terrorists bomb Ain Issa northern Raqqa Countryside, north Syria

Terrorists loyal to the Turkish madman Erdogan indiscriminately bombed with artillery the city of Ain Issa, in the northern Raqqa Countryside, north of Syria.

The bombing of the Ain Issa vicinity with several artillery shells caused material damage in the area.

Less than 10 days ago the Erdogan terrorists bombed with artillery the towns of Khalidiya and Hoshan in Ain Issa while the US-sponsored Kurdish SDF separatist militia raided at the same time a number of villages in the eastern countryside of the Raqqa province.

This war crime is part of the continuous policy of the Turkish madman in his attempt to Israelize large parts of northern Syrian territories to be inhabited by terrorists from the anti-Islamic Muslim Brotherhood loyal to him after emptying the region from its original residents.

Displacing indigenous people and replacing them with other groups of people is a war crime, Erdogan wants to create a demographic change in the northern regions of Syria, he managed to persuade President Putin of Russia to enter during their talks in Sochi, he claimed first he just wants to protect his country’s national security from terror groups, he was referring to the Kurdish separatist militias while the term ‘terror groups’ applies more on his own armed mercenaries he’s bringing from other regions in northern Syria under his forces control and from other countries along with their families, the likes of ISIS and Nusra Front, the offshoots of Al Qaeda which is also led by Ayman Zawahri, a Muslim Brotherhood.

Murad Gazdiev, RT’s correspondent, caught Erdogan telling his supporters that all the Turkish soldiers who were killed fighting in Syria died to make “those lands a part of the homeland [Turkey]”; this statement alone contradicts all Erdogan’s signed commitments with Russia and Iran, and with the United Nations.

Trump Erdogan Putin Land for Terrorists - Israel 3

Somebody needs to remind the Turkish madman Erdogan that he will not live forever, his political and military stunts will live even shorter than him as the patience of the Syrian leadership is wearing thin, as well Mr. Putin’s patience in regard to Erdogan’s betrayal and his opportunist acts that contradicts the commitments he only committed himself to.

Spriter, a veteran on Twitter shared a picture showing Erdogan forces stealing old olive trees from Afrin in the northwest of Syria:

This is another continuous looting by Erdogan depriving the Syrian farmers of their livelihood income, Erdogan and his terrorists have been doing so from the early days of the so-called Arab Spring, the NATO plot to destroy Arab countries surrounding Israel to coerce them into ‘peace’ deals with the anti-Jewish Zionist state.

To help us continue please visit the Donate page to donate or learn how you can help us with no cost on you.
Follow us on Telegram: http://t.me/syupdates link will open Telegram app.

180 Faylaq Al-Sham Terrorists Killed and Injured by a Russian Airstrike in Idlib

October 26, 2020 Arabi Souri

180 Terrorists of Faylaq Al Sham Killed in Russian strike in Idlib

Dozens of terrorists from the ‘Faylaq Al-Sham’ group between killed and injured in a Russian airstrike at 9:30 am this morning targeting their training camp in Jabal Duweilah area, in Idlib northwestern countryside.

The number of casualties among the terrorists is on the rise as the reports keep coming from that area especially that most of the injuries are severe, over 80 were killed and more than 100 injured, the latest reports confirm.

This is the largest toll among the terrorists for a long time now especially in the province of Idlib known as ‘the last stronghold of Al Qaeda in Syria’, the terrorists were attending a graduation ceremony in the camp when targeted by the Russian air force.

https://videopress.com/embed/tOx9gd8R?preloadContent=metadata&hd=1The video is also available on BitChute.

Faylaq Al-Sham is part of the anti-Islamic Muslim Brotherhood international organization which the Turkish madman Erdogan is its political leader, the exiled Egyptian cleric Qaradawi living in Qatar is its spiritual leader, while Qatar is currently the main financier of the international organization, and Ayman Zawahri, the current head of Al Qaeda is one of its main members.

The Faylaq Al-Sham has emerged in the Idlib province and northern Aleppo countryside, it’s one of Turkey’s main terrorist groups opposed to the Saudi-backed Jaysh Islam, another offshoot of Al Qaeda which had its headquarters in Douma, in the Eastern Ghouta, north of Damascus. Most of the terrorist groups were swallowed or eliminated by the Nusra Front aka HTS Hayat Tahrir Sham aka Al Qaeda Levant.

The Muslim Brotherhood organization is banned in Syria and in a number of countries, they were responsible of horrible terrorist attacks during the years 1967 – 1982 then went into hiding and resurfaced again in the ongoing US-sponsored colored revolutions in the Arab world dubbed the ‘Arab Spring’. They reached power in a number of Arab countries, namely Egypt which they were thrown out of the country and banned as an outlaw by a military coup, in Tunisia they lost their momentum although they kept a small majority of members in the parliament there, while the Libyan government out of Tripoli (Wifaq Govt) is also of the brotherhood, which explains their close ties to the Turkish madman Erdogan and his AKP party.

An illegal fuel market was also targeted by a Russian strike a couple of days ago near Jarabulus, in Aleppo countryside, leaving tens of oil tankers destroyed, a major blow to Erdogan’s family illegal business in smuggling stolen Syrian oil and selling it to Israel and other parties while depriving the Syrian people of their own oil.

Escalated Russian targeting of Turkish main groups and concentrations in Idlib in recent days could be understood as a Russian message to the Turkish pariah Erdogan who is accused of instigating the recent fighting in the Nagorno Karabach region between Azerbaijan and Armenia, and after Erdogan spoiled the first ceasefire between the warring parties reached in Moscow earlier this month and trying to spoil the second truce agreed upon this weekend.

Russia and Syria accuse Erdogan of delaying the implementation of the agreements in regard to the opening of the Aleppo – Latakia Highway known as the M4, which was supposed to be open over a year ago and has put Russia in a very uncomfortable and embarrassing situation with its Syrian allies being the main guarantor of the Idlib Agreement.

Expect some trembling in Turkey as Erdogan would be shouting and screaming, these terrorists are ‘closer to Erdogan’s heart than the Turkish Army itself’, as President Assad put it in one of his interviews.

To help us continue please visit the Donate page to donate or learn how you can help us with no cost on you.
Follow us on Telegram: http://t.me/syupdates link will open Telegram app.

إردوغان بين بايدن وترامب.. أحلاهما مرّ

ترامب وإردوغان في البيت الأبيض - 13 نوفمبر 2019 (أ.ف.ب)
حسني محلي

حسني محلي 

المصدر: الميادين نت

22 تشرين اول 16:58

لا تخفي أنقرة قلقها من احتمالات فوز جو بايدن المعروف بمواقفه السلبية تجاه تركيا، وخصوصاً في خلافاتها مع اليونان وقبرص، على الرغم من تضامنه مع إسلاميي “الربيع العربي” عندما كان نائباً لأوباما.

بعد أن هدّد ترامب وتوعَّد بإعلان الإخوان المسلمين تنظيماً إرهابياً خلال حملته الانتخابية السابقة، وهو ما تراجع عنه لاحقاً بسبب السياسات الأميركية التقليدية، استمرت واشنطن في علاقاتها “المميزة” مع أنقرة، على الرغم من سياسات المد والجزر بين الطرفين، أي ترامب و”الإسلامي” إردوغان.

وعلى الرغم من اتهامات الرئيس إردوغان لواشنطن بتقديم كلّ أنواع الدعم لوحدات حماية الشعب الكردية في سوريا، فقد تهرّبت أنقرة من توتير العلاقة مع حليفتها الاستراتيجية الولايات المتحدة الأميركية، رغم تغريدات الرئيس ترامب على موقع تويتر، والتي هدّد من خلالها إردوغان وتوعّده في حال اعتدى على كرد سوريا، ثم الرسالة التي أرسلها، وفيها الكثير من الإهانات الشَّخصية له.

في المقابل، لم تمنع هذه التهديدات والإهانات إردوغان من الاستمرار في علاقاته مع بوتين، والتي شهدت بدورها الكثير من حالات المد والجزر التي استفاد منها ترامب، إذ عمل على ترسيخ الوجود العسكري الأميركي شرق الفرات، بعد أن أضاء الضوء الأخضر لإردوغان كي تسيطر قواته على المنطقة الممتدة بين تل أبيض ورأس العين بعرض 110 كم من الحدود السورية مع تركيا شرق الفرات، وهو ما تحقَّق للأخير بفضل الضوء الأخضر الروسي، فلولاه منذ البداية (آب/أغسطس 2016)، لما كان الحديث الآن عن خلافات روسية – تركية في إدلب أو ليبيا، وأخيراً القوقاز حيث الحرب الأذربيجانية الأرمينية.

ولم تمنع هذه الخلافات الطرفين من الاستمرار في التعاون الواسع في العديد من المجالات، ومنها الغاز الطبيعي وبناء المفاعل النووي جنوب تركيا، وأخيراً موضوع صواريخ “أس 400″، التي كانت، وما زالت، الموضوع الأهم في الفتور والتوتر بين واشنطن وأنقرة، من دون أن يتحول هذا التوتر إلى مواجهة ساخنة بين الطرفين، على الرغم من تهديدات ترامب والمسؤولين الأميركيين المستمرة لإردوغان، وكأنّ الجميع يمثل، ليس فقط في هذا الموضوع، بل في كل الأمور التي تحولت إلى قاسم مشترك في علاقات تركيا مع كل من روسيا وأميركا.

يأتي ذلك في الوقت الذي يراهن الكثيرون على المواقف المحتملة للرئيس إردوغان خلال المرحلة القريبة القادمة، أي بعد الانتخابات الأميركية التي ستنعكس بنتائجها على سياسات تركيا الداخلية والخارجية، وبشكل خاص تحركات إردوغان الإقليمية، أي في الساحات التي لها علاقة مباشرة وغير مباشرة بالتنسيق والتعاون أو الخلافات التركية – الروسية، فأنقرة لا تخفي قلقها من احتمالات فوز جو بايدن المعروف بمواقفه السلبية تجاه تركيا، وخصوصاً في خلافاتها مع اليونان وقبرص، على الرغم من تضامنه مع إسلاميي “الربيع العربي” عندما كان نائباً للرئيس أوباما.

ولم تهمل أنقرة حسابات التأقلم سريعاً مع تبعات هذا الاحتمال الذي تتوقعه استطلاعات الرأي الأميركية. في المقابل، تتخذ أنقرة كل التدابير لمواجهة مفاجآت المرحلة القادمة في حال بقاء الرئيس ترامب في البيت الأبيض، لأنه سيستمر في سياساته الحالية التي يريد لها أن تحقق انتصاراً حاسماً ومطلقاً لتل أبيب، وهو ما قد يحرج إردوغان، بعد المعلومات التي تتوقع لقطر أن تلحق بركب التطبيع، مع الحديث عن احتمالات المصالحة السعودية – القطرية قبل المصالحة السعودية مع “إسرائيل” أو بعدها. وقد تسبقها مصالحة أو استسلام سوداني وعماني ومغربي وجيبوتي لـ”إسرائيل”، إن صحَّ التعبير، في حال فوز ترامب. وسيدفع كل ذلك ترامب إلى الاستعجال في حسم مساوماته السياسية وحربه النفسية مع إردوغان، ليقول له: “اختر لنفسك موقعاً ما في مخطَّطاتي العاجلة، وأثبت لي ولنا جميعاً أنك حليف صادق وموثوق به دائماً”.

وقد يدفع ذلك إردوغان إلى التفكير في تقرير مصير علاقاته مع الرئيس بوتين بعد وعود واضحة من الرئيس ترامب بتقديم كل أنواع الدعم السياسي والمالي والاستراتيجيّ، ليساعده ذلك على تحديد إطار ومضمون الدور التركي في سوريا وليبيا والعراق والقوقاز، بل والعديد من دول البلقان والدول الأفريقية، وأهمها الصومال.

وفي هذه الحالة، هل سيستمرّ إردوغان في تحالفاته التقليديّة مع الإسلاميين في المنطقة، في حال رضوخ حليفه الأكبر الشيخ تميم لمطالب وشروط المصالحة الخليجية التي ستعني في الوقت نفسه المصالحة مع “إسرائيل”، وهي جميعاً ضدّ المزاج الشخصي للرئيس إردوغان، الذي لا يخفي عبر مقولاته في الداخل والخارج الحديث عن مشاريعه العقائدية على طريق إقامة الدولة الإسلامية بنكهتها العثمانية التركية التي تشجَّع لها إسلاميو المنطقة، وبايعوه ضد العدو التقليدي آل سعود وأميرهم الشاب محمد المتهم بجريمة جمال خاشقجي الشنيعة؟! وكيف سيحصل ذلك؟

وتتحدَّث المعلومات هنا، ولو كانت شحيحة، عن احتمالات الانفراج في العلاقات التركية مع مصر، لسدّ الطريق على التحركات السعودية والإماراتية، وهو ما قد يعني تجميداً مرحلياً في الدعم التركي للإخوان المسلمين. ولا يخفي السوريون تخوّفهم من مثل هذا الاحتمال، وخصوصاً بعد الانسحاب من نقاط المراقبة التركية في جوار إدلب، في الوقت الذي تراقب أنقرة، عن كثب، ما كشف عنه الإعلام الأميركي، وبشكل مقصود، عن خفايا زيارة مسؤولين من البيت الأبيض إلى دمشق، وصادف ذلك عودة الرحلات الجوية بين دمشق وكل من قطر والإمارات، فالأولى حليفة إردوغان، والثانية من ألد أعدائه.

وبات واضحاً أن إردوغان سيجد نفسه في وضع لا يحسد عليه، أياً كانت صحة الاحتمالات والتوقعات، أي بفوز ترامب أو هزيمته أمام الديموقراطي جو بايدن، الذي لا شك في أنه سيتحرك وفق توصيات هيلاري كلينتون، صديقة أحمد داوود أوغلو، وهو الآن من ألدّ أعداء إردوغان. كما سيضع بايدن توصيات نائبه كامالا هاريس وزوجها اليهودي بعين الاعتبار خلال تعامله مع كل الملفات ذات العلاقة المباشرة وغير المباشرة بسياسات إردوغان الخارجيّة، وهي لها أيضاً علاقة مباشرة بمجمل الحسابات الإسرائيلية.

وحينها، سيجد الرئيس إردوغان نفسه أمام خيارات صعبة ومعقَّدة جداً، ما سيضطره إلى وضع النقاط على الحروف في مجمل سياساته الخارجية بانعكاساتها المحتملة على سياساته الداخلية، بعد أن اعترف الأسبوع الماضي بفشله في تطبيق مشروعه الفكري العقائدي، أي أسلمة الأمة والدولة التركية.

ولا شكَّ في أنّ كلّ هذه التناقضات ستضعه أمام امتحان صعب جداً، سيدفعه إلى تحديد المسارات الجديدة لسياساته الخارجية التي ستتطلَّب منه تقرير مصير علاقاته مع الرئيس بوتين في سوريا في الدرجة الأولى، لينتقل منها إلى ملفات أبسط بكثير في ليبيا والقوقاز، فالجميع يعرف أن سوريا كانت بوابة الانفتاح والتدخل التركي باتجاه العالم العربي، حيث أصبحت تركيا طرفاً مباشراً وأساسياً في جميع ملفاته، بما في ذلك مساوماته مع الرئيس بوتين حول كل العناوين الرئيسية، ليس في سوريا فقط، بل لاحقاً في ليبيا، والآن في القوقاز، في الوقت الَّذي لم يهمل إردوغان تحدياته للدول الأوروبية بسبب دعمها لقبرص واليونان، وهو بحاجة إلى التوتر معها لتحريك المشاعر القومية والدينية “ضد أعداء الأمة والدولة التركية”!.

هذا بالطبع إن لم تكن كلّ هذه المعطيات الحالية جزءاً من سيناريوهات متفق عليها مسبقاً بين بوتين وإردوغان، وهو احتمال ضعيف، إن لم نقل مستحيلاً، إلا في حالة واحدة، وهي المعجزة، لأنها ستعني في هذه الحالة انتقال تركيا من خانة التحالف الاستراتيجي مع الغرب منذ العام 1946 إلى الخندق المعادي، وهو أيضاً مستحيل بسبب الكثير من المعطيات التاريخية والسياسية التي ستعرقل مثل هذا الاحتمال. وآخر مثال على ذلك حرص أنقرة على التحالف السياسي والعسكري والاستراتيجي مع الرئيس الأوكراني “اليهودي” زالانسكي، العدو الأكبر لموسكو، والمدعوم من واشنطن ومعظم عواصم الاتحاد الأوروبي.

وقد أثبتت معظمها، رغم خلافاتها مع إردوغان، أنها ما زالت في عقلية الحرب الباردة ضد روسيا بعد 30 سنة من تمزق الاتحاد السوفياتي الذي كان العدو الأخطر بالنسبة إلى تركيا بسبب العداءات التاريخية والخطر الشيوعي. وبسقوطه، تنفَّست تركيا الصعداء، ولم تخفِ فرحتها لاستقلال الجمهوريات الإسلامية في القوقاز وآسيا الوسطى، وهي ذات أصل تركي، حالها حال جمهوريات الحكم الذاتي داخل حدود روسيا الحالية، وكانت جميعاً جزءاً من نظرية الحزام الأخضر للثنائي الأميركي اليهودي كيسنجر وبريجنسكي.

وفي جميع الحالات، وأياً كانت حسابات كل الأطراف في ما يتعلق بالمنطقة، فقد بات واضحاً أن الأيام القليلة القادمة، سواء مع ترامب أو بايدن، ستحمل في طياتها الكثير من المفاجآت المثيرة بالنسبة إلى المنطقة عموماً، كما ستضع إردوغان وجهاً لوجه أمام اختباره الأكبر في سياساته الخارجية، وسنرى معاً وقريباً مؤشراتها الجديدة في سوريا، لأنها قفل المرحلة القادمة ومفتاحه بالنسبة إلى الجميع!

فهل دمشق مستعدة وقادرة مع حليفاتها على مواجهة مفاجآت هذه المرحلة بكل معطياتها الصعبة والمعقدة؟ وهل استخلصت الدروس الكافية والضرورية من جميع محنها وأخطائها، حتى يتسنى لها الانتصار على جميع أعدائها أم أنها ستبقى ورقة في مهب الرياح الإقليمية والدولية، كما هي عليه منذ 9 سنوات، والسبب في ذلك هو حسابات إردوغان في سوريا؟

إقرأ للكاتب

%d bloggers like this: