Sudanese President Becomes First Arab Leader To Break Diplomatic Blockade On Syria, Meet With Assad

Sudanese President Becomes First Arab Leader To Break Diplomatic Blockade On Syria, Meet With Assad

South Front

On December 16, Sudan’s President, Omar al-Bashir, visited Syria and met with President Bashar al-Assad, thus becoming the first Arab leader to breaking the diplomatic blocked on the war torn country.

The Syrian Arab News Agency (SAA) said that Assad welcomed al-Bashir in Damascus airport then both presidents headed to the People’s Palace, where they held a meeting on bilateral relations and developments in Syria and the region.

“President al-Assad and President al-Bashir affirmed that the circumstances and crises affecting several Arab countries require finding new approaches for Arab action that are based on respecting the sovereignty of states and non-interference in their internal affairs, which should improve inter-Arab relations and serve the interests of the Arab people,” the SANA said in a press release.

During the meeting, al-Bashir said that weakening Syria means weakening Arab causes. The Sudanese President added that “despite the war, Syria continues to adhere to the standards of the Arab nations.”

“He [al-Bashir] voiced hope that Syria will recover its vitality and role in the region as soon as possible, and that its people will be able to decide the country’s future themselves without any foreign interference,” SANA said.

From his side, Assad affirmed that Syria still believes in Arabism and warned from the dependence of some Arab countries on the West that “will not bring any benefits to their peoples,” according to him.

Al-Bashir, who reportedly arrived aboard a Russian plane, has built a network of complicated relations across the Middle East over the last ten years. While he actively supports the Saudi-led coalition in Yemen, the Sudanese President maintained excellent relations with Turkey and Qatar.

Local observers said that al-Bashir’s visit to Damascus will pave the way for other Arab leaders. Since the beginning of this year, Syria’s relations with Jordan, Bahrain, UAE and Egypt witnessed much improvement.

Related Videos

Related Articles

The Plan: Why Israel Is Bent on Supporting Arab Division

By Elias Samo


During many meetings with senior members of the Syrian opposition in various European cities in 2013-2014, I would remind them that Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and the United States, amongst others, host and finance the opposition due to their own self-interest and agendas; and not out of love for Syria. I would note that there is no disagreement among us Syrians about the brutality, corruption and exploitation of the Ottoman Empire during its four-century rule of Syria; we don’t want history to repeat itself. As for Saudi Arabia, I would remind the opposition of the contributions Syrian professionals made in the development of the Kingdom in past decades. We say to the Saudis “Blessed be your Wahhabism for you, but not for Syria”; Syria is a cultural and societal mosaic of ethnic, religious and sectarian components. As for the United States, we all agree that Washington supports Israel and views Syria as an adversarial state. However, Israel is a totally different matter. Since its creation, Israel has pursued aggressive and expansionist policy towards its neighbors in pursuit of two primary objectives: I – Great Israel and II – No Arab Unity And Support Arab Division.

I – Great Israel:

Great Israel from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. Since the June 1967 War and the occupation of East Jerusalem and the West Bank, Israel has been in control of the land between the River and the Sea. Thus, Great Israel exists in reality, though not legally or officially until it annexes the West Bank and declares the Jewish Great Israel with Jerusalem its capital.

II –Supporting Arab division:

There are numerous documents and publications to that effect for the Arabs to read. Unfortunately, and according to international surveys, Arabs are amongst the least reading people in the world. This reminds me of the late Moshe Dayan, the Israeli Defense Minister during the June 1967 War. After the war, Dayan published some Israeli military strategies and tactics during the war. His colleagues criticized him for divulging military secrets to the Arabs. His response was not to worry; the Arabs don’t read. This problem is further compounded by the Arabs lack of interest in research or translation. Jointly, these three components form critical foundations for the development of societies and civilizations.

In the 1990’s, I participated in numerous Track II Diplomacy meetings with Israelis regarding the Syrian-Israeli Peace Process. During one of those meetings, attended by some Egyptians and Palestinians in addition to the Israelis, I gave a presentation in which I noted that the Arab region is divided into four sub-regions: The Fertile Crescent, The Arabian Peninsula, The Nile Valley and North Africa. Unlike the other three sub-regions, the Fertile Crescent faces national security threats being surrounded by three powerful and hostile neighbors: Turkey to the North, Israel to the South and Iran to the East. To deal with this multiple and omnipresent security threats, Syria and Iraq must agree to some form of unity; a joint population of 40+ million people, educated and productive endowed with natural resources including substantial oil reserves, and a large army. I emphasized the point that the purpose of such a unity is not aggressive; but defensive. I had hardly finished my presentation when the late Ze’ev Schiff, the military editor of the liberal Israeli newspaper Haaretz in a loud voice said “Do you think we will let you do that?”; meaning that any Arab initiative for unity must receive a prior Israeli approval which of course is not forthcoming. Mr. Schiff had previously published an article in Haaretz in 6/2/1982 proposing a plan for a future Iraq, in which he wrote that the best thing to serve Israel’s interest would be “the dissolution of Iraq into a Shiite State, a Sunni State and the separation of the Kurdish part.”

There were more comprehensive plans to break up a number of Arab states. In 1982, the Israeli journalist Oded Yinon proposed a more elaborate plan entitled “A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties”, published in the Hebrew Journal Kivunim. The plan called for the dissolution of several Arab states into smaller states. The author starts with “Lebanon’s total dissolution into five provinces…” He continues “Breaking Egypt down territorially into distinct geographical regions…” Furthermore, “ The dissolution of Syria and Iraq later on into ethnically or religiously unique areas such as Lebanon…” His solution for the Palestinians is through “The termination of the lengthy rule of King Hussein and the transfer of power to the Palestinians…”

After Yinon, the neoconservatives in 1996 submitted a plan for Prime Minister Netanyahu’s consideration entitled “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm”. Israel’s Western frontier is secured through the peace treaty with Egypt. The frontier with Syria could be secured “by weakening, containing and even rolling back Syria.” As for Iraq, it starts with “removing Saddam Hussein from power…”

In 2007, General Wesley Clark, in an interview and a lecture, said that while visiting the Pentagon just a few days after 9/11, a General explained to him that a decision has been made “to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and finishing off with Iran.”

Iraq, the first on the Pentagon war list was invaded in 2003. The Israeli journalist Ari Shavit, in a Haaretz article on April 3, 2003, notes that “the belief in war against Iraq was disseminated by a small group of 25 or 30 neoconservatives almost all of them Jewish, almost all of them intellectuals…” Syria, next on the Pentagon war list, was “a ripe fruit ready for picking” However, the picking of Syria had to wait until the start of the so-called “Arab Spring”.

Had Syrians known what was planned for them by Washington and Tel Aviv, they might have avoided the death and destruction in Syria, for patriotism and wisdom call upon the various factions in the State to put aside their differences and confront the external threats.

نصر يماني مظفر يقترب من الوقوع

أكتوبر 13, 2018

محمد صادق الحسيني

ثمّة مؤشرات تتدافع من كلّ حدب وصوب تشي بقرب انقشاع غبار المعارك الوحشية عن اليمن وانكسار عمود خيمة أصحاب الشجرة الملعونة والخبيثة ودفع سمومها عن أصل العرب..!

ومواكبة لمجاهدي الميادين المنصورين بإذن الله، فإنّ ثمة جهوداً وحراكاً دبلوماسياً كثيفاً تحت الطاولة وفوقها يتجهان لتتويج تحوّلات الميدان بإنجاز يمني كبير قد يغيّر الجغرافية السياسية في المنطقة كلها..!

وفي هذا السياق فقد أفاد مصدر دبلوماسي أوروأميركي أوروبي أميركي متابع للحرب على اليمن بما يلي:

أولاً: قام المبعوث العماني الخاص، السيد هيثم البوسعيدي، لمتابعة الأزمة اليمنية، بإبلاغ محمد بن سلمان رفض حركة أنصار الله والحكومة اليمنية في صنعاء القاطع والمانع للمقترحات السعودية الإماراتية لإيجاد حلّ في اليمن على طريقتهم وذلك قبل أيّام قليلة.

ثانياً: نقل المصدر عن السيد هيثم البوسعيدي أنّ ردّ أنصار الله على مقترحات ابن سلمان، المعروفة الجوهر دون علمنا بالتفاصيل حتى الآن، قد أكدت ما يلي:

إنّ رؤيتهم للحل تتمثل في انسحاب قوات الاحتلال

من كلّ نقطة في اليمن بشماله وجنوبه وأن لا مجال إطلاقاً للمساومة في هذا الموضوع.

بعد إتمام الانسحاب الكامل لقوات التحالف السعودي يتمّ تشكيل حكومة وحدة وطنية يمنية، تشارك فيها كافة الأطياف السياسية اليمنية، من دون استثناء أحد.

تعمل هذه الحكومة على ترتيب انتخابات رئاسية وتشريعية عامة في اليمن الموحّد وتحت إشراف دولي على مسار الانتخابات فقط ضماناً لشفافيتها.

يتمّ استثناء هادي وجماعته من جميع هذه الإجراءات مهما كانت الظروف، على أن تقوم حكومة الوحدة بالبتّ في جرائمهم لاحقاً.

يُعاد البنك المركزي اليمني الى صنعاء كما تُعاد كافة

الأموال اليمنية الى البنك المركزي الذي سيتولى دفع رواتب الموظفين وصرف موازنات الدولة حسب الأصول.

تبدأ حكومة الوحدة الجديدة بالعمل على إعادة توحيد الدوله اليمنية، بما في ذلك توحيد القوات المسلحة والأجهزة الأمنية في إطار إدارة مركزية ملتزمة بالثوابت الوطنية اليمنيه تحقيقاً للمحافظة على وحدة البلاد واستقلالها وسيادتها على كل الأراضي اليمنية، بما في ذلك كل الجزر اليمنية وعلى رأسها جزيرة سوقطرى، الى جانب المياه الإقليمية ومياه المنطقة الاقتصادية البحرية لدولة اليمن المستقلة.

ثالثاً: جُنّ جنون إبن سلمان عند سماعه هذا الردّ، خاصة أنه كان قد تلقّى صفعة من عمران خان، رئيس وزراء باكستان الجديد، خلال زيارته للسعودية، والذي رفض مشاركة الجيش الباكستاني في العمليات القتالية في اليمن تحت أيّ ظرف كان، إلا إذا تعرّضت السعودية لغزو خارجي، وهو غير واقع الآن كما قال عمران خان لإبن سلمان.

وقد دفع موقف رئيس الوزراء الباكستاني هذا الى امتناع السعودية عن تقديم حتى دولار واحد لباكستان.

رابعاً: أكد المبعوث العماني أنه ورغم تعنّت محمد بن سلمان وعدم موافقته على الشروط اليمنية حتى الآن، ورغم جهوده التي يبذلها للبحث عن جنود يقاتلون بدلاً من الجيش السعودي أو يقدّمون الدعم له في حربه في اليمن، إلا أنه سيضطر للموافقة على هذه الشروط نظراً لأنّ الدول التي جدّد الطلب منها المشاركة القتالية فيها لم توافق على ذلك. وهذه الدول هي مصر، التي أبلغته بموقف شبيه بالموقف الباكستاني، وتونس التي طلب منها المشاركة بخمسة آلاف جندي والتي فضلت مشاركة السعودية في تدريبات جوية في المرحلة الحاليّة. وهذا ما حصل فعلاً، حيث وصلت تونس قبل أيّام بضع طائرات حربية سعودية لـ»إجراء مناورات» مع سلاح الجو التونسي. وهو موضوع لا يثير الا السخرية.

خامساً: يواصل المبعوث العُماني اتصالاته مع الطرفين، اليمني والسعودي. وهو يرى في ما حصل في القنصلية السعودية في اسطنبول عاملاً مساعداً جداً على إرغام إبن سلمان على الموافقة على الشروط اليمنية وان بإخراج متفق عليه لتغطية الهزيمة الكاملة والصارخة للسعودية هذا كلام الرجل وليس كلام المصدر .

وتلك الأيام نداولها بين الناس.

بعدنا طيّبين، قولوا الله…

Related Articles

Related News

ماالذي تغير أم .. ماالذي لم يتغير؟؟

بقلم نارام سرجون

اذا كنت ممن عاصروا كل تفاصيل الربيع العربي – وأزعم اننا جميعا عاصرنا كل يوم مشؤوم فيه – فانك عندما تستمع الى هذه القطعة من خطاب للزعيم الراحل جمال عبد الناصر تحس أنك مشوش جدا ولاتدري هل جرفتك آلة الزمن وخطفتك الى الخلف ستين عاما أم ان ماتعيشه اليوم هو معركة في سلسلة معارك لها هدف واحد طوال ستين عاما هو الاستيلاء على سورية وتقاسمها بين تركيا وأميريكا .. فتركيا العثمانية أو العلمانية تنظر الى سورية على انها الابن الضال الذي تجب استعادته أو أنها رض الأجداد التي يجب ان تستعاد ..

وكما لم يتغير الهدف والمستهدف (أو الصيدة وفق لغة صاحب نظرية نحن نعاج) فان أدوات التنفيذ لم تتغير اطلاقا .. فتركيا طرف متحمس جدا وفعال .. والبوابة العراقية نحو سورية كانت دوما مفضلة للولوج الى سورية سواء كان ذلك الولوج عن طريق حكم نوري السعيد أو حكم ابي بكر البغدادي خليفة داعش .. وطبعا لابد من دور سعودي في اي مؤامرة في المنطقة .. فالمؤامرات من غير النكهة والدسم والسمن والسم السعودي ليس لها مذاق ولاتعتبر كاملة الاوصاف ..

واليوم نفس المتآمرين مهما غيروا من الثياب والألقاب وربطات العنق والعباءات سواء قصروا اللحى أم أطلقوها .. ومهما غيروا الاقنعة الجمهورية والديمقراطية والاسلامية والعلمانية .. الثلاثي الشرير تركيا وأميريكا وعرب اميريكا هم أنفسهم يعيدون الكرة للسطو على سورية فيما تنتظر اسرائيل حصتها من جهد هذا الثلاثي .. وهذه المرة ليس عن طريق حلف بغداد أو ربيع بغداد بل عن طريق الربيع العربي ..

ولك ان تلاحظ أيها المشدوه والذي اصابك التشوش واختلطت عليك الايام وتداخلت فيها المؤتمرات الاسلامية .. لاحظ أن اميريكا وفق هذا الخطاب للزعيم المصري عبد الناصر كانت تصرح بأشياء وتنكر أشياء ليتبين لاحقا أن ماأنكرته هو ماكانت تعمل عليه وأن ما ادعته هو مالم تلتزم به بل وانها هي صاحبة فكرة المؤتمرات الاسلامية وهي التي تتلاعب بها وبالاسلام والمسلمين ولاتكاد فتوى تصدر الا وتمر على مدير السي آي ايه .. ولايعقد مؤتمر اسلامي الا وتكتب توصياته في وزارة الخارجية الأمريكية .. تماما كما يحدث اليوم فهي تتفرج ببراءة على ثرثرات اتحاد علماء المسلمين القطري ودعوات لمؤتمرات اسلامية لاتعد ولاتحصى لنصرة الاسلام ونصرة أهل السنة .. وتتصنع موقف المدهوش الذي يهز رأسه تعجبا من كثرة المؤتمرات الدينية المليئة بلغة العنف والتطرف لنكتشف لاحقا أن كل هذا الاسلام الورع والنشط والقلق على أهل السنة مصنوع ومطبوخ في اميريكا وفي مطبخ هيلاري كلينتون وربما شاركت مونيكا لوينسكي في اعداده وتقشيره وسلقه وتقديمه مع الخضار الديمقراطية ..

وأميريكا أيضا تقول انها تحارب داعش ولكنها هي التي أحيتها وبعثتها .. وتحييها وتبعثها كلما ضربتها سيوف روسية وسورية .. وهي التي تعلن حرصها على سلامة ووحدة الاراضي السورية لكنها في الحقيقة تريد باصرار تمزيق الجغرافيا وتريد أن تغوص سكينها في قلب الأرض السورية لتغرف من الأرض كما يغرف لص بمغرفة من وعاء طعام مسروق ..

ومع ذلك فاسمح لي عزيزي القارئ بأن اقول بان المشروع الذي بدأ عام 57 وبقي ينتظر قد تم اطلاقه في أحدث نماذجه وأخطرها وأقساها وأشرسها في الربيع العربي .. ولكنه تلقى ضربة قاسية جدا .. ولكن المشروع سيبقى يكرر محاولاته للاستيلاء على سورية .. ولن يتوقف الى أن نكسر أحد أضلاعه الثلاثة الشريرة .. اميريكا أو اسرائيل .. تركيا .. السعودية وعرب اميريكا .. وقد صار بمقدورنا اليوم مع حلفائنا أن نكسر أحد أضلاع هذا الثالوث الشيطاني .. ثقتي بذلك لايداخلها شك .. فالاضلاع صارت هشة بعد أن نخرتها الهزائم والانتكاسات والخيبات .. على الارض السورية ..

 ( الجمعة 2018/01/19 SyriaNow)

   ( الجمعة 2018/01/19 SyriaNow)

Almayadeen: 2017 DAYS

Bahrain’s top Shia cleric Isa Qassim in critical condition under house arrest

Ayatollah Sheikh Isa Qassim, at his house in the northwestern Bahraini village of Diraz on November 26, 2017

DAMASCUS, SYRIA (8:00 PM) – The health conditon of Bahrain’s supreme Shia cleric Ayatollah Sheikh Isa Qassim has deteriorated to a point of mortal danger. This was said in a statement released by human rights organisation Bahrain Institute for Rights and Democracy (BIRD) on Monday.

According to BIRD, physicians who had visited Sheikh Isa Qassim in the northwestern village of Diraz, said the Ayatollah suffers from a “groin hernia requiring an emergency operation.”

“Such an operation carries a high mortality risk at Sheikh Isa Qassim´s age. He also suffers from high blood pressure, diabetes and a form of heart disease,” the statement continues.

According to Ali al-Aswad, former deputy of the Al-Wefaq National Islamic Society, the Bahraini regime is the prime culprit for the Sheikh’s worsening condition.

“Whoever decides to put Ayatollah Sheikh Isa Qassim under house arrest is the one who will bear this responsibility henceforth,”Aswad said.

The Al-Wefaq National Islamic Society used to be Bahrain’s largest political party and was founded by Isa Qassim, but was dissolved and banned by the emirate’s pro-Saudi regime in 2016 due to being of a mainly Shia religious orientation. Ever since, Qassim has been under virtual house arrest.

Earlier reports said that on Sunday, the cleric’s house was surrounded by Bahraini security forces, possibly to deter any potential attempts to breach the Ayatollah’s de facto house arrest.

Sheikh Isa Qassim has been officially stateless since June 2016, when the Manama regime stripped him of his nationality amidst a crackdown on dissent in the majority Shia kingdom. The Ayatollah faces official charges of “illegal fund collections, money laundering and helping terrorism” as well as “serving foreign interests” and promoting “sectarianism and violence,” charges which Qassim has all denied. Since the start of legal procedures against him, supporters of the Sheikh have been holding daily sit-ins and protests at his house in Dizar, which have regularly been met with deadly police violence.

The Sunni monarchy, led by King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifah and supported by Saudi Arabia, has stepped up its repression of Shia organisations since the 2011 mass protests against the regime. On March 14, 2011, troops from Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates were deployed to assist Bahraini regime in its crackdown on dissent, and since March the Khalifah regime has allowed military tribunals to organise trials of civilian protesters.

Related Articles


South Front

Syrian Social Nationalist Party, Arab Nationalism And Conflict In Syria

The traditional societies of the Middle East have always been notable for their ethnic and religious diversity. Today, however, the Middle East is on the cusp of a deep schism along ethnic and religious lines. This situation has brought several Muslim Arab states to the brink of collapse, is provoking new difficult to resolve conflicts, and continues to undermine the secular aspect of Arab nationalism to the benefit of strengthening its Islamic component, the replacement of nationalism as such with ultra-religious extremism and ethnic separatism.

An Iraqi Army M1A1M Abrams battle tank destroyed by Kurdish Peshmerga forces during the recently sparked Arab-Kurdish tensions in northern Iraq:

The current range of conflicts, which revolve around the struggle for power and territory, showed their destructive potential. The difficulty in resolving such conflicts is due to their roots in history, which further complicate the search for peace. There is also another, no less important, problem. Most of the current Arab states’ political organizations are based on the principle of nationalism. This is the principle that was used to form the post-Ottoman independent states. Their multi-religious and multi-ethnic nature was also the aftermath of the rather arbitrary drawing of borders during the colonial period.

The Evolution of Arab Nationalism

By the end of the late ‘30s and early ‘40s of the 20th Century, the influence of Islam on Arab nationalist movement began to grow. This was to a large extent due to a deep disappointment on the part of a sizable proportion of liberal secular Arab elites in the “civilizing” mission of the secular and enlightened West. As a result of Middle East policies of Western powers, Arabs were not able to establish a single state. Their lands were arbitrarily divided between Great Britain and France, the newly founded states became colonial dependencies. Simultaneously, Western powers actively supported the creation of a national Jewish nucleus in the Palestine, which only worsened the already tense situation.

After WW2, this process continued, receiving its expression in the concept of urub, or the spirit of Arab national consciousness, in order to strengthen the ties between Arab nationalism and Islam. The struggle over the future course of political development that raged in Arab states in the 1950s and ‘60s in the context of establishing independent states and modern societies brought to power secular Arab nationalists (Ba’athists, Naserites), who tried to pursue development using socialist ideas.

In spite of that, the Islamist trend within Arab nationalism did not vanish but merely receded. Even the most progressive and secular Arab leaders were forced to seek legitimacy in adherence to Islam and respect the interests of religiously active parts of society when forming own base of support.

Syrian Social Nationalist Party, Arab Nationalism And Conflict In Syria

Supporters of President Bashar al-Assad (portrait) wave Baath Party flags during a pro-government rally in Damascus. FILE IMAGE: Louai Beshara – AFP

The lack of a charismatic mainstream leader with regional appeal capable of offering a pan-Arab model of secular development respecting the interests of the Arab Muslim majority, the rights and desires of national and religious minorities, and attract regional elites and the broad masses, caused Arab leaders to encounter problems in the early 21st century. The long-serving leaders were  concerned continuity of their political course, in order to guarantee their own interests were preserved. Young Arab leaders inherited power from their fathers. This was achieved through intra-elite compromise, achieved not so much through free agreement or a democratic choice, but rather through clever intrigues and strong-arm tactics used to neutralize possible competition. Therefore the young leaders were forced to mostly worry about forming their own governing team, balancing between various power centers and regularly proving their legitimacy and the ability to govern the state to both domestic and international actors.

In the 1990s and early ‘00s, economic problems and the desire to demonstrate pro-democracy leanings led some Arab leaders to strengthen own legitimacy through elections. But the main winners of this liberalization were Islamist political movements, whose adherence to Western democratic norms was dubious.

As an alternative to hereditary power transfer, a whole range of moderate Islamic movements (for example, Tunisian An-Nahda Islamic party led by Rached Ghannouchi) entered the fray with the aim of democratizing Islam. They called for a “democratic Islamic state” within the existing borders. They also favored renouncing violence as a means of political struggle, condemned terrorism, supported the principle of open parliamentary elections, questioned the idea of divinity of authority, supported democratic power transition procedures, and also spoke in favor of expanding the role of women in the traditional Islamic society while in general actively promoting human rights.

But here the reformers of Islam ran into a problem. There were and are too few supporters of democratic Islam in the strongly traditional Arab society. And one can readily say the society is not ready for them. Can one seriously view the ideologues of moderate Islam the pioneers of democracy in the Arab world? Can a democratic Islamic state ensure political and religious pluralism, which is one of the fundamental aspects of democracy? How does one reconcile the norms of Sharia with human rights in the way they are understood in the West? To what extent can women’s rights be expanded? They could not answer these questions, and therefore the political fray was joined by supporters of Islamic fundamentalism who called for a return to the sources of Islam and build a modern society on this foundation.

Modern Islamic fundamentalism was formed as a reaction to such secular ideologies as liberalism, Marxism, and nationalism. For Muslim fundamentalists, an Islamic state was an ideological state, expanding its authority into every aspect of human life. It would control social, political, economic, and even cultural interactions. Sovereignty in such a state belongs to God, which in practical terms means Sharia law. Fundamentalists spoke in favor of democratic elections not for the sake of establishing democracy or individual freedoms, but in order to establish the rule of Islam. And when fundamentalist theorists touched upon the question of democracy, they were not talking about its compatibility or incompatibility with Islam, but about how difficult it was to reconcile Western democratic principles with Islamic governance that could only be based on the revealed laws of Islam—Sharia.

But even here there were problems. Principles of “pure Islam” adhered to by Wahhabites and Salafites were most applicable to the environment of early Middle Ages. When one had to overcome tribal conflicts and built a centralized state. The assumption of power in Egypt by the Muslim Brotherhood did not resolve societal problems, but rather made them worse. ISIS implementation of Islamic state ideas in Iraq and Syria showed how savage the application of Islamic norms can be in the context of 21st Century. The only example of successful functioning of a theocratic state is Iran. But here the overwhelming majority of population are adherents of Shia Islam which is based on the principle of vilayat al-fakih. This principle assumes that the leadership over the Shia is to a certain extent centralized and is being implemented by authoritative and competent Shia clerics whose authority is beyond doubt.

Given the proliferation of ideas and Islamic movements, the question of how (and whether) one can reconcile secular Arab nationalism with Islam, in order to develop the basis for a new national ideology, gains in importance. Or perhaps might it not be better to reject the idea of Arab national state with Islamic leanings?

It may be now is the time for concepts based on national, religious, and territorial principles, which could found the basis of a new political system capable of neutralizing obsolete medieval vestiges of Islam, unify states whose borders were drawn by Western powers without considering local issues, ensure justice among various ethnic and religious groups, stabilize international relations in the region.

One of such movements which might be ready to solve above-mentioned problems is the Syrian Social Nationalist Party.

Party History and Program

The idea of a Syrian nation within clearly defined borders is not new. In the 19t century the proponents of a Syrian state included Butrus al-Bustani, who believed that a unified Syrian nation ought to form an autonomy within the Ottoman Empire that required reform. His follower Henri Lammens, a prominent Arabist of the late 19th-early 20thcenturies, claimed that Greater Syria existed already in ancient times in the Fertile Crescent. After the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, the establishment of an Arab state became a very real possibility. But the intervention by Western powers in the affairs of former vassals of the Porte and the Sykes-Picot delineation of spheres of responsibility ended plans for creating such a state.

Syrian Social Nationalist Party, Arab Nationalism And Conflict In Syria

Antoun Saadeh

But the idea did not die, and in 1932 the Lebanese journalist and Christian Antoun Saadeh created the Syrian Social Nationalist Party (SSNP). It was founded as an anti-colonial and liberation organization. Saadeh rejected language and religion as defining characteristics of the new nation, and instead clamed nations are formed through joint developments of peoples inhabiting a certain geographic area.

Syrian Social Nationalist Party, Arab Nationalism And Conflict In Syria


The Syrian national state, as imagined by the party founder, should cover the Fertile Crescent and the area of current Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Palestine, Israel, Cyprus, Sinai, south-east Turkey (Alexandretta and Cilicia), parts of the Zagros mountains on Lebanese territory, and regions in Saudi Arabia’s north.

According to Saleh, “the aim of the SSNP is a Syrian social renaissance which will accomplish unification and breathe life into the Syrian nation, organizing a movement seeking full independence of the Syrian nation and defense of its sovereignty, creating a new social order to protect its interests and increase its standard of living, seeking to form the Arab Front.”

Syrian Social Nationalist Party, Arab Nationalism And Conflict In Syria

A map of Greater Syria. SOURCE:

Its main principles are separation of mosque and state, keeping the clerics from involvement in political and legal processes, removing religious barriers, removing feudal relics from social life, transforming the agrarian economy into an industrial one, protection of worker rights, of national and state interests, and the establishment of strong, effective military.

When it comes to relations with Jews, SSNP is strictly anti-Zonist, since Saadeh believed Jews were unable and unwilling to assimilate. He also criticized assertions that the Jews could be a foundation for a national state. According to SSNP Jews were not a nation because they were a heterogeneous mixture of nations.

Syrian Social Nationalist Party, Arab Nationalism And Conflict In Syria

SSNP flag. Click to see the full-size image

The party emblem is whirlwind (Arabic “Zawba’a), which according to party members is a fusion of Christian cross and Islamic half-moon. Emblem arms represent freedom, duty, discipline, power. The black backdrop reflects the dark past as part of Ottoman Empire, colonialism, national and religious fragmentation, and backwardness.

Here one needs a caveat to clarify the party’s name and its emblem. There is no similarity between it and the NSDAP. SSNP was formed long before NSDAP. Saadeh visited Axis powers during WW2 and was arrested by French colonial authorities, but released after they couldn’t find evidence of collaboration, and Nazi leaders said they had no dealings with him. He was also in favor of French colonial authorities over Nazi rule.

The creation of Israel in 1948 and its militant, aggressive policies pursued with Western approval caused worry in Arab states. Israel’s actions caused as an attempt to meddle in Arab matters using Jewish hands, and once again redraw the borders. Arab leaders’ incompetence caused their defeat in the 1947-48 war. Saadeh criticized their actions, and in 1949 SSNPR attempted a coup in Lebanon which failed. As a result of collusion between Lebanese and Syrian governments, and with active British intelligence support, Saadeh was executed. The party was delegalized. Prior to the start of the civil war, SSNP attempted another coup in 1961, fought against Arab nationalists. The civil war the party viewed as the consequence of dividing the Syrian nation into separate states. Until the end of the war, SSNP fought alongside Hezbollah against Israeli occupiers and their Lebanese supporters. Only in the early ‘90s did the party become legalized and, starting in 1992, it participates in Lebanese parliamentary elections.

In Syria itself, SSNP was a significant force since independence. But ideological disagreements with the ruling Ba’ath Party and the Syrian Communist Party led to SSNP leaving Syria’s political arena.

Current Situation

In the spring of 2005, SSPN was partly legalized in Syria and allowed an observer in the National Progressive Front which is headed by Ba’ath.

The party viewed the start of anti-government demonstrations as yet another effort to fracture the country along ethno-religious lines. It organized demonstrations in support of the current government. On February 26, 2012 the majority of Syrians supported a referendum that amended the constitution by removing Ba’ath Party from the post of the leading political force, equalizing its status with other parties. This allowed SSNP to fully participate in political struggles. Between March 2012 and May 2014 the party was part of the opposition Ba’ath National Front For Change and Liberation. But in May its leader stated SSNP would leave the National front and support Bashar Assad in presidential elections.

Syrian Social Nationalist Party, Arab Nationalism And Conflict In Syria

Ali Haidar

The current leader of SSNP in Syria is Ali Haidar, who also the Minister of National Reconciliation in Syria’s government. The party secretary is Joseph Sweid. He also has a ministerial portfolio. In Lebanon, SSNP is headed by Ali Halil Qanso who is also the Minister of State for Parliamentary Affairs

The party currently is the most numerous political force in Syria, after the ruling Ba’ath, with over 100,000 members. In 2012 elections the party won 4 out of 250 seats in Syria’s parliament, in 2009 Lebanese elections it won 2 seats out of 128.

Here is what Ali Haidar said in an interview with the Al-Mayadin TV channel concerning the civil war in Syria. “Throughout the war, the US headed the anti-Syrian campaign and tried to destroy Syria’s national existence using terrorist groups such as ISIS and an-Nusra. US airstrikes on ISIS terrorists on one hand, and sponsoring and training “opposition” fighters simply amount to replacing uncontrollable terrorism with US-controlled one.” In his view, US regional strategy has not changed. They seek to change Middle East’s political structure to guarantee Israel’s security and legalize its existence. As to reconciliation, Haidar said that it’s not a political tactic but the fate of all Syrians, the result of governmental effort on the national level, even though in some regions of Syria it is encountering resistance due to the presence of foreign mercenaries.

Armed formations and their role in the Syrian war

SSNP’s armed formation is the Nusur al-Zawba’a (Eagles of the Whirlwind). It was formed during the Lebanese civil war in 1974. The main motivating factor for SSNP member participation in the war was the ongoing war against Wahhabism and Israel which supports it, in order to preserve the multicultural and multi-religious Syria. Since 2014, Eagles of the Whirlwind are considered the most effective pro-government force, after the SAA.

Syrian Social Nationalist Party, Arab Nationalism And Conflict In Syria

Click to see the full-size map

Eagles’ strength is eastimated at 6-8 thousand. They operate in Raqqa, Aleppo, Hama, Homs, Sweida, Deraa, Deir-ez-Zor, Idlib, Latakia, Jobar, Damascus, East and West Ghouta provinces. They are armed mainly with small arms and improvised armored vehicles. This is due to them fighting mainly in urban confines, where rapid movement is required, every  house is a fortress, and tanks are an easy and sluggish target.

Eagles differ from other formations in that they don’t have a single commander. Each unit has its own commander and each region its administrator. Their names are unknown, only their pseudonyms.

The heaviest fighting experienced by SSNP units took place in northern Latakia, in Salma, Ghamam, and Deir Hanna. This region was strategically important since it is adjacent to Turkey and provides supply and reinforcement routes for an-Nusra. Moreover, controlling this region blocks militant movement into the province and also opens a route for government forces into Idlib.

Syrian Social Nationalist Party, Arab Nationalism And Conflict In Syria

Click to see the full-size image

Another region where Eagles were active is the al-Ghab plain. This plain runs along western coastal mountains, and is in close proximity to Hama province capital. Controlling the plain creates a buffer zone which is crucial to ensure the security of coastal regions. Next to al-Ghab there are several cities with mainly Christian population, Mahardah and al-Suqaylabiya. Mahardah, in particular was the site of heavy fighting since the start of the war. Since 2015, Islamists launched attacks here nearly every day. The approaches to the city were nominally held by SAA’s 11thDivision. But in the 6 years of war, the unit had practically ceased to exist. The division had under 500 soldiers and officers in March-April 2017. SSNP was able to field about 1500 fighters from among local inhabitants, and only their presence allowed the SAA to hold this important sector.

Syrian Social Nationalist Party, Arab Nationalism And Conflict In Syria

Click to see the full-size image

The Homs province includes the mostly Christian city of Sadad, which was also a test for SSNP fighters. An-Nusra first took Sadad in October 2013. According to Human Rights Watch, 46 inhabitants, including 14 women and 2 children, were murdered, some of the bodies were dropped into a well, and churches were looted. After intensive clashes, the SAA ejected Islamists from Sadad on October 28, 2013.

Two years later, in October-November 1015, ISIS appeared on Sadad outskirts after capturing nearby Muheen. The city was defended by local population, SAA, and 500 Christian fighters. They were helped by 200 SSNP fighters. Fighting together, they were able to stop ISIS advance.

Syrian Social Nationalist Party, Arab Nationalism And Conflict In Syria

Click to see the full-size image

The Sadad visit by Syrian Orthodox Church Patriarch Mor Ignatius Aphrem Karim II was an important event. He met with the fighters to raise their morale and take part in funeral rites. The defense of the city is significant because it is one of the few remaining Syrian cities with predominantly Christian population, fighting against a huge number of jihadists.

SSNP units are recruited from among Orthodox Lebanese and Syrian Christians. At first, most of the recruits came from Lebanon, then their number decreased as the number of Syrians grew. One should not think, however, the Eagles consist only of Christians. Muslims and Christians are fighting side by side. This was evident in Sadad fighting, where SSNP units contained many Muslim volunteers. This fact is yet more evidence of the level of support the idea of Syrian state has among its adherents, and SSNP does nto segregate along religious lines.

At present time, due to the large-scale government offensive, Eagles units maintain order in cities liberated from the militants.

The party’s future in Syria’s political life

In order to determine SSNP’s role in Syria’s and Middle East’s political life, one must deal with several difficult to answer questions.

SSNP’s strong aspects. Spring 2011 demonstrations were caused by external factors but also the internal political stagnation. The Ba’ath party has been in power since the early ‘60s. Sooner or later the war will end and Syria will have to make a choice—what political forces will govern the country? Secular and radical Islam have shown its true nature, and there is no return to it. USSR collapsed over 25 years ago. Without its support, there is also no future for a return of socialist parties in the Middle East. Therefore SSNP has a good chance to gain power and show its abilities. By Middle East standards, SSNP is a political veteran. It has a clearly defined program, which it follows. There is an advanced ideology with a future, which is important when no other political force can offer anything new. Seeking dialogue with the ruling party (Ba’ath in Syria) means that in extreme conditions SSNP will not seek confrontatios and is ready to aid its former rival. Participating in the war against Islamic and international terrorism, in deed and not word, gives the party considerable weight and popular support.

Syrian Social Nationalist Party, Arab Nationalism And Conflict In Syria

Omar Sanadiki / Reuters

Weak aspects. Since its start, the party has been underground. This is reflected in its low level of participation in legislative activity in Syria and Lebanon, as mentioned earlier. Apart these two countries and Jordan, where SSNP has been active since 2013, the party has no significant presence elsewhere.

Political democratization in post-imperial nation-states, first secular and then religious, meant the transfer of power into the hands of the majority. The question of religious or national minorities was addressed in different ways by various countries but, as a rule, these approaches tended to rely on force. Some nations had to emigrate, others took up arms. Given progressive state weakness and near-universal drive for autonomy, one can draw the conclusion the region is continuing its process of tribalization. Overcoming the remnants of clan and tribal systems and the minorities’ desire for own sovereign states will be very difficult for SSNP. This is further complicated by the persecution of Christians and their mass exodus from Lebanon in the past and Syria right now. But the local Christians were the most opposed to any forms of violence, and represented the intellectual and entrepreneurial elite. They made the party into what it is today: ready for dialogue, to offer a new path of development, to defend own country with force of arms.

Syrian Social Nationalist Party, Arab Nationalism And Conflict In Syria


There are also external factors which cloud the future of SSNP. How will regional powers, like Turkey or Israel, react to the appearance of a new actor, the Greater Syria? Will they allow it to appear at all? Will the leaders of countries in SSNP zone of interest be willing to give up own power, population, and territory?

Internal and external factors make SSNP’s future extremely uncertain. The idea of establishing a state on the basis of the common aspects of the people populating the region is still ahead of its time. But even if SSNP fails for some reason, it will represent a big step toward creating a new-model Arab state.


Unlimited nationalism as foundation of state system has sparked a trend toward anarchy and therefore can no longer be used as an effective means of political organization and preserving societal stability. Arab leaders who survived Arab Spring find it difficult to ensure own legitimacy, internal stability, and good relations with more powerful neighbors. Some have left the stage peacefully. Some were forcibly removed. Others are fighting to remain in power. Wars, coups, mass unrest, and outflow of refugees are boosting the trend toward anarchy and threaten not only the Middle East but the whole world. The recent history of Middle Eastern countries contains many examples of struggle between and cross-pollination among religious (pan-Islam, Islamic Modernism) and secular (Pan-Arabism, Arab Nationalism) currents. This trend to a certain extend determined the evolution of the Arab political thought and helped to, up to a certain point, adapt to the ideas borrowed from the West. But as noted above, they were unable to avert the fracturing of the Middle East and address the conflict among ethnic and religious groups. This fracturing is made worse by the arbitrary nature of borders of countries which qualify as Arab. These states control the territory they do largely due to powerful external pressure, and not as a result of internal processes. It means the current system suffers from a delay-fuse bomb planted under it. It may be now is the time to implement new political ideas and to establish a state based on a historic sense of community among people living in a certain area, irrespective of their language, religion, or nationality.

Intense fighting breaks out between pro-gov’t and pro-Kurdish forces in northern Iraq

BEIRUT, LEBANON (1:25 A.M.) – Intense fighting broke-out between pro-government Turkmen forces and Kurdish Peshmerga fighters in the Tuz Kharmatu area, tonight, amid growing tensions between the KRG regime and Iraqi government.

According to local reports, the Popular Mobilization Units (Hashd Al-Sha’abi) attacked the Peshmerga positions inside Tuz Kharmatu, resulting in a series of clashes in northern Iraq tonight.

No further details have been released.

Tensions between Turkmen and Kurdish residents of Tuz Kharmatu have been at an all-time high after the recent Iraqi Kurdistan independence referendum, which saw the latter emancipate itself from Baghdad.

On October 14, heave clashes between Kurdish Peshmerga forces and the Iraqi Popular Mobilization Units (PMU) broke out inside the Turkmen Shiite Tuz Khurmatu town 50km south of Kirkuk city, according to Iraqi sources.

Initial reports claimed that Peshmerga units opened fire on the Dah Dah Hussainiya hall in al-Askari neighborhood of Tuz Khurmatu town. A Hussainiya is a hall used for Shiite commemoration ceremonies, and its considered by Shiites a holy place just like Mosques.

Iraqi sources reported that local PMU fighters in Tuz Khurmatu town destroyed a vehicle of the Peshmerga during the clashes. In turn, Peshmerga shelled PMU positions inside the town with mortars.

Another video from inside Tuz Khurmato, clashes continue, civilians are getting involved now.

Meanwhile, an official of the PMU confirmed to the Iraqi media that heavy clashes are ongoing around the Turuz hospital in the center of Tuz Khurmatu town. However, the official said that the clashes are with “unknown” gunmen.

The situation in Tuz Khurmatu town is still not clear, especially that no officials of the Kurdistan Region Government (KRG) or the Iraqi Federal Government have commented on the ongoing clashes yet.

An impact site of the Peshmerga mortar fire:

Heavy Clashes Between Peshmerga And Popular Mobilization Units Break Out South Of Kirkuk City (Videos)

More about the PMU


“طلال سلمان: حول “الربيع العربي

كيف وصل “صبي الموساد” إلى عرش تنظيم الحمدين؟

لا أحد يعرف بالضبط لماذا اختار عزمي بشارة مغادرة فلسطين، إلا أن كتاب “تحت خط 48 عزمي بشارة وتخريب دور النخبة الثقافية” لمؤلفه عادل سمارة، فلسطيني الجنسية، يكشف عن أهم المداخل لفهم ظاهرة عزمي بشارة، أو “صبي الموساد”، كما أطلق عليه المؤلف، إذ يرى سمارة أن شخصية عزمي بشارة تثير الريبة، فهو العضو الأسبق بالكنيست الإسرائيلي، والمنظر اليساري، والناصري القومي المبشر بعودة العروبة لسابق مجدها، وهو المشرف حالياً على وضع سياسات النظام القطري وتحديد توجهات خطابه الفكري والإعلامي وفق رؤية إسلاموية.

ويؤكد سمارة في كتابه، بحسب صحيفة “عكاظ”، أن من مهام بشارة الكبرى استقطاب مثقفين وأكاديميين وضمهم إلى جوقة التآمر على العقل العربي خدمة لمشروع تنظيم الحمدين التخريبي، مشيراً إلى انكشاف سوءة بشارة عام 1994، حينما بدأت تظهر في كتاباته وأحاديثه أعراض سرطان الصهينة وتحديداً دخول الكنيست، إثر تركه الحزب الشيوعي بعد أن أهانه إيميل حبيبي بنعته بالحمار على مسمع آخرين.

ويبرز المؤلف شخصية عزمي بشارة الذي بدأ يطرح نفسه قومياً، برغم حفاظه على الاعتراف بالكيان الصهيوني الذي يقف على نقيض، وأنقاض الشعب الفلسطيني، ويتساءل المؤلف “أي مثقف يقبل ويقتنع باستعمار استيطاني اقتلاعي ضد شعبه ووطنه مأخوذ بالتحريفية الشيوعية الستالينية، وفي الوقت نفسه يرفع شعار الاعتقاد بالقومية العربية التي يُفترض بما هي قومية وعربية أن تكون نقيضاً، بل النقيض الأول والمباشر لوجود الكيان الصهيوني؟”.

واستنتج المؤلف أن بشارة خطط لامتطاء القومية كونه لا يستطيع الدخول في أحزاب دينية كالحركة الإسلامية، وهي بالطبع لا تقبل من ليس مسلماً ولكون الشعار القومي، يمكن أن يجد مساحة بين فلسطينيي 1948، وليقينه أنه ليس بوسعه وصول مركز قيادي في الحزب الشيوعي، وأن الجمهور الذي يمكنه استغلال عاطفته “الجمهور القومي”، لافتاً إلى تنقلات بشارة من نقيض إلى نقيض فهو تربى في أحضان الحزب الشيوعي الإسرائيلي (راكاح)، الذي يعتبر الكيان الصهيوني الأشكنازي واقعاً قائماً يبدأ النقاش معه وعنه بعد الإقرار بوجوده والاعتراف بحقه على أرض فلسطين. ثم أعلن ناصريته، وتبنى صوت المقاوم ليصل إلى علاقات مع قوى منظمة التحرير يسارها ويمينها ليعود إلى فلسطينيي 1948 مقبولاً من قوى منظمة التحرير، ولم يتضح في حينه أنه ليس تكتيك عزمي بل تكتيك الموساد.

كما أن بشارة يسقط عن نفسه قناع الديموقراطية والعلمانية، إذ يؤكد في حديث صحافي أن “مشروع الدولة الديموقراطية العلمانية لا تأخذ بالاعتبار وجود أمة يهودية هنا ذات ثقافة عبرية شكلت كيانها، إذ إن هذه الأمة ليست حقيقة وحسب، بل إنها أمة لها حق الكيانية وتقرير المصير”.

ما يريده بشارة ويبشر به، حكم ذاتي ثقافي ليس إلا ولم تعد الصهيونية حركة رجعية استعمارية في تحريفاته ويساريته الطفولية، إذ بات مدافعاً عن تقرير مصير اليهود مع شعوره بالنقص تجاه تفوق اليهودي الإشكنازي.

وأبدى المؤلف تعجبه من قدرة بشارة على “اختراق سوريا، والعبور إلى لبنان” وفق تعبره ، ويلفت المؤلف إلى اختيار عزمي بشارة لبلد مأمون المناخ الأمني والسياسي والثقافي والعسكري مثل قطر كونها بعيدة عن مرمى القومية العربية وهي محمية أمريكية، وهناك، لن يطول الرجل أحد مهما فعل. إذ الدوحة المكان الطبيعي ليواصل دوره في تخريب الوعي السياسي للشارع العربي باسم القومية وعبر فضائية “الجزيرة”.

وأوضح أن بشارة نجح في تعمية وتغميم الحقائق عبر الترويج الهائل لطريقة خروجه من فلسطين المحتلة كمنفي أو هارب، وينعت المؤلف بشارة بفتى الموساد، ويروي قصة خروج عزمي بشارة إلى بيروت ودمشق لتهنئة المقاومة وسوريا،  وبعدها مباشرة تلقى اتصالاً من حمد بن جاسم رئيس الوزراء ووزير الخارجية القطري السابق لزيارة الدوحة لاستشارته بقضايا مُلحّة.

استدعاه الشاباك (جهاز المخابرات الإسرائيلية)، لجلسة حُددت خلالها مهمته الجديدة بالدوحة، وأبرزها توطيد علاقات “إسرائيل” وقطر لتتجاوز محيطها الخليجي والعربي والانخراط بمنظومة إقليمية جديدة تقودها “إسرائيل” سراً، وقطر علانية، تمهيدًا لما يسمى بـالربيع العربي لصياغة شرق أوسط جديد بالمنطقة، كون “إسرائيل” فشلت في اختراق النخبة المصرية والعربية ثقافياً بحسب الكاتب، فكلفت بشارة بقيادة مشروع تموله قطر، ويتخذ لندن مقراً باعتبارها كبرى ساحات أنشطة الاستخبارات الدولية، ومتاح عبرها استقطاب مثقفين من دول عربية بعينها لاستخدامهم كأدوات بغطاء بحثي وحقوقي وإعلامي.

امارات 24

الخطأ القاتل للأكراد في حرب النجوم .. الشمس والنجمة في مواجهة الهلال الخصيب

 …نارام سرجون


اذا ماكتبنا هذه الأيام عن الأكراد فسيحاول بعض من يريد الوقيعة بين العرب والأكراد توجيه الكلام وتحميله بالرصاص وعصر السم منه أو شق بطنه لاستخراج العداوة والتهديد لاستفزاز أعصاب الأكراد وعصبية التحدي لدى بسطائهم ..


واذا حاولنا ان نلف الكلام بالنصيحة كما نلف الهدايا بأوراق الهدايا سيصاب بعض الأكراد بالغرور والصلف ويعتقدون أن زمن الاستماع للنصائح قد ولى منذ سقوط بغداد على يد الأمريكان .. ولأن النصائح الخالصة لاتستعمل هذه الأيام الا لمخاطبة الأقوياء .. فيستمرون في العناد والمغامرة لاعتقادهم أنهم ينصحون بمودة ولطف لأنهم أقوياء .. ولكني في هذا المقال لن أقدم نصائح ولن أذهب لشراء أوراق الهدايا لأنني لاأهدي من يظن الهدية تملقا لقوته بل أهدي من لديه الحكمة ليدرك ان القوي هو من يقدم النصيحة للضعفاء .. فيتخلون عن العناد ويسمحون لعقلهم أن يتنفس الأوكسجين النقي بدل حبسه مع جثث افكار ميتة في قفص واحد وحجرة واحدة مغلقة مظلمة ..

لايمكن أن يفسر العناد البرزاني في اعلان الاستفتاء والرعاية الامريكية للتحرك الكردي في سورية الا بأنه مهمة كلف بها الأكراد وأنها ساعة الصفر التي حددت لهم لهم .. وسبب عنادهم هو أنهم خلف الكواليس مطمئنون الى سيناريو الانفصال لأنه يحظى بمباركة غربية اسرائيلية وعربية .. والقيادات الكردية لاتستطيع مقاومة اغراء الفكرة .. وهي لاتأخذ بالحسبان اي اعتبار لخطورة ماتفعل وتأثيره على الشعب الكردي وهي مستعدة لأخذه الى المغامرة ولايهمها الثمن الذي قد يدفعه الأكراد حتى لو كان سحب كل المكتسبات التي حققوها بين العراق وسورية وتركيا حتى هذه اللحظة والعودة الى مصير دولة مهاباد الكردية التي لم تعمر الا أشهرا قليلة .. وهذه المغامرة تشبه جدا مافعلته الحركة الاسلامية في المنطقة التي قبلت الصفقة مع الغرب في انها ستنهي الصراع مع اسرائيل وتوجهه نحو ايران ومحور المقاومة .. وقدمت الحركة الاسلامية منذ الأيام الأولى للتمرد السوري البراهين على اتجاهها الجديد عندما بعثت رسالة ودية لاسرائيل من حمص برفع (الثوار الجدد) علم اسرائيل لأول مرة في الشوارع في بداية التحرك عام 2011 .. الرسالة كانت صادمة وصاعقة لأنه في نفس الوقت الذي رفع فيه علم اسرائيل تم احراق صور السيد حسن نصرالله ورفعت النداءات الطائفية التي تعلن عن اتجاه الصراع الذي ستأخذ فيه الثورة الشعب السوري بعد (انتصارها) أي الى الحرب شرقا وليس غربا أو جنوبا .. في غمرة اندفاعهم وحماسهم غامر الاسلامون بالمقايضة الخسيسة مقابل الحصول على السلطة في معادلة رخيصة تقول: خذوا فلسطين وأعطونا الخلافة .. وكان لديهم اليقين الذي لايداخله الشك بأن الغرب ان وعد وفى وبأنه ان أراد شيئا فسيكون وبأن مقادير المنطقة ومفاتيح السلطة ليست الا في واشنطن ولندن وباريس وتل أبيب ..

وبالغ الاسلاميون في ثقتهم المطلقة بأنهم حكام المنطقة القادمون فرفعوا من تحديهم وتحولت لغتهم الى لغة استفزازية وقحة وطائفية بغيضة لتحويل كل مشاعر الرفض لاسرائيل لتغطيها مشاعر الرفض والعداوة لايران ..

الحركة الاسلامية دفعت ثمن هذا الخطأ التاريخي والخطيئة الأخلاقية والرهان الطائش وخرجت بهذا الخطأ من تاريخ المنطقة وفقدت كل أوراقها الشعبية وكل مصداقيتها في كل شعاراتها حتى الايمانية منها لأنها باعت الدين من أجل الدنيا فخسرت الدين والدنيا حيث نكث الغرب بوعده القاطع لها بضمان انتصارها .. كما أن قاعدتها الخلفية في تركيا نكثت بوعدها فترك الاسلاميون في سورية ليلاقوا مصيرهم البائس في أسوأ هزيمة عقائدية واجتماعية وعسكرية ولن تقوم لهم قائمة بعد اليوم بعد الهزيمة السورية ..

من سخرية الأقدار أن شعوب المنطقة لاتستفيد من الدروس وتكرر نفس المسار المليء بالحفر وتقع في نفس الحفر دون أن تنحرف عنها مليمترا واحدا .. فلاسلاميون رأوا مصير العراق بعد تدمير استقلاله الوطني مقابل بيع السلطة في بغداد .. فكرروا نفس الخطأ في ليبيا وسوريا واليمن في تدمير أو محاولة تدمير الاستقلال الوطني ..

وهاهم الأكراد وقبل أن تجف التجرية الاسلامية البائسة والتي لايزال دمها طازجا في الصحراء وعلى أرصفة حمص وحلب يخوضون في نفس المياه والمستنقع وتحت اشراف نفس القوى التي أغرت الاسلاميين بتحركهم الأهوج غير المدروس ويوجهون سهامهم نحو القوى التي فشلت الحركات الاسلامية في زحزحتها ..

وذريعة القيادات الكردية هي أن الوقت ملائم للتحرك فالمنطقة أنضجتها الحروب ومثخنة بالجراح وأرهقت بالنزاعات ولن تقدر على خوض نزاع كبير آخر بعد الاستنزاف الكبير الذي أصابها .. فيما الحركة الكردية نضجت وقويت ولاتزال حيوية .. وهي الآن تستطيع بيع نفسها مقابل ثمن غال وهو تأسيس الكيان الكردي .. وهناك ضغط اعلامي سخي لاقناع الشعب الكردي أنه يعيد تجربة واستنساخ تجربة اسرائيل التي نجحت بالرهان على الغرب واجراء عقد تخادم مع الغرب حيث تخدم اسرائيل الغرب مقابل دعمه اللامحدود لها .. فقد استمتعت الى أحد القايديين الأكراد المتحمسين وهو يقول:

(بأن كردستان تشبه في الميلاد مراحل تكون اسرائيل .. فوعد بلفور أعطى صافرة الانذار ثم قام الغرب بالتهيئة باحتلال المنطقة وتفتيتها واحاطة المولود الجديد بكيانات ملكية موالية للغرب هي السعودية والاردن .. ولذلك جاء عام 48 وكانت عملية اعلان قيام اسرائيل سهلة للغاية وناضجة للغاية والمنطقة منزوعة الألغام .. ولذلك فان الدولة الكردية قد حصلت على الوعد سلفا كما وعد بلفور .. وهي تعد نفسها للاستقلال .. وهي لحظة تاريخية لن تتكرر حيث انهكت الجيوش العربية المحيطة بكردستان .. وحطمت مدنها تحطما شديدا ولن تقوى معارضتها للدولة الكردية على النهوض عن سرير الانهاك فورا غرف العناية المشددة .. وهناك لحظة في الغرب حاسمة تنظر الى التحرك الكردي باهتمام ولكنها تنتظر منه اظهار القوة والبأس كي تراهن عليه وتتحالف معه علنا .. لأن هناك رغبة في قيام كيان يحل محل داعش لابقاء المنطقة منشغلة عن اسرائيل .. ونحن يجب أن نستغل هذه اللحظة النادرة) ..

وكما نلاحظ في سياقات التبرير نجد أيضا تشابها في تفسيرات الاسلاميين الذين رفضوا ادعاءنا بنظرية المؤامرة وقالوا ان الغرب ذكي ورأى انطلاق قطار الثورات العربية في الربيع العربي الذي لايمكن ايقافه فركبه وابرم اتفاقا معه بدل مواجهته عندما رأى اندفاعه .. وهذا التفسير كان لالغاء دور المؤامرة وللتغطية على حقيقة مناقضة تماما لذلك وهي الاسلاميين هم الذين رأوا أن الغرب اندفع نحو الشرق بعد احتلال العراق وبدا قطار الاستعمار يعود الى الشرق فركبه الاسلاميون للوصول الى السلطة وأبرموا الاتفاق البغيض معه ..
أي ان الأكراد يريدون ان يستعملوا نفس ذرائع وتبريرات الاسلاميين من ان قطار الغرب الذي حمل الاسلاميين رأى أن الاسلاميين قد سقطوا ولكن الأكراد قد نهضوا ولايمكن ايقاف دولتهم وليس أمامه من خيار الا التحالف مع الأكراد الذين قبلوا الصفقة وصعدوا الى القطار ليوصلهم الى الدولة المنشودة ..

الخطأ الكردي في الحسابات ليس جغرافيا فقط وليس سياسيا بل تاريخي لأن لاوجود للوبي كردي في الغرب مثل اللوبي اليهودي كي يقاتل من أجل كردستان بل هناك استعمال وظيفي للأكراد من أجل اللوبي اليهودي الذي لايهمه وجع الأكراد طالما أنهم يتلقون الرصاص بدل اسرائيل .. وهذا اللوبي اليهودي لم يندفع للقتال الى جانب الاسلاميين رغم تحالفه معهم بل اكتفى بمؤازرتهم سياسيا وأحجم عن التورط العسكري المباشر ولكن عندما تم سحقهم اكتفى بالقاء نظرة الأسف عليهم ومضى لايلوي على شيء .. والأهم أن هناك علاقة عقائدية بين الغرب واسرائيل من خلال العهد القديم والعهد الجديد أقرب من العلاقة مع القرآن كتاب المسلمين الأكراد وسيكون حجم التعاطف العقائدي ضعيفا .. ناهيك عن أن قيام اسرائيل لايشبه ظروف ومصاعب الدولة الكردية لأن قيام اسرائيل تم التحضير له باسقاط الدولة العثمانية وعدم السماح بقيام دولة بديلة حيث قام الغرب على الفور بالحلول محل الوجود العثماني ولم يسمح بنهوض دولة عربية تشكل جيشا منظما ولم يخرج من الشرق الا عندما كانت اسرائيل جاهزة للنهوض .. فخرج الفرنسيون والبريطانيون بعد أن جهزوا مسرح الشرق الأوسط بتكوين جسم يهودي عسكري معتبر خلال عشرين سنة يقابله غياب أي جيش معاد .. وعندما نهضت اسرائيل لم يكن عمر الدولة الوحيدة المستقلة يومها – وهي سورية – المرشحة للمواجهة والاعتراض الا عامان لم يكونا كافيين لتجهيز جيش قوي ودولة راسخة يمكن أن توقف اسرائيل .. أما الأكراد اليوم فانهم ينهضون عقب حرب طاحنة انتصرت فيها الدولتان الرئيسيتان اللتان قد تواجهان المشروع الكردي وهما عسكريا أقوى بكثير بسبب تراكم الخبرة العسكرية وتدفق السلاح الذي جعل توازن القوى لصالح الجيش السوري .. ومع ذلك فلن تكلف سورية نفسها عناء زجر الأكراد لأن الجغرافيا تحاصرهم من كل مكان وليسوا في وضع الاسرائيليين على شاطئ البحيرة التي تصلهم بأوروبة .. كما أن تركيا التي كانت تزمجر وتهدد بالدخول لنصرة حلفائها الثورجيين السوريين لم تفعل لأن خسارة الثورة السورية لن تؤثر على تركيا مباشرة أما انتصار الدولة الكردية فسيضرب ويزلزل كيان تركيا من الداخل وينسفها لأن الأكراد في تركيا مثل حزام ناسف محيط بجسد تركيا سينفجر بمجرد ان تصله النار الكردية من الشمال السوري والعراقي .. لذلك فانها معركة وجود ومصير لتركيا وليست قضية معارضة سورية لاتضر ولاتنفع .. وقد بدأ أردوغان يفاوض لتسليم ادلب مقابل أن تتعاون المنطقة معه لتدمير الكيان الكردي دون اعتراض سوري أو روسي أو عراقي .. وهم الذين يعلمون أن التركي هو من سيتكفل بعلاج الصداع الكردي ..

هناك مراهقون ومراهنون ومضاربون ومقامرون ومستثمرون وتجار عقارات وسياسات يريدون أن يربطوا ظهور الشمس الكردية التي تتوسط العلم الكردي بالنجمة الاسرائيلية التي تتوسط العلم الاسرائيلي .. ويريدون توريط الشعب الكردي واستدراجه الى أكبر مواجهة له عبر التاريخ والى عملية استعداء لكل من حوله .. ويروجون الى تلاقي الشمس النجم في مواجهة الهلال الخصيب التاريخي الأزلي وسيخوضونها كما لو انها حرب النجوم .. ولكن اذا كان هناك من حصيفي الراي وذوي عقل راجح فعليهم أن يعلموا أن من المحال أن تظهر الشمس مع النجوم في الطبيعة في وضح النهار .. فهما لايلتقيان .. والشمس الكردية لايجب أن تلتقي مع النجمة الاسرائيلية .. وكل من يظن أنه سيرى النجوم في الى جانب الشمس لتحل محل الهلال الخصيب واهم .. وكل من يظن أنه سيرى الشمس تسير مع النجوم في الليل الداجي عندما يغيب الهلال أكثر وهما .. الا اذا كان الواهمون يصرون على ان يروا النجوم في عز الظهر .. لانهم سيرون فعلا النجوم في عز الظهيرة .. فهناك زمن قادم قد يجد الأكراد أنفسهم وحيدين محاصرين بأعتى قوى .. وستتخلى عنهم النجوم ويحل الليل البهيم الشتوي العاصف على أحلامهم .. حيث لاترى لاشمس ولاقمر .. ولانجم ولا ضوء نجم .. لاشيء يبقى الا الهلال الذي بدا حكاية الحضارة ولن تنتهي الحكاية الا كما يريد أن ينهيها ..

   ( الثلاثاء 2017/09/26 SyriaNow)

Related videos

Related Articles

من التحوّلات الميدانية إلى التحوّلات السياسية


سبتمبر 20, 2017

زياد حافظ


عرضنا في المقال السابق بعض التحوّلات الدولية والإقليمية الناتجة عن التحوّلات الميدانية في كلّ من سورية والعراق. وكما ذكرنا سابقاً فإنّ المشهد الدولي لا ينفصل عن المشهد الإقليمي والعربي. وكذلك الأمر بالنسبة للمشهد العربي. ففي السياق العربي نبدي الملاحظات التالية.

أولاً: كانت الإنجازات الميدانية في كلّ من العراق وسورية إضافات عزّزت الدور الإيراني وعلى حساب دور حلفاء الولايات المتحدة في المنطقة وفي مقدّمتهم دولة الكيان الصهيوني وفي الجزيرة العربية حكومة الرياض ومجلس التعاون الخليجي. ففي هذا السياق، نعتبر أنّ فعالية مجلس التعاون ككتلة سياسية مهيمنة على المشهد السياسي العربي خلال العقد الماضي تراجعت بشكل ملحوظ بعد انفجار الأزمة بين حكومة الرياض وحكومة الدوحة.

ثانياً: إنّ قراءتنا لتلك التطوّرات تفيد بأنّ مصر لعبت دوراً مفصلياً في تحييد دور مجلس التعاون الذي كانت تقوده حكومة الرياض. لذلك أصبحت حكومة الرياض مكشوفة وأضعف بعد الإخفاق المدوّي في كلّ من اليمن والعراق وسورية، وحتى في لبنان، مع «تحرّر» نسبي لرموز لبنانية

موالية لها من توجهّات كادت تبعدها نهائياً عن السلطة. ونضيف إلى كلّ ذلك تراجع سعر برميل النفط الذي أثّر بشكل مباشر وكبير على قدرة حكومة الرياض في الاستمرار في سياسة الإنفاق الداخلي والخارجي العبثي في آن واحد. كما أنّ الابتزاز الأميركي لحكومة الرياض أفضى إلى شفط ما يقارب 450 مليار دولار من احتياطها المالي. وبغضّ النظر إذا ما تمّ دفع تلك المبالغ أو لا، فإنّ الانطباع في مجمل الأوساط المراقبة هي تراجع القدرة المالية لحكومة الرياض في التأثير على القرار العربي بشكل عام، وبالتالي على الصعيد الإقليمي والدولي.

دور مصر في إفشال قمّة ترامب ونتائجها السياسية المرتقبة لتشكيل حلف أطلسي عربي سني في مواجهة إيران، وتلقائياً محور المقاومة، كان عبر الخطاب الذي ألقاه الرئيس المصري عبد الفتّاح السيسي في قمة الرياض التي جمعت قادة من الدول العربية والإسلامية مع الرئيس الأميركي دونالد ترامب. فمصر تستعيد تدريجياً وعلى خطى ثابتة استقلالية قرارها السياسي. فمن جهة حافظت على التواصل والتفاهم مع حكومة الرياض حتى في المغامرة غير المحسوبة في العدوان على اليمن، وعلى محاربة جماعات التعصّب والتوحّش والغلوّ التي دعمتها حكومة الرياض بشكل مباشر وغير مباشر. وبالتالي استطاعت أن تحيّد في الحدّ الأدنى حكومة الرياض تجاه توجّهات مصر وفي الحدّ الأقصى الاستفادة من المساعدات المالية. غير أنّ إصرار الرئيس المصري في خطابه في القمة على إدانة كلّ من يموّل الإرهاب فجّر العلاقة مع حكومة الدوحة، وبالتالي وحدة الموقف في مجلس التعاون. ومن المفارقات التي نتجت عن تلك القمة هي الانفصام في المواقف. فمن جهة كانت بعض قرارات تلك القمة إدانة لجماعة الإخوان المسلمين وحركة حماس وحزب الله، ومن جهة أخرى فتحت مصر صفحة جديدة من العلاقات مع حركة حماس. فترميم العلاقة بين مصر وحماس يقلق الكيان الصهيوني وينسف نتائج قمة الرياض في حلف سني يخدم أهداف الكيان.

من جهة أخرى وبعد خمسين سنة على خروج مصر من اليمن، تحت ضغط حكومة الرياض وما رافقها من شبهات بدور الأخيرة في العدوان الصهيوني على الجمهورية العربية المتحدة، أصبحت مصر مَن يستطيع إخراج بلاد الحرمين من التعثّر في اليمن عبر احتوائها وليس عبر احتواء حكومة الرياض لمصر. قد ينقلب المشهد كلّياً وذلك بسبب حكمة السياسة المصرية ودقّتها في الملفّات المعقّدة.

ثالثاً: أما على صعيد علاقة مصر بالكيان الصهيوني، فرغم كلّ التصريحات الرسمية بين الدولتين، فهناك أنباء مصدرها وسائل الإعلام في الكيان الصهيوني تفيد أنّ صفقة الأسلحة الأخيرة بين الولايات المتحدة والكيان الصهيوني والتي تشمل تسليم 17 طائرة من طراز «أف 35»، هي لمواجهة «العدو» المصري! كما أنّ المشروع الصهيوني لربط المتوسط بإيلات عبر قناة يمرّ بالأردن هو تهديد مباشر للأمن القومي المصري، لأنه تعدّ مباشر على قناة السويس.

رابعاً: إنّ قرار جامعة الدول العربية بالتنسيق مع السلطة الفلسطينية في إنشاء لجنة مهمّتها العمل على منع حصول الكيان الصهيوني على مقعد دائم في مجلس الأمن لم يكن ليحصل لولا مباركة مصر.

خامساً: إذا أخذنا بعين الاعتبار أنّ العقيدة القتالية للجيش في جمهورية مصر العربية هي أنّ العدو هو الكيان الصهيوني، وبما أنّ الكيان لم يعد يخفي نظرته العدائية لمصر، ففي رأينا فإنّ الخط البياني للعلاقة بين مصر والكيان سيصل إلى تفريغ اتفاقية كامب دافيد من مضمونها في فترة قد لا تكون بعيدة. عندئذ يكتمل دور مصر في التوازن الإقليمي والدولي وعلى الصعيد العربي. وما قد يسرّع في ذلك التحوّل العداء الأميركي لمصر المتمثّل بقرارات الكونغرس الأميركي بتخفيض ملموس للمساعدات الأميركية وربطها بقرارات تمسّ السيادة المصرية. هذا ما لا تقبله مصر وقد يحرّرها من الجنوح إلى الولايات المتحدة. لم تصل الأمور حتى الآن إلى القطيعة مع الولايات المتحدة غير أنّ الحكومة المصرية بادرت منذ فترة بتبنّي سياسة التوازن وتنويع مصادر تسليحها ونسج علاقات مع دول بريكس التي تُوّجت بدعوتها لحضور القمة الأخيرة لها.


التحوّلات الميدانية في كلّ من العراق وسورية ستشكّل قاعدة للتحوّلات السياسية في المشرق العربي بشكل مباشر. فالتلاقي الميداني بين قوات الجيش العربي السوري وحلفائه وفي طليعتهم المقاومة مع قوات الجيش العراقي وحلفائه على الحدود له دلالات عديدة.

أولاً: إنّ التلاقي هو الردّ القومي على تجاوز مفهوم الحدود الموروثة من الحقبة الاستعمارية والذي حاول تسويقه مشروع الدولة الإسلامية في العراق والشام، على حدّ زعمه. فالتلاقي على الحدود يكرّس وحدة الدم العربي في مواجهة المشاريع التقسيمية والتفتيتية التي يحاول الحلف

الصهيوأميركي فرضها على بلاد الشام وبلاد الرافدين. وهذا التلاقي يحاكي ويشفي غليل المواطن العربي الذي ينادي بوحدة الصف والموقف والتكامل تمهيداً عندما تسمح الظروف الموضوعية والذاتية لتحقيق الوحدة، حلم أبناء الأمة.

ثانياً: إنّ تصريح القائد الميداني لقوّات حزب الله على الحدود السورية العراقية وتأكيده على عروبة العراق، هو الردّ الميداني على ما حاول المحتلّ الأميركي تحقيقه في نزع عروبة العراق عن دستوره. كما هو تأكيد على إفشال تقسيم العراق إلى كيانات مذهبية متناحرة. فالعروبة تجمع أبناء الأمة بينما الطروحات الأخرى تفرّق بينهم.

ثالثاً: إنّ تأكيد أمين عام حزب الله السيد حسن نصرالله أنّ الرئيس السوري بشّار الأسد هو القائد لمحور المقاومة، يؤكّد أولاً على قومية المعركة في وجه جماعات التعصّب والغلوّ والتوحّش، وثانياً، أنها تنفي الادّعاءات المشكّكة في الدور العربي لمحور المقاومة. فالتحالف مع الجمهورية الإسلامية في إيران هو تحالف ندّي وليس تحالفاً تابعاً لأيّ جهة إقليمية أو دولية.

رابعاً: إنّ قرار الرئيس السوري بالتوجّه نحو «الشرق» على الصعيدين السياسي والاقتصادي يشكّل نقلة نوعية مفصلية قد تُخرج نهائياً الغرب من التأثير في الأقطار العربية في منطقة الشرق الأوسط. إنّ التلاقي الميداني السوري العراقي يواكب التلاقي السوري مع العمق الآسيوي أولاً مع إيران وثانياً مع دول بريكس. هذا التلاقي يربط بحر الصين ببحر المتوسط بشكل غير منقطع رغم محاولات الولايات المتحدة في قطعه بانتشاره المتعثّر في أفغانستان.

هذا الصمود ثم النصر التاريخي والأسطوري بدأت انعكاساته على المحور المناهض لمحور المقاومة. فالسجال المؤسف الذي شهدناه في اجتماع على مستوى المندوبين في الجامعة العربية يعيدنا إلى ما شهدناه منذ ست سنوات، عندما تمّت مخالفة ميثاق الجامعة بتعليق عضوية دولة مؤسّسة لها أيّ الجمهورية العربية السورية. إنّ السياسات العبثية التي اتبعتها بعض الدول الخليجية بدءاً من تغطية احتلال العراق إلى تغطية العدوان الأطلسي على ليبيا إلى العدوان الوحشي على اليمن والعدوان الكوني على سورية أتت أكلُها. فمن استثمر في احتلال العراق وفي الفتنة المذهبية يحصد ما زرعه من مآسٍ وخيبات أمل وتراجع في المصداقية والنفوذ. وهذا التراجع قد ينعكس سلباً في داخل هذه الدول التي استسهلت المراهنة على الخارج. هذا المشهد لا يُفرحنا بل يؤلمنا. والجامعة العربية مدعوّة اليوم قبل الغد أن تقوم بمراجعة جذرية وجريئة لسياساتها منذ تغطيتها احتلال العراق حتى الساعة. ولا تكتمل هذه المراجعة في المؤسّسة وفي الدول المؤثرة فيها إلاّ بعد الرجوع إلى مقاومة الغرب والكيان الصهيوني. كما أنّ المراجعة داخل الجامعة العربية يجب أن تترافق بمشاركة الشعوب، فجامعة الدولة العربية مقتصرة على الحكومات وتقصي الشعوب وهذا لم يعُد ممكناً.

إنّ التحوّلات في العراق وسورية ستكون حبلى بتطوّرات على الصعيد السياسي والاقتصادي في المشرق العربي. فعلى الصعيد السياسي فإنّ التلاقي الميداني بين القواّت العراقية وحلفائها مع الجيش العربي السوري والمقاومة وحلفائه يعني أنّ أيّ مغامرة قد يقدم عليها الكيان الصهيوني أو حتى الولايات المتحدة والحلف الأطلسي ستُواجه بطاقات بشرية ومادية من كلّ قطر عربي. هذا هو فحوى رسالة أمين عام حزب الله في أحد خطاباته الأخيرة محذّراً العدو وحلفائه من أيّ حماقة. فالجبهة الشرقية التي حاولت الدول العربية في الستينيات إيجادها أصبحت قائمة وهذا ما يقلق الكيان الصهيوني.

من التداعيات السياسية إنهاء حالة النفور بين الدولة اللبنانية والجمهورية العربية السورية، علماً أنّ شرائح وازنة في تكوين الكيان اللبناني لم تقطع علاقاتها مع سورية رغم سياسة «النأي بالنفس» العبثية. موازين القوة تغيّرت والمصلحة اللبنانية تقضي بالتفاهم مع الدولة السورية. وقد بدأت ملامح التغيير في المشهد السياسي اللبناني، حيث رموز التشدّد تجاه سورية بدأت بمراجعة مواقفها للحفاظ على مصالحها. كذلك الأمر بالنسبة لحكومة الأردن التي تسعى إلى فتح صفحة جديدة مع سورية.

ولا بدّ لنا من الإشارة إلى أنّ النصر الذي يتحقّق أمامنا ستكون له انعكاسات كبيرة على الصراع مع الكيان الصهيوني. فنهج المقاومة ينتصر في لبنان وسورية والعراق، وبطبيعة الحال في فلسطين. نتوقّع نقلات نوعية في نهج المقاومة في فلسطين بعد ترتيب البيت الداخلي وعودة بعض الفصائل إلى نهج المقاومة وليس التفاوض. فما زالت اللاءات الشهيرة في قمة الخرطوم منذ خمسين سنة صالحة اليوم.

وإذا ربطنا هذه التحوّلات مع التصدّع في مجلس التعاون الخليجي والعودة التدريجية لدور مصر فإنّ ملامح نظام عربي جديد باتت على الأبواب. غير أنّ التغيير المرتقب يحتاج إلى عمل دؤوب لتكريس استقلالية ذلك النظام وتحصينه من اختراقات التطبيع والتبعية. فما كان مستحيلاً منذ فترة وجيزة أصبح ممكناً بل واجباً. فهذه هي مسؤولية النخب العربية المسكونة بوحدة هذه الأمة ونهضتها.

أما على الصعيد الاقتصادي فورشة عملية إعادة إعمار، خاصة بلاد الشام، والتشبيك المرتقب مع بلاد الرافدين بالنسبة للبنى التحتية ستجعل المنطقة تشهد فورة اقتصادية لم تشهدها سابقاً. غير أنّ المشكّكين يثيرون مسألة التمويل الممسوك من المؤسسات المالية الغربية ما يعيد دخولها إلى المنطقة. نعتقد أنّ البدائل للمؤسسات المالية الغربية موجودة، وأنّ الإمكانيات متوافرة سواء من الصين أو الهند أو روسيا أو دول آسيوية أخرى تدور في فلك بريكس، خاصة أنّ كلاً من العراق وسورية تعومان على بحر من النفط والغاز.

في النهاية، فإنّ النصر في سورية والعراق أمام الهجمة الكونية عليهما تحت عناوين جماعات التعصّب والغلو والتوحّش غيّر في المعادلة العربية والإقليمية والدولية. يبقى استثمار هذا النصر لمصلحة شعوب المنطقة. ونختتم باقتباس ما جاء به الدكتور علي فخرو في مقال مثير قائلاً: «والآن، وبعد أن واجه القطران نفس المؤامرات، من نفس المصادر، بنفس أسلحة الغدر والخيانات من البعيد ومن الإخوة الأعداء القريبين، وبعد أن نجح كلّ ذلك في نشر الدمار والاقتلاع واضطرار الملايين للخروج إلى منافي الضياع وفي معاناة ستة ملايين من أطفال سورية وخمسة ملايين من أطفال العراق من المرض والجوع والحرمان من الدراسة والتشرّد في الشوارع، وبعد أن ضعفت الدولتان إلى حدود العجز أمام حركات الانفصال والتقسيم وإشعال الصراعات الطائفية والقبلية… الآن وكلتاهما تحصدان ما زرعه ضياع فرصة التوحيد التاريخية التي أشرنا إليها، فإنّ السؤال … لا بدّ أن يطرح نفسه ويستدعي الجواب الواضح الصريح. السؤال: هل تعلّم القطران الدرس؟ وهل سيستفيدان من عبر أوجاع وأهوال الجراح المتماثلة والمشتركة؟

بمعنى آخر هل سيحدثان زلزالاً استراتيجياً في الأرض العربية من خلال توجههما بخطى ثابتة، حتى ولو كانت تدريجية، نحو تبني وتنفيذ خطوات وحدوية في الاقتصاد والأمن الداخلي والخارجي والسياسة والعمالة والنظام المجتمعي المدني والتربية والتعليم وحقوق المواطنة، على سبيل المثال…؟

أمين عام المؤتمر القومي العربي


خيارات اللحظة الأخيرة: الإبادة أم الاحتواء؟

أسابيع قليلة، وتتم محاصرة نصف
مليون على جانبَي حدود سوريا والعراق، والحل الواقعي أساسه المسامحة

ابراهيم الأمين

تهاوى «داعش». وانهياره لا يصيب كياناً سياسياً وتنظيمياً وفكرياً، بل يهشّم فئة من المجمتع العربي منتشرة اليوم بين بلاد العرب جميعاً. والإحباط الذي يصيب المنضوين في هذا التيار لا يقل قساوة عنه الإحباط الذي يصيب المؤيدين له أو المراهنين عليه. والحديث، هنا، ليس عن قوى وجهات سياسية ودولية، بل عن جمهور يجب البحث معه عن حلول تعيد تنظيم العلاقات الإنسانية في مساحات واسعة من الأراضي في سوريا والعراق ولبنان، وبما يسمح بمداواة جروح عميقة، بعضها قائم منذ ما قبل ظهور «داعش»، وبعضها الآخر رافق صعوده العجائبي وانهياره السريع أيضاً.

لنضع جانباً المغالاة أو المزايدات القائمة من جمهور وقوى يريدون تصفية كل من له صلة بهذا التنظيم، لأن أصحاب هذه الوجهة بينهم من يريد إزالة كل آثار الجريمة، كي لا تظهر مشاركته فيها، لكن هؤلاء أقلية. أما الأكثرية، فهم يتصرفون بتوتر ورعونة تجعلهم في مصاف «داعش» من حيث آلية التفكير والقرار. والذين يدعون الى الإبادة الشاملة، يتجاهلون أنهم يتحدثون عن مئات الآلاف من العناصر والمؤيدين والأهل والأفراد. ويتجاهلون حقيقة أن بعض الذين ناصروا هذا الفريق عن اقتناع، إنما يعيشون اليوم أسوأ أيامهم مع هذه الهزيمة المدوية. وعقابهم لا يكون بإبادتهم، ولا بتشريد عشرات آلاف العائلات من نساء وأطفال ومسنّين، من الذين لا ذنب لهم سوى أنهم عائلات هؤلاء المسلحين.

هل من إمكانية لعلاج؟

طبعاً، هناك ألف طريقة للعلاج. وما يجري تناقله عن واقع الجبهات التي ينهار فيها «داعش» يفتح الباب أمام علاجات مقبولة الآن، ويقوم على فكرة استسلام العسكريين منهم، وترتيب أوضاع المدنيين منهم كي يعيشوا بعيداً عن منطق الثأر والانتقام. وهي مسؤولية الحكومات أولاً، ومسؤولية القوى الفاعلة على الأرض ثانياً، ومسؤولية عقلاء هذه البيئة ثالثاً. أما من يريد انتظار المجتمع الدولي والدول الكبرى والنافذة إقليمياً ودولياً، فهي جهات لم تهتم أصلاً عندما قام هذا التنظيم، ولا هي تهتم لسقوطه، ولا هي تبحث في الانعكاسات الاجتماعية والإنسانية الناجمة عن المعارك الطاحنة القائمة، بل هي جهات تفكر فقط في الاستثمار المباشر، سواء خلال المعارك أو ما بعدها.

بناءً على هذا، يجب مناقشة كل من عارض التسوية التي أبرمها حزب الله مع قيادة المسلحين لمعالجة ملف الحدود اللبنانية ــ السورية. والنقاش لا يخصّ اللبنانيين من الذين لا يملكون سوى الصراخ، بل يخص السوريين والعراقيين، حيث المشكلة الأكبر، وحيث المسؤولية أكبر أيضاً. وهو نقاش يجب أن تشارك فيه إيران وتركيا والأردن وروسيا بقوة، وأن يكون هناك تفاهم واقعي، وعقلاني، يتيح احتواء مناخات ما بعد «داعش»، وهو أمر ممكن وفي الإمكان تحقيقه.
في هذا السياق، من المفيد مراجعة موقف القيادة السورية. ومثلما شرح السيد حسن نصرالله عن الإحراج الذي يشعر به الرئيس بشار الأسد والقيادة السورية جراء عقد صفقة مع تنظيم مثل «داعش»، إلا أن الموافقة السورية على التسوية وعلى ضمان تنفيذها داخل الأراضي السورية، تعطي الإشارة للبيئة الحاضنة لهؤلاء بأن فكرة الدولة الراعية لا تزال تتحكم بعقل القيادة السورية. وأن دمشق، والجيش السوري، والموالين للدولة والنظام، من الذين تعرضوا لأبشع الجرائم على يد إرهابيي «داعش»، يتصرفون بمسؤولية أنهم يريدون استعادة البلاد والعباد. وهذا يعني، ببساطة، أن دمشق جاهزة لنقاش يقود الى تسوية تمنع حروب الإبادة.

أما في العراق، فإن الذين يبكون على «داعش» في الجانبين المتنازعين سياسياً، هم الوجه الآخر لـ«داعش»، إذ يتبنّون الأفكار والخرافات والأساطير التي لا تقود الى حلول ولا إلى حياة مستقرة. ومن يرفض التسوية مع «داعش» لا يكون جالساً في حضن آل سعود، وهم الأهل الشرعيون لهذا التنظيم الإرهابي. ومن يرد للمقاومة وسوريا وإيران عدم التساهل مع هذا التنظيم، عليه أن يكون حاضراً أصلاً في جبهات القتال، وليس متنقلاً بين عواصم الدول الراعية للإرهاب، خاطباً الود من أجل مكاسب تافهة في بلاد الرافدين.

ما هي إلا اسابيع قليلة جداً، حتى يكون بمقدور الجميع مراقبة شريط يجمع جانبي الحدود بين سوريا والعراق، وعلى امتداد يتجاوز المئة كلم، وبعمق يتراوح بين 25 و35 كلم، حيث يوجد هناك نحو نصف مليون من البيئة الحاضنة لهذا التنظيم، إضافة الى عناصر التنظيم وعائلاتهم. فكيف يكون العلاج معهم؟

هل يمكن طردهم الى السعودية وقطر والإمارات والأردن، أو تسفيرهم الى الولايات المتحدة وأورويا؟

هل يمكن محاصرتهم وتجويعهم وترك الموت ينهش بهم، عسكريين ومدنيين ومن هو أعزل منهم؟

هل يجب القيام بعملية حرق جماعية، تسمى في العلوم كافة الإبادة الشاملة حتى يرتاح من هو غاضب من هذه التجربة؟
بالتأكيد، هناك خيار آخر، وهو خيار دفعهم بالقوة نحو الاستسلام، وإطلاق عملية احتواء مركزة، فيها مصالحات وفيها عقوبات وفيها إفساح المجال أمام الناس ليعودوا إلى طبيعتهم بحثاً عن مستقبل أفضل.
وكل كلام آخر، هو جنون بجنون!

مقالات أخرى لابراهيم الأمين:

The Neoconservatives and the “Coming World”: A response to the questions of a virtual friend

July 31, 2017

by Amir Nour (1)

« In the emerging world of ethnic conflict and civilizational clash, Western belief in the universalityof Western culture suffers three problems: it is false; it is immoral; and it is dangerous »

Samuel Phillips Huntington

« The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order »

Dear friend, I have just read the The Neoconservatives and the “Coming World”: A response to the questions of a virtual friendgreat question you have asked me about the world’s future according to the American Neo-conservative’s vision. This question came quite naturally to your mind when reading the interview (2) given by one of the most impassioned advocates of this school of thought – Thomas Barnett – author of the controversial book “The Pentagon’s New map: War and Peace in the twenty-first century”.

Assuredly, we’re dealing here with a major issue whose understanding is a sine qua non condition for deciphering both the contingencies and the dominant trends characterizing the evolution of international relations, particularly since the end of the Cold War.

Indeed, the turmoil and convulsions the world is experiencing since the turn of the third millennium, more particularly in the region that should be of a paramount interest to you – i.e. the Arab-Muslim world – are one of the most significant manifestations of the process of multidimensional change underway. Most probably, they are harbingers of the “coming world”- in the words of Malek Bennabi- one radically different from that which we have known since the end of the Second World War to the fall of the Berlin Wall and the subsequent collapse of the Soviet empire in 1992.

The ensuing new international reality -the emergence of the United States of America as the sole global superpower- has also been a long shot since it has in turn faded as a result of both the financial and economic crisis that erupted in 2007-2008 and continues to this day, and the rise of new assertive international actors, including the BRICS members (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa).

In all likelihood, this new “coming world” will be multipolar. This is a frightening prospect for the proponents of the perpetuation of the Old Order established by and for the West several centuries ago. And it is quite naturally therefore that the West, under the aegis of its American hegemon leader, is fiercely trying to hinder the realization of this inexorable prospect.

In the first chapter of my aforementioned book (3), I tried to analyze the reasons for this “fear”. At the core of those is undoubtedly the persistence of the imperial ideology that took over American policy after World War II: Neo-conservatism.

As explained in a related Wikipedia article, neoconservatism is a political movement born in the United States during the 1960s of the twentieth century, among conservative-leaning Democrats who became disenchanted with the party’s foreign policy and the “New Left” culture. The first writings of the neo-conservative current appeared in the Jewish monthly New York Monthly Review Magazine Commentary, published by the American Jewish Committee. And the first neo-conservative theorist to have adopted this word and is considered therefore as the founder of this ideology is Irving Kristol (who was militant Trotskyist in his early days!). He is the founder of the famous neo-conservative think tank: Project for the New American Century (PNAC).

Neo-conservatism peaked in influence during the Republican presidential administration of Ronald Reagan whose doctrine was guided by anticommunism and opposition to the global influence of the USSR. It reached its climax at the turn of the last century with the Bush Doctrine of exporting democracy, including by means of military force if necessary. The prominent neo-conservative newspapers are Commentary and the Weekly Standard. There are also neo-conservative think tanks on foreign policy, including American Enterprise Institute (AEI), the Heritage Foundation, JINSA (Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs) and, of course, the PNAC (4).

In foreign policy, the Neocons defend “the military power of Democratic States in international relations in order to establish a new international order”. In a PNAC manifesto published in 1996, they laid out their quintessential thought and principles as follows:

-Moral clarity and benevolent hegemony;
-Preventing the emergence of a rival power;
-End of “complacency” towards dictatorships;
-Refusal of the decline of the American power because it is the first democratic power of the world;
-Upgrading of the military tool to respond to aggression.

The Neo-conservatives say they want a new international order based on freedom, according to the designs that are not those of Kant and Wilson, to which they reproach the impotence, but which take their source in the writings of Moses Maimonides and Saint Augustine. They criticize the United Nations and international law in the name of morality. At major international conferences, they prefer smaller coalitions according to the “mission-defines-the-coalition” principle. They support Israel. Their creed is interventionism. Therefore, the United States “must be recognized as the flagship nation of human rights and export democracy and freedom all over the world if need be by force”.

Among the emblematic ideas of the Neo-conservatives, features prominently the theory of “creative chaos” -developed mainly by Michael Ledeen, a former correspondent in Rome of the New Republic. It is a project aiming to “establish a state of war and permanent instability in the Middle East that would enable the Americans and Israelis to preserve their geostrategic objectives in the region, even by re-redrawing it’s map”. Neo-conservatives do not consider the stability of the world a good to maintain but instead advocate the virtues of destabilisation.

Such was the opinion of Robert Kagan, co-founder with William Kristol of the PNAC. He was the originator of the letter of 26 January 1998 sent to Bill Clinton asking him to conduct another policy in Iraq, one with a view to toppling Saddam Hussein to preserve American interests in the Gulf. The same can be said about Robert Cooper, a British partisan of neoconservatism who advocated a doctrine of “imperialist liberalism” granting the “right” to “civilized countries” to use force against their “foreign ennemies” (5).

It was, however, President G. W. Bush who is notoriously known for having endorsed and put in practice these neo-conservative principles. He did so by invading Afghanistan in 2001 and Iraq in 2003 through an extreme instrumentalization of the unfortunate though “miraculous” events of 11 September 2001. In his 31 December 2005 State of the Union Address, he explained that there is no question of satisfying the “false comfort of isolationism”, which ends in “danger and decline”. America must “lead” the world. It’s a security imperative. “The alternative to American leadership is a much more dangerous and anxious world.” In his view, America must therefore continue to “act boldly in favour of freedom”. And as in 1945 “when she liberated the camps of death, she must accept the call of history to deliver the oppressed”, Half the world lives in a democracy, he said. “We do not forget the other half, in countries like Syria, Burma, Zimbabwe, North Korea and Iran because the demands of justice and the Peace of the world also require their freedom” (6).

To do so, the Security Council of a United Nations, although until then so decried by the neo-conservatives, becomes the privileged instrument for conducting hazardous military expeditions with chaotic consequences for some “recalcitrant” States and their peoples, particularly in the MENA region (7). George W. Bush named as his Ambassador to this important UN body John Bolton, a neo-conservative “hawk” who recounts his UN experience in a book with a very significant title (8).

Almost a decade later, and notwithstanding the debacles of unilateralism and military interventionism he has been preaching ceaselessly, Robert Kagan continues to exert a strong influence on the American establishment. In his book (9) published in 2012, he strived to refute the thesis of the “Decline of America”. This book is said to have become the bedside book of President Barack Obama, who stated in his State of the Union Address in January 2012: “America is back. Anyone who tells you otherwise, anyone who tells you that America is in decline or that our influence has waned doesn’t know what they’re talking about”.

This vision is shared by Steve Bannon, the mastermind of the new administration (before being excluded from it) of President Donald Trump. As explained in the excellent article by Pepe Escobar (10), Steve Bannon “a man who eats history and political theory essays for breakfast (…) a post-truth Machiavelli behind the most powerful of Princes”, sees our current geopolitical juncture as “the ultimate battle between Good and Evil (no, Nietzsche’s verdict, for him, does not apply) ‘Good’ in our case is Christian civilization and its history of two millennia – with a possible place of honor for the Enlightenment and the Industrial Revolution. Its opposite, ‘evil’ is conveyed by a whole series of ‘existential threats’ – from the post-modern, technocratic/secular elites (the inner enemy) to Islam (the enemy in general)”.

For more insight into the roots of this neo-conservative ideology and its impact on the policy that characterizes the United States today, I recommend reading the analysis written by Paul Fitzgerald and Elizabeth Gould (11). Armed with a razor-sharp writing style and remarkably documented references, they dissect the history of the Neocon take over of the United States, through a four-step-process presented as follows:

– American Imperialism Leads the World into Dante’s Vision of Hell
– How Neocons Push for War by Cooking the Books
– How the CIA Created a Fake Western Reality for ‘Unconventional Warfare’
– The Final Stage of the Machiavellian Elites’ Takeover of America

The Neocons, the Arab World and Israel

Dear friend, after outlining this long but indispensable historic and geostrategic overview, I come to the other major question underlying the issue you raised: Why is the Arab-Muslim world the main victim of this American neo-conservative ideology, one that is supposedly the bedrock of the New World Order and the ultimate culmination of a long process of a history coming to an end – according to another neo-conservative theorist: Francis Fukuyama? We now know that History did not end; on the contrary, it is witnessing an unprecedented acceleration, and the American Empire, far from bringing peace and prosperity to the world, has led all mankind on the road to the great disorder in the world and destructive chaos in the Arab-Muslim world, especially through the ill-named “Arab Springs”.

Aided by a formidable “media compressor roller” in its enterprise of global domination on behalf of a so-called messianic “manifest destiny”, the American empire undertook to redesign the world map in order to be able to establish, in the long term, a kind of « World State » or a « World Government ». This presupposes the destruction of nations by dissolving them into regions and continental poles. This is probably what Herbert Marshall McLuhan, the Canadian sociologist and Vatican adviser – notably known for coining the expression « the medium is the message » – had in mind when he wrote in 1968 “War and Peace in the Global village” (12) his revolutionary book in which he depicted a planet made ever smaller by new technologies, and used the concept of “glocal”, a mixture of global and local, foreshadowing the fundamental architecture of the New World Order.

As is well explained in an article (13) published in 2012, after the fall of communism, the epicenter of this policy was set in the Middle East “where not only the great reserves of hydrocarbons are located, but also the State of Israel, the real mother house of Globalism, which has been impeding all attempts of peace in this region of the world since its creation”. The map of this part of the planet has long been redesigned within Judeo-American think tanks as well as by military commands whose ultimate goals are the fragmentation of nations on ethnic and religious bases (leaving Israel as the only regional superpower), but also by pushing Islam to operate its “Vatican II” so as to be integrated tomorrow into the vast global market in gestation. Because Europe « is being in Dormition, whether we like it or not, Islam is the only bulwark against the total stranglehold of the Tel-Aviv and Washington traders on the world”. This desire to subdue Islam also aims to “create a single religion” (which should bring together all religious currents). This will only be achieved through the division of Muslims, Sunnis and Shiites. In view of this, one can easily understand why the sacred Islamic State (14) is also planned, including Mecca and Medina, to better control Islam and integrate it into a new world order, which is not possible today. Indeed this religion does not have an identified hierarchy (15).

In his excellent book “Black Terror White Soldiers: Islam, Fascism & the New Age”, David Livingstone states that because they are far too ignorant of the histories of the rest of the world, and being aware of only the accomplishments of Greece, Rome and Europe, Westerners have been made to believe that their societies represent the most superior examples of civilization. This idea, he continues, derives from the hidden influence of those who believe in and teach that history would attain its fulfillment when man would become God, and make his own laws. Livingstone concludes that this is the basis of the propaganda which has been used to foster a Clash of Civilizations, whereby the Islamic world is presented as stubbornly adhering to the anachronistic idea of “theocracy”. Where once the spread of Christianity and civilizing the world were used as pretexts for colonization, today a new White Man’s Burden makes use of human rights and democracy to justify imperial aggression. And because, after centuries of decline, the Islamic world is incapable of mobilizing a defense, the Western powers, as part of their age-old strategy of Divide and Conquer, have fostered the rise of Islamic fundamentalism, to both serve as agent-provocateurs and to malign the image of Islam.

Few weeks after the Amercian invasion of Iraq, Ari Shavit wrote a thought-provoking piece in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz under the significant title « White Man’s Burden » (16). He stated that the war against Iraq was based on an « ardent faith disseminated by a small group of 25 or 30 neo-conservatives, almost all of them Jewish, almost all of them intellectuals (a partial list: Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, William Kristol, Elliot Abrams, Charles Krauthammer), people who are mutual friends and cultivate one another and are convinced that political ideas are a major driving force of history. They believe that the right political idea entails a fusion of morality and force, human rights and grit. The philosophical underpinnings of the Washington neo-conservatives are the writings of Machiavelli, Hobbes and Edmund Burke. They also admire Winston Churchill and the policy pursued by Ronald Reagan ».

Quoting William Kristol, he added that this war was also based on « the new American understanding that if the United States does not shape the world in its image, the world will shape the United States in its own image ». At a deeper level, according to Kristol, it is « a greater war, for the shaping of a new Middle East. It is a war that is intended to change the political culture of the entire region. Because what happened on September 11, 2001, Kristol says, is that the Americans looked around and saw that the world is not what they thought it was. The world is a dangerous place. Therefore the Americans looked for a doctrine that would enable them to cope with this dangerous world. And the only doctrine they found was the neo-conservative one ».

This opinion is obviously shared by Charles Krauthammer for whom « the war in Iraq is being fought to replace the demonic deal America cut with the Arab world decades ago. That deal said: you will send us oil and we will not intervene in your internal affairs ». That deal effectively expired on September 11, 2001, Krauthammer says. Since that day, the Americans have understood that “if they allow the Arab world to proceed in its evil ways – suppression, economic ruin, sowing despair – it will continue to produce more and more bin Ladens”. America thus reached the conclusion that it has no choice: it has to take on itself the project of rebuilding the Arab world. Therefore, the Iraq war « is really the beginning of a gigantic historical experiment whose purpose is to do in the Arab world what was done in Germany and Japan after World War II ».

The article ends with a slightly divergent opinion expressed by Thomas Friedman, The New York Times columnist, who is not part of the group, although he didn’t oppose the war and was convinced that « the status quo in the Middle East is no longer acceptable. The status quo is terminal. And therefore it is urgent to foment a reform in the Arab world ». Friedman thought « it’s the war the neo-conservatives wanted. It’s the war the neo-conservatives marketed. Those people had an idea to sell when September 11 came, and they sold it. Oh boy, did they sell it. So this is not a war that the masses demanded. This is a war of an elite (…) I could give you the names of 25 people (all of whom are at this moment within a five-block radius of this office) who, if you had exiled them to a desert island a year and a half ago, the Iraq war would not have happened ». Still, he was of the opinion that « it’s not some fantasy the neo-conservatives invented. It’s not that 25 people hijacked America. You don’t take such a great nation into such a great adventure with Bill Kristol and the Weekly Standard and another five or six influential columnists. In the final analysis, what fomented the war is America’s over-reaction to September 11; the genuine sense of anxiety that spread in America after September 11. It is not only the neo-conservatives who led us to the outskirts of Baghdad. What led us to the outskirts of Baghdad is a very American combination of anxiety and hubris ».

Echoeing Ari Shavit, Stephen Green affirms (17) that since 9-11, a small group of neo-conservatives –many of whom are senior officials in the Defense Department, National Security Council and Office of the Vice President– have effectively gutted–they would say reformed–traditional American foreign and security policy. After reviewing the internal security backgrounds of some of the best known among them, he concludes that they had dual agendas, while professing to work for the internal security of the United States against its terrorist enemies.

Bill Christison (18) and Kathleen Christison reach the same conclusion (19). They say that since the long-forgotten days when the State Department’s Middle East policy was run by a group of so-called Arabists, U.S. policy on Israel and the Arab world “has increasingly become the purview of officials well known for tilting toward Israel”. These people, “who can fairly be called Israeli loyalists, are now at all levels of government, from desk officers at the Defense Department to the deputy secretary level at both State and Defense, as well as on the National Security Council staff and in the vice president’s office”.

An examination of the cast of characters in Bush administration policymaking circles, they say, reveals a “startlingly pervasive network of pro-Israel activists, and an examination of the neo-cons’ voluminous written record shows that Israel comes up constantly as a neo-con reference point, always mentioned with the United States as the beneficiary of a recommended policy, always linked with the United States when national interests are at issue”.

The two authors point out to a telling example of the drafting by Feith, Perle, and both David and Meyrav Wurmser of a policy paper issued, in 1996, by an Israeli think tank and written for newly elected Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu. Through this document, they urged Israel “to make a ‘clean break’ from pursuit of the peace process, particularly its land-for-peace aspects, which the authors regarded as a prescription for Israel’s annihilation”.

The document’s authors saw the principal threat to Israel coming, we should not be surprised to discover now, from Iraq and Syria and advised that focusing on the removal of Saddam Hussein would kill two birds with one stone by also thwarting Syria’s regional ambitions.

According to the Christisons, Elliott Abrams is “another unabashed supporter of the Israeli right, now bringing his links with Israel into the service of U.S”, after his appointment as Middle East director on the NSC staff.

Interestingly enough, the Christisons were of the view that the dual loyalists in the Bush administration “have given added impetus to the growth of a messianic strain of Christian fundamentalism that has allied itself with Israel in preparation for the so-called End of Days”. These crazed fundamentalists, they say, see Israel’s domination over all of Palestine as a “necessary step toward fulfillment of the biblical Millennium, consider any Israeli relinquishment of territory in Palestine as a sacrilege, and view warfare between Jews and Arabs as a divinely ordained prelude to Armageddon”, which raises the horrifying but very real prospect of an apocalyptic Christian-Islamic war”.

Writing a commentary in a recent issue of Foreign Policy magazine (20), Elliott Abrams –in his capacity as a senior fellow for Middle Eastern studies at the Council on Foreign Relation-, predicts that “even in the best-case scenario, with the Islamic State defeated and losing its control over a “state,” it may continue to exist as a terrorist group — and in any event al Qaeda and other jihadi groups will not disappear”. This, he concludes, “will not end our involvement in Middle East conflicts and may in fact lead it to increase. There will be no repeat of the Iraq wars, with vast American armies on the ground, but there will need to be a long continuation of the sort of commitment we see today”.

As is explained by Alison Weir in her book (21), « Few Americans today are aware that US support enabled the creation of modern Israel. Even fewer know that US politicians pushed

this policy over the forceful objections of top diplomatic and military experts ». Prodigiously documented, this book brings together « meticulously sourced evidence to illuminate a reality that differs starkly from the prevailing narrative. It provides a clear view of the history that is key to understanding one of the most critically important political issues of our day ».

All of the above fits perfectly with the thesis of the “New Sykes-Picot” that I develop in my book.

In conclusion, I believe I can assert that if Men are the main driving force of the events that make world history, they are certainly not the movers and shakers of its destiny. This -as the great Algerian thinker Malek Bennabi wrote in the past century in his flagship book “l’Afro-asiatisme” (22) – is realized “in spite of the will of men (for) human reason would be futile if it did not coincide with the processes of facts that impose God’s will on History. And it would be sacrilegious if it wanted to deflect the course of history as if it wanted to oppose God’s will and purposes”.

* *


[1] Algerian researcher in international relations, author of the book « L’Orient et l’Occident à l’heure d’un nouveau Sykes-Picot » (“The Orient and the Occident in time of a new Sykes-Picot”), Editions Alem El Afkar, Algiers, 2014.  He is a fervent advocate of the henceforth vital “dialogue of civilizations”, the alternative option of which in today’s increasingly globalized and polarized world, is a catastrophic “clash of civilizations.
[2] “A future worth creating: Interview with Dr. Thomas Barnett“:
[3] Downloadable free of charge, in French and Arabic languages, by clicking on the following links: Http://  and
[4] Read the presentation made by l’Observatoire européen des think tanks:
[5] Robert Cooper “The Breaking of Nations: Order and chaos in the twenty-first century“, Atlantic Monthly Press, New York, 2003.
[6] Read the article in the French newspaper Le Monde of 01/02/2006 entitled ” L’Amérique doit conduire le monde, selon Bush» (America must lead the world, according to Bush).
[7] This episode is superbly analyzed by Hardeep Singh Puri, Permanent Representative of India in Geneva and New York (between 2002 and 2013) in his book “Perilous Interventions: the Security Council and the Politics of chaos“, Harper Collins, 2016.
[8] John Bolton, “Surrender is not an option: Defending America at the United Nations and abroad“, Threshold Editions, 2008.
[9] Robert Kagan, “The World America made“, Alfred A. Knopf, 2012.
[10] Pepe Ecsobar, “Will Andrew Jackson Trump Embody the Benno doctrine” Entelekheia, March 21, 2017.
[11] A four part analysis titled “The history of the Neocon takeover of America “, the Francophone Saker, 10 May 2017.
[12] “War and Peace in the global Village“, Bantam Books, New York, 1967.
[13] Read “Les coups tordus de l’Empire“, in the French magazine “Réfléchir et agir”, No. 40, Winter 2012.
[14] According to a readjustment of the boundaries of the Islamic geographical area imagined by Ralph Peters, member of the PNAC, in an article in the military journal Armed Forces newspaper of June 2006 entitled “How a better Middle East would look“.
[15] In “L’Iran, un pays en sursis “, French magazine ‘Nexus 66’, January-February 2010.
[16] See article « White Man’s Burden », Haaretz newspaper, April 3, 2003.
[17] See Stephen Green, « Neo-Cons, Israel and the Bush Administration », Counterpunch, February 28, 2004.
[18] Bill Christison was a senior official of the CIA. He served as a National Intelligence Officer and as Director of the CIA’s Office of Regional and Political Analysis.
[19] See « The Bush Neocons and Israel », Counterpunch, September 6, 2004.
[20] See « The United States Can’t Retreat From the Middle East », Foreign Policy magazine, July 10, 2017.
[21] Alison Weir, « Against Our Better Judgment: The hidden history of how the United States was used to create Israel », CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, February 2014.
[22] Malek Bennabi, «L’Afro-Asiatisme, conclusions sur la Conférence de Bandoeng », Cairo, Imprimerie Misr S.A.E, 1956.


South Front

Qatar Praises Russia Constructive Role In Syrian Peace Process, Turns Away From Former Allies Within Anti-Assad Coalition

Qatar has allegedly joined Turkey in an attempt to cooperate with Russia and Iran in the ongoing Middle Eastern standoff. Following the ongoing diplomatic crisis over Doha, the Qatari government has choosen to follow up Ankara and to built closer ties with Russia instead of directly following the inconsistent US cource over conflicts in the Middle East.

Just in 2015, Qatar, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and other US “partners” were blaming Russian airstrikes in Syria and were calling on Moscow to drop support to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Now, Doha is direclty prasing the Russian constructive role in the Syrian conflict and in the whole Middle East.

We back the Astana process, we back the Geneva process, we continue to support Russia’s efforts in resolving the crisis. I think Russia is leading a very constructive process, is trying to bring all the opposition and government to come and sit around the negotiating table. This takes time, it takes effort, but it also takes collective will by all the parties who are engaged in this process, both the United States, Europe, the Arab countries — Qatar, Saudi and Egypt, and of course Iran and Turkey and Russia,” Qatari Ambassador to Russia Fahad Mohammed Attiyah said on Sunday according to the Russian state-run news agency Sputniknews.

The ambassador added that Doha believes that the ongoing Gulf crisis (over Qatar) will not affect Qatar’s attitude towards the intra-Syrian talks. However, he added that some countries may use it.

“No, I don’t think the GCC [Gulf Cooperation Council] crisis will affect this process, although the blockading countries might want to. Qatar stands firm that the crisis should not have any spillover effects on Syrian file or any other file,” Sputnik quoted the Qatari official. “What we cannot guarantee is what blockading nations are going to do, what Saudi really is going to do, what the Emirates are going to do, because they could act as spoiler nations. And they have indeed been acting in that way in the past.

Fahad Mohammed Attiyah also supported the Russian efforts over the ongoing Qatar diplomatic crisis.

“Russia has backed the Kuwaiti mediator and has asked all the people to come around the table of dialogue. And if needed, Russia is ready to come and support any effort for a speedy resolution,” he said. “Russia as a permanent member of the Security Council, as one of the founding nations for the UN system altogether, is and has been over the years a protector of the main principles of sovereignty, non-interference, non-regime change. And everything that these four blockading countries have been doing is the very violations that Russia is trying to prevent.”


South Front

Popular Mobilization Units: Establishment, War On ISIS, Role In Future Of Iraq

In June 2014, the so-called Islamic State (IS) occupied about one-third of Iraq’s territory, including Iraq’s second largest city, Mosul. It meant the radical islamists were close to capturing Baghdad and imposing its authority over all of Iraq. At that point the Iraqi government recognized the real danger of the situation and started forming militia units to liberate the country from IS. The Popular Mobilization Units (PMU) played a decisive role in that process.

The PMU (Al-HashdAl-Sha’abi) are pro-government forces operating under the formal leadership of the Iraqi military and consisting of about 70 factions. They were formed at the directive of Iraqi religious authorities after IS seized large swaths of territory in several provinces north of Baghdad in 2014.

Establishment history

One of the internal political factors which led to the PMU’s appearance in Iraq was the failure of state capacity in the realm of national security, against the backdrop of the rise of IS influence. The fall of Mosul due to massive corruption and Iraqi army’s inability to carry out its key functions meant then-PM Maliki lost faith in the armed forces. According to former Minister of Interior Mohammed Al-Ghabban, “The PMU is a unique, successful and necessary experience that was produced by the period.”

Popular Mobilization Units: Establishment, War On ISIS, Role In Future Of Iraq

Click to see the full-size image

Having armed loyal Shia militias, in contrast to the doubtfully reliable multi-ethnic Iraq units, turned out to to be a far more effective means of restoring order.

On June 15, 204, the leader of Iraqi Shia Ayatollah Ali al-Husseini al-Sistani issued a fatwa calling for struggle against IS and establishing the PMU. One should note here that Sistani did not limit his fatwa to Iraqi Shia. He insisted on characterizing the national mobilization forces as a national institution with the participation of all ethnic, religious, and social groups.


The core of the PMU are such armed Iraqi Shia formation as the Badr Organization, Asaib ahl al-Haq, Kata’ib Hezbollah, Kata’ib Sayyid al-Shuhada, Harakat Hezbollahal-Nujaba, Kata’ib al-Imam Ali, and Kata’ib Jund al-Imam. These units collaborate with certain Sunni tribes in the Salaheddin, Niniveh, and Anbar provinces that were occupied by IS. In addition, PMU includes units consisting of Christians, Turkmen, Kurds, and Yazidis.

Badr Organization. This formation was created in 2003 from the Badr Brigades, the paramilitary organization of the Shia Islamist party “Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq” (ISCI). Its leader is Hadi Al-Amiri. At present it is not only a military organization but also a political party with 22 seats in Iraqi parliament. Its military units are 10 to 15 thousand troops strong. Its units were spotted in every PMU operation against IS.

Asaib ahl al-Haq (League of Righteous People).  This group was formed in 2006 and is closely tied to Lebanese Hezbollah. Its ideology supports the official line of Iran’s leader Ayatollah Khamenei. Its leader is Qais al-Khazali. As of 2016, it had about 10 thousand troops. Its subunit, called Haidar al-Karar Brigades, is operating on Syria’s territory.

Kata’ib Hezbollah (Battalions of the Party of God). This organization was formed in 2003 in order to resist the US invasion of Iraq. Led by Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis and has up to 30 thousand troops. Its fighters also support government forces in Syria.

Kata’ib Sayyid al-Shuhada (Martyrs of Sayyid Battalions). Militarized Iraqi Shia militia. Formed in 2013 to defend “Shia holy sites around the world” and preserving the country’s unity. Led by Abu Mustafa al-Sheibani who used to be a member of Iraq’s Supreme Islamic Council. These units also fight in Syria in support of the government, mainly in Damascus province. No information on personnel strength.

Harakat Hezbollahal-Nujaba (Movement of the Party of God’s Nobles). Formed in 2013 in response to the drawn-out war in Syria and to disputes with Asaib ahl al-Haq leadership. The two groups still maintain close ties and often cooperate on the battlefield. Led by Sheikh Akram al-Kaabi whose ideology is consistent with that of Ayatollah Khamenei. No information on strength. These units also operate in Syria.

Kata’ib al-Imam Ali (Imam Ali Battalions). Armed wing of the Iraq Islamic Movement. Formed in June 2014 in response to IS aggression. Led by Shibl al-Zayd who earlier fought in the Mahdi Army under Moqtada al-Sadr. Its distinguishing feature is a unit formed from Christians, the Spirit of God Jesus Son of Mary Battalions. No data on strength. Its units participated in liberating Palmyra, battles for Tikrit, and the siege of Mosul.

Kata’ib Jund al-Imam (The Imam’s Soldiers’ Battalions). Its leader ‘Abu Ja’afar’ Ahmed al-Asadi is the PMU press secretary. Its ideology is consistent with that of Khamenei. No data on strength. Its units participated in the liberation of Baiji (2014-15).

Popular Mobilization Units: Establishment, War On ISIS, Role In Future Of Iraq

Ahmed al-Asadi

By various estimates, the PMU today is 60-90 thousand strong. The national mobilization reserve on Iraq’s territory is up to 3 million, including women. National mobilization forces also include support units (combat engineers, medical, logistics, media). Most PMU fighters have significant combat experience amassed during the US invasion of Iraq.

The PMU is headed by Falih al-Fayyadh whose deputy and military commander is Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, an engineer. In military respects the PMU are subordinate to the Iraqi army and executive authority. One should also add that the PMU has several HQs in Baghdad and Najaf.

Popular Mobilization Units: Establishment, War On ISIS, Role In Future Of Iraq

Falih al-Fayyadh

Iraqi government is supporting the PMU both militarily and financially. Its budget is about 1.16 trillion Iraqi pounds. Iraq’s population is making major financial contributions to the PMU. Weapons and munitions come mainly from neighboring Iran. The government of Iran, Hezbollah, and the Syrian Arab Army have sent their best-trained officers and junior commanders to the PMU units in order to increase their combat effectiveness.

Popular Mobilization Units: Establishment, War On ISIS, Role In Future Of Iraq

Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis

Weapons and equipment

PMU have a large number of Soviet-made APCs provided by the Iraqi army, and also many repaired and overhauled armored vehicles. Armor provided by Iran (such as BMP-1s, as well as T-55 and T-72 tanks and their clones) is also found in PMU. Moreover, PMU has been observed using US-made armor (M1 Abrams, M113 APCs, Humvees, MRAPs). PMU manufactures and makes extensive use of improvised rockets and munitions, and also perform major engineering preparation of the battlefield, including river crossings, fortifications, and airfields.

Popular Mobilization Units: Establishment, War On ISIS, Role In Future Of Iraq

Click to see the full-size image


Since the moment of its creation, PMU conducted many defensive and offensive ops against IS. The first major success is the lifting of the blockade off Amirli, in Salahaddin province in June-August 2014. Turkmen units and fighters from Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq particularly distinguished themselves in this fight. From October through December 2014, PMU liberated Dhuluʿiya and Jurf Al Sakhar.

In November 2014 the operation to liberate Anbar province capital Ramade was launched, which resulted in a decisive victory of popular mobilization forces and the Iraqi army. Radical islamists brutally killed over 1200 inhabitants, whose bodies were found in the city and its outskirts. This victory had a major psychological impact and revealed the true face of the adherents of the “one true Islam.”

The operation to liberate Baiji took place between December 2014 and October 2015. The city was home to a large oil refinery and also a construction materials factory. Participants in this battle included Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq, Kata’ibHezbollah, Badr Organization subunits, and others. The road connecting Baiji to Baghdad was seized by government forces which allowed them to use the city as a jumping off point for offensive on Mosul.

The battle for the capital of Salahaddin province, Tikrit, took place in March and April 2015, with PMU support. This operation saw the participation of Asaib ahl al-Haq, Kata’ib al-Imam Ali, Kata’ib Sayyid al-Shuhada, subunits of the Badr Organization, Turkmen formations (16-th Brigade) as well as Sunni militia, the Martyrs of Salahiddeen (up to 5,000 fighters).

In early March 2016, the Operation Imam Ali al-Hadi was initiated in order to liberate Samara in Salahaddin province. All PMU units participated in support of federal police and Iraqi army. This operation had several objectives: liberating Baghdad and Salahaddin provinces, ensuring access to the tombs of two military imams, surrounding Anbar province, and liberating Samarra.

On May 23, 2016, Iraqi PM Haidar al-Abbadi announced Operation Destruction of Terrorism to liberate Falluja. This operation saw the participation of Iraqi army, federal police, the Golden Division, PMU units, and local militias. PMU participation was limited to fighting IS militants on the outskirts of Falluja and the Khaldiya island. The city was liberated on June 26.

It’s possible that the most important PMU achievement is its contribution to liberating Mosul, which began on October 17, 2016. PMU did not participate directly in the assault, but played an important role in besieging the city from direction of Tal-Afar. These operations cut off IS fighters’ retreat corridors toward Syria, and blocked possible reinforcements from Syria. The Mosul city itself was taken under control by government forces, but the operation is continuing since not all the militants have been eliminated.

Separately, the PMU also launched an effort aimed at reaching the border with Syria west of Tal Afar. PMU fighters liberated a large area from ISIS, including Al-Baaj, al-Qayrawan and Hatar, and reached the border with Syria. Controlling a part of the Syrian-Iraqi border, the PMU once again confirmed its important role in the ongoing anti-ISIS effort in Syria and Iraq and set a foothold for further operations in the border area.

The PMU are also playing an important humanitarian role, using their volunteers to collect contributions, distribute humanitarian aid, and provide medical assistance to civilians forced to leave their homes by the fighting. The PMU dramatically transformed the battlefield since it is they who undermined IS ascendancy. They were able to rapidly concentrate a large number of troops in a given sector and deploy units without the need to coordinate with higher HQs. One should also note the media component of PMU operations, which use IS’ own weapon against it. Media were used to organize objective coverage of operations which took public criticism into account.

Role in future political life of Iraq

The liberation of Mosul, IS military defeats in Syria, and the announced death of its leader, have placed a new question on the agenda—who will govern Iraq.

Western media are circulating information that Iraq’s Sunnis have begun to form a new insurgency. Tarikat Nakshbandi, Revolutionary Brigades of 1920, and Khavija City Baathists in the Kirkuk province have declared their intent to fight against the current Iraqi government after IS is destroyed.

Popular Mobilization Units: Establishment, War On ISIS, Role In Future Of Iraq

Click to see the full-size image

Army of the Men of the Naqshbandi Order. The armed wing of the Tarikat Nakshbandi Sufi order. By some estimates, its size and influence are second only to the IS. It has some 5 thousand fighters. It waged guerrilla warfare against US forces and Iraqi government forces. Remarkably, in June 2014 they participated in the assault on Mosul alongside IS. Its leader, Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri was the Deputy Chairman of Iraq’s Revolutionary Command Council between 1979 and 2003, and right now is one of the most US-sought high-ranking Saddam Hussein-era officials.

Therefore the defeat of IS will only be to their benefit, since it will eliminate the main competitor, and moreover after IS terror any other group looks more attractive to the Sunnis.

Moreover, with the defeat of IS Al-Qaeda could also reinvent itself, though it seems unlikely. IS collapse may show islamists of the whole world that Al-Qaeda’s strategy to establish a khalifate only in the final stage of the jihad, when the entire population already unconditionally shares jihadist ideology, is more productive than a khalifate established by violence. However, al-Qaeda currently does not play the role in the world of radical Islam that it played 10-15 years ago.

One also shouldn’t dismiss IS. The physical suppression of IS and Shia celebrations will hardly have a positive effect on Iraqi and Syrian Sunni dispositions. One can’t rule out new Sunni terrorist groups. Since the start of the Mosul battle, IS militants were able to carry out several major and bloody terror attacks in various parts of Iraq, including Kirkuk, Tikrit, Samarra, and Baghdad. With IS transitioning to guerrilla war after military defeat in Iraq and Syria, one can expect more of them. And it will be more difficult to determine who, radical Sunnis or IS survivors, is behind them.

One may draw a conclusion from the Middle East chaos that US policies have totally failed. But that would be incorrect. US will continue to exert significant influence on political processes. If one were to leave everything as it is, Iran would fill the created vacuum using Shia militias which exist to varying extent in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq. This will threaten the positions of such countries as Israel and Jordan.

The relations between Iraqi Kurds and the government are also complex. The Iraqi Kurdistan is a self-sufficient autonomous entity with own administration, economy, police, and army. Moreover, a referendum is planned for Sept. 25, 2017 on Iraqi Kurdistan independence, which can’t help but create tensions with Iraq’s federal government and with minorities who live on IK territory (Turkomen, Sunni Arabs, Shia Arabs). The Arab-Kurd relations are mde worse by the memory of Saddam Hussein’s repressions during the Iran-Iraq war, and the Kurds’ active support of the US administration during its occupation of Iraq.

As far as PMU future is concerned, there are several nuances. PMU has no single political leader as it is a militarized entity. There are current and potential frictions within PMU due to competition for power among three factions: Khamenei’s, Ali al-Sistani’s, and Moqtada al-Sadr’s.

The Khamenei faction includes several relatively small entities formed by Iran. Its leaders are proud of that affiliation, emphasizing their religious obedience to Khamenei. These groups include, for example, Saraya Khurasani and Kata’ib Abu Fadhlal-Abbas. This faction has the aim of furthering Iranian interests in Syria, and protecting Iran’s border regions. These militarized formations are either fully formed political parties, or are becoming them in anticipation of planned 2018 provincial and parliamentary elections. These groups are close to former PM Maliki, who convinced them to join the Coalition for Rule of Law during the Iraq parliamentary elections in 2014. Though initially formed as military organizations, these formations have become genuine political parties under former PM’s leadership.

Popular Mobilization Units: Establishment, War On ISIS, Role In Future Of Iraq

Click to see the full-size image

The second PMU faction includes several military formations which swore allegiance to the supreme leader of Iraqi Shia, Ayatollah Sistani, and whose interests are non-political. They were formed exclusively by Sistani’s fatwa to protect Iraqi Shia holy sites and literate territory from IS. In 2014, there was a real threat that IS could destroy Shia holy sites in Baghdad and other provinces. This faction’s main formations are Saraya al-Ataba al-Abbasiya, Saraya al-Ataba al-Hussainiya, Saraya al-Ataba al-Alawiya, and Liwa ‘Al ial-Akbar. Each of those names corresponds to one of the four sacred mosques in Kadhimi, Karbala, and Najaf. According to some of leaders and members of these groups, they will be disbanded as soon as IS threat dissipates. This view is based on Sistani’s fatwa being issued in response to a specific threat and having a temporary character. Their key mission is protecting Shia zones and obeying Sistani’s orders. It means this faction’s groups could be disbanded or integrated into Iraqi military.

Peace regiments (Sarai al-Salam) were formed by radical Shia leader Moqtada al-Sadr right after the slaughter perpertrated by radical islamists in 2014 in Camp Speicher. This amounted to rebranding the Mahdi Army which was disbanded in 2008 but retained its core of commanders and specialists. They were easily remobilized, since Sadr had more experience working with militarized formations than other leaders. By some estimates Sarai al-Salam could quickly mobilize up to 100,000 men. According to faction leaders, its power is not limited by number of volunteers but by shortage of resources, particularly money and military equipment. That’s because, unlike other factions, Moqtada al-Sadr’s group is largely cut off from Iranian funding. The movement, and its semi-military character, is popular in Iraq due to its activities in Iraq prior to US invasion in 2003. Unlike other parties and military groups, Sadrists were not part of the elite that returned to Iraq after US-led invasion. The movement was embedded with ordinary Iraqi citizens, not elites. Sadr has charted his own course, to the disappointment of Iran’s leaders who poured resources into Mahdi Army in 2003-10. Today Sadr and his militarized formations have a strong pro-national position, reject Khamenei’s politics, and are against the presence of any foreign troops in Iraq. This stance has introduced confusion concerning the role Sarai al-Salam in PMU. From time to time, Sadr’s supporters claim they are part of PMU, yet in other instances they claim they are not. This is partly the result of not recognizing Khamenei’s faction as part of PMU, and an even greater rejection of Iranian influence and of former PM Maliki in Iraq. However, this faction finds it useful to declare itself part of PMU due to its popularity among Iraqis.

Matters of contention within the PMU

Involvement in Syrian affairs. Khamenei’s faction remains close to Iran and favors aiding Assad’s government. Many of those groups, particularly the core of seven militarized formations, still support the legitimate government of Syria and are ready to help defend Damascus. But Sistani’s and Sadr’s supporters were against getting involved in aiding Assad. Sadr even criticized Hassan Nasrallah and Hezbollah for its official involvement in Syria in 2014. He claimed that Shia movements and parties ought to observe their own jurisdictions and not complicate their politics by intervening in other countries’ affairs. He also criticized Iraqi Shia militiamen for their presence in Syria. Moreover, many of Sistani’s unit commanders are more concerned with protecting Shia territory and holy sites in Iraq than intervening in Syria.

Integrating PMU into the existing Iraqi security institutions is another contentious matter. Khamenei’s faction is wary of being integrated into the Iraqi army or police, since they are still too weak post-2014. For their part, most groups tied to Sistani and Sadr voiced readiness to integrate into state institutions or even disband some of their military formations.

Whether PMU is integrated into existing armed forces or preserved as a separate branch of forces will have consequences not only for Iraq’s security but for its politics. If the acting Prime Minister Abadi is able to effectively and painlessly integrate PMU into Iraqi military, it will be a convincing argument in favor of his leadership. But the fact that Abadi kept PMU from participating in assault on Mosul and send them to a secondary sector, even though Iraqi military showed weakness and PMU could have been used effectively along the main axis of advance, shows that PMU will continue to have a decisive influence on the political balance of power in Iraq. Thus next year PMU will inevitably become a political instrument used by all parties in their efforts to attain power in Iraq.

Popular Mobilization Units: Establishment, War On ISIS, Role In Future Of Iraq

Iraqi PM is in Mosul


The PMU may be considered one of the biggest military and civilian organizations in the Middle East. They are the most likely and desirable center of  political power in Iraq. The PMU unites numerous Sunni, Shia, Christian, Yazidi, Turkoman, and Kurdish armed formations, which means that the PMU, in spite of internal disagreements, is a platform for dialogue on military and political matters, and also a guarantee against the internal or external threat of radical Islam. Currently only the PMU has major experience of conducting military operations, working with local population on humanitarian matters, and ensuring objective media coverage. Most ordinary Iraqis believe the PMU should have a political future, because it is they who broke the back of ISIS in Iraq and are ready to aid neighboring Syria.

For Iraq to be able to address own problems, it should strengthen local and federal institutions in order to combat armed terrorists and reach mutual understanding among ethno-religious communities. Only then will Iraq be able to translate its current military victories into long-term political dividends and ensure peace and stability in the region.


Related Articles

They wanted to provoke Iran ……. But they found Turkey أرادوا التحرّش بإيران… فوجدوا تركيا؟

They wanted to provoke Iran ……. But they found Turkey

يونيو 14, 2017

Written by Nasser Kandil,

Officially Turkey is still a member in the NATO which is led by Washington, and which does not include any of the Gulf countries which announced the war on Qatar. Officially Ankara announced that it has a relation with Doha through a military cooperation agreement that is similar to the one which associates Doha with Washington and which is based on the US base Aladid in Qatar. So similarly Turkey will put a parallel base for its forces. Officially the Kuwaiti mediation fell as the US efforts which remained in media. Doha announces that it refuses the guardianship and that it is able to coexist with the Saudi diplomatic and economic punishment, since the commercial supply line across Iran is enough.

What was planned for the file of the relation with Qatar was based on two axes the economic isolation towards the bankruptcy, and the military geographic confinement with the indication to the choices of discipline through the coup which will be used as a pretext for the invasion and the occupation. The leaders of the war made use of every necessary reinforcement elements of the US position which was present due to the Saudi loyalty and the readiness to move without limits or conditions in the relation with Israel in order to discipline Qatar, along with five hundred billion dollars. The Saudis made use of their relations and money to earn more of the participants in the boycotting from the Comoros to Djibouti and the Maldives, but the media and the political gatherings are approaching their ceiling, so the question becomes about the next step in case Qatar does not surrender.

The terrorist attacks in Tehran which coincided with the Qatari crisis were public provocation by Washington and Riyadh, and an attempt to affect the Iranian dignity in way that provoked it hoping that any coming confrontation will be under Gulf-Iranian title, in a way that gives Washington the justification to show its strength, but at the same time it does not go to the difficult ends, but it stops at the limits of imposing Saudi dominance map in the Gulf that starts from Qatar. If Tehran avoided responding to the provocation, then Qatar would be easily controlled, but Iran keeps its calmness and the steadfastness in the fronts’ confrontation regarding the race with America to the borders between Syria and Iraq, and Turkey activated its military agreement with Qatar, and suggested to intervene if Qatar is exposed to danger.

For the second time, the considerations of Mohammed Bin Salman lost, in the war of Yemen Bin Salman based his considerations on winning in this war within few weeks, but years have passed and he is still stuck in the swamp, and now after he lost five hundred billion dollars he fell in a new swamp. If he takes a risk militarily he will find the Turks in front of him not the Iranians, and if he stops in the middle his impasse will aggravate, and the small Emirate will prove its ability to withstand and challenge the royal will, and instead of showing it as an example for everyone who disobeys Saudi Arabia it will turn into an example to rely on by the opponents of Saudi Arabia in the Gulf from Bahrain to Yemen and an example of how to challenge Saudi Arabia and thus the fall of the solemnity which its industry has cost a lot of money.

The disaster will affect Bin Salman if Doha and Ankara along with the risks of the existential challenge which are considered by the US tendency  which based on measuring the security of Israel and which is committed by Saudi Arabia move to position in the Iranian-Russian alliance, after it became clear that the choice starts and ends in Syria between two projects one wants to prolong and manage the chaos from a bilateral gate ISIS and the Kurds forces, and the other wants to go to settlement that rebuilds the Syrian unity from the gate of Astana.

Translated by Lina Shehadeh,


أرادوا التحرّش بإيران… فوجدوا تركيا؟

ناصر قنديل

يونيو 9, 2017

– رسمياً، لا تزال تركيا عضواً في حلف شمال الأطلسي الذي تقوده واشنطن، والذي لا يضمّ بين صفوفه أياً من دول الخليج التي أعلنت الحرب على قطر. ورسمياً أنقرة أعلنت أنها ترتبط مع الدوحة باتفاقية تعاون عسكري تشبه تلك التي تربط الدوحة بواشنطن وتقوم على أساسها قاعدة العديد الأميركية في قطر. وبالمثل ستضع تركيا قاعدة لقواتها في قاعدة موازية. ورسمياً سقطت الوساطة الكويتية ومثلها المساعي الأميركية بقيت في الإعلام، والدوحة تعلن أنها ترفض الوصاية، وأنها قادرة على التعايش مع العقاب السعودي الدبلوماسي والاقتصادي وأن خط الإمداد التجاري عبر إيران كافٍ.

– ما جرت هندسته لملف العلاقة بقطر كان مبنياً على محوري العزل الاقتصادي وصولاً لباب الإفلاس، والتطويق الجغرافي العسكري مع التلويح بخيارات التأديب عبر الانقلاب الذي يتخذ ذريعة للغزو والاحتلال، ولم يدخر قادة الحرب لتأديب قطر كل عناصر الاستقواء اللازمة بالموقف الأميركي الذي كان حاضراً بقوة الولاء السعودي والجهوزية للمضي بلا حدود ولا شروط في العلاقة بـ«إسرائيل»، وفوقه خمسمئة مليار دولار، ولا ادّخر السعوديون علاقاتهم وأموالهم لكسب المزيد من المشاركين في جوقة المقاطعة، من جزر القمر إلى جيبوتي والمالديف، لكن الجلبة الإعلامية والسياسية تقارب بلوغ سقوفها، ويصير السؤال عن الخطوة التالية ما لم تستسلم قطر.

– جاءت العمليات الإرهابية في طهران بالتزامن مع الأزمة القطرية استفزازاً بتوقيع علني من واشنطن والرياض، ومحاولة لإصابة الكرامة الإيرانية بجرح يخرجها من الحسابات الهادئة، أملاً بأن تكون أي مواجهة مقبلة بعنوان خليجي إيراني يمنح واشنطن مبرر استعراض قوة، ولا يذهب للنهايات الصعبة بل يتوقف عند حدود فرض خريطة نفوذ سعودية في الخليج، تبدأ من قطر. وإن تحاشت طهران التجاوب مع الاستفزاز يجري قطاف سهل لقطر، فإذ إيران باقية على هدوء الرد، والثبات في جبهات المواجهة وعنوانها السباق مع الأميركي على الحدود بين سورية والعراق، وإذ بتركيا تفعّل اتفاقيتها العسكرية مع قطر وتلوّح بالتدخل إذا تعرّضت قطر للخطر.

– حسابات محمد بن سلمان للمرة الثانية تضيع بين الحقل والبيدر، ففي حرب اليمن أقام بن سلمان حساباته على الفوز بالحرب خلال أسابيع قليلة. ومضت سنوات ولا زال عالقاً في المستنقع. وها هي حساباته بعد خسارة الخمسمئة مليار تضعه في مستنقع جديد، فإن غامر عسكرياً سيجد الأتراك أمامه وليس الإيرانيين، وإن توقف في منتصف الطريق زاد مأزقه تفاقماً وأثبتت الإمارة الصغيرة قدرتها على الصمود وتحدّت المشيئة الملكية، وبدلاً من تقديمها مثالاً لكل من يفكر بشق عصا الطاعة ستتحول لقاعدة إسناد لكل خصوم السعودية في الخليج من البحرين إلى اليمن، ومثالاً على كيفية تحدي السعودية وسقوطاً للمهابة التي كلفت صناعتها أموالاً طائلة.

المصيبة تقع على رأس بن سلمان إن ذهبت الدوحة وأنقرة مع أخطار التحدّي الوجودي، التي يحملها التوجه الأميركي المحسوب على قياس أمن «إسرائيل» وتلتزمه السعودية، إلى التموضع في الحلف الروسي الإيراني، بعدما صار واضحاً أن الخيار يبدأ وينتهي في سورية، بين مشروعَيْن: واحد يريد إدامة الفوضى وإدارتها من بوابة ثنائية داعش وقوات الأكراد، وثانٍ يريد الذهاب لتسوية تُعيد بناء الوحدة السورية من بوابة أستانة.

(Visited 377 times, 377 visits today)

Related Videos

Related Articles

This Is The Real Story Behind The Crisis Unfolding In Qatar

Only Shakespeare’s plays could come close to describing such treachery – the comedies, that is

By Robert Fisk

June 11, 2017 “Information Clearing House” –

The Qatar crisis proves two things: the continued infantilisation of the Arab states, and the total collapse of the Sunni Muslim unity supposedly created by Donald Trump’s preposterous attendance at the Saudi summit two weeks ago.

After promising to fight to the death against Shia Iranian “terror,” Saudi Arabia and its closest chums have now ganged up on one of the wealthiest of their neighbours, Qatar, for being a fountainhead of “terror”. Only Shakespeare’s plays could come close to describing such treachery. Shakespeare’s comedies, of course.

For, truly, there is something vastly fantastical about this charade. Qatar’s citizens have certainly contributed to Isis. But so have Saudi Arabia’s citizens.

No Qataris flew the 9/11 planes into New York and Washington. All but four of the 19 killers were Saudi. Bin Laden was not a Qatari. He was a Saudi.

But Bin Laden favoured Qatar’s al-Jazeera channel with his personal broadcasts, and it was al-Jazeera who tried to give spurious morality to the al-Qaeda/Jabhat al-Nusrah desperadoes of Syria by allowing their leader hours of free airtime to explain what a moderate, peace-loving group they all were.

Saudi Arabia cuts ties with Qatar over terror links

First, let’s just get rid of the hysterically funny bits of this story. I see that Yemen is breaking air links with Qatar. Quite a shock for the poor Qatari Emir, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani, since Yemen – under constant bombardment by his former Saudi and Emirati chums – doesn’t have a single serviceable airliner left with which to create, let alone break, an air link.

The Maldives have also broken relations with Qatar. To be sure, this has nothing to do with the recent promise of a Saudi five-year loan facility of $300m to the Maldives, the proposal of a Saudi property company to invest $100m in a family resort in the Maldives and a promise by Saudi Islamic scholars to spend $100,000 on 10 “world class” mosques in the Maldives.

And let us not mention the rather large number of Isis and other Islamist cultists who arrived to fight for Isis in Iraq and Syria from – well, the Maldives.

Now the Qatari Emir hasn’t enough troops to defend his little country should the Saudis decide to request that he ask their army to enter Qatar to restore stability – as the Saudis persuaded the King of Bahrain to do back in 2011. But Sheikh Tamim no doubt hopes that the massive US military air base in Qatar will deter such Saudi generosity.

When I asked his father, Sheikh Hamad (later uncharitably deposed by Tamim) why he didn’t kick the Americans out of Qatar, he replied:

“Because if I did, my Arab brothers would invade me.”

Like father, like son, I suppose. God Bless America.

All this started – so we are supposed to believe – with an alleged hacking of the Qatar News Agency, which produced some uncomplimentary but distressingly truthful remarks by Qatar’s Emir about the need to maintain a relationship with Iran.

Qatar denied the veracity of the story. The Saudis decided it was true and broadcast the contents on their own normally staid (and immensely boring) state television network. The upstart Emir, so went the message, had gone too far this time. The Saudis decided policy in the Gulf, not miniscule Qatar. Wasn’t that what Donald Trump’s visit proved?

But the Saudis had other problems to worry about. Kuwait, far from cutting relations with Qatar, is now acting as a peacemaker between Qatar and the Saudis and Emiratis. The emirate of Dubai is quite close to Iran, has tens of thousands of Iranian expatriates, and is hardly following Abu Dhabi’s example of anti-Qatari wrath.

Oman was even staging joint naval manoeuvres with Iran a couple of months ago. Pakistan long ago declined to send its army to help the Saudis in Yemen, because the Saudis asked for only Sunni and no Shia soldiers; the Pakistani army was understandably outraged to realise that Saudi Arabia was trying to sectarianise its military personnel.

Pakistan’s former army commander, General Raheel Sharif, is rumoured to be on the brink of resigning as head of the Saudi-sponsored Muslim alliance to fight “terror”.

Five things to know about Qatar’s first 2022 World Cup stadium

President-Field Marshal al-Sissi of Egypt has been roaring against Qatar for its support of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood – and Qatar does indeed support the now-banned group which Sissi falsely claims is part of Isis – but significantly Egypt, though the recipient of Saudi millions, also does not intend to supply its own troops to bolster the Saudis in its catastrophic Yemen war.

Besides, Sissi needs his Egyptian soldiers at home to fight off Isis attacks and maintain, along with Israel, the siege of the Palestinian Gaza Strip.

But if we look a bit further down the road, it’s not difficult to see what really worries the Saudis. Qatar also maintains quiet links with the Assad regime. It helped secure the release of Syrian Christian nuns in Jabhat al-Nusrah hands and has helped release Lebanese soldiers from Isis hands in western Syria. When the nuns emerged from captivity, they thanked both Bashar al-Assad and Qatar.

And there are growing suspicions in the Gulf that Qatar has much larger ambitions: to fund the rebuilding of post-war Syria. Even if Assad remained as president, Syria’s debt to Qatar would place the nation under Qatari economic control.

And this would give tiny Qatar two golden rewards. It would give it a land empire to match its al-Jazeera media empire. And it would extend its largesse to the Syrian territories, which many oil companies would like to use as a pipeline route from the Gulf to Europe via Turkey, or via tankers from the Syrian port of Lattakia.

For Europeans, such a route would reduce the chances of Russian oil blackmail, and make sea-going oil routes less vulnerable if vessels did not have to move through the Gulf of Hormuz.

So rich pickings for Qatar – or for Saudi Arabia, of course, if the assumptions about US power of the two emirs, Hamad and Tamim, prove worthless. A Saudi military force in Qatar would allow Riyadh to gobble up all the liquid gas in the emirate.

But surely the peace-loving “anti-terror” Saudis – let’s forget the head-chopping for a moment – would never contemplate such a fate for an Arab brother.

So let’s hope that for the moment, the routes of Qatar Airways are the only parts of the Qatari body politics to get chopped off.

This article was first published by The Independent

The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Information Clearing House.

View image on Twitter

View image on Twitter

Where are ISIS supporters tweeting from the most? Saudi Arabia!
Imagine my shock.
 Click for Spanish, German, Dutch, Danish, French, translation- Note- Translation may take a moment to load.

“Somewhere … Down There” – Was Our VT Combat Correspondent, Sirte, Libya, Nov 2011

Lavrov: People from outside Libya killed Gaddafi and returned to Europe and obtained nationalities



Sham Times claimed 

“Lavrov revealed in a press conference with Egyptian Foreign Minister Sameh Shukri that the killing of Libyan leader Moamer Kadhafi was carried out by people from outside Libya, adding that these people returned to Europe and obtained European nationalities”

لافروف: أشخاص من خارج ليبيا قتلوا القذافي وعادوا إلى أوروبا وحصلوا على جنسيات

عدد المشاهدات : 3735 | تاريخ النشر : 2017-05-30 08:20:20

وكالة أوقات الشام الإخبارية

كشف لافروف، فى مؤتمر صحافي مع وزير الخارجية المصري سامح شكرى، أن قتل الزعيم الليبي الراحل معمر القذافي تم على يد شخصيات من خارج ليبيا، موضحاً أن هؤلاء الأشخاص عادوا إلى أوروبا وحصلوا على جنسيات أوروبية، موضحاً أن عشرات الأعمال الإرهابية تمت فى أوروبا،

I checked both  Arabic and English versions of the press confirance and noticed that Lavrov never mentioned Moamer Kadhafi. He talked about regime change carried out by people from outside Libya, which has been a fact. I am posting both videos

I advise reader to check the VT Exclusive: VT at Gaddafi’s Capture written by  VT Editors Gordon Duff  and  Jim W. Dean on  November 3, 2011. VT editors admitted that their Libya Correspondent Leads Gaddafi Capture. VT Libya Correspondent Leads Gaddafi Capture.

there was one journalist present.  In this case, he was commanding a unit that had been tracking, had been hunting Gaddafi for weeks. 

“Somewhere … Down There” – Was Our VT Combat Correspondent, Sirte, Libya

Gordon Duff omitted the name of VT Correspondent saying:

I will omit the name of the writer who can make a longer version public when he is ready.

However, he is a well known journalist, born in Libya, who has worked for years in support of human rights projects around the world.  Almost all members of the independent press know this individual well.  Most consider him a friend and trusted colleague, in fact none have ever stated otherwise.

I claim that VT and their Combat Correspondent were involed in Gaddafi Capture that lead to his brutal killing. Their hands are soaked with Libyan blood,

On February 25, 2011, Gordon Duff wrote: AMERICA MUST ATTACK GADDAFI NOW!

Later, on  October 20, 201, Gordon Duff  tried to wash his bloody hands. He wrote

“I didn’t want to see Gaddafi arrested, killed or tried. However, I am an American and didn’t live under his rule for 42 years. Those who did, people I know of heroism and character, hated him.” Wrote Gordon Duff,

On that, I wrote on November 4, 2011

[Gordaffii’s – Gordon Duff- well known “independent journalist” “born in Libya, who has worked for years in support of human rights projects around the world.” “was commanding a unit – hand-picked squad – that had been tracking, had been hunting Gaddafi for weeks.”

Gordaffi is not talking about the French “Independant Philospher, Bernard-Henri Levy, born in Algeria, who has worked also in support of “human rights projects around the world” such as South Sudan, Darfour, Afghanistan, and Libya, wher he revived his image after his failed attempt to jump on the bandwagon of the Egyptian uprising]
“This first hand account of the capture of Colonel Gaddafi, will be not be redacted.
Our videographer was not there, having been assassinated by Gaddafi agents some weeks before, however there is enough video of this scene for everyone.”

Here is one titled Nato was there – Proof.

Gordaffi, don’t want you to see, inorder not “to make Gaddaf look like a victim of a NATO “holocaust”.

“Thus, when Gaddafi was captured alive and sent away in an ambulance, there was absolutely no NATO involvement of any kind. No NATO troops were ashore, no NATO planes above.” Gordaffi lied.

Let us check this LIE:

“Colonel Roland Lavoie, spokesman for Nato’s operational headquarters in Naples, said its aircraft today struck two vehicles of pro-Gaddafi forces “which were part of a larger group manoeuvring in the vicinity of Sirte”.

The Ministry of Defence in London confirmed that Nato warplanes today attacked a convoy of vehicles fleeing Sirte.”

Gaddafi was captured alive in Sirte by members of the Libyan National Liberation Army after his convoy was attacked by NATO warplanes as Sirte fell on 20 October 2011

Consequently, Nato hands are clean from the blood of Gaddafi, his “independant journalist” commanding a unit – hand-picked squad -” after “tracking, …hunting Gaddafi for weeks.”…..”on Thursday morning, 20 October, intercepted communications from his son Mu’tasim ordering his men to assemble in District No. 2 by 4 a.m.”

The hand-picked squad were appox half a km behind him but in the desert, south of the road they were using.” Out of sudden“a French Raphael jet appeared and hit his convoy several times.

The hand-picked squad just managed … corner Gaddafi, ….grabbed him and  his son, pulled them out of the sewer. Injured Gaddafi ” was escorted into an ambulance, “barely able to walk which headed west to Misrata.”

Fact check

“The following clip shows Gadhafi’s bloodied body being dragged through the streets of Sirte. Please be warned this graphic clip is not suited for the faint of heart and could ruin your morning.” – the Chip was removed by the user.

Gordon’s corropondace wrote to wash hid bloody hands:

At that point, after the ambulance headed west to Misrata”, the independant journalist” followed one of his “golden rules of survival (when your mission is accomplished, never hang about or dwell on things but just simply leave) I bid farewell to some of the fighters and headed for Benghazi. By the time I arrived there I heard that Gaddafi was dead. I have no idea what happened to him exactly and, to be honest, I really don’t care.”

“One final word. Some will be wondering whether we got a reward or in any way been paid for our troubles. The answer is an emphatic no. We did this out of a sense of duty to our country. For me personally, I lost approximately 12, 500 GBP in lost earnings while I was away fighting (July-October).”

Reading between the lines, here is the conclusion:

The so called “independent journalist”“born in Libya, who has worked for years in support of human rights projects around the world.” is a British sent to Libya to command a hand-picked squad. 
His mission was “tracking”, “hunting,” once the mission is accomplished,” he followed the“golden rules of survival” He left the crime scene.

More here

Like killary VT rejoiced killing Qaddafi :

[Editor Note: The post ops analysis of the media shilling on the Libyan Revolution will be providing VT many teaching opportunities for exposing who was who. The phonies lay back in the weeds in their chosen ideological target nests, sticking to their audience tested material to build readership. The Left has their ‘progressive’ smokescreen, and the Right has their ‘defending our culture against those that hate it’ silliness.

As live street interviews are pouring in from the Tripoli people, their intense joy of finally being free after 42 years. The most memorable was the young lady who was saying that if she died the next day after Gaddafi is captured she would still be happy to have lived one day of freedom.

To all the progressives out there that shilled for Gadaffi, especially the ones who got paid for it….eternal shame on you. We are coming for you…VT and the free Libyan people who will have something to say about your horrific conduct. They may be calling for no retribution in Libya, but I have not signed on. It’s time to begin the hunt for those that were working undercover…so they are not allowed to just moved on to the next game.  Jim W. Dean, editor]

[Syria] is the game as I shall illustrate later

Please Check my post dated November 4, 2011 on Biden prescription for winning wars without losing a single life. (Making new Bin Ladens), Bedin’s perscription for Lybia was a great success “thanks” for Nato, Arab leage and VT and their Correspondent, but so-far was a great failure in Syria.

Most likely reader are curious to know who is VT Libya Correspondent who led Gaddafi Capture?.

Please check the following links:

The Next Game

Listen to the same “amazing” GUY who called, On Nov 3rd 2011 AMERICA TO ATTACK GADDAFI saying the so-called “most honest truth about terrorism in SYRIA”

syria terror usa

Chk Link :

“Incredible speech by Gordon Duff at the Syrian International Conference to Combat Terrorism. Gordon led a group that represented the United States at the conference!”

Gordon discusses who really runs the United States from the shadows! He names the US Generals and a Senator who runs ISIS! Never in history have the people of Syria been told the truth to this extent! I urge patriots worldwide to share this video and keep sharing all articles from Take over the comments for all controlled opposition in alternative media that censor VT! Take over comments and pages for all fake mainstream news! Patriots aroudn the world are now uniting behind our veterans putting out the truth! Never stop sharing VT and bringing more patriots to our team! VT for VICTORY!

Is it an awakening of conscience? I guess NO

Gordan’Speech indicate that his mission is something else:

Gordonsaid that Israel runs the United States from the shadows and named Senator John McCain as”  The Father of ISIS” – the terrorist group assembled by the US/Israeli criminal cabal.  

It’s time we simply said what we know – whether it’s classified information or not.  All of you have seen the results of what we’re saying.  What we’re saying will fit what has happened here and what facts you have been able to bring out.

Our hypothesis is based on solid information, solid research on the ground, using human signals intelligence from our extensive capabilities.  We don’t guess. We know what we’re talking about here….

I accept your statements and I recognize the truth and honesty of what you are saying but I do believe there are areas of misunderstanding how the United States works, politically.  This is a tremendous problem in the middle-east and one of the things that has driven us here…..

A little more than one week ago, the United States Defense Secretary, Chuck Hagel resigned.  Chuck Hagel was the individual who stopped the United States from bombing Syria over the False Flag gas attacks near Allepo….

It’s our goal – while we are here – to establish a method of communication that will allow Syria and other nations in the area, to understand Israel’s control of the United States, the control of the US by organized crime and how the US government is subservient to a world-wide criminal organization.

This may well have been the first time in history an American intelligence team of “non-activists” gave a military briefing to an audience of this type, including key military leaders of diverse tribal forces throughout Lebanon, Syria and Iraq, a Russian delegation and others from around the world.

Related Videos

Related Articles

Sayyed Nasrallah Advises Saudis to Talk to Iran: We’re Stronger than Ever

Zeinab Essa

Hezbollah Secretary General His Eminence Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah delivered Thursday a speech commemorating 17 years on the Liberation and Resistance Day.

Sayyed Nasrallah Advises Saudis to Talk to Iran: We're Stronger than Ever

Appearing via video link, Sayyed Nasrallah addressed a huge crowd of people who gathered in Hermel [city of martyrs] to celebrate the event.

At the beginning of his speech, the Resistance leader praised the role and sacrifices of Baalbeck- Hermel region in supporting the Resistance that led the liberation as well as in facing the takfiri scheme.

“This spirit and will were repeated in the Bekaa, Hermel and Baalbek, and when the events started in Syria and the armed groups seized control of the border with Bekaa, and when Hermel was hit by rockets and car bombs, you were the ones who confronted the situation, not the foreign forces who were offering them arms and financial and political support,” he said.

As he praised the sacrifices of people in Baalbeck- Hermel, he addressed them by saying: “You stood by your national army and offered martyrs and the entire resistance stood by you. The same as Hermel’s youths fell as martyrs in the South, the young men of the South came to Hermel’s outskirts to fall as martyrs there.”

He further reminded that when “Israel” occupied Lebanon, including the capital Beirut, the world remained silent. “When “Israel” invaded Lebanon in 1982, the entire world stood idly by and when the occupation army occupied around half of Lebanon including Beirut, no one in the world lifted a finger,” Sayyed Nasrallah added.

Warning that we are today witnessing a very critical stage in the history of Lebanon and the region, His Eminence stressed that on the Resistance and Liberation Day, we repeat what we say every year: “The only and only 2 countries that supported and stood by Lebanon in its resistance in face of “Israel” were the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Syrian Arab Republic.

He also slammed the fact that some Arab countries offered support for “Israel” in its occupation of Lebanon.

Sayyed Nasrallah went on to say that this historical victory happened as a result of great cooperation between the army, resistance and people.

“When the Lebanese took the decision to resist the occupation and liberate the land, the Islamist and national factions in Lebanon took this decision and used their modest capabilities, achieving gradual liberation and the grand victory on May 25, 2000, without waiting for anything from Arab, Muslim or Western countries, the US, the Security Council, the Arab League the Organization of the Islamic Community.”

According to His Eminence, “The destiny of the people is made by the people themselves whether in Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, Bahrain and Palestine.”

In this context, he gave the example of the Palestinian that was inherited from one generation to another as most of people present in the battlefield are youth.

Moreover, he viewed that the new generations must acknowledge that the grand victory is the result of the sacrifices of the resistance fighters of all factions, including the Islamic Resistance, AMAL, the Lebanese National Resistance factions, the Palestinian resistance factions, and the Syrian army forces.

“We must always remember names that contributed to this victory, such as Imam Moussa al-Sadr, Sayyed Abbas al-Moussawi, Sheikh Ragheb Harb, Leader Imad Mughniyeh and others,” Sayyed Nasrallah emphasized.

Regarding the situation in Arsal outskirts, Sayyed Nasrallah announced that the situation shouldn’t continue as we are “keen on preserving bloodshed .”

“The current situation can’t continue , the outskirts contain armed groups and would-be suicide bombers who are threatening the region and its neighbors and I tell the armed groups in the outskirts that they have reached a dead end, he said noting that ” people in Arsal as well as the government must exert efforts to put an end to this situation.”

On another level, His Eminence urged the people in Bekaa to cooperate with the security agencies as he stressed the importance of this official security effort in the face of the violations in this region.

“You must show further cooperation with the army and security forces to achieve this goal which will reflect positively on everyone,” he clarified.

Sayyed Nasrallah went on to comment on the internal political debate over an electoral law.

“There is not much time left to June 20 but we still hope to reach a new electoral law,” he said, pointing out that “some new ideas were proposed over the past two days and they might lead to a good result.”

Stressing the importance of reaching a new law for the sake of the country,” His Eminence reiterated the 3 Nos. “We have said no to vacuum, no to extension and no the 1960 law.”

“As the political forces have a period until June 20, this logically means that an extraordinary legislative session is a must to reach the desired result,” he explained.

On the regional level, Sayyed Nasrallah assured the Lebanese that the decisions taken in the Riyadh summit will have no impact on the Lebanese arena.

“Since General Aoun was elected as president, good consensus has been reached inside country over a host of issues. We’ve agreed to distance Lebanon from the surrounding problems. We have reached an understanding in Lebanon to differ over political matters, but follow the same line on economic and security matters.”

According to His Eminence, the Riyadh summit was simply organized to glorify racist US President Donald Trump, threaten the Islamic Republic of Iran as well as the resistance axis in Iraq ,eighboring Syria and Lebanon.

“They sought to glorify Trump who has disrespected Islam as well as Arab nations the most during his presidential campaigning,” he said, asking the leaders in Riyadh: Hadn’t Trump previously called for milking Saudi Arabia of money and then eliminating it.

“Why all that honoring to Trump knowing that he is the most US president who offended Arabs, Muslims, Gulf countries, and Saudis in his electoral campaign? Isn’t he the first US president to forbid Muslims from eight countries to visit US? Isn’t he the president who loves “Israel the most?” Sayyed Nasrallah wondered

He also elaborated that KSA invited Trump to get his support in the face of rising global criticism of its role in terrorism and to present Saudi Arabia as the center of decision in the region.

“The entire world knows that Saudi Arabia is behind the spread of terrorist Takfiri ideology,” he said noting that “the Saudi-backed terrorists were wreaking havoc across the world and their damage was not limited to a single country or the Islamic world, but had spread to the Western countries as well.”

On this level, His Eminence reiterated: “Saudi Arabia is the center of world terrorism. It is responsible for the creation and supplying arms and munitions to al-Qaeda, Taliban and Daesh terrorists groups. The kingdom’s Wahhabi ideology is fanning the flames of sectarianism and sedition in the Muslim world. Don’t Daesh scholars teach the books of Mohammad Bin Abd Wahhab?”

His Eminence also underscored that Riyadh statement was not approved and discussed by the Arab leaders as claimed but only by the US president and Saudis.

Moving to Bahrain, Sayyed Nasrallah slammed the Bahraini regime’s heinous crimes in Diraz. And the house arrest applied on Ayatollah Sheikh Isa Qassim.

“The Bahraini king did not meet the rightful demands, he rather referred to oppression,” His Eminence mentioned, noting that “the Bahrain king took the green light from the US president to go on with his oppression.”

Turning to Saudi Arabia’s military onslaught against Yemen, Sayyed Nasrallah hailed the Yemeni nation’s steadfastness, emphasizing that the Riyadh regime is perpetrating crimes against humanity in the impoverished country through starving and slaughtering ordinary people.

The Resistance leader underlined that Saudi Arabia was haplessly seeking to isolate Iran.

He added that Saudi officials had paid billions of dollars to US statesmen in this regard forgetting all about the plights of poor Muslims.


Noting that Saudi Arabia’s aggression of Yemen was a clear political and military failure, Sayyed Nasrallah advised Saudi authorities to put hostility towards Iran aside and engage in negotiations with Iran.

He also leveled strident criticism against Arab leaders for their disregard of the important role that Iran is playing against terrorism in the Middle East region.

His Eminence also dismissed allegations against Hezbollah resistance movement as “repetitive,” stressing that members of the group were unfazed by ongoing threats and were fully prepared to defend their land, nation and the future of their children.

The Resistance Leader stressed that the resistance movement in the region was stronger than ever, adding that Daesh terrorists will soon be defeated in both Iraq and Syria.

“As for us there is nothing to fear of. We have always been on the US list of terrorism and nothing have changed,” he said.

Al-Ahed news

Related Articles

%d bloggers like this: