Saudi-Iranian talks are an attempt to pre-empt the American return to nuclear deal, says sociologist

June 16, 2021 – 17:12

By M. A. Saki

TEHRAN – Head of the Center for Political Studies at the University of Lebanon says that the Saudi desire to negotiate with Iran is an attempt to pre-empt the American return to the nuclear deal.

“The Saudi-Syrian normalization is a positive step and the Saudi-Iranian dialogue is an attempt to pre-empt the American return to the nuclear deal,” Dr. Talal Atrissi tells the Tehran Times.

 “Saudi Arabia sees tangibly that all of its previous bets failed, and I assure that this step was by American encouragement and support, especially since Saudi Arabia failed in the war on Yemen and today it is trying to get out of the Yemeni quagmire at any cost,” Atrissi notes.

Following is the text of the interview:

Q: How do you evaluate the ongoing talks over revitalizing the Iran nuclear deal?

A: Most of the statements, whether from the Iranian side or the American side, confirm that the negotiations are heading to yield results. The statements are optimistic, and the announcement of the formation of committees to study how to lift the sanctions implies that all sides are nearing an agreement. 

The statements of the Russian, Chinese and even European delegates indicate progress and seriousness in the negotiations. But this does not mean that things will go quickly. The United States, for its part, will not lift the sanctions so easily, and even not all sanctions will be lifted. It will try to negotiate to lift only parts of the sanctions in exchange for Iran’s return to full commitment to the terms of the nuclear deal.

As for Iran, it has an interest in negotiating and has a direct interest in lifting the sanctions, which have caused great damage to the Iranian economy, and for this reason, Iran has returned to the negotiating table. But Iran has no interest in prolongation of the talks. I mean, you go back to the negotiation table again, as if we need a new agreement. With regard to Iran, this is unacceptable, as the Leader of the Islamic Revolution warned about prolonging the negotiations, while America wants to extract the largest number of concessions from Iran before lifting the sanctions.

This is what is happening today in the successive rounds of the Vienna talks. 

Q: How would the revival of the Iran nuclear pact affect the region?

A: If this agreement occurs, of course, it will reflect positively on the relations among the countries of the region. I believe that Saudi Arabia’s desire for dialogue with Iran began with America’s encouragement, not on a self-initiative, meaning that the new American administration wants some kind of stability in the Middle East (West Asia) and mitigating Persian Gulf-Iranian tension. 

The main tensions have been from the Israeli side while the Biden administration looks forward to a kind of stability and dialogue, and this is one of the reasons for thinking about reviving the nuclear agreement with Iran.

The biggest strategic challenge for the Biden administration is China, and this means that the United States is reluctant to get involved in the Middle East (West Asia) again. It is also withdrawing from Afghanistan. Afghanistan was a major failure for America and its policies in the world and the region.

So, if the negotiations for an agreement succeeds, the allies of the United States, including Saudi Arabia in the first place, will return to stable relations and understanding with Iran, and this could contribute to solving problems in Lebanon, Yemen and other countries of the region.

Q: What are Israel’s options to undermine the nuclear talks in Vienna? Do you think Israel will start a war to block the path for reviving the nuclear pact?

A: From the beginning, Israel and the U.S. administration have been at odds over the 2015 nuclear deal, and Netanyahu considered the agreement signed by Obama a “historical mistake” rather than a “historic achievement,” as Obama called it. Israel tried to obstruct the path of the agreement and worked with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to prevent the conclusion of the pact, but the agreement was achieved in 2015.

 When Trump came to power in 2016, Israel considered it a great opportunity to push America to pull out of the nuclear deal.

As for the possibility of Israel carrying out some kind of operation or sabotaging Iran’s nuclear facilities to change the balance and impede a possible revival of the nuclear agreement between Iran and America, I rule out that this would happen.

First, Israel faces a domestic crisis, and Netanyahu is accused of having failed in the battle of “the sword of Jerusalem,” and therefore the victory that has been achieved by the Palestinian resistance is a victory for Iran. The resistance in Palestine expressed its thanks to Iran for its role in supporting Palestine.

For Israel, it is very difficult to contemplate such an option, especially since Netanyahu has moved to the ranks of the opposition and is no longer prime minister.

Q: How do you read Saudi-Syrian normalization, especially when we put this alongside the Iranian-Saudi talks? What caused the Saudi policy change in the region?

A: The Saudi-Syrian normalization is a positive step and the Saudi-Iranian dialogue is an attempt to pre-empt the American return to the nuclear deal.
Saudi Arabia sees tangibly that all of its previous bets failed, and I am sure that this step was by American encouragement and support, especially since Saudi Arabia failed in the war on Yemen and today it is trying to get out of the Yemeni quagmire at any cost.

She believes that dialogue with Iran can help it get out of this war, and thus Saudi Arabia’s return to the negotiation table with Iran and Syria is an indirect acknowledgment of the failure of its previous policies.

I mean, the policy of toppling the government in Syria has failed, and the policy of forming an Arab-(Persian) Gulf-Israeli axis against Iran has failed, as well as normalization with Israel and the deal of the century, after what happened recently in occupied Palestine.

So, this step on the part of Saudi Arabia is an affirmation that Iran and the axis of resistance are in a better position than before and that the past decade was a period of steadfastness and resistance in the face of all attempts to ruin the region, Syria, and Yemen in particular.

 Today, after the battle of Palestine, the axis of resistance is in a position of strength, and this is what prompts the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to engage in dialogue with the parties to this axis.

Q: What is the significance of the Iran-China partnership for the region and the larger world?

A: The importance of the Iran-China partnership is that it opens up broad prospects for Iran at various levels of development in the areas of investment, oil and communications. On the other hand, this may be an alternative even to the nuclear agreement with the West. Even if the nuclear deal is not revived, Iran can be satisfied with the partnership with China.

 Even if Iran complies fully to the nuclear agreement and agrees with the United States, it will have balanced relations with East and West, with the preference of China, especially since China is not a colonial country and did not create problems in the region.

 So, the Chinese-Iranian partnership is an important strategic agreement that may block the way for the U.S. to put pressure on Iran.

In addition, the Iranian-Chinese partnership as an economic agreement is inseparable from China’s vision and its historical and strategic project to restore the Silk Road (One Road, One Belt). 

Iran will be a major station in this project. For this reason, China is counting on partnership with Iran and wants Iran to remain a strong and pivotal country in the face of the American hegemony, and this is not in the interest of the West and the United States in particular.

RELATED NEWS

St. Petersburg International Economic Forum Can Strengthen Relations Between Palestine & Russia

By Denis Korkodinov

Source

St. Petersburg International Economic Forum Can Strengthen Relations Between Palestine & Russia

According to experts, the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum not only strengthens Russia’s mediation efforts to overcome the existing problems in Palestine, but can also serve as a basis for mobilizing Palestinian economic factions, turning them into a powerful instrument of international influence.

The International Economic Forum, scheduled for June 2-5, 2021 in St. Petersburg, contributes to the strengthening of relations between Russia and Palestine. Moscow would like to use the event to discuss joint projects with Palestinian colleagues and open a new page in the interaction of the two countries.

The current state of the Palestinian question allows us to make an unambiguous conclusion that Ramallah is on the verge of a fateful systemic change in the principles of cooperation. The organization of an inter-Arab dialogue and the foreign policy of Iran and Turkey allow Palestine to remain on the periphery of international attention. However, the reaction of most of the countries of the Arab world to the so-called “Deal of the Century” and the process of “Israelization” that has swept the Middle East serve as a certain signal for many countries that the Palestinian dossier is rapidly losing the interest of many regional players. This state of affairs is explained, first of all, by the protracted internal political crisis, the conflict between Hamas and Fatah, as well as the low economic attractiveness of Palestine for international investors. In this regard, the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum may become a unique opportunity for Ramallah to enlist the support of big business, establish a dialogue with international partners and use Russian levers of influence on long-standing regional conflicts.

It is worth noting that the strengthening of Russian-Palestinian relations over the past 10 years has been due to Moscow’s particularly prominent foreign policy in the Middle East. Now Russia has a great interest in resolving Palestinian-Israeli conflicts and restoring the Palestinian economy, which has suffered not only from international sanctions, but also due to the global spread of COVID-19. The St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, to which Palestinian politicians and businessmen are invited, once again testifies that Moscow is ready to play a decisive role in resolving Palestinian problems and aims to restore the positions of Ramallah that were lost as a result of the “Deal of the Century”. At the same time, ensuring the economic independence of the Palestinians is a key point in this area of cooperation between the two countries.

The decision to participate in the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum may be an attempt to resolve the long-standing crisis between Fatah and Hamas and serve as a guarantee that the Palestinian people will forget about their political differences in order to achieve the sole goal of economic prosperity of their state.

Moscow is quite active in influencing the political and economic processes in Palestine and is especially actively helping to overcome the Palestinian crisis. The St. Petersburg International Economic Forum can become a negotiating platform for Fatah, Hamas and their foreign partners.

According to experts, the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum not only strengthens Russia’s mediation efforts to overcome the existing problems in Palestine, but can also serve as a basis for mobilizing Palestinian economic factions, turning them into a powerful instrument of international influence. In addition, given that Russia is ready for dialogue with all representatives of Palestine, it will be difficult enough to accuse Moscow of being biased or intending to express its sympathies to any one Palestinian group. In addition to Russia’s real support for the Palestinian dossier, the Kremlin, at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, offers the prospect of significant economic investment. In particular, Moscow is ready to develop cooperation with Ramallah in the field of agriculture, as well as on projects for the construction of industrial facilities in Bethlehem, Jerekhon, Hebron and other Palestinian cities, which is a very tempting prospect, given that Palestine is now in dire need of economic assistance.

Ayatollah Khamenei: Balance tipped in Islam’s favor, Zionist enemy in decline

Friday, 07 May 2021 10:12 AM  [ Last Update: Friday, 07 May 2021 10:58 AM ]1

Source

US Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) (L) talks with Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) during a rally with fellow Democrats before voting on H.R. 1, or the People Act, on the East Steps of the US Capitol on March 08, 2019 in Washington, DC. (AFP photo)
Ayatollah Khamenei delivers a televised speech on the occasion of the International Quds Day on Friday, May 7, 2021. (Photo by Leader.ir)

Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei has marked the International Quds Day, saying Israel is not a country but a terrorist base against the people of Palestine and other Muslim nations.

“Since the first day, the Zionists turned the usurped Palestine into a terrorist base. Israel is not a country, rather it is a terrorist camp against the Palestinian nation and other Muslim nations,” the Leader said on Friday.

“Fighting against this despotic regime is fighting against oppression and terrorism. And this is a collective responsibility,” Ayatollah Khamenei added. 

The Leader voiced confidence that the downward movement of the Zionist regime has already started and “it will never stop”.

Ayatollah Khamenei said the issue of Palestine continues to be the most important and active issue for the Islamic Ummah collectively.

He said the policies of the oppressive and cruel capitalism “have driven a people out of their homes, their homeland and their ancestral roots and instead, it has installed a terrorist regime and has housed a foreign people therein.”

The following is the full text of Ayatollah Khamenei’s speech:

In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful

All praise is due to Allah, the Lord of the Worlds, and peace and greetings be upon our Master and Prophet, Ab-al-Qassem Al-Mustafa Muhammad, upon his pure and immaculate household, upon his chosen companions and upon those who follow them until the Day of Judgment.

Palestine is the most important issue for the Islamic Ummah

The issue of Palestine continues to be the most important and active issue for the Islamic Ummah collectively. The policies of the oppressive and cruel capitalism have driven a people out of their homes, their homeland and their ancestral roots and instead, it has installed a terrorist regime and has housed a foreign people therein.

The logic behind the establishment of the Zionist regime

Can one find a logic weaker and shakier than that of the establishment of the Zionist regime? On the basis of their claim, the Europeans oppressed the Jews during the Second World War, therefore they believe that the oppression against the Jews should be revenged by displacing a nation in West Asia and by committing a horrible massacre in that country!

This is the logic which western governments have relied on with their wholehearted and blind support for the Zionist regime, thereby disproving all their false claims about human rights and democracy. It has been 70 years now that they have been sticking with this laughable and at the same time tragic story and every now and then, they add a new chapter to it.

Fighting against the Zionist regime is a collective responsibility

Since the first day, the Zionists turned the usurped Palestine into a terrorist base. Israel is not a country, rather it is a terrorist camp against the Palestinian nation and other Muslim nations. Fighting against this despotic regime is fighting against oppression and terrorism. And this is a collective responsibility.

Weakness and discord in the Islamic Ummah prepared the ground for the usurpation of Palestine

Another noteworthy point is that although that the usurping regime was established in 1948, the ground for occupying that sensitive Islamic region had been prepared years before that. Those specific years coincided with the active interference of westerners in Islamic countries with the purpose of establishing secularism and excessive and blind nationalism and also with the goal of installing despotic governments who were infatuated with or controlled by the West.

Studying those events in Iran, Turkey and Arab countries stretching from West Asia to North Africa reveals this bitter truth that weakness and discord in the Islamic Ummah paved the way for the disastrous usurpation of Palestine, allowing the world of arrogance to deliver that blow to the Islamic Ummah.

Westerners and Easterners colluding with one another over the matter of usurping Palestine

It is instructive that at that time, the capitalism and communism camps colluded with the rich Zionists. It was the English who masterminded the plot and who persisted in it and then, Zionist capitalists executed it with their money and weapons. The Soviet Union too was one of the first governments that officially recognized the establishment of that illegitimate regime and later on dispatched a large number of Jews to that area.

The usurping regime was actually an outcome of that situation in the world of Islam on the one hand, and of a European plot, invasion and transgression, on the other.

In the present time, the balance has been tipped in favor of the world of Islam

Today, the situation in the world is not like those days. We should keep this reality within sight. Today, the balance of power has swung in favor of the world of Islam. Various political and social incidents in Europe and in the United States have laid bare the weaknesses and the deep structural, managerial and moral conflicts among westerners. The electoral events in the US and the notoriously scandalous failures of the hubristic and arrogant managers in that country, the unsuccessful one-year fight against the pandemic in the US and Europe and the embarrassing incidents that ensued, and also the recent political and social instabilities in the most important European countries are all signs of the downward movement of the western camp.

On the other hand, the growth of the Resistance forces in the most sensitive Islamic regions, the development of their defensive and offensive capabilities, their growth of self-awareness, motivation and hope in Muslim nations, the increasing tendency to follow Islamic and Quranic slogans and the growth of independence and self-reliance in nations are auspicious signs of a better future.

The necessity for Muslim countries to cooperate with one another on the pivot of Palestine and Quds

In this auspicious future, cooperation between Muslim countries should be a main and fundamental goal and this does not seem unlikely. The pivot around which this cooperation turns is the issue of Palestine–the entirety of that country–and the fate of Holy Quds. This is the same truth that guided the enlightened heart of the great Imam Khomeini (may God bestow mercy upon him) towards the announcement of International Quds Day on the last Friday of Ramadan.

Cooperation between Muslims around the pivot of Holy Quds is an absolute nightmare for the Zionists and for their American and European advocates. The failed project called “The Deal of the Century” and the effort to normalize the relations between a few weak Arab governments and the Zionist regime were desperate attempts to run away from that nightmare.

I tell you with confidence: These attempts will not get them anywhere. The downward movement of the Zionist enemy has started and it will not stop moving downward.

The decisive factors in the future: The continued activities of the Resistance in the occupied lands and Muslims’ support for the Palestinian mujahids

There are two determining factors in the future: First and foremost is the continued activities of resistance in the Palestinian lands and the strengthening of the line of jihad and martyrdom and second, global support, on the part of governments and Muslim nations throughout the world, for the Palestinian mujahids.

All of us–government officials, intellectuals, religious scholars, political parties and groups, the brave youths and people of various social backgrounds–should determine our position in this public movement and play our part.

This is what nullifies the enemy’s plots and it will be a millennial manifestation of this ayah: “Or do they intend a plot? But those who defy Allah are themselves involved in a plot” [The Holy Quran, 52: 42], and “And Allah has full power and control over His affairs, but most among mankind do not know” [The Holy Quran, 12: 21].

I also wish to address the Arab youth in their own language…

In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful

Greetings be upon all liberated individuals in the Arab world, in particular Arab youth, and greetings be upon the resistant people of Palestine and Quds and the defenders in Masjid al-Aqsa.

Greetings be upon the martyrs of Resistance and the large number of the mujahids who laid down their lives on this path, in particular martyr Sheikh Ahmed Yasin, martyr Sayyid Abbas Musawi, martyr Fathi Shaqaqi, martyr Imad Moughniyah, martyr Abdul-Aziz Rantisi, martyr Abu-Mahdi al-Muhandis and finally, the most prominent personality among the martyrs of Resistance, martyr Qassem Soleimani. Even after their fruitful and blessed life, with their martyrdom, each of these personalities exerted a deep impact on the Resistance.

The endeavors of Palestinians and the pure blood of the Resistance martyrs have managed to hold up this auspicious flag and to increase the internal power of Palestinian jihad by a hundred times. One day, the Palestinian youth used to defend themselves by throwing stones, but today, they respond to enemy attacks with precision missiles.

Palestine and Quds has been described in the Holy Quran as the “Holy Land”. It has been tens of years now that the most impure and malicious human beings have been occupying this pure land: they are devils who massacre honorable human beings and then they confess to it with complete shamelessness. They are racists who have been harassing, for more than 70 years, the main owners of the land by murdering, looting, imprisoning and torturing them, but, thank God, they have not been able to break their willpower.

Palestine is alive and it continues to resist and it will finally overcome the malicious enemy with God’s assistance. Holy Quds and the entire Palestine belongs to those people [the Palestinians] and they will regain its possession again: “Nor is that for Allah any great matter.” [The Holy Quran, 14:20].

All Muslim governments and nations are responsible towards Palestine, but the Palestinians themselves are the pivot of the jihad and their population reaches about 14 million people inside and outside the land. The unity and the unanimous willpower of those people will work wonders.

Today, unity is the biggest weapon for the Palestinians

The enemies of Palestinian unity are the Zionist regime, the US and some other political powers, but if unity is not shattered from inside the Palestinian society itself, the extrinsic enemies will not be able to do anything.

The pivot of this unity should be national jihad and lack of trust in the enemies. The main enemies of the Palestinians-the US, England and vicious Zionists-should not be used as a source of support for Palestinian politics.

All Palestinians–including the Palestinians in Gaza, in Quds, in the West Bank, in 1948 lands and even the ones living in refugee camps–form a single unit and they should adopt the strategy of coalescence. Every part should defend another part and when under pressure, they should utilize the tools at their disposal.

Today, hope of achieving victory is stronger than ever. Today, the balance of power has swung in favor of the Palestinians. The Zionist enemy has become weaker year after year while its army, which used to describe itself as “the army which will never be defeated”, has turned into “an army which will never taste victory” after its debacle in the 33-day war in Lebanon and its experiences in 22-day and 8-day wars. As for its political condition, it has been forced to hold four elections in the space of two years. In terms of security as well, it continuously tastes defeat. Moreover, the increasing desire among Jews to emigrate from that country has become a source of embarrassment for that overconfident regime. Its serious endeavor to normalize relations with a few Arab countries, with the assistance of the US, is another sign of the decline of that regime. Of course, this will not help that regime in any way either. Tens of years ago, it established relations with Egypt, but since then, it has become much weaker and much more vulnerable. Therefore, will the normalization of relations with a few weak and small countries be able to help that regime? Of course, those countries will not benefit from the relations either, as the Zionist regime will transgress against their properties and their land and it will promote corruption and insecurity in their countries.

Of course, these truths should not make others forget about their heavy duty. Muslim and Christian ulama should announce the act of normalization as haraam from a religious perspective and intellectuals and liberated individuals should explain to everyone the results of this treachery, which is a stab in the back of Palestine.

Contrary to the downward movement of the regime, an increase in the capabilities of the camp of Resistance is a sign of a bright future: An increase in defensive and military power, self-sufficiency in building effective weapons, the self-confidence of mujahids, the increasing awareness of youth, the extension of the Resistance circle to the entire country of Palestine and beyond, the recent uprising of youth in defending Masjid al-Aqsa and the simultaneous promotion of the Palestinian nation’s spirit of jihad and innocence among public opinion in many parts of the world.

The logic behind the Palestinian cause, which has been registered in the United Nations documents, is a progressive and attractive logic. Palestinian warriors can bring up the idea of holding a referendum with the participation of the main inhabitants of Palestine. The referendum will determine the political system of the country and the main inhabitants, including the displaced Palestinians, no matter what their ethnicity and religion are, will participate in it. That political system will bring back the displaced [Palestinians] and will determine the fate of the foreigners inhabiting there.

This demand is based on the common democracy accepted in the whole world and no one can question its progressiveness.

The Palestinian fighters should continue their legitimate and moral fight against the usurping regime until it is forced to give in to this demand.

Move forward in the Name of God and know that: “Allah will certainly aid those who aid His cause” [The Holy Quran, 22: 40].

Greetings be upon you and Allah’s mercy


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

www.presstv.ir

www.presstv.co.uk

www.presstv.tv

Sayyed Nasrallah To the Saudis: Don’t Waste Your Time, Yemen is Victorious …The US is Declining

Sayyed Nasrallah To the Saudis: Don’t Waste Your Time, Yemen is Victorious …The US is Declining
Click here for Videos

Zeinab Essa

Hezbollah Secretary General His Eminence Sayyed Hassasn Nasrallah delivered on Wednesday a speech on the memorial ceremony held by the Association of Muslim Scholars to honor its late Chairman of the Board of Trustees, judge Sheikh Ahmad Zein.

As His Eminence renewed Hezbollah’s condolences on the demise of the great Sheikh, dear resistance fighter, father and teacher Sheikh Ahmad Zein, His Eminence hailed “Sheikh Zein as a sublime model of faith, religiosity, knowledge and sincerity.”

“Sheikh Ahmad Zein resembles a model of ethics, humility, transparency, tenderness, friendliness, love and kindness,” Sayyed Nasrallah added, noting that “Sheikh Ahmad Zein is a model of the revolutionary resistant who was clear in his stances, vision, and bravery.”

In parallel, the resistance leader underscored that “Sheikh Ahmad Zein was stable and solid in the path of [Muslim] unity and resistance.”

“Unlike Sheikh Ahmad Zein, other people’s stances changed due to personal desperation, Petrodollars and authority,” he confirmed, praising “Sheikh Ahmad Zein, who walked a path of an intellectual, juristic, and religious basis on which he remained firm.”

According to Sayyed Nasrallah, “Sheikh Ahmed placed before him the constants of Palestine, its people, Al-Quds and the occupied land from the sea to the river. He took upon himself the cause of confronting the ‘Israeli’-American scheme to dominate the region.”

“Sheikh Ahmed, from the beginning to the end, was with Palestine and against the liquidation of its cause and with everyone who stood with it,” His Eminence highlighted, recalling that “Sheikh Ahmad Zein stood from the beginning with the revolution in Iran, because it supported Palestine.”

Moreover, Sayyed Nasrallah went on to say: “Sheikh Zein backed and supported all resistance fighters and scholars. He offered all what he could for the sake of resistance.”

He further said that “The most difficult situation for Sheikh Ahmed Zein was in Syria, and he endured a lot for that stance.”

“The most important reason behind targeting Syria was because of Palestine and the resistance, which Sheikh Zein had been aware of,” His Eminence mentioned, reminding that “Sheikh Zein rejected the regime’s practices in Bahrain and the war on Yemen despite all the pressures, and he was one of the scholars who uncovered the fabrications and misleading regarding the talk of the so-called sectarian war in Yemen.”

Sayyed Nasrallah also hinted that “The most difficult level of Sheikh Zein’s and the resistance scholars’ political life was in this decade. Recently, stances made by Sheikh Zein and other scholars were of great importance.”

In addition, Sayyed Nasrallah underscored that “In the last stage, the position of Sheikh Zein and other scholars had great significance. One of the most dangerous and difficult problems was those who tried to turn the battles into a sectarian war.”

Meanwhile, Sayyed Nasrallah hailed the historic role of many scholars who buried the sectarian division long sought by conspiring states, noting that what happened in many countries was intended to be turned into a Sunni-Shia strife as in Syria, Yemen, Iraq, etc…

“Those who broke the strife in this war are the wonderful and distinguished Sunni elite,” he elaborated.

On another level, Sayyed Nasrallah underscored that “There is a new political and media war against the oppressed Yemeni people through showing that Saudi Arabia wants to end the war while Ansarullah refuses this.”

“What is proposed to the Yemenis is not an end to the war. It is just a ceasefire while all other forms of war continue such as blocking the airport, seaports, and borders,” he emphasized, noting that “What is proposed to Yemenis is a major deceit that neither Sayyed Abdul Malik Al-Houthi nor the Ansarullah movement or the Yemeni scholars will be deceived with, not even the Yemeni children will accept this.”

In addition, Sayyed Nasrallah hailed “The Yemeni people who are as great in politics as in resistance.”

He further advised the Saudis and the Americans not to waste time after they have touched the Yemenis could not be deceived. “Ceasing the fire without lifting the siege is misleading and reflects the desire to achieve what they were unable to score in the military field.”

To the Saudis, Sayyed Nasrallah sent a sounding message: “Don’t waste time as your game won’t deceive the Yemenis. Just stop the war and end the blockade.”

On the Palestinian front, His Eminence viewed that “Palestinian steadfastness is the reason behind ‘the deal of the century’s’ failure, particularly disappearance from circulation.”

“The axis of resistance passed and crossed the worst and most dangerous stage in its history, and it continues to meet threats with hard work and the accumulation of capabilities,” Sayyed Nasrallah stressed, underlining that “Iran will not give today what it didn’t give during the harshest stage of sanctions and the daily threat with war.”

Moreover, he underlined that “Iran is on the threshold of overcoming the blockade and sanctions, and it has proven its strength and abilities.”

“Biden’s admin is seeking not to let Iran be part of an alliance that includes Russia and China. However, what Iran did not offer amid the harshest sanctions and daily threats of war it won’t offer now. It’s on its way to overcome the blockade and sanctions. It [Iran] proved strength.”

On another level, Sayyed Nasrallah predicted that “The US is moving in decline, while the axis of resistance is moving in an upward progression.”

To the Lebanese, His Eminence sent the following advise:“Let us not wait for America, the world, and developments. Let us set internal and regional dialogues to solve our problems.”

“America’s allies should know that the current US administration’s priorities are not in our region anymore, and that the US is sinking,” he said, warning that “Everybody should learn that Lebanon has exhausted its time. And it is now that we must reach a solution.”

Blockbuster: Biden Rolling Back Israel’s ‘Free Ride,’ Ready to Recognize Palestinian State

Plans for ‘reset’ of PA ties include rollback of Trump policies legitimizing settlements, $15 million in COVID-related aid to Palestinians

Times of Israel: The Biden administration will reportedly push for a two-state solution based on the pre-1967 lines, with mutually agreed upon land swaps, reinstating US policy on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to more traditionally held positions than those of former president Donald Trump.

memo titled “The US Palestinian Reset and the Path Forward,” which was revealed Wednesday to the Abu Dhabi-based The National, also showed that the Biden administration is planning on announcing a $15 million aid package in coronavirus-related humanitarian assistance for the Palestinians as early as this month.

Drafted by Deputy Assistant Secretary for Israeli and Palestinian Affairs Hady Amr, the memo also details plans to roll back various Trump policies that Washington believes made reaching a two-state solution more difficult, such as US legitimization of the settlement enterprise.

Amr recommends in the memo that the White House back a two-state framework “based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed land swaps and agreements on security and refugees.”

Hady Amr, now US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Israeli and Palestinian Affairs, speaks at the Brookings Institute, where he was a fellow, on December 3, 2018. (Screen capture/YouTube)

While behind closed doors, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has participated in peace negotiations based on the 1967 lines, publicly the formula is not very popular in Israel, particularly among the right wing, which is expected to further expand in the Knesset after next week’s election.

The memo discusses “rolling back certain steps by the prior administration that bring into question our commitment or pose real barriers to a two-state solution, such as country of origin labeling.”

The memo was referring to a last-minute policy change announced by Trump’s secretary of state Mike Pompeo, which requires all US exports from the settlements to be labeled as having been “made in Israel.”

Since 1995, US policy had required products made in the West Bank and Gaza to be labeled as such. That directive was republished in 2016 by the Obama administration, which warned that labeling goods as “made in Israel” could lead to fines. Prior to the Oslo Accords, however, all products manufactured in these areas were required to mention Israel in their label when exporting to the United States.

The Pompeo order went into effect in December, but manufacturers were given a 90-day grace period, until March 23, to implement the change.

“As we reset US relations with the Palestinians, the Palestinian body politic is at an inflection point as it moves towards its first elections in 15 years,” the new memo reads. “At the same time, we [the US] suffer from a lack of connective tissue following the 2018 closure of the PLO office in Washington and refusal of Palestinian Authority leadership to directly engage with our embassy to Israel.

The Washington office of the Palestine Liberation Organization, pictured in 2017. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

Trump closed the Palestinian Liberation Organization’s diplomatic mission in Washington in 2018, against the backdrop of the PA’s boycott of his administration following the US recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.

In 2019, the Trump administration shuttered the US consulate in Jerusalem, which served as the de facto embassy to the Palestinians in East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza. The mission was folded into the US embassy to Israel in Jerusalem and the previous position of consul-general was dissolved.

Before the Trump administration began tightening the screws on the PA in 2018 for refusing to engage with its peace efforts, the United States was the single largest donor country to the PA.

The US paid hundreds of millions of dollars a year to the PA’s creditors, such as the Israeli state utility companies from which the Palestinians purchase water and electricity. They paid for training for the PA’s security forces and numerous infrastructure projects.

Washington also gave hundreds of millions a year in funding for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency — known as UNRWA — which is in charge of administering the daily needs of hundreds of thousands of Palestinian refugees and their descendants across the Middle East.

The memo, which was passed along to US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, highlights UNRWA in particular as one of the organizations the Biden administration plans to back in order to aid the Palestinians.

Israel accuses UNRWA of perpetuating the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, criticizing the agency’s practice of extending refugee status to millions of descendants, rather than only to the original refugees as is the norm with most refugee populations worldwide.

Then-US president Donald Trump (L) and PA President Mahmoud Abbas leave following a joint press conference at the presidential palace in the West Bank city of Bethlehem on May 23, 2017. (AFP/Mandel Ngan)

Noting major economic disparities between Israelis and Palestinians, the memo states that the Biden administration is “planning a full range of economic, security and humanitarian assistance programs [for Palestinians], including through UN Relief and World Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA).”

“State and USAID are working towards a restart of US assistance to the Palestinians in late March or early April,” the memo says, adding that the COVID-related humanitarian relief package will be announced beforehand.

The memo reveals the administration’s plans to “take a two-fold approach of maintaining and ideally improving the US relationship with Israel by deepening its integration into the region while resetting the US relationship with the Palestinian people and leadership.”

It notes Amr’s “listening sessions” with senior officials in the Israeli Foreign Ministry and Defense Ministry who “welcomed the restart of US-Palestinian relations.”

The United States consulate building in Jerusalem, March 4, 2019. (AP/Ariel Schalit)

Notably, those two offices are controlled by Blue and White ministers Benny Gantz and Gabi Ashkenazi who hold more moderate public stances on the Palestinian issue than Netanyahu and his Likud party. Gantz and Ashkenazi have taken pride in their efforts to block Netanyahu’s West Bank annexation plans last year.

One section of the memo likely to please both sides of the political spectrum in Israel is its support for expanding the normalization agreements brokered by the Trump administration between Israel and its Arab and Muslim neighbors.

However, Amr also writes of using such agreements “to support Israeli-Palestinian peace efforts and improve the quality of life for the Palestinian people.” Netanyahu has sought to divorce the normalization deals from the Palestinian issue, arguing that the peace deals prove that Israel can expand its diplomatic ties in the region without making concessions to the Palestinians.

As previously pledged by Biden officials, the memo floats the idea of reopening an independent consulate akin to the one that served as the de facto mission to the Palestinians and operated out of the western part of Jerusalem until 2019. Doing so would signal US recommitment to a two-state solution, the document says. However, no final decisions have been made yet on the matter.

Benny Gantz (left) and Gabi Ashkenazi of the Blue and White party arrive to give a joint a statement in Tel Aviv on February 21, 2019. (Noam Revkin Fenton/Flash90)

The memo notes the Biden administration’s commitment to engaging the international community via the UN and the Middle East Quartet, which consists of the United Nations, United States, European Union and Russia.

The document notes the upcoming Palestinian legislative elections in May and presidential elections in July, adding that it has been 15 years since Palestinians have been able to elect their representatives.

“But the implications of an election remain uncertain: the collapse of a power-sharing agreement after the prior elections led to the Hamas takeover of Gaza [in 2007],” the memo says, noting the PA request that the US push Jerusalem to allow elections to take place in Israeli-annexed East Jerusalem, but not stating Washington’s position on the matter.

“We are analyzing the evolving situation and will propose a US posture together with the inter-agency,” the memo reads.

The lack of position on elections is likely to disappoint Ramallah as Palestinian officials have been lobbying Washington in recent weeks to come out in support of the democratic process, sources familiar with the matter told The Times of Israel.

Mahmoud Abbas, left, and Joe Biden after their meeting in the West Bank city of Ramallah, Wednesday, March 10, 2010. (AP/Bernat Armangue)

Amr recommends the Biden administration push the PA to clamp down on incitement while also calling out Israeli settlement expansion on land that Palestinians hope will be part of their future state.

The memo reveals that talks are underway with the PA leadership aimed at altering Ramallah’s controversial payment of stipends to Palestinian security prisoners, including those convicted of terror attacks against Israeli civilians.

The altered policy currently being discussed in Ramallah would base the stipends on prisoners’ financial need rather than the length of their sentence, senior Palestinian officials told The Times of Israel in January.

The Biden administration will also seek to boost Palestinian institutions. “This includes strengthening civil society, media watchdogs and other elements of the fourth estate, such as emphasizing to the [Palestinian Authority] the need to protect civil society through the reductions of arrests of bloggers and dissidents,” the memo reads.

ABOUT VT EDITORS

VT EditorsVeterans Today

VT Editors is a General Posting account managed by Jim W. Dean and Gordon Duff. All content herein is owned and copyrighted by Jim W. Dean and Gordon Duffeditors@veteranstoday.com

The “New Shaam” and the Detonation of Jordan الشام الجديد» وتفجير الأردن

The “New Shaam” and the Detonation of Jordan

by Nasser Kandil

Egyptian, Iraqi, and Jordanian meetings are being held to reinforce a trilateral project with an economic title failing to mask political, and possibly, strategic dimensions. This project called “The New Shaam ” does not answer how a project bearing the name of Syria (Al Shaam) could be founded while excluding Syria from its consideration. Those involved in the project are incapable of denying the reality of the role of isolator between Syria and Iran that this trio is playing, in addition to isolating Iraq and Jordan from Syria which geographically falls in the middle between those two countries. Those involved also fail to deny the declared American paternity of this project in parallel to American declared paternity of the Gulf-Israeli normalization, with both projects being complimentary and a guarantee for each other’s success.

The economic return of this “New Shaam” project is not unrelated to its political role. Egyptian electricity to Iraq compensates Egypt for the loss of Suez Canal returns resulting from Gulf-Israeli normalization, while simultaneously acting as a substitute for electricity to Iraq from Iran. Similarly the exchange of Iraqi oil and Egyptian gas via Jordan detaches Iraq from need for Iranian gas, and provides additional compensation for anticipated Suez Canal revenue loss from the reliance of the Gulf trade on Israeli ports after normalization. As for what has been promised to Jordan from this project has been financing to compensate for the halting of goods from Syria in transit via Jordan to the Gulf, and becoming a compulsory junction for the goods arriving at the Occupation’s ports and destined for the Gulf.

The Gulf-Israeli normalization built on the foundation of granting the Occupation a pivotal economic role in the region, redraws the political-economic map of the countries in the region, and markets it using appealing names such as the “The New Shaam.” The new map imposes on Egypt accepting the loss of the role which the Suez Canal has played in exchange for the crumbs meted by the designated replacement role, and imposes on Iraq the role of separating Syria from Iran, encircling Syria with an Iraqi-Jordanian siege, accepting the loss of Iraq’s natural common interests with both Iran and Syria, and placing Iraq’s internal cohesion, unity, and stability in danger. Jordan, however, will be the most vulnerable to the influences and pressures resulting from this project, irrespective of the enticements Jordan is offered to accept this role.

Jordan lies at the intersection of two fault lines portending renewed crises, namely the closed door to a resolution for the Palestinian Cause, and the wide open door to the Gulf-Israeli normalization, along with the connection to a third fault line of high tension entitled separating Syria from Iran, and separating Jordan and Iraq from Syria and besieging her. The question becomes could the delicate situation in Jordan withstand such pressures, given the weight of the Palestinian Cause and its influence on Jordan especially in light of the Palestinian united opposition to the “Deal of the Century” and Jordan’s inability to isolate herself from such Palestinian transformation, and in view of the strong Jordanian-Syrian social and political intertwinement, and the popular climate in Jordan aspiring to speeding up the natural and cooperative relationships between Jordan and Syria? Given the popular demand in Jordan for the closure of the Israeli Embassy, can Jordanians tolerate scenarios of trucks crossing Jordan with goods loaded from the Port of Haifa in transit to the Gulf?

If “The New Shaam” project does not become quadrilateral, open to and inclusive of Syria, refusing the designated role of marketing normalization at the expense of the Palestinian People and Egyptian interests, and rejecting playing the role of isolating and besieging Syria, Iraq and Egypt will pay a political and economic toll from their stability. Jordan, on the other hand, will be facing fateful and possibly existential challenges, similar to what pushed Lebanon in the eve of Camp David.

«الشام الجديد» وتفجير الأردن

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is Untitled-1087.png

ناصر قنديل

للمرة الثانية ينعقد لقاء مصري عراقي أردني تأكيداً على مشروع ثلاثي بعنوان اقتصادي لا يُخفى البعد السياسي وربما الاستراتيجي وراءه، فالمشروع المسمّى بالشام الجديد، لا يملك جواباً على كيفية قيام مشروع يحمل اسم الشام ويستثني الشام من حساباته؟ بل لا يستطيع القيّمون على المشروع إنكار حقيقة أن الثلاثي الجديد يلعب دور العازل بين إيران وسورية، عدا عن كونه يعزل الأردن والعراق عن سورية بينما هي تتوسّطهما معاً، كما لا يمكن لأصحاب المشروع إنكار ما قاله الأميركيون عن أبوتهم للمشروع بالتوازي مع أبوتهم للتطبيع الخليجي الإسرائيلي، حيث يكمّل أحد المشروعين الآخر، ويضمن نجاحه.

العائد الاقتصادي للمشروع غير منفصل عن وظيفته السياسية، فالكهرباء المصرية للعراق هي من جهة تعويض لمصر عن خسائر قناة السويس الناتجة عن التطبيع الخليجي الإسرائيلي، ومن جهة مقابلة تأمين بديل كهربائي للعراق عن المصدر الإيراني، كما تبادل النفط العراقي والغاز المصري عبر الأردن فك للعراق عن حاجته للغاز الإيراني، وتأمين موارد إضافيّة بديلة عن خسائر ستحلق بقناة السويس من الاتجاه للاعتماد التجاري للخليج على موانئ كيان الاحتلال بعد التطبيع، أما العائدات الموعودة للأردن من هذا الربط فهي لتمويل يعوّض على الأردن ما سيُصيبه من خسائر توقف خط الترانزيت الى الخليج عبر سورية مقابل لعب دور المعبر الإلزامي للبضائع الواصلة إلى موانئ كيان الاحتلال والمتجهة نحو الخليج.

التطبيع الخليجي الإسرائيلي المؤسس على ركيزة منح كيان الاحتلال دوراً اقتصادياً محورياً في المنطقة، يُعيد تشكيل الخريطة السياسية والاقتصادية لدول المنطقة، ويتم تسويق هذه الخريطة بأسماء جاذبة مثل الشام الجديد، فعلى مصر وفقاً للخريطة الجديدة أن تتلقى خسارة قناة السويس لدورها وتصمت لقاء فتات دور بديل، وعلى العراق الذي يكلف بمهمة فصل سورية عن أيران وتطويق سورية بحصار عراقي أردني، أن يرتضي خسارة مصالحه المشتركة الطبيعيّة مع كل من سورية وإيران، وأن يعرّض تماسكه الداخلي ووحدته واستقراره الأمني للخطر، لكن الأردن سيبقى الساحة الأشد عرضة للضغوط والتأثيرات الناجمة عن هذا المشروع رغم العروض التشجيعيّة التي يتلقاها لقبول الدور.

الأردن الذي يشكّل خط تقاطع فوالق الأزمات المستجدّة بفعل التوتر العالي لخطَّي إغلاق أبواب الحلول أمام القضيّة الفلسطينية، وفتح الباب الواسع للتطبيع الخليجيّ الإسرائيليّ، يتم ربطه بخط توتر عالٍ ثالث عنوانه فصل سورية عن إيران، وعزل العراق والأردن عن سورية بنية حصارها، ويصير السؤال هل الوضع الدقيق في الأردن يحتمل هذه الضغوط، في ظل حجم حضور القضية الفلسطينية وتأثيرها على الأردن، خصوصاً مع وحدة الموقف الفلسطيني بوجه صفقة القرن، وعجز الأردن عن تحييد نفسه عن هذه التحولات الفلسطينية، وفي ظل حجم التشابك الاجتماعي والسياسي الأردني السوري، وتنامي مناخ شعبيّ أردنيّ يتطلع لتسريع العلاقات الطبيعيّة والتعاونيّة بين سورية والأردن، وفي ظل مطالبات أردنية بإغلاق السفارة الإسرائيلية هل يمكن للأردنيين تحمل مشاهد الشاحنات العابرة من مرفأ حيفا نحو الخليج؟

ما لم يكن مشروع الشام الجديد رباعياً يضمّ سورية، وينفتح عليها، ويرفض الدور المرسوم لتسويق التطبيع على حساب الشعب الفلسطيني والمصالح المصرية، ويرفض لعب دور العزل والحصار بحق سورية، فإن العراق ومصر سيدفعان أثماناً سياسية واقتصادية، من استقرارهما، لكن الأردن سيكون أمام تحديات مصيرية وربما وجودية، تشبه تلك التي دُفع لبنان نحوها عشية كامب ديفيد.

Israel And The Emirates Sign The “Abraham Accords”

Written by Thierry MEYSSAN on 25/09/2020

The situation in the Middle East has been blocked since the Oslo Accords signed by Yitzhak Rabin and Yasser Arafat in 1993. They were supplemented by the Jericho-Gaza Agreement, which recognizes certain prerogatives of the Palestinian Authority, and the Wadi Araba Agreements, which concluded peace between Israel and Jordan.

At the time, the Israeli government intended to separate definitively from the Palestinians. It was ready to do so by creating a Palestinian pseudo-state, devoid of several attributes of sovereignty, including an independent army and finances. Labour’s Yitzhak Rabin had previously experimented with Bantustans in South Africa, where Israel was advising the apartheid regime. Another experiment took place in Guatemala with a Mayan tribe under General Efraín Ríos Montt.

Yasser Arafat accepted the Oslo Accords to derail the process of the Madrid Conference (1991). Presidents George W. Bush and Mikhail Gorbachev had tried to impose peace on Israel by removing Arafat from the international scene with the support of Arab leaders.

Despite all this, many commentators believed that the Oslo Accords could bring peace.

In any case, 27 years later, nothing positive has limited the suffering of the Palestinian people, but the state of Israel has been gradually transformed from within. Today this country is divided into two antagonistic camps, as evidenced by its government, the only one in the world to have two Prime Ministers at the same time. On the one hand the partisans of British colonialism behind the first Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanhyahu, on the other hand the partisans of a normalization of the country and its relations with its neighbors, behind the second Prime Minister, Benny Gantz. This two-headed system reflects the incompatibility of these two projects. Each camp paralyzes its rival. Only time will come to end the colonial project of conquering Greater Israel from the banks of the Nile to those of the Euphrates, the comet tail of an outdated era.

Since the attacks of September 11, 2001, the United States has implemented the Rumsfeld/Cebrowski strategy aimed at adapting the US army to the needs of a new form of capitalism based no longer on the production of goods and services, but on financial engineering. To do this, they began an “endless war” of destruction of state structures throughout the “broader Middle East” without taking into account their friends and enemies. In two decades, the region became cursed for its inhabitants. Afghanistan, then Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen are the theater of wars presented as lasting a few weeks, but which last indefinitely, without perspective.

When Donald Trump was elected president, he promised to put an end to the “endless wars” and to bring US soldiers home. In this spirit, he gave carte blanche to his special adviser and nevertheless son-in-law, Jared Kushner. The fact that President Trump is supported in his country by Zionist Christians and that Jared Kushner is an Orthodox Jew has led many commentators to portray them as friends of Israel. If they do indeed have an electoral interest in letting this be believed, it is not at all their approach to the Middle East. They intend to defend the interests of the American people, and not those of the Israelis, by substituting trade relations for war on the model of President Andrew Jackson (1829-37). Jackson managed to prevent the disappearance of the Indians he had fought as a general, although only the Cherokees signed the agreement he proposed. Today they have become the largest Native American tribe, despite the infamous episode of the “Trail of Tears”.

For three years, Jared Kushner travelled through the region. He was able to see for himself how much fear and hatred had developed there. For 75 years, Israel has persisted in violating all UN resolutions that concern it and continues its slow and inexorable nibbling of Arab territory. The negotiator reached only one conclusion: International Law is powerless because almost no one – with the notable exception of Bush Sr. and Gorbachev – has wanted to really apply it since the partition plan for Palestine in 1947. Because of the inaction of the international community, its application if it were to happen today would add injustice to injustice.

Kushner worked on many hypotheses, including the unification of the Palestinian people around Jordan and the linking of Gaza to Egypt. In June 2019, he presented proposals for the economic development of the Palestinian territories at a conference in Bahrain (the “deal of the century”). Rather than negotiating anything, the idea was to quantify what everyone would gain from peace. In the end, he managed, on September 13, 2020, to get a secret agreement signed in Washington between the United Arab Emirates and Israel. The agreement was formalized two days later, on September 15, in a watered-down version.”

Press in the Emirates
The press in the Emirates does not have the same version of the events as that of Israel. None of them has an interest in expressing itself frankly.

As always, the most important thing is the secret part: Israel was forced to renounce in writing its plans for annexation (including the territories allegedly “offered” by Donald Trump in the “deal of the century” project) and to let Dubai Ports World (known as “DP World”) take over the port of Haifa, from which the Chinese have just been ejected.

This agreement is in line with the ideas of the second Israeli Prime Minister Benny Gantz, but represents a disaster for the camp of the first Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu.

Not having read the secret part of the agreements myself, I do not know if it clearly indicates the renunciation of annexing the Syrian Golan Heights, occupied since 1967, and the Lebanese Shebaa Farms, occupied since 1982. Similarly, I do not know whether compensation is provided for the port of Beirut, since it is clear that its eventual reconstruction would be detrimental both to Israel and to the Emirates’ investments in Haifa. However, the Lebanese President, Michel Aoun, has already publicly evoked a real estate construction project instead of the port of Beirut.

In order to make this treaty acceptable to all parties, it has been named “Abraham Accords”, after the common father of Judaism and Islam. The paternity was attributed, to the great joy of Benny Gantz, to the “outstretched hand” (sic) of Benjamin Netanyahu, his toughest opponent. Finally, Bahrain was associated with it.

This last point aims to mount the new regional role that Washington has granted to the Emirates in replacement of Saudi Arabia. As we announced, it is now Abu Dhabi and no longer Riyadh that represents US interests in the Arab world Other Arab states are invited to follow Bahrain’s example.

The Palestinian President, Mahmoud Abbas, has not had harsh words against the Emirati “betrayal”. He was taken up both by those who remain hostile to peace (the Iranian ayatollahs) and by those who remain committed to the Oslo Accords and the two-state solution. Indeed, by formalizing diplomatic relations between Israel and the new Arab leader, the Emirates, the Abraham Accords turn the page on the Oslo Accords. The palm of hypocrisy goes to the European Union, which persists in defending international law in theory and violating it in practice.

If President Trump is re-elected and Jared Kushner continues his work, the Israeli-Emirati agreements will be remembered as the moment when Israelis and Arabs regained the right to speak to each other, just as the overthrow of the Berlin Wall marked the moment when East Germans regained the right to speak to their relatives in the West. On the contrary, if Joe Biden is elected, Israel’s nibbling of Arab territories and the “endless war” will resume throughout the region.

Relations between Israel and the Emirates had long since stabilized without a peace treaty since there was never a declared war between them. The Emirates have been secretly buying arms from the Jewish state for the past decade. Over time this trade has increased, especially in terms of telephone interceptions and internet surveillance. In addition, an Israeli embassy was already operating under cover of an intelligence agency.

In addition, an Israeli embassy was already operating under cover of a delegation to an obscure UN body in the Emirates. However, the “Abraham Accords” challenge the dominant Arab-Israeli discourse and shake up internal relations in the entire region.

Source: Voltaire Network

في مواجهة «صفقة القرن» ومخرجاتها

معن بشور

نعقد على مواقع التواصل الالكتروني على مدى يومي السبت والأحد في 11 و 12 تموز/ يوليو الحالي «الملتقى العربي: متحدون ضدّ صفقة القرن وخطة الضم» بدعوة من ستة هيئات عربية (المؤتمر القومي العربي، المؤتمر القومي/ الاسلامي، المؤتمر العام للأحزاب العربية، اللقاء اليساري العربي، الجبهة العربية التقدمية، مؤسسة القدس الدولية) ويشارك في الملتقى أعضاء الأمانات العامة لهذه الهيئات وقادة فصائل المقاومة والاتحادات المهنية العربية وشخصيات محدودة من فلسطين والأردن بما يجعل الملتقى جامعاً لممثلين عن معظم مكونات العمل الشعبي العربي، ومن غالبية تياراته الفكرية والسياسية في تحدّ واضح ليس لـ «جائحة الكورونا» ومتطلبات مواجهتها فحسب، بل في تحدّ للمشروع الصهيو/ أميركي الذي يسعى الى تجزئة الأمة، وتقسيم كياناتها الوطنية، وتشظي مجتمعاتها وقواها الشعبية، ليتمكن من تنفيذ كلّ مخططاته الرامية الى نهب موارد أمتنا وتعطيل مشروعها النهضوي وضرب مقوماتها الروحية والمادية…

واذا كانت المبادرة بعقد هذا الملتقى قد جاءت من المغرب، من خلال شخصية بارزة لها باع طويل في النضال من أجل فلسطين وقضايا الأمة، وهو المناضل خالد السفياني المنسّق العام للمؤتمر القومي الإسلامي وأمين عام مؤسسة المفكر الكبير الراحل الدكتور محمد عابد الجابري، فإنّ التجاوب السريع معها قد جاء من أقطار الوطن العربي كافة، كما من تيارات الأمة المتنوعة، والتي باتت تدرك انّ المدخل السليم لمواجهة التحديات الضاغطة على حاضر الأمة ومستقبلها إنما يكمن بتلاقي تياراتها النهضوية كافة وتجاوز كلّ الجراح الأليمة التي أصابت العلاقات بينها في ظلّ مراجعة نقدية جريئة وصادقة ومنزهة لا مكان فيها لتبرير أخطاء وخطايا وقعنا بها، او للتشهير ببعضنا البعض وتحويل ماضي العلاقات بيننا الى سجن نبقى في أسره بدلاً من أن يكون مدرسة نتعلم منها…

وإذا كان التحرك المباشر للدعوة الى هذا الملتقى، كما الى الملتقى المماثل السابق في بيروت في 7/7/2019، هو التصدي لـ «صفقة القرن» بالأمس ولخطة الضمّ الصهيونية اليوم التي لا ينبغي اعتبار تأجيل الإعلان عنها – رغم انّ التأجيل هزيمة لنتنياهو وداعميه في واشنطن – إسقاطاً لها، فإنّ المشاركين في هذا الملتقى، يدركون، رغم تباين المواقف الفكرية والسياسية بينهم، انّ لـ «صفقة القرن» مخرجات عدة تمتدّ من المحيط الى الخليج، وأبرزها دون شكّ هو استمرار الحروب على أقطار والاحتراب داخل أقطار أخرى، حيث أثبتت الأحداث الأليمة التي نمرّ بها جميعاً أنّ أحداً من أبناء الأمة قد ربح من هذه الحروب أو الاحتراب، وأنّ الرابح الأكبر هو المشروع الصهيو – استعماري الذي بدأ بالتجزئة ليستمرّ بالتفتيت.

ولعله من بديهيات القول إنّ البداية الحقيقية لـ «صفقة القرن»، إنما بدأت باحتلال العراق، بعد حصار جائر استمر 13 عاماً. وهم يسعون اليوم الى تطبيقه في فلسطين وسورية ولبنان واليمن وصولاً الى الجمهورية الإسلامية في إيران.

ولم يكن من قبيل الصدف أن يعلن جورج بوش الابن بعد إتمام مهمته في الحرب على العراق عام 2003، ان مشروع الشرق الأوسط الجديد قد بدأ تنفيذه، والذي هو في نهاية الأمر نسخة مبكرة عن «صفقة القرن»… فلكلّ حاكم في الولايات المتحدة او دول الغرب الاستعمارية مشروعه لـ «صفقة القرن» باسم حلف من هنا، او مشروع من هناك، او قانون من هنا او مخطط من جهة ثانية.

من أول مخرجات الصفقة والضمّ التي باتت واضحة للأردنيّين عموماً، ملكاً وحكومة وشعباً، هو أن يدفع الأردنيون، مع الفلسطينيين، الثمن المباشر للضفقة المشؤومة ولخطة الضمّ، وهو ما يتطلب تنسيقاً قوياً ومتواصلاً بين الأردن وفلسطين. وتماسكاً شعبياً داخلياً يمنح القيادة الأردنية قدرة أكبر على المواجهة.

يتقدّم هذه المخرجات أيضاً، هو ما يشهده لبنان من ضغوطات وحروب وحصار تستهدف تجريده من مصادر قوته والمتمثلة بوحدة شعبه وبمقاومته الباسلة التي حققت في سنوات انتصارات، ما عجزت عنه حكومات ودول وجيوش…

كما يتقدّم هذه المخرجات أيضاً ما تشهده سورية من حرب عليها وفيها، واعتداءات صهيونية وأميركية متواصلة، وصولاً الى «قانون قيصر» الذي يدّعي «حماية المدنيين في سورية» فيما المتضرّر الأكبر منه هو الشعب العربي في سورية الذي يدفع أغلى الأثمان بسبب هذه الحرب الظالمة المفروضة عليه منذ عشر سنوات. بسبب مواقفه القومية التحررية التاريخية تجاه قضايا الأمة كلها، وفي طليعتها قضية فلسطين التي شكلت سورية على الدوام العقبة الكأداء في وجه محاولات تصفيتها كما شكلت والسند المباشر لكلّ حركة مقاومة في وجهها.

من مخرجات هذه الصفقة أيضاً هو ما تشهده مصر من استهداف مباشر لأمنها المائي من خلال سدّ النهضة، وأمنها الوطني من خلال الإرهاب في سيناء، وأمنها القومي من خلال ما يجري في ليبيا… وهذا الاستهداف لا يمكن مواجهته إلا بتعزيز الالتفاف العربي والإسلامي حول مصر، وبذل كلّ جهد ممكن لتعزيز الجبهة الداخلية في القطر العربي الأكبر.

والحرب في اليمن أيضاً، سواء من خلال ما يتعرّض له شماله من عدوان وقصف وتدمير وحصار، او ما يتعرّض له جنوبه من احتراب بين حلفاء، تستخدم ايضاً في إطار خدمة «صفقة القرن» ومعاقبة شعب عظيم، كان وسيبقى، متمسكاً بفلسطين وكل قضايا أمته.

أما تحويل الساحة الليبية الى ساحة حروب إقليمية ودولية، فليس هدفها فقط تدمير بلد عربي، كان شعبه ولا يزال، حريصاً على عروبته وإسلامه وحريته وكرامته، وهي حرب بدأت مع الغزوة الأطلسية قبل تسع سنوات لتستمر اقتتالاً لا يهدّد الأمن الوطني لليبيا، بل هدفها أيضاً استهداف الأمن القومي لشمال أفريقيا، وغربها، لا سيما مصر ودول المغرب العربي التي تسعى المخططات الاستعمارية الى إشعال كلّ أنواع الفتن في ربوعها…

أما دول الخليج والجزيرة العربية، فهي ليست بعيدة عن دائرة الاستهداف، بل انّ المشروع الصهيو – استعماري يدفع الى إغراق بعضها في سياسات محلية وعربية وإقليمية لن تؤدي إلا الى تبديد ما تبقى من مواردها، وابتزاز أكبر قدر ممكن من أموالها، وإشعال الاضطرابات في داخلها، ودفعها لأن تكون القاطرة الأولى في قافلة التطبيع الذي هو في رأس أهداف «صفقة القرن» المشؤومة …

ولعلّ ما يشهده السودان اليوم من استغلال مطالب مشروعة في الحرية والعدالة والكرامة الإنسانية، من أجل إيقاع السودان في مهاوي الصراع الداخلي، والتفكك الوطني، والتطبيع مع العدو، ليس بعيداً عن مخرجات «صفقة القرن» وأهدافها الخبيثة…

وبالتأكيد تبقى تصفية قضية فلسطين هي الهدف، والغاية من هذه الصفقة، والمدخل من اجل ترسيخ التجزئة وتعزيز مشاريع التفتيت في المنطقة، وهو ما يتطلب تعزيز التوجه المبارك لتجاوز الانقسام المدمّر للمشروع الوطني الفلسطيني، وتوحيد الطاقات والجهود الفلسطينية لإطلاق انتفاضة كبرى لن تؤدي الى سقوط «صفقة القرن» ومخرجاتها فقط، بل تؤدي الى دحر الاحتلال عن الأرض الفلسطينية المحتلة وعاصمتها القدس.

وإذا كانت مواجهة «صفقة القرن» ومخرجاتها مهمّة الأمة بكلّ أقطارها فإنّ الردّ الشامل عليها يكمن في تبني لمعادلة الخلاص التي أعلناها بعد احتلال العراق وتقوم على مهمات أربع، 1- مقاومة احتلال الأرض، 2- مراجعة للتجارب والعلاقات بين أبناء الأمة وقواها وتياراتها لنطوّر الإيجابي منها، ونتخلص مما علق بها من شوائب، 3- مصالحة تبني للمستقبل وتخرجنا من سلبيات الماضي، 4- فمشاركة تسمح لكلّ أبناء الوطن المساهمة في تقرير مصيرهم…

«صفقة القرن» إذن ليست المشروع الصهيو – استعماري الوحيد الذي واجهته الأمة، وما تزال، ولن يتوقف الأعداء على إخراج مشاريع مماثلة من أجل سحق أمتنا والقضاء على مستقبلها وآمالها، وتحويلها من أمة قائدة في الإنسانية الى أمة تابعة وذيل للدول الاستعمارية ومقاومة هذه الصفقة اليوم، بكلّ مخرجاتها وفي مقدمها خطة الضمّ الصهيوني تكون بالاستمرار في مقاومة المشروع الصهيو/ استعماري الممتدّة منذ عشرات السسنوات، وفي وحدة الأمة بكلّ أقطارها وتياراتها، فحيث كانت هذه الوحدة تتوفر، كانت المقاومة تنتصر، وحيث كانت تتعثر كانت المقاومة تتراجع.

من هنا، يكتسب ملتقى «متحدون» كخطوة على طريق توحيد الرؤى والجهود أهمية استثنائية في ظروف استثنائية.

الأمين العام السابق للمؤتمر القومي العربي

الطبيعيّ يهزم التطبيعيّ

حمدين صباحي

التطبيع هو الجائزة الكبرى التي يسعى إليها العدو الصهيوني.

إنه استسلام المغتصب للغاصب، ومباركة الضحيّة لسكين الجلاد، هو تخلّي صاحب الحق عن هويته وتنكّره لدمه وتكذيبه لروايته وترديده لسردية قاتله.

هو الانسحاق النفسي والسلوكي الذي يُخرج المطبعين من صفة الأحرار ليدبغ أرواحهم بوشم العبيد.

تعدّدت الجبهات وتوالت الحروب في الصراع العربي الصهيوني. الصراع الحضاري الشامل عسكرياً ومعرفياً وثقافياً وعلمياً وتكنولوجيًا وسياسيًا، صراع من نوع فريد لن ينتهي إلا بانتفاء أحد طرفيه، صراع وجود لا حدود.

وفي سياق هذا الصراع فإن التطبيع هو حرب كبرى، هو رمانة ميزان الصراع، فعند العدو كل انتصار منقوص ما لم يتمّمه التطبيع. وعند الأمة كل هزيمة محتملة ما لم يكرّسها التطبيع.

التطبيع لا يعني فقط التخلي عن فلسطين بل هو موت العروبة.

لأنه انتفاء شرط الأمة. الأمة ليست عديد محض لبشر يتساكنون، بل جماعة يوحدها تاريخ من الهم والحلم والسعي نحو حياة تجسد هويتها وتحقق أهدافها، ولكل أمة مقاصدها الكبرى تجتمع على السعي نحو تحقيقها. وقد بلور العرب بوحدة الجغرافيا والتاريخ هوية جامعة ومقاصد نبيلة في الحرية والتنمية المستقلة والعدل الاجتماعي والكرامة الانسانية والتجدد الحضاري وبناء دولة القانون المدنية الديمقراطية الحديثة الحامية لحقوق الإنسان. وفي قلب هذه المقاصد تحرير فلسطين. الذي هو حق وواجب أخلاقي وقومي ووطني.

هذه المقاصد سلسلة متكاملة الحلقات يعزز بعضها بعضاً. فلو انكسرت بالتطبيع حلقة تحرير فلسطين لتكسرت السلسلة وانفرط العقد وتبعثرت الأمة.

وانتفاء أحد طرفي صراع الوجود لا يعني بالضرورة الإبادة الجسدية بل إكراهه أو استدراجه إلى الرضوخ والتخلي عن الحقوق. وقد ثبت أن هذا الهدف لن يتحقق بالقوة العارية وحدها، فتاريخ العدو يفيض بالمذابح وسفك الدم والاقتلاع والتهجير والترانسفير والاحتلال والعدوان والفصل العنصري والإبادة الجماعية. ورغم كل هذه الوحشية لم يزل العربي الفلسطيني على مدى سبعين عاماً على قيد الحياة والمقاومة والأمل.

لا يتحقق هذا الهدف الرئيس إلا بالتطبيع. فبالتطبيع وحده يمكن إخراج العرب من حال الأمة التي تقاوم عدوها ككل الأحرار، إلى حال قطعان العبيد الراكعين في حظيرة التطبيع يديرهم السيد الصهيوني ويحرسهم ويعلفهم ويذبحهم متى شاء. وهذا هو المقصد الجوهري للمشروع الصهيوني بتعدّد لافتاته من “إسرائيل” الكبرى إلى الشرق الأوسط الجديد إلى صفقة القرن.

ولكل حرب أسلحتها وجنودها. وسلاح التطبيع هو الكذب وجنوده هم بضعة عرب كاذبون استهدفوا تزييف وعي الأمة وإصابة الروح والعقل والوجدان العربي بفيروس التطبيع، كما يفعل فيروس كورونا الآن.

ولأن الكيان الصهيوني هو عضو غريب مزروع بـالـعنف في الجسد العربي، ولأن المعلوم من الطب أن الجسد يلفظ العضو المزروع ما لم يُحقن بمثبطات المناعة لكي يتقبله. فإن هدف فيروس التطبيع هو تثبيط المناعة العربية لكي تقبل الكيان الدخيل.

على مدار أربعين عام يتوالى حقن العقل العربي بفيروس التطبيع. منذ حقنة كامب ديفيد أم الخطايا إلى حقنة أوسلو وحقنة وادي عربة انتهاءً بأقراص التطبيع المسمومة مما يحاول إعلام العبيد ترويجها كما تفعل قناة mbc وسواها من الكذبة التابعين.

أربعة عقود من حرب التطبيع خاضها الصهاينة بدعم أميركي وتواطؤ دولي ومشاركة ذليلة من بعض النخب العربية التي خارت فخانت في قصور الحكم وأجهزة الإعلام وأسواق التجارة. فماذا كان الحصاد؟

هزيمة ماحقة للتطبيع والمطبعين.

ونصر مبين للوعي الشعبي والعقل الجمعيّ العربيّ.

تكفي نظرة فاحصة لحالة مصر التي عمّدت خلال هذه الحرب أبطالها في مواجهة التطبيع: سعد إدريس حلاوة وسليمان خاطر وأيمن حسن وأبطال تنظيم “ثورة مصر” بقيادة خالد عبدالناصر ومحمود نورالدين كما عمد الأردن العربي بطله احمد الدقامسة.

والأكثر دلالة ملايين الابطال المغمورين من النساء والرجال العاديين الذين يتجلى رفضهم الطبيعي للتطبيع واحتقارهم ونبذهم للمطبعين.

ولعل من مكر التاريخ أن الجيل الذي ولد في ظلال كامب ديفيد وتربّى تحت سلطة وأبواق التطبيع حتى إذا بلغ أشده رفع علم فلسطين في ميدان التحرير في أعظم تجليات الربيع العربي قبل أن يختطفه خريف الحكام التابعين. هو نفسه الذي رفع في الميدان صورة جمال عبد الناصر الرمز الأصدق في مقاومة الصهيونية والاستعمار، هو الجيل نفسه الذي ما أن أسقط مبارك حتى اتجه إلى سفارة العدو على شاطئ النيل يحاصرها بأجساده الغضة وهتافاته الغاضبة ويتسلق جدرانها بأظافره ويقتحمها بصدوره العارية.

ما أبأس المطبعين وما أحقرهم، ورغم خطرهم ما أهونهم.

إن النصر عليهم أكيد. لأن حرب التطبيع ليست وقفاً على الجنرال أو المثقف، إنها حرب كل الناس، حرب الشعب، وما دامت بطبيعتها حرب الشعب فإن النصر فيها هو الممكن الوحيد.

إن هزيمة الكيان الصهيوني في حرب التطبيع تحرمه من ثمرة عدوانه، وتبقيه في مهب تبديد كل ما حققه. وانتصار أمتنا في حرب التطبيع لا يحقق مقاصدها لكن يؤكد مناعتها، وهي الشرط اللازم لتقدمها الواجب من الممانعة الى المقاومة، ثم من المقاومة إلى تحرير فلسطين.. كل فلسطين.

والنيل يجري.

فما ضيَر إن تسقط في مجراه العميق بعض جثث الحيوانات النافقة؟ يجرفها تياره الطبيعي، يتطهر ذاتياً ويُطهّر، يُخضر ويُعمّر.

كذلك تيار الوعي الجمعي لأمة وحدتها هزائم مقيمة وانتصارات مبددة وأحلام لا تموت. فتعلمت أن تميز العدو من الصديق كما تميز الخبيث من الطيب. لا يضيره أن تسقط فيه بعض أكاذيب منتنة يلقيها مهرّبو التطبيع. يجرفها تيار الوعي الجمعي الطبيعي.

هذا هو القانون الحاكم من أربعين عاماً، وسيبقى:

الطبيعيّ يهزم التطبيعيّ.

والنيل يجري.

(1) مداخلة ألقيت في الملتقى العربي الدولي «الافتراضي» لمناهضة التطبيع مع العدو الصهيوني.

*سياسي مصري

مقالات متعلقة

Friday’s Talk from Tehran- 2- Nasser Kandil حديث الجمعة من طهران (2)– ناصر قنديل

Friday’s Talk from Tehran- 2- Nasser Kandil

The regional and the international files are as a number of carpets or water supply systems operated simultaneously: (Nuclear file between raising the enrichment, leaving the treaty, and abolishing the arms embargo) ( Afghanistan is an open battlefield where settlements are conditioned by the American departure) ( Iraq is an operations arena unannounced by the Americans – the popular and political resistance escalation) ) Syria is a field of integration with Russia and the containment of Turkey under the ceiling of the Syrian sovereignty) ( the backgrounds of the Deal of Century after the elections and turning the challenge into an opportunity).

For the second week, I devote this Friday’s Talk for Tehran and my visit for six days along with the accompanying meetings with decision-makers and important leaders who made it possible to know how the Iranian leadership sees the regional and the international files. After I devoted the previous Friday’s Talk to the Iranian interior, in this edition, I will deal with analyses, readings, positions, and decisions that form the pillars of the Iranian position in approaching the different files from the nuclear file to the situation in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria, and what is beyond the Deal of the Century and how to deal with it.

The discussion of files together, why not?

Many people think that except the major countries which have enormous financial and military capacities it is not possible to follow up the complicated files without falling into the problem of priorities. While Iran seems smoothly capable to combine between presence and effectiveness in issues that have no link other than being issues that concern Iran, it may be important to Iran that they are issues that concern America too. Iran does not need to manage the different intertwined issues together from the history of heritage and culture that the Iranians inherit since they have two main resources for that. First, their professionalism of weaving carpets, this profession does not only need patience, the ability to wait, perfectness, accuracy, and distinction but also the ability to gather many things at once. The tradition of an Iranian family for thousands of years begins with weaving a carpet with every newborn, where the carpets are weaved together simultaneously one is preceded while the other is delayed according to the need and sometimes for the dates of marriages. This is the same as making canals for drawing water from dozens of springs and wells to dozens of towns and villages. For 2700 years, Iran is still drinking and watering more than forty villages and towns in Khorasan from canals that do not leak, it reaches to all homes, fields, and orchards, by running under the ground. They are run by the villagers who make maintenance, as hundreds of water supply systems spread in Iran, which imposed the living in the lower part of the foothills to facilitate the flow of water by the force of gravity. Second, The Iranians are accustomed to the state of linkage and intertwining of many files. It does not confuse them to manage their nuclear file while they are concerned with the battles of Yemen and Palestine and present in Afghanistan and Iraq, and partners in the political equations and the battlefields in Syria.

The nuclear file:

The politicians, diplomats, and those who are concerned with the Iranian nuclear file technically converge with those concerned in security that the political complicated path is still active despite the escalation in the Iranian- American relationships. Iran has progressed much than it was at the date of signing the nuclear agreement at the technical level; now it is enough to say that it possesses modern centrifuges of a high enrichment capacity equivalent to twice of what it was before at 20%, it has now what it can double the enriched quantities throughout the one day to be equal to what it needs six weeks of enrichment at a rate of less than three or four times. Technically, Iran is of no less experience than the capable nuclear countries which have the full scientific cycle. Politically and diplomatically, a senior official who is concerned with the foreign affairs sees that the open confrontation with Washington about the nuclear file and other files after the assassination of the Commander Qassem Soleimani does not mean that official contacts across the Swiss who sponsor the American interests in Iran have stopped but may be they could more effective than before, along with indirect communication network that includes Oman, Qatar, Russian, Japan, and France. All of these countries have reasons as Iran which kept them for political solutions that are restricted on resolving some outstanding issues just as issues of detainees and humanitarian needs and the import of some of the Iranian needs from America that are not covered by the ban, and which do not take the first place politically because in Iran the priority is to show ability to impose the American withdrawal from the region even if there were opportunities of understandings they will be postponed, and because the American electoral time is not suitable for any serious political research. Many ministers and senior advisors assure that Iran is not concerned with what will result from these elections; it does not have plans for the post- elections. The Iranians consider that the American withdrawal from the nuclear understanding is not a nuclear matter rather it is political and related to the region affairs especially the unstable security of Israel, and the seeking to extract Iran through the sanctions on the nuclear file is just to bargain Iran to stop its support of the resistance movements. The Iranians distinguish between Europe’s desire and its inability to protect the nuclear understanding and Washington’s lack of desire and its ability to disrupt the nuclear understanding. They explain the European desire of the political and economic interests towards the higher interest in stability and fighting the terrorism which lives in anxiety, chaos, and vacancy and the lack of the American desire due to the absence of the economic and political interests and the priority of the security interests governed mainly by Israel that makes the nuclear file, siege, and sanctions mere arenas and tools to express the American need of negotiation, hoping to get gains for the Israeli security. Therefore, the Iranians graduate in the nuclear escalation from within the agreement, they threatened Europe of the difficult exit from the treaty on the non-proliferation of Nuclear Weapons if they leave the understanding or if they go to the Security Council to present the Iranian nuclear file, despite the fact that Iran does not concern to that due to the reliable Russian and Chinese vetoes, but according to Iran the protection of the agreement is a common interest. In this Fall Iran will benefit from lifting the ban on its sale and purchase of weapons and this is known by the Europeans. Just for that an Iranian official says that the Foreign Minister of the European Union Josep Borrell has ended his mission successfully through drawing the rules of engagement while Europe was unable to perform its obligations in accordance to the agreement.

Afghanistan

Since the first days of their entry to Afghanistan, the Americans knew that Iran is their partner in the Afghani file. The geographical neighboring along with the spreading of Pashtun between the borders of the two countries has contributed in playing a role in the great demographic intertwining just as the presence of Hazara (the Shiites of Afghanistan) who play a role in another intertwining. Most of Afghanistan’s needs of fuel, vegetables, meat, and flour come from Iran. Furthermore, many of the Afghani middle class people teach their sons at the universities of Iran where the rich of Afghanistan and the sheikh of their tribes spend their vacancies on the Caspian Sea or in its cold places and where they find in Iran modern services that are not available in Afghanistan. The Iranian military presence in Afghanistan does not need a proof, since many of the armed factions have been coordinating with Iran and consulting its leaders since the days of Ahmed Shah Masoud and Gulbuddin Hekmatya. According to the Iranian leaders regarding the situation nowadays the negotiations of the Americans and Taliban Movement are moving from failure to another and will fail except if the Americans accept the complete withdrawal from Afghanistan. Few days ago a ministerial conference has been held in which Afghanistan, the governments of India, China, Russia, Pakistan, Tajikistan, Iran, and Turkmenistan participated. The Iranians do not hide their conviction of the fragility of the government of Ashraf Ghani and the demonstration of Taliban on two-thirds of Afghanistan which the Americans were unable to confront. More importantly, the Iranians are aware that Taliban is a false arena of Islamic religiousness that is divided between moderation and extremism and has an incubating environment for Al-Qaeda along with a national Afghani arena that focuses on ousting the Americans and the preparation for a constitution and elections through a government of national unity that supports Iran. The Iranians know that their call for the American departure from the region has supported the Afghani movements, formations, and factions whether from the traditional friends of Iran or from the national and moderated environments of Taliban in addition to the Brigade of Tatemiyoun whom the Commander Qassem Soleimani supervised on its support, supplied it with capabilities, and set up its regular formations, where the most prominent units of it participated in the defense of Syria against ISIS and Al-Qaeda formations and whose its leader Mohammed Jaafar Al-Husseini nicked as “Abu Zainab” died of his wounds during the battles in Syria. The Iranian expectations concerning Afghanistan revolve around one goal; the inescapable American withdrawal.

Iraq

The Iranians take into consideration the historiographical factors of their relationship with Iraq and the effect of the presence of a Shiite Majority in Iraq whether by virtue of greatening the role of Iran or weakening it, but today they focus on a pivotal role of a collective ceiling represented by the reference of Al Najaf on which the Americans and the Gulf People try to create a fabricated clash between it and the Holy status of Qom or the reference of the Leader of the Islamic Republic Al Imam Ali AL Khamenei according to the rules of the Wilayat Al Faqih. Under the ceiling of this reference the Iranians aspire at the unity of the Shiite arena as a safety way to confront the American project and to the repercussions of the economic intertwining and the ethnic and security intertwining with Kurdistan. They depend on three critical elements that ensure the impossibility of the success of the Americans in manipulating the decision of their withdrawal from Iraq. The first factor is the position of Al Sayyed Moqtada Al-Sadr as a partner in the battle of ousting the Americans due to his independent national privacy that defies all the words that Iran imposed on the Iraqis to oust the Americans. The positions of Al Sayyed Al-Sadr stem from his relationship with the Sunni environment and his principled position against the occupation in addition to his refusal of the participation in the political process and his early calls for resistance. The second factor is the martyrdom of the Iraqi beloved Commander Abu Mahdi Al-Muhandis who is different from the leaders who participated in the political process and were accused of charges of corruption and wealth, he preserved the purity of the revolutionaries and mujahideen and their modesty and austerity, and he took care of the poor and the needy. The martyrdom of Abu Mahdi Al-Muhandis made the issue of ousting the Americans an Iraqi issue that concerned the resistance forces, and everyone who is committed to the concept of Iraqi sovereignty. The third factor, Iran is open to all the forces which link its call for the expel of the American occupation with the exit of all foreign forces from Iraq and neutralizing it from the regional conflict and with the confrontation of corruption. The Iranian leaders sympathize with this slogan and consider it capable of ensuring an Iraqi national state that reassures them and makes them less preoccupied with the Iraqi concerns. The Iranian leaders speak out publicly that there is an urgent need for a new kind of ruling different from that established by Paul Bremer during the occupation and formed the main reason for the widespread of corruption and sectarianism, and a suitable environment for quotas and strife. But the Iranians as governmental officials and concerned in Iraq in leading the Revolutionary Guards and follow-up analysts meet on the fact that the Americans are losing daily through killed and wounded in the resistance operations which they hide them, but the days to come will show the facts that will no longer be hidden.

Gulf and Yemen

The Iranian-Gulf communications exist once directly and once indirectly, but these relationships are tensioned not due to the American-Gulf relationships or the Gulf role in the Deal of Century as much as because they are related to the prolonged aggression against Yemen. The Iranians express their admiration of Ansar Allah and say that we do not negotiate on the behalf of any ally but we pave the way for the direct negotiation with them. This has happened before Stockholm Agreement concerning Al Hodeida. They consider that the continuation of the war on Yemen has become nonsense since the security of the Gulf countries is subject to danger and there is no hope from changing the military equation to weaken Ansar Allah, where the western allies of the Gulf countries do not hide their tiredness from the Gulf stalemate in getting out of war and finding a realistic political exit without impossible conditions that cannot be imposed on Ansar Allah. They say that they advised the Gulf people repeatedly to accelerate in finding a political solution as well as they contributed in creating a suitable environment to help the UN envoy in his negotiating endeavors, but the Gulf stubbornness and the pretension of cleverness of being positive and the preparation for a new round of war is still dominant on the thought of the Saudi and Emirati governments despite the repetitive Emirati promises of withdrawal. A senior Iranian official said maybe the Americans after the new rounds of confrontation with Iran try to keep the Gulf in the face of confrontation in order to extort them with an illusion of danger that threats their security and in order to sell them more weapons. But this means more losses and developments that are not controlled. The Iranian official added that the owners of the glass cities are right in their fear but they have to move quickly to find political solutions to avoid the worst.

Syria

A senior Iranian official concerned with the Syrian issues, Astana Talks and Sochi Conference and concerned with the military and political cooperation with each of Syria and Russia said that the end of the war on Syria is imminent and that the situation of Syria has been resolved, the issue is just a matter of time, Syria with its borders which we knew in 2011 will return unified once again under the control of the Syrian army, but Syria which we knew politically in 2011 is difficult to return to what it was before. Since the victory of the Syrian state against division, fragmentation, and occupation is something and the need of the political reform is something else. He explained that this is agreed upon through a Syrian-Russian-Iranian understanding from the beginnings, other Iranian officials think that there is an indispensable need to deal with Turkey under the title of containment, Turkey which played a destructive role in Syria throughout the past years and now is playing in its last card to obstruct the ability of the Syrian army of imposing its control on more geography. The containment means the repelling when needed even by force and the involvement into settlements and understandings. The Iranians think that the Turks will repeat what they did in Aleppo battles, they will bet on the battlefield and will adapt with the outcomes, as the Muslim Brotherhood whom embraced by Turkey which tries to impose their role in the coming Syrian political process, after they drove Syria to war. The Iranians officials wonder about how to contain the sectarian division especially the effects left by war as the extremism in the Sunni arena and the Gulf finance which had dangerous consequences. They still think of the possibility of the inclusion of the Muslim brotherhood in a well-studied political process although they know that the Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad is opposing their participation and consider their participation a danger that must be avoided. The Iranians think that these contradictory trends with the Syrian leadership will not affect anything since any work in Syria must be under the Syrian constants; they recognize that the behavior of the Turks and the Muslim Brotherhood grants credibility to the fears of the Syrian leadership. They think that in the end of imposing the Syrian sovereignty in the battlefield three issues must be dealt; first, how to work according to Adana Agreement in a way that ensures the reassurance of the security Turkish fears. Second, how to redistribute the constitutional powers between the President of the Republic and the Prime Minister. Third; how to arrange the parliamentary elections in a way that gets popular and international legitimacy where no one is excluded. The main concern of Iran in Syria is the Israeli threats of a war of attrition with the Americans. The Iranians hope that this happens because now Iran has offers of power that can show the magnitude of remorse of the Israelis as a result of any military tampering or security folly. The officials who are concerned with security and military affairs reveal that the response to any Israeli aggression against the Iranian forces in Syria will be carried out this time from inside Iran according to Iranian military official statement.

The Deal of the Century

The Iranians who follow-up the official political files agree with the talk that the timing of the announcement of the Deal of Century comes as a result of electoral backgrounds, they try to deeply explain this folly by unifying the Palestinians under the option of confrontation and affecting the meditate position of America between the Palestinians and the Israelis and the influence which it grants to Washington among the Palestinian leaderships. They did not see a logical reason for the situation of the Arab rulers who are undergoing the normalization with Israel, and who did not mind to end the Palestinian cause despite the embarrassment of expressing publicly of the acceptance of the American plan, while neither the American nor the Israeli has what makes it possible to impose it even by force or with a Palestinian partner who can accept it. The only interpretation after the assassination of the Commander Qassem Soleimani is the despair from imposing a settlement because the initiative has been turned to the resistance forces in the region and the inability of the supposed partners in the settlement of ensuring security to the occupation entity. Knowing that in the past this security was a sufficient reason for the accepting the ideas of abandoning geography, but now the full control on geography after the absence of a settlement that ensures security has become the way for security that needs an American guarantees to continue the flow of the American money and weapons despite the processes of annexation and Judaism which form an alternative to a settlement with a American- Israeli consensus. The announcement of the Deal of Century was a political legal framework to ensure that. Therefore, Israel has resorted to the procedures of annexation, expansion, and displacement under the title of more security. The Americans and the Israelis think that the occupation entity will become securer with these procedures; they think that it becomes safer after the assassination of the Commander Soleimani. While the follow-up officials say that what is needed is that the Americans and the Israelis discover that the entity becomes less secure whether through the popular resistance represented by the intifada or through the armed resistance which will find its way towards to the West Bank, Jerusalem, and the occupation territories in 1948. The Deal of the Century has renewed the fate partnership between these movements and the people of the occupied territories in 1967 after they were separated by the projects of negotiation and settlement which do not cover the people of the occupied territories in 1948. The Iranians know that the resistance has capacities and know their impact on the security of the occupation entity and its vital installations whenever the Israelis think of a new war on Gaza, which will form a strategic base for the resistance in all the territories of Palestine.

The Fifth decade

Iran is entering the fifth decade of revolution and is still vivid, it refuses the theory of the Iranian influence in the region, but it sees it a formation of the sources of power against the American and Israeli projects, as it refuses the theory of the state and the revolution and their contradiction as the theory of spreading the concept of the revolution. The state’s legitimacy comes from its commitment to the issue of the first liberation humanly, religiously, and morally (Palestinian cause) which means the continuation of revolution. Iran since the victory of revolution is progressing according to a plan. The first decade was through steadfastness and repelling the attacks especially the war launched by the former Iraqi president under Gulf support and armament and western support. The second decade was for construction, the third decade was for possessing the capacities, the fourth decade was to stabilize the balances of power and drawing equations. While the fifth decade was for achieving the goals and turning them into an agenda while the bloods of the martyr the Commander Soleimani will be a decade of liberating Jerusalem and ousting the American occupation from the region.
Translated by Lina Shehadeh,

حديث الجمعة من طهران (2)– ناصر قنديل

الملفات الإقليميّة والدوليّة مجموعة سجّادات أو شبكة أقنية مياه تُدار في آنٍ واحد: ‭}‬ الملف النوويّ بين رفع التخصيب والخروج من المعاهدة وإلغاء الحظر على السلاح ‭}‬ أفغانستان ساحة اشتباك مفتوح والتسويات مشروطة بالرحيل الأميركيّ ‭}‬ العراق ساحة عمليّات لا يعلن عنها الأميركيّون وتصعيد المقاومة الشعبيّة والسياسيّة ‭}‬ سورية ميدان تكامل مع روسيا واحتواء لتركيا تحت سقف السيادة السوريّة ‭}‬ خلفيّات صفقة القرن ما بعد الانتخابية وتحويل التحدّي فرصة

للأسبوع الثاني أخصص حديث الجمعة لطهران وما رافق زيارتها لستة أيام من لقاءات أتاحت التعرّف من مواقع صناعة القرار وقادة الرأي، على كيفية تفكير ونظرة القيادة الإيرانية للملفّات الإقليمية والدولية، بعدما خصّصتُ حديث الجمعة الماضي للشأن الداخلي الإيراني، سأخصص هذا الحديث لتناول تحليلات وقراءات ومواقف وقرارات تشكل أرضيّة وسقوف وأعمدة الموقف الإيراني في مقاربة الملفات المختلفة من الملف النووي إلى الوضع في أفغانستان والعراق وسورية والنظرة لما وراء صفقة القرن وكيفية التعامل معها.

الملفات معاً ولمَ لا؟

يفترض الكثيرون أنه باستثناء الدول الكبرى التي تملك مقدرات مالية وعسكرية هائلة لا يمكن التفرّغ لمتابعة العديد من الملفات المعقدة، دون الوقوع في مشكلة الأولويات، بينما تبدو إيران قادرة بسلاسة على الجمع بين الحضور والفعالية في ملفات لا رابط بينها سوى كونها ملفات تهم إيران، وربما يكون مهماً لإيران أنها أيضاً ملفات تهم الأميركيين، الذين يشكلون كيفما أدرت رأسك القطب المقابل لإيران. ففي إيران لا حاجة للتدرب على الإدارة المتشابكة لمجموعة ملفات معاً، من تاريخ التراث والثقافة التي يتوارثها الإيرانيون، مصدران رئيسيان لهذه السلاسة، الأول هو احترافهم كشعب حياكة السجاد، وهي حرفة لا تدرّب صاحبها فقط على الصبر وقدرة تحمّل الانتظار، وعلى الإتقان والدقة والتمييز، بل أيضاً على جمع الملفات. فالتقليد العائلي الإيراني منذ آلاف السنين يبدأ حياكة سجادة مع كل مولود جديد ويتوازى حبك السجادات معاً بالتزامن، تتقدّم إحداها وتتراجع إحداها وفقاً للحاجة، وأحياناً لمواعيد الزواج، ومثل حياكة السجاد صناعة قنوات جرّ المياه للري والشرب، من عشرات الآبار والينابيع إلى عشرات البلدات والقرى، ومنذ 2700 سنة لا تزال تشرب وتروي أرضها أكثر من أربعين بلدة وقرية في خراسان من قنوات لا يتسرّب منها الماء، تصل إلى كل البيوت والحقول والبساتين، وتسير تحت الأرض، ويديرها القرويون ويقومون بصيانتها، ومثلها مئات الشبكات المنتشرة في إيران، والتي فرضت على هندسة القرى والبلدات السكن في النصف السفليّ من سفوح الجبال تسهيلاً لسير المياه بقوة الجاذبيّة. وهكذا يعتاد الإيرانيون أن يكون بين أيديهم هذا الربط والتشابك بين ملفات عديدة، فلا يربكهم أنهم يديرون ملفهم النووي، وفي الوقت ذاته معنيّون بمعارك اليمن وفلسطين وحاضرون في أفغانستان والعراق وشركاء المعادلات السياسية ومعارك الميدان في سورية.

الملف النوويّ

يلتقي كلام السياسيين والدبلوماسيين والمعنيين بالملف النووي الإيراني تقنياً، مع كلام المعنيين أمنياً، بأن المسار السياسي المعقّد لم يتوقف، وليس مقفلاً رغم كل التصعيد في العلاقات الإيرانية الأميركية، فإيران على المستوى التقني تقدّمت كثيراً عما كانت عليه بتاريخ توقيع الاتفاق النووي، ويكفي القول إنها صارت تملك أجهزة طرد حديثة بطاقة تخصيب مرتفعة تعادل أضعاف ما كان سقفه أيامها التخصيب على نسبة 20%، وبات لديها ما يتيح مضاعفة الكميات المخصبة على مدار اليوم الواحد ليعادل ما كانت تحتاج إلى ستة أسابيع لتخصيبه على نسبة أقل بثلاث أو أربع مرات من قبل، وإيران تقنياً لا تقلّ خبرة وقدرة عن أي من الدول النووية المقتدرة، والتي تملك الدورة العلمية الكاملة. أما على الصعيدين السياسي والدبلوماسي فيصف مسؤول إيراني كبير معني بالاتصالات الخارجية، أن المواجهة المفتوحة مع واشنطن حول الملف النووي وسواه من الملفات خصوصاً بعد الاغتيال الإجرامي للقائد قاسم سليماني، لا تعني أن خطوط الاتصال الرسمية عبر السويسريين الذين يرعون المصالح الأميركية في إيران قد قطعت، بل ربما تكون فاعلة أكثر من قبل، ومعها شبكة تواصل غير مباشرة تضم عُمان وقطر وروسيا واليابان وفرنسا. ولكل من هذه الدول أسباب، ولإيران أسباب لمنحه دوراً في هذا الاتصال، كرصيد سياسي يحضر عندما يصير للحلول السياسية مكان، وتقتصر اليوم على حلحلة بعض الأمور العالقة كقضايا معتقلين وحاجات إنسانية، وتوريد بعض الحاجات الإيرانية من أميركا غير المشمولة بالحظر، لكن لا توقعات لبلوغها مرتبة السياسة. فالمناخ غير مناسب إيرانياً لأن الأولوية هي لتظهير الاقتدار وصولاً لفرض الانسحاب الأميركي من المنطقة ولو تيسرت فرص تفاهمات راهناً فهي مؤجلة، وثانياً لأن الزمن الانتخابي الأميركي غير مناسب لأي بحث سياسي جدّي. وإيران المهتمة باستقراء زوارها لما يتوقعون في الانتخابات الرئاسية الأميركية من باب معرفة الشيء وتحليله، تؤكد بألسنة العديد من الوزراء والمستشارين الكبار أنها غير معنية بما ستسفر عنه هذه الانتخابات، وليست لديها خطط لما بعد الانتخابات تختلف حسب طبيعة الفائز. فما تريده إيران واضح وواحد، وليست له نسخ متعددة، ولا يغيب عن بال الإيرانيين أن الانسحاب الأميركي من التفاهم النووي ليس نووياً، بل هو سياسي يرتبط بشؤون المنطقة وفي مقدمتها أمن «إسرائيل» المهتز والسعي لابتزاز إيران عبر العقوبات التي يتم ربطها تعسفاً بالملف النووي لمفاوضة إيران على وقف دعمها لحركات المقاومة في المنطقة. وفيما يميز الإيرانيون بين رغبة أوروبا وعدم قدرتها على حماية الاتفاق النووي، وعدم رغبة واشنطن وقدرتها على تعطيل الاتفاق، يعيدون الرغبة الأوروبية للمصالح السياسية والاقتصادية وصولاً للمصلحة العليا بالاستقرار ومكافحة الإرهاب الذي يعيش على التوتر والفوضى والفراغ، ويفسرون عدم الرغبة الأميركية بغياب المصالح الاقتصادية والسياسية وغلبة المصالح الأمنية، والمصالح الأمنية المحكومة بمأزق «إسرائيل» بصورة رئيسية، تجعل الملف النووي والحصار والعقوبات مجرد مسارح وأدوات، للتعبير عن الحاجة الأميركية للتفاوض الساخن أملاً بتحصيل مكاسب للأمن الإسرائيلي، ولذلك يلعب الإيرانيون أوراقهم بهدوء، فهم يتدرّجون في التصعيد النووي من داخل الاتفاق، ولا يخرجون منه، لكنهم يلوّحون لأوروبا بالخروج الأصعب وهو الخروج من معاهدة عدم الانتشار النووي، إذا خرجوا من الاتفاق أو ذهبوا إلى مجلس الأمن لعرض ملف إيران النووي، رغم عدم قلق إيران من هذا الاحتمال لوجود فيتو روسي وفيتو صيني تثق إيران بهما، إلا أن حماية الاتفاق بنظر إيران تتم بالتهديد بالخروج من المعاهدة، خصوصاً أن حماية الاتفاق مصلحة مشتركة. فإيران ستستفيد في خريف هذا العام من رفع الحظر على بيعها وشرائها للسلاح، وفقاً للاتفاق وهي حريصة على بلوغ هذه النتيجة، وهذا يعرفه الأوروبيون، ولذلك يقول مسؤول إيراني معني بأن وزير خارجية الاتحاد الأوروبي جوزيب بوريل أنهى مهمته بنجاح برسم قواعد الاشتباك في غياب قدرة أوروبا على أداء موجباتها وفقاً للاتفاق.

أفغانستان

منذ الأيام الأولى لدخولهم إلى أفغانستان والأميركيون يعلمون أن إيران شريكهم في الملف الأفغاني، فعدا عن الجوار الجغرافي يلعب توزّع البشتون بين حدود البلدين دوراً في تشابك ديمغرافي كبير كما يلعب وجود الهزارا وهم شيعة أفغانستان دوراً في تشابك من نوع آخر، بينما أغلب حاجات أفغانستان من المشتقات النفطية والخضار واللحوم والطحين تأتي من إيران، والكثير من أبناء الطبقة الوسطى الأفغانيّة يعلّمون أبناءهم في جامعات إيران ويمضي أغنياء أفغانستان وشيوخ قبائلها مواسم الاصطياف على بحر قزوين أو في مناطقها الباردة خلال الصيف الأفغاني الحار، وفي ظل تجهيزات خدمية عصرية في إيران لا تتوافر في أفغانستان، والحضور الإيراني في أفغانستان عسكرياً لا يحتاج إلى إثبات. فالكثير من الفصائل المسلحة تنسق مع إيران وتتشاور مع قيادتها منذ أيام أحمد شاه مسعود وقلب الدين حكمتيار. وعن الحال اليوم يقول القادة الإيرانيون إن مفاوضات الأميركيين وحركة طالبان من فشل إلى فشل وستفشل حكماً إلا إذا قرّر الأميركيّون القبول بمبدأ الانسحاب الكامل من أفغانستان، الذي يشكل قاسماً مشتركاً بين الأفغان وإيران، التي تدعم حكومة الرئيس أشرف غني المدعوم من الأميركيين، وقد عقد قبل أيام مؤتمر وزاري شاركت فيه أفغانستان مع حكومات الهند والصين وروسيا وباكستان وطاجكستان وإيران وتركمانستان، لكن الإيرانيين لا يخفون قناعتهم بهشاشة وضع حكومة أشرف ولا كذلك بسيطرة طالبان على ثلثي مساحة أفغانستان، وعجز الأميركيين عن مواجهتها، والأهم قناعة القادة الإيرانيين الذين يتابعون ملف أفغانستان بأن طالبان مساحة هلامية لتدين إسلامي يتوزّع بين الاعتدال والتطرف، وفيها بيئة حاضنة لتنظيم القاعدة، لكنها فيها مساحة موازية لوطنية أفغانية تتركز على إخراج الأميركيين والتمهيد لدستور وانتخابات، من خلال حكومة وحدة وطنية تدعم إيران تشكيلها بالترابط والتزامن مع الانسحاب الأميركي. ويعلم الإيرانيون أن دعواتهم لرحيل الأميركيين من المنطقة منح حركات وتشكيلات وفصائل أفغانية سواء من أصدقاء إيران التقلدييين أو من البيئات الوطنية والمعتدلة في طالبان، هذا إضافة إلى لواء فاطميون الذي أشرف على دعمه ورفده بالمقدرات وبناء تشكيلاته النظامية الجنرال قاسم سليماني، وشاركت وحدات بارزة منه في الدفاع عن سورية بوجه تنظيم داعش وتشكيلات القاعدة، والذي توفي مؤخراً قائده محمد جعفر الحسيني الملقب بـ «أبو زينب» متأثراً بجراحه التي أصيب بها خلال المعارك في سورية، والتوقعات الإيرانية حول أفغانستان تتجه نحو بوصلة واحدة لا ترى بديلاً لها، هي حتمية الرحيل الأميركي خلال فترة غير بعيدة.

العراق

يأخذ الإيرانيون بالاعتبار العوامل التاريخية والجغرافية لعلاقتهم الخاصة بالعراق، والتأثير الذي يلعبه وجود أغلبية شيعية في العراق، سواء ما يؤثر من هذه العوامل لجهة تعظيم دور إيران أو إضعافه، لكنهم يركزون اليوم على دور محوري لسقف جامع هو موقف مرجعية النجف التي يشتغل الأميركيون والخليجيون على افتعال صادم وهميّ بينها وبين موقع قم المقدسة، أو مرجعية مرشد الجمهورية الإسلامية الإمام علي الخامنئي وفقاً لقواعد ولاية الفقيه، وتحت سقف المرجعية ينظر الإيرانيون لوحدة الساحة الشيعيّة كصمام أمان لمواجهة المشروع الأميركي، واستطراداً لتأثيرات التداخل الاقتصادي والتشابك الأمني والعرقي مع كردستان، ويتوقفون أمام ثلاثة عناصر حاسمة تجعلهم على يقين من استحالة نجاح الأميركيين في التلاعب بقرار رحيلهم من العراق: العامل الأول هو موقع السيد مقتدى الصدر كشريك كامل في معركة إخراج الأميركيين، وما له من خصوصية وطنية استقلالية تجعل الكلام عن أن معركة إخراج الأميركيين هي معركة إيران المفروضة على العراقيين مصدر سخرية، ولموقع السيد الصدر نتائج نابعة من تاريخه بعلاقاته مع البيئة السنية من جهة، وموقفه المبدئي من الاحتلال ورفضه المشاركة في العملية السياسية ودعواته المبكرة للمقاومة. والعامل الثاني هو استشهاد القائد العراقي المحبوب أبي مهدي المهندس الذي يختلف عن القادة الذين شاركوا في العملية السياسية ولاحقتهم تهم الفساد والثراء بمحافظته على نقاء الثوار والمجاهدين وتواضعهم ونمط عيش تقشفي ورعايته للفقراء والمساكين، واستشهاد أبي مهدي المهندس جعل إخراج الأميركيين قضية عراقية تعني قوى المقاومة والحشد الشعبي بالتأكيد، لكنها تعني كل ملتزم بصدق بمفهوم السيادة العراقية؛ أما العامل الثالث فهو أن إيران منفتحة على القوى التي تشترط لشراكتها بطرد الاحتلال الأميركي ربط هذه المعركة بالحديث عن خروج جميع القوات الأجنبية من العراق وتحييده عن الصراعات الإقليمية، ولا ترى أن لديها سبباً لرفض هذا الشعار، كما ربط معركة إخراج الاحتلال بمواجهة الفساد. والقادة الإيرانيون يتعاطفون مع هذا الشعار ويرونه قادراً على تأمين بناء دولة وطنية عراقية تطمئنهم وتجعلهم أقل انشغالاً بالهموم العراقية، ويجاهر القادة الإيرانيون بأن الحاجة ملحّة لصيغة حكم مختلفة عن تلك التي أسسها بول بريمير في زمن الاحتلال، وشكّلت السبب في تفشي الفساد والطائفية وإيجاد بيئة مناسبة للمحاصصة والفتن، لكن الإيرانيين مسؤولين حكوميين ومعنيين بالعراق في قيادة الحرس الثوري ومحللين متابعين يُجمعون على أن الأميركيين يخسرون يومياً بين صفوفهم شهداء وجرحى في عمليات مقاومة يتكتمون عليها، ولا ترى المقاومة سبباً للإعلان، لكن الأيام ستتكفل بتظهير الحقائق التي لا يمكن الصمت عنها أكثر.

الخليج واليمن

الاتصالات الإيرانيّة الخليجية قائمة، أحياناً مباشرة وأحياناً بصورة غير مباشرة، لكن العلاقات متوترة بسبب لا يتصل بالعلاقات الأميركية الخليجية أو بالدور الخليجي في صفقة القرن بقدر ما يتصل بالعدوان على اليمن، وقد طال أمد هذا العدوان أكثر مما يجب، ويبدي الإيرانيون إعجابهم بأنصار الله، ويقولون نحن لا نفاوض نيابة عن أي من الحلفاء بل نمهّد الطريق للتفاوض المباشر معهم وهذا ما حدث قبيل اتفاق استكهولم حول الحُديدة، ويعتبرون أن استمرار الحرب على اليمن بات فاقداً للمعنى، حيث أمن دول الخليج هو المعرّض للخطر، وحيث لا أمل يرتجى من تغيير المعادلات العسكرية لجهة إضعاف أنصار الله، وأن الحلفاء الغربيين لدول الخليج لا يخفون علناً التعبير عن أنهم سئموا الماطلة الخليجية في الخروج من الحرب وإيجاد مخرج سياسي واقعي دون شروط تعجيزية يستحيل فرضها على أنصار الله، ويقولون إنهم نصحوا الخليجيين مراراً بالإسراع في التوجه نحو الحل السياسي وساعدوا في خلق مناخ ملائم لمساعدة المبعوث الأممي في مساعيه التفاوضية، لكن التعنت الخليجي والتذاكي بالإيحاء بالإيجابية والتحضير لجولة حرب جديدة لا يزال طاغياً على تفكير الحكومتين السعودية والإماراتية، رغم وعود الإمارات المتكررة بالانسحاب. ويقول مسؤول إيراني بارز، ربما يكون الأميركيون بعد الحلقات الجديدة من المواجهة مع إيران يريدون بقاء الخليجيين في قلب المحرقة، لابتزازهم بوهم مخاطر تهدّد أمنهم وبيعهم المزيد من السلاح، لكن ذلك سيعني في حال أي تطور في المواجهة مع اليمن خسائر وتطورات يصعب حصرها والسيطرة عليها. ويضيف المسؤول الإيراني، أن أصحاب المدن الزجاجية محقون في خوفهم، لكن عليهم التحرك سريعاً نحو الحلول السياسية لتفادي الأسوأ.

سورية

يقول مسؤول إيراني بارز متابع للملف السوري وفي محادثات أستانة ومؤتمر سوتشي، ومعني بالتعاون العسكري والسياسي مع كل من سورية وروسيا، إن نهاية الحرب في سورية باتت وشيكة، وإن مصير سورية حُسم، والمسألة مسألة وقت. فسورية التي كنا نعرفها عام 2011 بحدودها ستعود موحّدة وتحت سيطرة الجيش السوري، لكن سورية التي كنا نعرفها سياسياً عام 2011 يصعب أن تعود كما كانت، ويرى أن انتصار مشروع الدولة السورية بوجه التقسيم والتفتيت والاحتلال شيء، والحاجة للإصلاح السياسي شيء آخر. ويوضح ان هذا موضع تفاهم سوري روسي إيراني منذ البدايات، ويعتقد كما مسؤولين إيرانيين آخرين أن تركيا التي لعبت دوراً تخريبياً في سورية طوال السنوات الماضية وهي اليوم تلعب آخر أوراقها لشل قدرة الجيش السوري عن التقدم وفرض سيطرته على المزيد من الجغرافيا التي تقع تحت سيطرة الجماعات الإرهابية، لا غنى عن العمل المستديم معها تحت عنوان الاحتواء، وللاحتواء معنى الصدّ عند الحاجة ولو بالقوة كما يحصل الآن، والدخول في تسويات وتفاهمات عندما تنضج. ولا يعتقد الإيرانيون أن الأتراك سيذهبون بعيداً فهم سيعيدون ما فعلوه في معارك حلب، يراهنون على الميدان حتى تتوضح الاتجاهات فيتأقلمون معها، ومثل حال الأتراك حال الأخوان المسلمين الذين تحتضنهم تركيا، وتحمل مشروعهم وتسعى لضمان فرض دورهم في العملية السياسية السورية المقبلة، وقد كانوا رأس الحربة في أخذ سورية إلى الأزمة فالحرب، لكن المسؤولين الإيرانيين يتساءلون عن كيفية احتواء التشققات الطائفية خصوصاً ما تركته الحرب من آثار تطرف وتمذهب في الساحة السنية والتمويل الخليجي الذي ترك بصمات خطيرة، ولا يزالون يعتقدون بإمكانية ضم الأخوان إلى عملية سياسية مدروسة يعلمون أن الرئيس السوري بشار الأسد يرفض مشاركتهم فيها ويعتبر إشراكهم مخاطرة يجب تفاديها، بمثل ما ينظر للدور التركي. ويعتقد الإيرانيون أن هذا التباين في الاجتهاد مع القيادة السورية، لن يؤثر على كون أي عمل في سورية يجب أن يجري تحت الثوابت السورية، ويعترفون أن سلوك الأتراك والأخوان يمنح مصداقية كبيرة لشكوك ومخاوف القيادة السورية، لكنهم يعتقدون أنه في النهاية بعد فرض الإرادة السورية في الميدان تجب معالجة ثلاثة عناوين: أولها كيفية تطبيق اتفاق أضنة كإطار للسيادة السورية وضمان طمأنة المخاوف التركية الأمنية، وثانيها كيفية إعادة توزيع الصلاحيات الدستورية بين رئيسي الجمهورية والحكومة، والثالثة كيفية ترتيب الانتخابات النيابية بطريقة تحوز شرعية شعبية ودولية لا يتم فيها استبعاد أحد، لكن الشغل الشاغل في سورية لإيران اليوم هو التهديدات الإسرائيلية بحرب استنزاف ضمن تقسيم عمل مع الأميركيين، يرد الإيرانيون أنهم يتمنّون وقوعه، لأن إيران في التوقيت المناسب لعروض قوة تظهر للإسرائيليين حجم الندم الذي سيُصيبهم من جراء أي عبث عسكري أو حماقة أمنية، ويكشف مسؤولون معنيون بالشؤون الأمنية والعسكرية أن الرد على أي عدوان إسرائيلي على القوات الإيرانية في سورية سيتمّ هذه المرة من داخل إيران وبموجب بيان رسميّ عسكريّ إيرانيّ.

صفقة القرن

يشارك الإيرانيون المتابعون للملفات السياسية الرسمية الكلام عن خلفيات انتخابية وراء توقيت الإعلان عن صفقة القرن، لكنهم يحاولون استكشاف أسباب أعمق تفسر هذه الحماقة بتوحيد الفلسطينيين وراء خيار المواجهة، وإسقاط المكانة الوسيطة لأميركا بين الفلسطينيين والإسرائيليين، والنفوذ الذي كانت تؤمنه لواشنطن بين القيادات الفلسطينية، ولا يرون سبباً منطقياً لوضع الحكام العرب الذين يخوضون التطبيع مع «إسرائيل»، ولا يمانعون بتصفية القضية الفلسطينية أمام إحراج يمنعهم من المجاهرة بقبول الخطة الأميركية، فيما لا يملك الأميركي ولا الإسرائيلي ما يتيح فرضها بالقوة أو إيجاد شريك فلسطيني وازن يقبلها. والتفسير الوحيد الذي يجدونه بالترابط مع اغتيال القائد قاسم سليماني هو اليأس من فرص التسوية بسبب انتقال زمام المبادرة إلى يد محور المقاومة في المنطقة، وعجز الشركاء المفترضين في التسوية عن تأمين الأمن لكيان الاحتلال. وهذا الأمن كان في الماضي سبباً كافياً لقبول فكرة التنازل عن الجغرافيا، بينما باتت السيطرة الكاملة على الجغرافيا بغياب فرص تسوية تحقق الأمن، هي الطريق للمزيد من الأمن. وهذه السيطرة تحتاج تغطية أميركية وضمانات بمواصلة تدفق المال والسلاح الأميركيين رغم عمليات الضم والتهويد التي تشكل البديل عن التسوية بتوافق أميركي إسرائيلي، فجاء الإعلان عن صفقة ترامب إطاراً سياسياً وقانونياً يضمن ذلك، لتذهب «إسرائيل» لإجراءات الضم والتوسع والتهجير، والمعيار هو المزيد من الأمن. وكما يظن الأميركيون والإسرائيليون أن الكيان يصير اكثر أمناً بهذه الإجراءات يعتقدون انه يصير أشد أمناً بعد اغتيال القائد سليماني، وعن المواجهة يقول المسؤولون المتابعون للعلاقة بفصائل المقاومة، إن الأمر لا يحتاج إلى الكثير من التفكير. فالمطلوب هو أن يكتشف الأميركيون والإسرائيليون أن الكيان بات أقل أمناً، سواء بالمقاومة الشعبية التي تجسّدها الانتفاضة، أو بالمقاومة المسلحة التي ستجد طريقها إلى الضفة الغربية والقدس والأراضي المحتلة العام 1948، وقد جدّدت صفقة القرن شراكة المصير بينهم وبين أبناء الأراضي المحتلة عام 1967 بعدما فرقتهم مشاريع التفاوض والتسوية التي لا مكان فيها لسكان الأراضي المحتلة العام 1948. ولا يخفي الإيرانيون أنهم يعلمون ما لدى المقاومة من مقدرات وحجم تأثير هذه المقدرات على أمن كيان الاحتلال ومنشآته الحيوية كلما فكّر الإسرائيليون بحرب جديدة على غزة، التي ستشكل قاعدة استراتيجية وعمقاً لكل المقاومة في كل فلسطين.

العقد الخامس

تدخل إيران العقد الخامس للثورة ولا تزال فتيّة، وهي ترفض نظرية النفوذ الإيراني في المنطقة بل تراه تشكيلاً لمصادر قوة في جبهة مقاومة للمشروعين الأميركي والإسرائيلي، كما ترفض نظرية الدولة والثورة وتناقضهما، ومثلها نظرية تصدير الثورة. فشرعية الدولة تأتي من التزامها بقضية التحرر الأولى إنسانياً ودينياً وأخلاقياً وهي قضية فلسطين، أي من استمرار الثورة، وإيران منذ انتصار ثورتها تسير وفقاً لخطة وقد كان العقد الأول للصمود وصد الهجمات، خصوصاً الحرب التي شنها رئيس النظام العراقي السابق عليها بدعم وتمويل خليجي وتسليح وإسناد غربي، والعقد الثاني كان للبناء، والعقد الثالث كان لامتلاك المقدرات، والعقد الرابع لتثبيت موازين القوة ورسم المعادلات، وها هو العقد الخامس للاقتراب من تحقيق الأهداف، وتحويلها إلى برنامج عمل، وهو بدماء الشهيد القائد قاسم سليماني، يقول مسؤول إيراني كبير، سيكون عقد تحرير القدس وإخراج الاحتلال الأميركي من المنطقة.

Miscegenation as elephant in the room

February 12, 2020

Miscegenation as elephant in the room

Source

by Denis A. Conroy for The Saker Blog

In the capitalist West, a reinvention of bourgeois culture is continuously expressed through ownership of devises that legitimise power. Alternating forms of bourgeois culture come and go to allow the public to toy with alternative bourgeois values, but never with the idea of alternatives ‘to’ bourgeois values as such. The net result of all of this is that the public is permitted to pay lip service to democracy while being forced to submit to a stitch-up…or, an exogenous variable whose time-line is no longer relevant but continues to do what it has always done, allow elites to emasculate the public voice. The best example of this is to be found in private narratives that exist for the purpose of legitimising the private sector’s methods of wealth extraction by promoting a trickle-down version of philanthropic mush to those who passively accept the status quo.

This capitalist trajectory is indubitably observed in the stepping-stones that history’s dealers put in place for themselves to achieve positions of pre-eminence. From Mayer Amschel Rothchild(ren), banker, 1744-1812, to our present time, dealers have made an artform of dealership, and the current President of the USA…Donald Trump is no exception. It’s his form of exceptionality (make America great again) that we need to look more closely at.

It wasn’t serendipity that enabled elites to acquire the power needed to lord it over the masses, but rather an ability to trade a passage toward creating a centre that could ultimately achieve an institutionally sacrosanct level of security for themselves…the ‘too-big-to-fail’ phenomenon we live with today. As the fundamental building-blocks of a ‘free state’ emerged in America, a branding process was devised that would enable mainstream media and Hollywood to collaborate in imposing a narrative upon an unwitting public. As the old-world class system was introduced into the new world, it became evident that history was repeating itself; people were provided with a catechism by the elites…a propagandistic one…and they swallowed it hook, line, and sinker.

Thereafter, believing that they were baptised and rendered secure in the holy waters of patriotic impunity, they set to performing their anointed role as cheerleaders to the wacky sheriffs who ruled over them. A too-big-to-fail corporate posse came into existence to convince them…bully fashion…that America’s destiny lay in colonizing the world.

Witness the American public’s incontrovertible need to believe in their own exceptionality. They swallow the gruel that their masters feed them without it ever affecting their conscience…their rampaging foreign policy attests to this! If Trump’s blunt assassination of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani, or his administration’s Middle Eastern “deal of the century” signifies anything, it is that Trump’s campaign slogan “Make America Great Again” acknowledges the success of indoctrination vis-à-vis myth. It is the elite who possess the power to awakens an innate call-to-arms mentality in the public when they choose to.

As a consequence of this, the collective mind is alerted to the possibility of losing ‘top dog’ status and it’s self-appointed role in the world. The massive military budget attests to the fact that the myth of American supremacy is to be aggressively pursued at all costs…and considering the stockpile of nuclear missiles, one must assume that this myth has been swallowed hook, line and sinker by the masses.

Washington’s commitment to power owes much to His or Her Majesties Governments when it comes to deal making. The principles acted upon during the time of the First World War are the same principles that explain the current American imperial foreign policy…focus on the money trail and to hell with insignificant natives as they have insignificant cash resources.

On the subject of insignificant natives, the White House published a 180-page document recently entitled “Peace to Prosperity: Vision to Improve the Lives of the Palestinian and Israeli People”…it had all the Balfourian myopia of a similar declaration produced in 1917.

BALFOUR DECLARATION

Foreign Office

November 2nd. 1917

Dear Lord Rothschild,

I have much pleasure in conveying to you, on behalf of His Majesty’s Government, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet.

“His Majesty’s Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish People, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.”

I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.

Author(s)Walter Rothschild

Arthur Balfour

Leo Amery

Lord Milner

On reading the above document, one cannot but conclude that America and Zionist Israel have one notable trait in common, the ability to feel exceptional despite the horror their settler cultures imposed on the indigenous people whose countries they have occupied. That their energies go into replicating bourgeois class values, there can be no doubt. The stratified model of class that underpins Western culture, now sadly in need of an overhaul, is of itself a blinkered vision of the world and irredeemably flawed. What the above document reveals, is the Anglo-Zionist banking system’s propensity to see the world in terms of ‘low-hanging-fruit’, especially when it is ripe for the picking.

Donald Trump’s cave-man determination and Bibi Netanyahu’s fake and sugary comity do little to disguise the fact that they are in the business of extracting what blood remains of Palestine’s corporeal existence. A beautiful country exposed to collusion and perfidy at the hands of Anglo-Zionist whose intentions all along were to devour Palestine. The duplicitous process that commenced in 1917…moved from London to Washington, where Harry Truman (1948), while acting as midwife in an onerous deal at a banker’s tea party, set in motion a move that was little more than approving the transfer of a parasite into the host body… Palestine!

That the parasite has devoured most of Palestine in this time frame, seems of little matter to Trump or his ilk. In effect, it is a deal that runs roughshod over the concept of human rights. Indeed, the cabal Trump colludes with convey the impression that they would have no compunction in stripping the Palestinians of the last vestiges of their heritage. But the truth is, contemporary elites can do deceitful things and they are especially capable of repeating this piece of infamy yet again.

And what do we Westerners do about that? Sadly, the answer is nothing, nothing, nothing, because we no longer seem to feel the rapture that comes with being alive. And not being alive, we have become inured to violence. It’s o.k. when Jared Kushner-real-estate-investor extraordinaire, Donald Trump-wheeler-dealer extraordinaire and Bibi Netanyahu-purveyor-of-biblical- myths extraordinaire come together vis-à-vis America’s elitist media to promote more cynical ‘honest-broker-tropes’ to obfuscate the truth behind the occupation of Palestine.

Trump, it must be said, is just one more presidential enabler doing it for Zionist Israel. One can imagine Don phoning Bib and congratulating him; “Bib…honey, you shrunk the Palestinian kids and you have our blessing, its’ a proud day for Zion!” It appears that the intention all along was to reduce Palestine to a few Bantustans. The deal, which proposes granting Zionist Israel all of the West Bank land where it wants to build its settlements beggars belief.

The alliance between America and Zionist Israel is based on religious mythology. Religious mythology, unlike secular mythology (or unreligious stories) tends to be male oriented and its iterations tend toward defending a patriarchal or tribal premise. In the Jewish context, it is primal to the point of loathing the concept of miscegenation…a threatening concept that stubbornly repeats itself in religious myths…and much written about in the Old Testament. It appears that Jewish religious mythology brought forth a phobic fear of emasculation that has now taken a turn for the worse in our modern era. A new iteration involving assets and concomitant devises is expressing itself in a most retrograde fashion…is phobia becoming viral, we need to ask ourselves?

In Zionist Israel, a new milieu has come into existence to launch tribalism into a secondary phase of identity politics. A phase shaped by religious mythology implying something strange and undemocratic. If you are not Jewish, then you are of a lesser stripe…or, of no worth at all!

Perspectives from beyond Zionist Israel might suggest that there is a breeding program afoot that may intensify the Jewish propensity to generate entities that end up looking like angry Meerkats wearing yarmulkes while snarling over territorial rights that keep on stacking up…and surely there must exist somewhere in their bible a text that says that God gave the entire world to them?

On the other hand, America’s part in the alliance is somewhat different. Their brand of religious fervour is part New and part Old Testament but laced with a uniquely American brand of evangelical hubris. It acts out it’s narrative on an industrial scale so as to find traction with the national psyche which loves all things big. It’s the good-guy-bad-guy component that gets it to the Box Office every time. It needs to capitalise on the myth that America as a country exists for the good of mankind. Being good guys (?) they, like the Israelis, need a very large military capability as back-up to their presence on mother earth.

So, it was against this background that Russian Jews…and there were many of them who came to America in the early part of the 20th century…to apply their talents to what might have been thought of as an amorphous culture rich for the picking. They were very talented in matters of business. Upon gaining ownership of media and having become extremely active in the development of Hollywood etc., their influence in American was soon very apparent. As time went by, the general population failed to notice that Zionism, based on religious mythology had entered the body-politic of America’s heartland to reshape the American dream as a corporate one. It was this trend that killed any chance of the Palestinians receiving justice.

To many in the outside world, their voice within the American narrative had become disproportionately righteous, and their use of money to buy support for the colonization of Palestine so egregious, that more and more people across the world were sickened by their continues carping on about the Holocaust…as though it were the only one that mattered…which many in the outside world noticed was used as a means to deflect attention away from criticism.

Eventually the world outside the American-Jewish nexus became weary of Jewish insistence that they were the only voice on the block that had credibility. They began to feel that the kerfuffle surrounding anti-Semitism was one where you were expected to passively accept the righteousness of a Judaic ‘right’ to interpret their own narrative as faultless, and if you questioned this premise, you were against them…anti-Semitic! They were demanding that their interpretations, in matters relating to the holocaust, be taken as gospel.

All of the above was allowed to happen because coup-d’etats are a feature of the American way of doing business. Yesterday it was colonial Europe (foremostly the British empire), today its’ the USA who have the gall to make proposals that concern six million Palestine lives with all the nonchalance attributable to the puerile of mind.

At what point did vulgar materialism begin to shrink the Western imagination? Does quantifying the aspirational desires of America’s notion of freedom distort the amplitude of the American dream? Do Americans and Israelis believe that only they can achieve emancipation per acquisition of other people’s assets? They both like to think that it is their God-given right to own the countries they occupy. It is already clear that these are the defining features of 21st. century statecraft and Trump and his administration is there to do deals with his mate Bibi that entails suffocating what is left of Palestine. If this is America as leader of the democratic world, God help us all!

But the multiplicity of energies that live within the strange narrative that is sold as the American way of doing business remains captive to the whims of the media. Self-congratulatory vectors operate 24/7 in the hope of keeping the average Joe and Joie focused on the splendours and opportunities that exist for them in their market culture. On the home front, political chicanery has trumped the rule of law and foreign policy has become just another way of shafting foreigners. In the main, matters of morality and lack of accountability have become de rigueur. Since money became the elixir of life, the dirty linen factor behind Donald Trump’s impeachment merits little more than a yawn. It seems that the deeds of the elite need to be kept hidden from public scrutiny.

But what is most strange with the American way of doing business is how elites have managed to reverse the roles of journalists who would otherwise disclose truth. An in-your-face culture has come into existence to target whistle-blowers and muffle their voices.

An excellent article by Caitlin Johnstone entitled, “The Primary Mechanism of Oppression is Not Hidden” (February 5, 2020) and published in Consortiumnews.

She writes;

“The key to turning this ship around does not lie hidden somewhere behind a veil of government opacity. It lies in you. It lies in all of us. We can begin awakening our fellow humans right now by attacking the narrative management of the propaganda machine that sits right in front of us, unarmoured and unhidden.”

In conclusion, it is refreshing to encounter writers whose clarity of mind and insights into mythology remain free of religious myths.

John Campbell, the author of “The Power of Myths” is one such writer.

“People say that we’re all seeking a meaning for life.

I don’t think that’s what we’re really seeking. Rather I think we’re seeking an experience of being alive, so that our life expressions will have resonances with our own innermost being and reality, so that we actually feel the rapture to be alive.”

Lets’ wish it to be so for the Palestinians too!!


Denis A. Conroy, Freelance Writer, Australia

Netanyahu/Gantz White House Invitation to Discuss Trump Regime’s No-Peace/Peace Plan

By Stephen Lendman

Source

Leaked information shows Trump’s so-called deal of the century is a one-sided scam, favoring Israel at the expense of fundamental Palestinian rights.

The so-called peace process is the greatest hoax in modern times, along with the US war OF terror worldwide, not on it.

Israeli/Palestinian no-peace/peace plans have been around since the 1970s — a near-half century of failure to reach accommodation proof positive of US/Israeli unwillingness to respect Palestinian rights.

If both countries wanted conflict resolution resolution with Palestinians, it would have happened long ago.

Former Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Shamir explained why not. He and his predecessors wanted forever talks accomplishing nothing – giving Israel time to steal all valued Palestinian land.

His successors to the present day followed the same strategy.

Since Israel seized control of the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza in 1967, colonizing and developing the most valued Palestinian land for exclusive Jewish use became official state policy — explained by Yigal Allon’s regional scheme, its elements including:

• permanent militarized occupation;

• maximum land for Jews with minimum Arabs;

• dispossessing Palestinians from areas Israel wants for exclusive Jewish development and use;

• annexing all valued parts of Judea and Sumaria;

• controlling Jerusalem as Israel’s exclusive capital;

• establishing settlements, military bases, free-fire zones, commercial locations, tourist sites, nature reserves, no-go areas, Jews-only roads, checkpoints, other barriers, and other exclusive Jewish areas — non-Jews excluded from them;

• stealing Palestinian resources; and

• cracking down hard on resisters. 

The above policies make peace, stability, equity and justice for Palestinians unattainable.

Achieving them defeats the US/Israeli agenda — dependent on endless regional conflicts and instability.

It’s why decades of peace plans when unveiled were dead on arrival, Trump’s let em eat cake deal of the century dead before arrival.

Partly introduced last June at a so-called “Peace to Prosperity Workshop” in Bahrain, the Trump regime’s dog and pony PR show was boycotted by Palestinians.

Deceptively billed as “a vision to empower the Palestinian people to build a prosperous and vibrant Palestinian society,” the economic plan has nothing to do with peace, equity and justice for long-suffering Palestinians — everything to do with one-sidedly serving US/Israeli interests. 

Based on what’s known so far, subject to fine-tuning, Trump’s overall scheme ignores fundamental final status issues, especially real Palestinian self-determination free from Israeli occupation and control, Israeli land theft, air and water rights, other resources, the right of diaspora Palestinians to return to their homeland, and East Jerusalem as exclusive Palestinian capital. 

He illegally recognized Jerusalem (a UN-established international city) as Israel’s exclusive capital, moved the US embassy there, abandoned a legitimate two-state solution, recognized Israel’s unlawful Golan annexation, and no longer considers illegal settlements occupied territory.

Trump and hardliners surrounding him are no friends of Palestinians or ordinary people anywhere, not at home or abroad.

Information leaked last month about his no-peace/peace plan revealed it excludes 70% or more of West Bank land controlled by Israel, including the Jordan Valley, closed military zones, exclusive Jewish commercial areas, tourist sites, no-go areas, and illegal settlements on stolen Palestinian land. 

Jerusalem is to remain undivided, the city “shared between Israel and New Palestine” — Israel maintaining exclusive control, the way it’s been for over half a century.

On July 30, 1980, the Knesset Jerusalem Law officially annexed the city as Israel’s exclusive capital — breaching Security Council Res. 465 (March 1980).

It declared actions taken by Israel “to change the physical character, demographic composition, institutional structure or status of the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, or any part thereof, have no legal validity…”

In July 2004,  the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that “Israeli settlements in the Occupied Territory, including East Jerusalem, are illegal and an obstacle to peace and to economic and social development (and) have been established in breach of international law.”

Time and again, the US and Israel breach Security Council resolutions and other international laws.

Trump’s no-peace/peace plan is all about serving US and Israeli interests at the expense of regional peace, stability, and fundamental Palestinian rights.

According to Mike Pence on Thursday, Netanyahu and his chief political rival Benny Gantz will meet with Trump in the White House next week to discuss regional issues and what PA official Saeb Erekat called Trump’s “deal of the next century,” a conspiracy against Palestinian rights.

Reuters reported that the Trump regime will release his no-peace/peace plan ahead of the January 28 meeting with Netanyahu and Gantz.

DJT calling it “a great plan” defies reality. PA spokesman Nabil Abu Rudeineh reaffirmed the Palestinian demand for an independent state within June 1967 borders — free from Israeli occupation and control.

On Thursday, Israel’s Channel 12, citing unnamed Netanyahu regime sources, said Trump’s plan includes exclusive Israeli sovereignty over Jerusalem, illegal settlements, and the Jordan Valley adding:

It supports the illusion of Palestinian self-determination, demanding a demilitarized Hamas, along with Palestinian recognition of Israel as a Jewish state, Jerusalem its capital.

It also reportedly stipulates that if Palestinians reject the so-called plan, the Trump regime will support Israeli annexation of illegal settlements unilaterally.

According to the Wafa PA news site, Rudeineh said the following:

“If the announcement of this deal, with these unacceptable formulas, is made, the (PA) leadership will announce a series of measures to preserve our legitimate rights, and we will call on Israel to assume its responsibilities as an occupying power,” adding:

“We warn (the Netanyahu and Trump regimes) to not cross the red lines.”

Hamas spokesman Hazem Qassim said “any deal or project that does not contain our people’s full rights in our land and holy sites will not stand,” adding:

“All the attempts to make this deal come to pass will be squashed by our people’s resistance and steadfastness.” 

“Our Palestinian people will determine its fate by way of its ongoing revolution, legitimate struggle and absolute belief in the justness of its cause.”

On Thursday, Trump tweeted:

“Reports about details and timing of our closely-held peace plan are purely speculative.”

If its provisions resemble what’s discussed above, it’ll clearly be rejected by the PA, Hamas, and the Palestinian street.

“Deal of the Century” Draft Revealed

“Deal of the Century” Draft Revealed

Translated by Staff, Al-Mayadeen

Beirut-based satellite television channel al-Mayadeen obtained a detailed draft outlining the terms of the “Deal of the Century”. According to the document, the deal involves the signing of a tripartite agreement between “Israel”, the Palestine Liberation Organization [PLO] and Hamas. It also refers to the establishment of a Palestinian state dubbed “New Palestine” where “Israel” will act as the defender from “any external aggression” on condition that Palestinians pay for “Israeli” protection.

Al-Mayadeen announced on Monday that it was in possession of the leaked copy of the so-called ‘deal’, which US President Donald Trump described as “a solution to the ‘Israeli’-Palestinian conflict”.

The document stipulates that “New Palestine” would encompass some of the territory in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, but would exclude existing “Israeli” settlements.

Those settlements are to be joined together and remain under “Israeli” control.

The draft notes that the holy city of Al-Quds [Jerusalem] will not be divided.

“It will be shared between ‘Israel’ and New Palestine, and the Arab population will be transferred and become residents of New Palestine and not ‘Israelis’,” the document reads.

Al-Quds is to be designated as a single municipality that would administer all of its lands “except for education which will be the responsibility of New Palestine. In return, New Palestine will pay Arnona and water tax to the al-Quds Jewish municipality.”

The Jewish population will not be permitted to purchase Arab homes, and the same would apply to Arab residents when it comes to the purchase of Jewish homes.

“Additional areas will not be annexed to al-Quds, and the holy sites will remain as they are today,” the draft adds.

Regarding the Gaza Strip, the “Deal of the Century” tasks Egypt with granting new lands to Palestine. The land would be allocated for building an airport, factories as well as facilitating commercial exchanges and agriculture. However, the deal does not permit “Palestinians to live on [the land].”

The deal’s text asserts that “the size and price of the lands will be agreed upon between the parties through a supportive state, which will be identified later.”

Meanwhile, a highway will be constructed to connect Gaza with the West Bank. A water treatment conveyer would be built underground between Gaza and the West Bank.

Furthermore, the draft identifies the United States, the European Union and oil-producing Gulf states as the benefactors of the deal – essentially offering financial guarantees for its implementation.

“An amount of USD 30 billion will be allocated over a period of five years for projects related to New Palestine,” the document explains.

The breakdown of donations is as follows: US 20%, EU 10%, Gulf States 70%. According to the document, the financial burden among Arab states will be distributed in accordance with their oil-producing capabilities.  

On the issue of annexing settlements to “Israel”, including the isolated settlements, the draft tasks the occupying entity with picking up the tab.

When it comes to defense, New Palestine will be banned from “having an army, and the only weapons permitted are police firearms.”

“Israel” and New Palestine would ink an agreement whereby the former would defend the latter from “any external aggression” provided the Palestinians pay the price of protection.     

Separate negotiations between “Israel” and Arab countries will determine the sum that Arabs will pay the “Israeli” army as “a price for protection.”

The draft also offers a timeline and stages for the implementation of the “Deal of the Century”. Once the deal is signed, the following needs to take place:                                       

1-   Hamas gives up all of its weapons, including individual and personal weapons of Hamas leaders. Arms will be handed over to the Egyptians.

2-   Men belonging to Hamas, instead, will receive monthly salaries from Arab countries.

3-   The borders of the Gaza Strip will be opened to international trade through the “Israeli” and Egyptian crossings. The Gaza market will be open with the West Bank as well as by sea.

4-   A year into the agreement, democratic elections will be held to choose a government for New Palestinian, and every Palestinian resident can run.

5-   One year after the elections, all prisoners will gradually be released over a period of three years.

6-   Within five years, a seaport and an airport for New Palestine will be built. Until then, the Palestinians will use “Israel’s” airports and seaports.

7-   Borders between New Palestine and “Israel” will remain open to residents and goods, as is the case with friendly countries.

8-   A suspension bridge will be built between a highway that rises 30 meters above the ground and connects Gaza and the West Bank. The task would be delegated to a company from China. The cost is shared by China 50%, Japan 10%, South Korea 10%, Australia 10%, and Canada 10%. The remaining 10% will be covered jointly by the US and EU.

The draft adds that “the Jordan Valley will remain in the hands of ‘Israel’ as it is today,” while Road 90 will be transformed into a four-lane road.

“Israel” will also supervise the construction of Road 90. Two of the lanes will be for Palestinians. The road will link New Palestine with Jordan and will be under the supervision of the Palestinians.

The “Deal of the Century” draft outlines responsibilities of all parties:

1-   If Hamas and the PLO reject the deal, the United States will cancel all its financial support for the Palestinians and strive to prevent any other country from assisting the Palestinians.

2-   If the PLO agrees to the terms of this agreement, while Hamas or the Islamic Jihad do not accept it, the two organizations bear responsibility. In any military confrontation between “Israel” and Hamas, the US will support “Israel” to inflict harm on the leaders of Hamas and Islamic Jihad.

3-   If “Israel” rejects the deal, its economic support will be halted.

Finally, the deal includes the transfer of the custodianship of al-Aqsa Mosque from Jordan to Saudi Arabia.IsraelPalestinealqudsUnitedStatesDealOfTheCentury

Finally the USA Supports the One State Solution

 

One State .jpg

By Gilad Atzmon

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced yesterday that the US is softening its position on Israeli settlements in the West Bank. Secretary Pompeo repudiated the 1978 State Department legal opinion that stated that Jewish settlements in the occupied territories are “inconsistent with international law.”

 It is hard to determine whether the move was intended to rescue Benjamin Netanyahu’s political career or to buy the Jewish Lobby’s support for President Trump at a critical time. It is reasonable to assume that the policy was put forth to advance both aims.

 Pompeo’s declaration was, predictably, welcomed by PM Netanyahu and denounced by Palestinian officials and anyone else who still advances the delusional Two State Solution. Like Secretary Pompeo, I am far from an expert on international law, but it seems the notion of international law is vague or elastic enough to allow the secretary to (mis) interpret it in a radical manner. Yet, unlike most Palestinian solidarity campaigners, I see Trump, his administration and the recent move as a positive development.

 However inadvertently, Trump has finally committed the USA to the One State Solution. It is hard to deny that the area between the ‘River and the Sea’  is a single piece of land. It shares one electric grid, one pre-dial code (+972) and one sewage system. Ay present, the land is ruled over by a racist, tribal and discriminatory ideology through an apparatus that calls itself  ‘The Jewish State;’ and declares itself home for every Jew around the world; yet, is abusive, lethal and some would say genocidal toward the indigenous people of the land.

Yesterday’s move may buy Netanyahu some time and it may save Trump from being evicted from his current residence, but what it did most clearly was to redeliver a message to the Palestinians: In the battle for your liberation you are alone. America is not a negotiator, it has never been one. The USA has a side in the conflict and it is not your side.

In categorical terms Pompeo’s declaration repeats Trump’s earlier decision to move the American Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. On December 6, 2017, President Trump announced that the United States recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and ordered the relocation of the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. No doubt, the move bought Trump support from the Jewish Lobby in America, and political gain for Netanyahu in the Jewish State, it was also an unambiguous message to the Palestinians: there is no prospect of a  harmonious and peaceful solution for your plight.

 For the Palestinians, the move also exposed the misleading and dangerous nature of their ‘solidarity’ movement. Jewish ‘anti’ Zionist institutions have undertaken a relentless effort to suppress the Palestinian’s Right of Return and replace it with watery alternatives such as ‘End of occupation’ or  ‘the Right to BDS.’ Trump’s move forced the Palestinians to accept that they were alone in their battle and finally  accept that The Right of Return is the core and the essence of their plight. Less than four months after Trump’s Jerusalem decision, on 30 March 2018,  thousands of Gazans gathered on the Israeli border to demand a return to their land.

That clumsy decision by Trump made to serve some immediate political purpose to do with Jewish support has matured into a vast awakening for the Palestinians.  Week after week, for almost three years, Gazans have arrived at the Gaza border in the thousands to bravely confront the IDF’s merciless snipers, tanks and air force.  The Hamas owes a big thank you to Trump who has managed to fuel and unite the Palestinians with a renewed spirit of fearless resistance. Israeli military analysts and commanders admit that the situation at the Gaza border is pretty much out of control. They agree that Israel’s power of deterrence is literally a matter of  nostalgia. Accordingly, Palestinian resistance organizations do not hesitate to retaliate against  Israel. Last week Israel was hit by the rain of 400 rockets fired over the course of only two days in response to  Israel’s assassination of a Palestinian Islamic Jihad militant.

 Pompeo’s declaration provides an explicit and necessary message to the Palestinians in general and in the West Bank in particular. The conflict is not progressing toward a peaceful resolution. Those amongst the Palestinians who advocated the ‘Two States Solution’ will have to hide now.  Pompeo has affirmed that there is one Holy Land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. From now on the battle over this disputed land is whether it will be subject to the racist discriminatory ideology implied by the notion of “The Jewish State” and its ‘National Bill,’ or if it will transform itself into a ‘State of its Citizens’ as is inherit in the notion of One Palestine.

Listen to Morales at the UN and see why he was overthrown by the Empire

Source

November 15, 2019

This is Evo Morales’ UNSC speech of this Spring:

“Greater Israel”: The Zionist Plan for the Middle East

Global Research, November 16, 2019
Association of Arab-American University Graduates, Inc. 3 March 2013

Introduction

The following document pertaining to the formation of “Greater Israel” constitutes the cornerstone of powerful Zionist factions within the current Netanyahu government,  the Likud party, as well as within the Israeli military and intelligence establishment. 

President Donald Trump has confirmed in no uncertain terms, his support of Israel’s illegal settlements (including his opposition to UN Security Council Resolution 2334, pertaining to the illegality of the Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank). In recent developments, the Trump administration has expressed its recognition of Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights. 

“Greater Israel” is de facto part of the election campaign.  Netanyahu has pledged to annex large parts of the occupied West Bank if he wins in the forthcoming September 17 elections.

Netanyahu, who is fighting for his political life after an inconclusive vote in April [2019], said that Israel will “apply Israeli sovereignty to the Jordan Valley and the northern Dead Sea immediately” if he secured a fifth term in the September 17 polls. (Al Jazeera, September 11, 2019

Trump’s “Deal of the Century” is supportive of the “Greater Israel” project, which also consists in the derogation of Palestinians’ “right of return” by “naturalizing them as citizens of Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, Iraq, and elsewhere regionally where they reside”.

Bear in mind: The Greater Israel design is not strictly a Zionist Project for the Middle East, it is an integral part of US foreign policy, its strategic objective is extend US hegemony as well as fracture and balkanize the Middle East.

Trump’s decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital is intended to trigger political instability throughout the region.  

According to the founding father of Zionism Theodore Herzl, “the area of the Jewish State stretches: “From the Brook of Egypt to the Euphrates.”  According to Rabbi Fischmann,  “The Promised Land extends from the River of Egypt up to the Euphrates, it includes parts of Syria and Lebanon.”

 

When viewed in the current context, including the siege on Gaza, the Zionist Plan for the Middle East bears an intimate relationship to the 2003 invasion of  Iraq, the 2006 war on Lebanon, the 2011 war on Libya, the ongoing wars on Syria, Iraq and Yemen, not to mention the political crisis in Saudi Arabia.  

The “Greater Israel” project consists in weakening and eventually fracturing neighboring Arab states as part of a US-Israeli expansionist project, with the support of NATO and Saudi Arabia. In this regard, the Saudi-Israeli rapprochement is from Netanyahu’s viewpoint a means to expanding Israel’s spheres of influence in the Middle East as well as confronting Iran. Needless to day, the “Greater Israel” project is consistent with America’s imperial design. 

“Greater Israel” consists in an area extending from the Nile Valley to the Euphrates. According to Stephen Lendman, “A near-century ago, the World Zionist Organization’s plan for a Jewish state included:

• historic Palestine;

• South Lebanon up to Sidon and the Litani River;

• Syria’s Golan Heights, Hauran Plain and Deraa; and

• control of the Hijaz Railway from Deraa to Amman, Jordan as well as the Gulf of Aqaba.

Some Zionists wanted more – land from the Nile in the West to the Euphrates in the East, comprising Palestine, Lebanon, Western Syria and Southern Turkey.”

The Zionist project supports the Jewish settlement movement. More broadly it involves a policy of excluding Palestinians from Palestine leading to the eventual annexation of both the West Bank and Gaza to the State of Israel.

Greater Israel would create a number of proxy States. It would include parts of Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, the Sinai, as well as parts of  Iraq and Saudi Arabia. (See map).

According to Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya in a 2011 Global Research article,   The Yinon Plan was a continuation of Britain’s colonial design in the Middle East:

“[The Yinon plan] is an Israeli strategic plan to ensure Israeli regional superiority. It insists and stipulates that Israel must reconfigure its geo-political environment through the balkanization of the surrounding Arab states into smaller and weaker states.

Israeli strategists viewed Iraq as their biggest strategic challenge from an Arab state. This is why Iraq was outlined as the centerpiece to the balkanization of the Middle East and the Arab World. In Iraq, on the basis of the concepts of the Yinon Plan, Israeli strategists have called for the division of Iraq into a Kurdish state and two Arab states, one for Shiite Muslims and the other for Sunni Muslims. The first step towards establishing this was a war between Iraq and Iran, which the Yinon Plan discusses.

The Atlantic, in 2008, and the U.S. military’s Armed Forces Journal, in 2006, both published widely circulated maps that closely followed the outline of the Yinon Plan. Aside from a divided Iraq, which the Biden Plan also calls for, the Yinon Plan calls for a divided Lebanon, Egypt, and Syria. The partitioning of Iran, Turkey, Somalia, and Pakistan also all fall into line with these views. The Yinon Plan also calls for dissolution in North Africa and forecasts it as starting from Egypt and then spilling over into Sudan, Libya, and the rest of the region.

“Greater Israel” requires the breaking up of the existing Arab states into small states.

“The plan operates on two essential premises. To survive, Israel must 1) become an imperial regional power, and 2) must effect the division of the whole area into small states by the dissolution of all existing Arab states. Small here will depend on the ethnic or sectarian composition of each state. Consequently, the Zionist hope is that sectarian-based states become Israel’s satellites and, ironically, its source of moral legitimation…  This is not a new idea, nor does it surface for the first time in Zionist strategic thinking. Indeed, fragmenting all Arab states into smaller units has been a recurrent theme.” (Yinon Plan, see below)

Viewed in this context, the war on Syria and Iraq is part of  the process of Israeli territorial expansion. 

In this regard, the defeat of US sponsored terrorists (ISIS, Al Nusra) by Syrian Forces with the support of Russia, Iran and Hizbollah constitute a significant setback for Israel.  

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, September 06, 2015, updated September 13, 2019


The Zionist Plan for the Middle East

Translated and edited by

Israel Shahak

The Israel of Theodore Herzl (1904) and of Rabbi Fischmann (1947)

In his Complete Diaries, Vol. II. p. 711, Theodore Herzl, the founder of Zionism, says that the area of the Jewish State stretches: “From the Brook of Egypt to the Euphrates.”

Rabbi Fischmann, member of the Jewish Agency for Palestine, declared in his testimony to the U.N. Special Committee of Enquiry on 9 July 1947: “The Promised Land extends from the River of Egypt up to the Euphrates, it includes parts of Syria and Lebanon.”

from

Oded Yinon’s

“A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties”

Published by the

Association of Arab-American University Graduates, Inc.

Belmont, Massachusetts, 1982

Special Document No. 1 (ISBN 0-937694-56-8)

Table of Contents

 Publisher’s Note1

The Association of Arab-American University Graduates finds it compelling to inaugurate its new publication series, Special Documents, with Oded Yinon’s article which appeared in Kivunim (Directions), the journal of the Department of Information of the World Zionist Organization. Oded Yinon is an Israeli journalist and was formerly attached to the Foreign Ministry of Israel. To our knowledge, this document is the most explicit, detailed and unambiguous statement to date of the Zionist strategy in the Middle East. Furthermore, it stands as an accurate representation of the “vision” for the entire Middle East of the presently ruling Zionist regime of Begin, Sharon and Eitan. Its importance, hence, lies not in its historical value but in the nightmare which it presents.

2

The plan operates on two essential premises. To survive, Israel must 1) become an imperial regional power, and 2) must effect the division of the whole area into small states by the dissolution of all existing Arab states. Small here will depend on the ethnic or sectarian composition of each state. Consequently, the Zionist hope is that sectarian-based states become Israel’s satellites and, ironically, its source of moral legitimation.

3

This is not a new idea, nor does it surface for the first time in Zionist strategic thinking. Indeed, fragmenting all Arab states into smaller units has been a recurrent theme. This theme has been documented on a very modest scale in the AAUG publication,  Israel’s Sacred Terrorism (1980), by Livia Rokach. Based on the memoirs of Moshe Sharett, former Prime Minister of Israel, Rokach’s study documents, in convincing detail, the Zionist plan as it applies to Lebanon and as it was prepared in the mid-fifties.

4

The first massive Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1978 bore this plan out to the minutest detail. The second and more barbaric and encompassing Israeli invasion of Lebanon on June 6, 1982, aims to effect certain parts of this plan which hopes to see not only Lebanon, but Syria and Jordan as well, in fragments. This ought to make mockery of Israeli public claims regarding their desire for a strong and independent Lebanese central government. More accurately, they want a Lebanese central government that sanctions their regional imperialist designs by signing a peace treaty with them. They also seek acquiescence in their designs by the Syrian, Iraqi, Jordanian and other Arab governments as well as by the Palestinian people. What they want and what they are planning for is not an Arab world, but a world of Arab fragments that is ready to succumb to Israeli hegemony. Hence, Oded Yinon in his essay, “A Strategy for Israel in the 1980’s,” talks about “far-reaching opportunities for the first time since 1967” that are created by the “very stormy situation [that] surrounds Israel.”

5

The Zionist policy of displacing the Palestinians from Palestine is very much an active policy, but is pursued more forcefully in times of conflict, such as in the 1947-1948 war and in the 1967 war. An appendix entitled  “Israel Talks of a New Exodus” is included in this publication to demonstrate past Zionist dispersals of Palestinians from their homeland and to show, besides the main Zionist document we present, other Zionist planning for the de-Palestinization of Palestine.

6

It is clear from the Kivunim document, published in February, 1982, that the “far-reaching opportunities” of which Zionist strategists have been thinking are the same “opportunities” of which they are trying to convince the world and which they claim were generated by their June, 1982 invasion. It is also clear that the Palestinians were never the sole target of Zionist plans, but the priority target since their viable and independent presence as a people negates the essence of the Zionist state. Every Arab state, however, especially those with cohesive and clear nationalist directions, is a real target sooner or later.

7

Contrasted with the detailed and unambiguous Zionist strategy elucidated in this document, Arab and Palestinian strategy, unfortunately, suffers from ambiguity and incoherence. There is no indication that Arab strategists have internalized the Zionist plan in its full ramifications. Instead, they react with incredulity and shock whenever a new stage of it unfolds. This is apparent in Arab reaction, albeit muted, to the Israeli siege of Beirut. The sad fact is that as long as the Zionist strategy for the Middle East is not taken seriously Arab reaction to any future siege of other Arab capitals will be the same.

Khalil Nakhleh

July 23, 1982

Foreward

by Israel Shahak

1

The following essay represents, in my opinion, the accurate and detailed plan of the present Zionist regime (of Sharon and Eitan) for the Middle East which is based on the division of the whole area into small states, and the dissolution of all the existing Arab states. I will comment on the military aspect of this plan in a concluding note. Here I want to draw the attention of the readers to several important points:

2

1. The idea that all the Arab states should be broken down, by Israel, into small units, occurs again and again in Israeli strategic thinking. For example, Ze’ev Schiff, the military correspondent of Ha’aretz (and probably the most knowledgeable in Israel, on this topic) writes about the “best” that can happen for Israeli interests in Iraq: “The dissolution of Iraq into a Shi’ite state, a Sunni state and the separation of the Kurdish part” (Ha’aretz 6/2/1982). Actually, this aspect of the plan is very old.

3

2. The strong connection with Neo-Conservative thought in the USA is very prominent, especially in the author’s notes. But, while lip service is paid to the idea of the “defense of the West” from Soviet power, the real aim of the author, and of the present Israeli establishment is clear: To make an Imperial Israel into a world power. In other words, the aim of Sharon is to deceive the Americans after he has deceived all the rest.

4

3. It is obvious that much of the relevant data, both in the notes and in the text, is garbled or omitted, such as the financial help of the U.S. to Israel. Much of it is pure fantasy. But, the plan is not to be regarded as not influential, or as not capable of realization for a short time. The plan follows faithfully the geopolitical ideas current in Germany of 1890-1933, which were swallowed whole by Hitler and the Nazi movement, and determined their aims for East Europe. Those aims, especially the division of the existing states, were carried out in 1939-1941, and only an alliance on the global scale prevented their consolidation for a period of time.

5

The notes by the author follow the text. To avoid confusion, I did not add any notes of my own, but have put the substance of them into this foreward and the conclusion at the end. I have, however, emphasized some portions of the text.

Israel Shahak

June 13, 1982


 

A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties

by Oded Yinon

This essay originally appeared in Hebrew in KIVUNIM (Directions), A Journal for Judaism and Zionism; Issue No, 14–Winter, 5742, February 1982, Editor: Yoram Beck. Editorial Committee: Eli Eyal, Yoram Beck, Amnon Hadari, Yohanan Manor, Elieser Schweid. Published by the Department of Publicity/The World Zionist Organization, Jerusalem.

1

At the outset of the nineteen eighties the State of Israel is in need of a new perspective as to its place, its aims and national targets, at home and abroad. This need has become even more vital due to a number of central processes which the country, the region and the world are undergoing. We are living today in the early stages of a new epoch in human history which is not at all similar to its predecessor, and its characteristics are totally different from what we have hitherto known. That is why we need an understanding of the central processes which typify this historical epoch on the one hand, and on the other hand we need a world outlook and an operational strategy in accordance with the new conditions. The existence, prosperity and steadfastness of the Jewish state will depend upon its ability to adopt a new framework for its domestic and foreign affairs.

2

This epoch is characterized by several traits which we can already diagnose, and which symbolize a genuine revolution in our present lifestyle. The dominant process is the breakdown of the rationalist, humanist outlook as the major cornerstone supporting the life and achievements of Western civilization since the Renaissance. The political, social and economic views which have emanated from this foundation have been based on several “truths” which are presently disappearing–for example, the view that man as an individual is the center of the universe and everything exists in order to fulfill his basic material needs. This position is being invalidated in the present when it has become clear that the amount of resources in the cosmos does not meet Man’s requirements, his economic needs or his demographic constraints. In a world in which there are four billion human beings and economic and energy resources which do not grow proportionally to meet the needs of mankind, it is unrealistic to expect to fulfill the main requirement of Western Society, 1 i.e., the wish and aspiration for boundless consumption. The view that ethics plays no part in determining the direction Man takes, but rather his material needs do–that view is becoming prevalent today as we see a world in which nearly all values are disappearing. We are losing the ability to assess the simplest things, especially when they concern the simple question of what is Good and what is Evil.

3

The vision of man’s limitless aspirations and abilities shrinks in the face of the sad facts of life, when we witness the break-up of world order around us. The view which promises liberty and freedom to mankind seems absurd in light of the sad fact that three fourths of the human race lives under totalitarian regimes. The views concerning equality and social justice have been transformed by socialism and especially by Communism into a laughing stock. There is no argument as to the truth of these two ideas, but it is clear that they have not been put into practice properly and the majority of mankind has lost the liberty, the freedom and the opportunity for equality and justice. In this nuclear world in which we are (still) living in relative peace for thirty years, the concept of peace and coexistence among nations has no meaning when a superpower like the USSR holds a military and political doctrine of the sort it has: that not only is a nuclear war possible and necessary in order to achieve the ends of Marxism, but that it is possible to survive after it, not to speak of the fact that one can be victorious in it.2

4

The essential concepts of human society, especially those of the West, are undergoing a change due to political, military and economic transformations. Thus, the nuclear and conventional might of the USSR has transformed the epoch that has just ended into the last respite before the great saga that will demolish a large part of our world in a multi-dimensional global war, in comparison with which the past world wars will have been mere child’s play. The power of nuclear as well as of conventional weapons, their quantity, their precision and quality will turn most of our world upside down within a few years, and we must align ourselves so as to face that in Israel. That is, then, the main threat to our existence and that of the Western world. 3 The war over resources in the world, the Arab monopoly on oil, and the need of the West to import most of its raw materials from the Third World, are transforming the world we know, given that one of the major aims of the USSR is to defeat the West by gaining control over the gigantic resources in the Persian Gulf and in the southern part of Africa, in which the majority of world minerals are located. We can imagine the dimensions of the global confrontation which will face us in the future.

5

The Gorshkov doctrine calls for Soviet control of the oceans and mineral rich areas of the Third World. That together with the present Soviet nuclear doctrine which holds that it is possible to manage, win and survive a nuclear war, in the course of which the West’s military might well be destroyed and its inhabitants made slaves in the service of Marxism-Leninism, is the main danger to world peace and to our own existence. Since 1967, the Soviets have transformed Clausewitz’ dictum into “War is the continuation of policy in nuclear means,” and made it the motto which guides all their policies. Already today they are busy carrying out their aims in our region and throughout the world, and the need to face them becomes the major element in our country’s security policy and of course that of the rest of the Free World. That is our major foreign challenge.4

6

The Arab Moslem world, therefore, is not the major strategic problem which we shall face in the Eighties, despite the fact that it carries the main threat against Israel, due to its growing military might. This world, with its ethnic minorities, its factions and internal crises, which is astonishingly self-destructive, as we can see in Lebanon, in non-Arab Iran and now also in Syria, is unable to deal successfully with its fundamental problems and does not therefore constitute a real threat against the State of Israel in the long run, but only in the short run where its immediate military power has great import. In the long run, this world will be unable to exist within its present framework in the areas around us without having to go through genuine revolutionary changes. The Moslem Arab World is built like a temporary house of cards put together by foreigners (France and Britain in the Nineteen Twenties), without the wishes and desires of the inhabitants having been taken into account. It was arbitrarily divided into 19 states, all made of combinations of minorites and ethnic groups which are hostile to one another, so that every Arab Moslem state nowadays faces ethnic social destruction from within, and in some a civil war is already raging. 5 Most of the Arabs, 118 million out of 170 million, live in Africa, mostly in Egypt (45 million today).

7

Apart from Egypt, all the Maghreb states are made up of a mixture of Arabs and non-Arab Berbers. In Algeria there is already a civil war raging in the Kabile mountains between the two nations in the country. Morocco and Algeria are at war with each other over Spanish Sahara, in addition to the internal struggle in each of them. Militant Islam endangers the integrity of Tunisia and Qaddafi organizes wars which are destructive from the Arab point of view, from a country which is sparsely populated and which cannot become a powerful nation. That is why he has been attempting unifications in the past with states that are more genuine, like Egypt and Syria. Sudan, the most torn apart state in the Arab Moslem world today is built upon four groups hostile to each other, an Arab Moslem Sunni minority which rules over a majority of non-Arab Africans, Pagans, and Christians. In Egypt there is a Sunni Moslem majority facing a large minority of Christians which is dominant in upper Egypt: some 7 million of them, so that even Sadat, in his speech on May 8, expressed the fear that they will want a state of their own, something like a “second” Christian Lebanon in Egypt.

8

All the Arab States east of Israel are torn apart, broken up and riddled with inner conflict even more than those of the Maghreb. Syria is fundamentally no different from Lebanon except in the strong military regime which rules it. But the real civil war taking place nowadays between the Sunni majority and the Shi’ite Alawi ruling minority (a mere 12% of the population) testifies to the severity of the domestic trouble.

9

Iraq is, once again, no different in essence from its neighbors, although its majority is Shi’ite and the ruling minority Sunni. Sixty-five percent of the population has no say in politics, in which an elite of 20 percent holds the power. In addition there is a large Kurdish minority in the north, and if it weren’t for the strength of the ruling regime, the army and the oil revenues, Iraq’s future state would be no different than that of Lebanon in the past or of Syria today. The seeds of inner conflict and civil war are apparent today already, especially after the rise of Khomeini to power in Iran, a leader whom the Shi’ites in Iraq view as their natural leader.

10

All the Gulf principalities and Saudi Arabia are built upon a delicate house of sand in which there is only oil. In Kuwait, the Kuwaitis constitute only a quarter of the population. In Bahrain, the Shi’ites are the majority but are deprived of power. In the UAE, Shi’ites are once again the majority but the Sunnis are in power. The same is true of Oman and North Yemen. Even in the Marxist South Yemen there is a sizable Shi’ite minority. In Saudi Arabia half the population is foreign, Egyptian and Yemenite, but a Saudi minority holds power.

11

Jordan is in reality Palestinian, ruled by a Trans-Jordanian Bedouin minority, but most of the army and certainly the bureaucracy is now Palestinian. As a matter of fact Amman is as Palestinian as Nablus. All of these countries have powerful armies, relatively speaking. But there is a problem there too. The Syrian army today is mostly Sunni with an Alawi officer corps, the Iraqi army Shi’ite with Sunni commanders. This has great significance in the long run, and that is why it will not be possible to retain the loyalty of the army for a long time except where it comes to the only common denominator: The hostility towards Israel, and today even that is insufficient.

12

Alongside the Arabs, split as they are, the other Moslem states share a similar predicament. Half of Iran’s population is comprised of a Persian speaking group and the other half of an ethnically Turkish group. Turkey’s population comprises a Turkish Sunni Moslem majority, some 50%, and two large minorities, 12 million Shi’ite Alawis and 6 million Sunni Kurds. In Afghanistan there are 5 million

Shi’ites who constitute one third of the population. In Sunni Pakistan there are 15 million Shi’ites who endanger the existence of that state.

13

This national ethnic minority picture extending from Morocco to India and from Somalia to Turkey points to the absence of stability and a rapid degeneration in the entire region. When this picture is added to the economic one, we see how the entire region is built like a house of cards, unable to withstand its severe problems.

14

In this giant and fractured world there are a few wealthy groups and a huge mass of poor people. Most of the Arabs have an average yearly income of 300 dollars. That is the situation in Egypt, in most of the Maghreb countries except for Libya, and in Iraq. Lebanon is torn apart and its economy is falling to pieces. It is a state in which there is no centralized power, but only 5 de facto sovereign authorities (Christian in the north, supported by the Syrians and under the rule of the Franjieh clan, in the East an area of direct Syrian conquest, in the center a Phalangist controlled Christian enclave, in the south and up to the Litani river a mostly Palestinian region controlled by the PLO and Major Haddad’s state of Christians and half a million Shi’ites). Syria is in an even graver situation and even the assistance she will obtain in the future after the unification with Libya will not be sufficient for dealing with the basic problems of existence and the maintenance of a large army. Egypt is in the worst situation: Millions are on the verge of hunger, half the labor force is unemployed, and housing is scarce in this most densely populated area of the world. Except for the army, there is not a single department operating efficiently and the state is in a permanent state of bankruptcy and depends entirely on American foreign assistance granted since the peace.6

15

In the Gulf states, Saudi Arabia, Libya and Egypt there is the largest accumulation of money and oil in the world, but those enjoying it are tiny elites who lack a wide base of support and self-confidence, something that no army can guarantee. 7 The Saudi army with all its equipment cannot defend the regime from real dangers at home or abroad, and what took place in Mecca in 1980 is only an example. A sad and very stormy situation surrounds Israel and creates challenges for it, problems, risks but also far-reaching opportunities for the first time since 1967. Chances are that opportunities missed at that time will become achievable in the Eighties to an extent and along dimensions which we cannot even imagine today.

16

The “peace” policy and the return of territories, through a dependence upon the US, precludes the realization of the new option created for us. Since 1967, all the governments of Israel have tied our national aims down to narrow political needs, on the one hand, and on the other to destructive opinions at home which neutralized our capacities both at home and abroad. Failing to take steps towards the Arab population in the new territories, acquired in the course of a war forced upon us, is the major strategic error committed by Israel on the morning after the Six Day War. We could have saved ourselves all the bitter and dangerous conflict since then if we had given Jordan to the Palestinians who live west of the Jordan river. By doing that we would have neutralized the Palestinian problem which we nowadays face, and to which we have found solutions that are really no solutions at all, such as territorial compromise or autonomy which amount, in fact, to the same thing. 8 Today, we suddenly face immense opportunities for transforming the situation thoroughly and this we must do in the coming decade, otherwise we shall not survive as a state.

17

In the course of the Nineteen Eighties, the State of Israel will have to go through far-reaching changes in its political and economic regime domestically, along with radical changes in its foreign policy, in order to stand up to the global and regional challenges of this new epoch. The loss of the Suez Canal oil fields, of the immense potential of the oil, gas and other natural resources in the Sinai peninsula which is geomorphologically identical to the rich oil-producing countries in the region, will result in an energy drain in the near future and will destroy our domestic economy: one quarter of our present GNP as well as one third of the budget is used for the purchase of oil. 9 The search for raw materials in the Negev and on the coast will not, in the near future, serve to alter that state of affairs.

18

(Regaining) the Sinai peninsula with its present and potential resources is therefore a political priority which is obstructed by the Camp David and the peace agreements. The fault for that lies of course with the present Israeli government and the governments which paved the road to the policy of territorial compromise, the Alignment governments since 1967. The Egyptians will not need to keep the peace treaty after the return of the Sinai, and they will do all they can to return to the fold of the Arab world and to the USSR in order to gain support and military assistance. American aid is guaranteed only for a short while, for the terms of the peace and the weakening of the U.S. both at home and abroad will bring about a reduction in aid. Without oil and the income from it, with the present enormous expenditure, we will not be able to get through 1982 under the present conditions and we will have to act in order to return the situation to the status quo which existed in Sinai prior to Sadat’s visit and the mistaken peace agreement signed with him in March 1979. 10

19

Israel has two major routes through which to realize this purpose, one direct and the other indirect. The direct option is the less realistic one because of the nature of the regime and government in Israel as well as the wisdom of Sadat who obtained our withdrawal from Sinai, which was, next to the war of 1973, his major achievement since he took power. Israel will not unilaterally break the treaty, neither today, nor in 1982, unless it is very hard pressed economically and politically and Egypt provides Israel with the excuse to take the Sinai back into our hands for the fourth time in our short history. What is left therefore, is the indirect option. The economic situation in Egypt, the nature of the regime and its pan-

Arab policy, will bring about a situation after April 1982 in which Israel will be forced to act directly or indirectly in order to regain control over Sinai as a strategic, economic and energy reserve for the long run. Egypt does not constitute a military strategic problem due to its internal conflicts and it could be driven back to the post 1967 war situation in no more than one day. 11

20

The myth of Egypt as the strong leader of the Arab World was demolished back in 1956 and definitely did not survive 1967, but our policy, as in the return of the Sinai, served to turn the myth into “fact.” In reality, however, Egypt’s power in proportion both to Israel alone and to the rest of the Arab World has gone down about 50 percent since 1967. Egypt is no longer the leading political power in the Arab World and is economically on the verge of a crisis. Without foreign assistance the crisis will come tomorrow. 12 In the short run, due to the return of the Sinai, Egypt will gain several advantages at our expense, but only in the short run until 1982, and that will not change the balance of power to its benefit, and will possibly bring about its downfall. Egypt, in its present domestic political picture, is already a corpse, all the more so if we take into account the growing Moslem-Christian rift. Breaking Egypt down territorially into distinct geographical regions is the political aim of Israel in the Nineteen Eighties on its Western front.

21

Egypt is divided and torn apart into many foci of authority. If Egypt falls apart, countries like Libya, Sudan or even the more distant states will not continue to exist in their present form and will join the downfall and dissolution of Egypt. The vision of a Christian Coptic State in Upper Egypt alongside a number of weak states with very localized power and without a centralized government as to date, is the key to a historical development which was only set back by the peace agreement but which seems inevitable in the long run. 13

22

The Western front, which on the surface appears more problematic, is in fact less complicated than the Eastern front, in which most of the events that make the headlines have been taking place recently. Lebanon’s total dissolution into five provinces serves as a precendent for the entire Arab world including Egypt, Syria, Iraq and the Arabian peninsula and is already following that track. The dissolution of Syria and Iraq later on into ethnically or religiously unqiue areas such as in Lebanon, is Israel’s primary target on the Eastern front in the long run, while the dissolution of the military power of those states serves as the primary short term target. Syria will fall apart, in accordance with its ethnic and religious structure, into several states such as in present day Lebanon, so that there will be a Shi’ite Alawi state along its coast, a Sunni state in the Aleppo area, another Sunni state in Damascus hostile to its northern neighbor, and the Druzes who will set up a state, maybe even in our Golan, and certainly in the Hauran and in northern Jordan. This state of affairs will be the guarantee for peace and security in the area in the long run, and that aim is already within our reach today. 14

23

Iraq, rich in oil on the one hand and internally torn on the other, is guaranteed as a candidate for Israel’s targets. Its dissolution is even more important for us than that of Syria. Iraq is stronger than Syria. In the short run it is Iraqi power which constitutes the greatest threat to Israel. An Iraqi-Iranian war will tear Iraq apart and cause its downfall at home even before it is able to organize a struggle on a wide front against us. Every kind of inter-Arab confrontation will assist us in the short run and will shorten the way to the more important aim of breaking up Iraq into denominations as in Syria and in Lebanon. In Iraq, a division into provinces along ethnic/religious lines as in Syria during Ottoman times is possible. So, three (or more) states will exist around the three major cities: Basra, Baghdad and Mosul, and Shi’ite areas in the south will separate from the Sunni and Kurdish north. It is possible that the present Iranian-Iraqi confrontation will deepen this polarization. 15

24

The entire Arabian peninsula is a natural candidate for dissolution due to internal and external pressures, and the matter is inevitable especially in Saudi Arabia. Regardless of whether its economic might based on oil remains intact or whether it is diminished in the long run, the internal rifts and breakdowns are a clear and natural development in light of the present political structure. 16

25

Jordan constitutes an immediate strategic target in the short run but not in the long run, for it does not constitute a real threat in the long run after its dissolution, the termination of the lengthy rule of King Hussein and the transfer of power to the Palestinians in the short run.

26

There is no chance that Jordan will continue to exist in its present structure for a long time, and Israel’s policy, both in war and in peace, ought to be directed at the liquidation of Jordan under the present regime and the transfer of power to the Palestinian majority. Changing the regime east of the river will also cause the termination of the problem of the territories densely populated with Arabs west of the Jordan. Whether in war or under conditions of peace, emigration from the territories and economic demographic freeze in them, are the guarantees for the coming change on both banks of the river, and we ought to be active in order to accelerate this process in the nearest future. The autonomy plan ought also to be rejected, as well as any compromise or division of the territories for, given the plans of the PLO and those of the Israeli Arabs themselves, the Shefa’amr plan of September 1980, it is not possible to go on living in this country in the present situation without separating the two nations, the Arabs to Jordan and the Jews to the areas west of the river. Genuine coexistence and peace will reign over the land only when the Arabs understand that without Jewish rule between the Jordan and the sea they will have neither existence nor security. A nation of their own and security will be theirs only in Jordan. 17

27

Within Israel the distinction between the areas of ’67 and the territories beyond them, those of ’48, has always been meaningless for Arabs and nowadays no longer has any significance for us. The problem should be seen in its entirety without any divisions as of ’67. It should be clear, under any future political situation or military constellation, that the solution of the problem of the indigenous Arabs will come only when they recognize the existence of Israel in secure borders up to the Jordan river and beyond it, as our existential need in this difficult epoch, the nuclear epoch which we shall soon enter. It is no longer possible to live with three fourths of the Jewish population on the dense shoreline which is so dangerous in a nuclear epoch.

28

Dispersal of the population is therefore a domestic strategic aim of the highest order; otherwise, we shall cease to exist within any borders. Judea, Samaria and the Galilee are our sole guarantee for national existence, and if we do not become the majority in the mountain areas, we shall not rule in the country and we shall be like the Crusaders, who lost this country which was not theirs anyhow, and in which they were foreigners to begin with. Rebalancing the country demographically, strategically and economically is the highest and most central aim today. Taking hold of the mountain watershed from Beersheba to the Upper Galilee is the national aim generated by the major strategic consideration which is settling the mountainous part of the country that is empty of Jews today. l8

29

Realizing our aims on the Eastern front depends first on the realization of this internal strategic objective. The transformation of the political and economic structure, so as to enable the realization of these strategic aims, is the key to achieving the entire change. We need to change from a centralized economy in which the government is extensively involved, to an open and free market as well as to switch from depending upon the U.S. taxpayer to developing, with our own hands, of a genuine productive economic infrastructure. If we are not able to make this change freely and voluntarily, we shall be forced into it by world developments, especially in the areas of economics, energy, and politics, and by our own growing isolation. l9

30

From a military and strategic point of view, the West led by the U.S. is unable to withstand the global pressures of the USSR throughout the world, and Israel must therefore stand alone in the Eighties, without any foreign assistance, military or economic, and this is within our capacities today, with no compromises. 20 Rapid changes in the world will also bring about a change in the condition of world Jewry to which Israel will become not only a last resort but the only existential option. We cannot assume that U.S. Jews, and the communities of Europe and Latin America will continue to exist in the present form in the future. 21

31

Our existence in this country itself is certain, and there is no force that could remove us from here either forcefully or by treachery (Sadat’s method). Despite the difficulties of the mistaken “peace” policy and the problem of the Israeli Arabs and those of the territories, we can effectively deal with these problems in the foreseeable future.

Conclusion

1

Three important points have to be clarified in order to be able to understand the significant possibilities of realization of this Zionist plan for the Middle East, and also why it had to be published.

2

The Military Background of The Plan

The military conditions of this plan have not been mentioned above, but on the many occasions where something very like it is being “explained” in closed meetings to members of the Israeli Establishment, this point is clarified. It is assumed that the Israeli military forces, in all their branches, are insufficient for the actual work of occupation of such wide territories as discussed above. In fact, even in times of intense Palestinian “unrest” on the West Bank, the forces of the Israeli Army are stretched out too much. The answer to that is the method of ruling by means of “Haddad forces” or of “Village Associations” (also known as “Village Leagues”): local forces under “leaders” completely dissociated from the population, not having even any feudal or party structure (such as the Phalangists have, for example). The “states” proposed by Yinon are “Haddadland” and “Village Associations,” and their armed forces will be, no doubt, quite similar. In addition, Israeli military superiority in such a situation will be much greater than it is even now, so that any movement of revolt will be “punished” either by mass humiliation as in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, or by bombardment and obliteration of cities, as in Lebanon now (June 1982), or by both. In order to ensure this, the plan, as explained orally, calls for the establishment of Israeli garrisons in focal places between the mini states, equipped with the necessary mobile destructive forces. In fact, we have seen something like this in Haddadland and we will almost certainly soon see the first example of this system functioning either in South Lebanon or in all Lebanon.

3

It is obvious that the above military assumptions, and the whole plan too, depend also on the Arabs continuing to be even more divided than they are now, and on the lack of any truly progressive mass movement among them. It may be that those two conditions will be removed only when the plan will be well advanced, with consequences which can not be foreseen.

4

Why it is necessary to publish this in Israel?

The reason for publication is the dual nature of the Israeli-Jewish society: A very great measure of freedom and democracy, specially for Jews, combined with expansionism and racist discrimination. In such a situation the Israeli-Jewish elite (for the masses follow the TV and Begin’s speeches) has to be persuaded. The first steps in the process of persuasion are oral, as indicated above, but a time comes in which it becomes inconvenient. Written material must be produced for the benefit of the more stupid “persuaders” and “explainers” (for example medium-rank officers, who are, usually, remarkably stupid). They then “learn it,” more or less, and preach to others. It should be remarked that Israel, and even the Yishuv from the Twenties, has always functioned in this way. I myself well remember how (before I was “in opposition”) the necessity of war with was explained to me and others a year before the 1956 war, and the necessity of conquering “the rest of Western Palestine when we will have the opportunity” was explained in the years 1965-67.

5

Why is it assumed that there is no special risk from the outside in the publication of such plans?

Such risks can come from two sources, so long as the principled opposition inside Israel is very weak (a situation which may change as a consequence of the war on Lebanon) : The Arab World, including the Palestinians, and the United States. The Arab World has shown itself so far quite incapable of a detailed and rational analysis of Israeli-Jewish society, and the Palestinians have been, on the average, no better than the rest. In such a situation, even those who are shouting about the dangers of Israeli expansionism (which are real enough) are doing this not because of factual and detailed knowledge, but because of belief in myth. A good example is the very persistent belief in the non-existent writing on the wall of the Knesset of the Biblical verse about the Nile and the Euphrates. Another example is the persistent, and completely false declarations, which were made by some of the most important Arab leaders, that the two blue stripes of the Israeli flag symbolize the Nile and the Euphrates, while in fact they are taken from the stripes of the Jewish praying shawl (Talit). The Israeli specialists assume that, on the whole, the Arabs will pay no attention to their serious discussions of the future, and the Lebanon war has proved them right. So why should they not continue with their old methods of persuading other Israelis?

6

In the United States a very similar situation exists, at least until now. The more or less serious commentators take their information about Israel, and much of their opinions about it, from two sources. The first is from articles in the “liberal” American press, written almost totally by Jewish admirers of Israel who, even if they are critical of some aspects of the Israeli state, practice loyally what Stalin used to call “the constructive criticism.” (In fact those among them who claim also to be “Anti-Stalinist” are in reality more Stalinist than Stalin, with Israel being their god which has not yet failed). In the framework of such critical worship it must be assumed that Israel has always “good intentions” and only “makes mistakes,” and therefore such a plan would not be a matter for discussion–exactly as the Biblical genocides committed by Jews are not mentioned. The other source of information, The Jerusalem Post, has similar policies. So long, therefore, as the situation exists in which Israel is really a “closed society” to the rest of the world, because the world wants to close its eyes, the publication and even the beginning of the realization of such a plan is realistic and feasible.

Israel Shahak

June 17, 1982 Jerusalem

About the Translator

Israel Shahak is a professor of organic chemistly at Hebrew University in Jerusalem and the chairman of the Israeli League for Human and Civil Rights. He published The Shahak Papers, collections of key articles from the Hebrew press, and is the author of numerous articles and books, among them Non-Jew in the Jewish State. His latest book is Israel’s Global Role: Weapons for Repression, published by the AAUG in 1982. Israel Shahak: (1933-2001)

Notes

 1. American Universities Field Staff. Report No.33, 1979. According to this research, the population of the world will be 6 billion in the year 2000. Today’s world population can be broken down as follows: China, 958 million; India, 635 million; USSR, 261 million; U.S., 218 million Indonesia, 140 million; Brazil and Japan, 110 million each. According to the figures of the U.N. Population Fund for 1980, there will be, in 2000, 50 cities with a population of over 5 million each. The population ofthp;Third World will then be 80% of the world population. According to Justin Blackwelder, U.S. Census Office chief, the world population will not reach 6 billion because of hunger.

 2. Soviet nuclear policy has been well summarized by two American Sovietologists: Joseph D. Douglas and Amoretta M. Hoeber, Soviet Strategy for Nuclear War, (Stanford, Ca., Hoover Inst. Press, 1979). In the Soviet Union tens and hundreds of articles and books are published each year which detail the Soviet doctrine for nuclear war and there is a great deal of documentation translated into English and published by the U.S. Air Force,including USAF: Marxism-Leninism on War and the Army: The Soviet View, Moscow, 1972; USAF: The Armed Forces of the Soviet State. Moscow, 1975, by Marshal A. Grechko. The basic Soviet approach to the matter is presented in the book by Marshal Sokolovski published in 1962 in Moscow: Marshal V. D. Sokolovski, Military Strategy, Soviet Doctrine and Concepts(New York, Praeger, 1963).

 3. A picture of Soviet intentions in various areas of the world can be drawn from the book by Douglas and Hoeber, ibid. For additional material see: Michael Morgan, “USSR’s Minerals as Strategic Weapon in the Future,” Defense and Foreign Affairs, Washington, D.C., Dec. 1979.

 4. Admiral of the Fleet Sergei Gorshkov, Sea Power and the State, London, 1979. Morgan, loc. cit. General George S. Brown (USAF) C-JCS, Statement to the Congress on the Defense Posture of the United States For Fiscal Year 1979, p. 103; National Security Council, Review of Non-Fuel Mineral Policy, (Washington, D.C. 1979,); Drew Middleton, The New York Times, (9/15/79); Time, 9/21/80.

 5. Elie Kedourie, “The End of the Ottoman Empire,” Journal of Contemporary History, Vol. 3, No.4, 1968.

 6. Al-Thawra, Syria 12/20/79, Al-Ahram,12/30/79, Al Ba’ath, Syria, 5/6/79. 55% of the Arabs are 20 years old and younger, 70% of the Arabs live in Africa, 55% of the Arabs under 15 are unemployed, 33% live in urban areas, Oded Yinon, “Egypt’s Population Problem,” The Jerusalem Quarterly, No. 15, Spring 1980.

 7. E. Kanovsky, “Arab Haves and Have Nots,” The Jerusalem Quarterly, No.1, Fall 1976, Al Ba’ath, Syria, 5/6/79.

 8. In his book, former Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin said that the Israeli government is in fact responsible for the design of American policy in the Middle East, after June ’67, because of its own indecisiveness as to the future of the territories and the inconsistency in its positions since it established the background for Resolution 242 and certainly twelve years later for the Camp David agreements and the peace treaty with Egypt. According to Rabin, on June 19, 1967, President Johnson sent a letter to Prime Minister Eshkol in which he did not mention anything about withdrawal from the new territories but exactly on the same day the government resolved to return territories in exchange for peace. After the Arab resolutions in Khartoum (9/1/67) the government altered its position but contrary to its decision of June 19, did not notify the U.S. of the alteration and the U.S. continued to support 242 in the Security Council on the basis of its earlier understanding that Israel is prepared to return territories. At that point it was already too late to change the U.S. position and Israel’s policy. From here the way was opened to peace agreements on the basis of 242 as was later agreed upon in Camp David. See Yitzhak Rabin. Pinkas Sherut, (Ma’ariv 1979) pp. 226-227.

 9. Foreign and Defense Committee Chairman Prof. Moshe Arens argued in an interview (Ma ‘ariv,10/3/80) that the Israeli government failed to prepare an economic plan before the Camp David agreements and was itself surprised by the cost of the agreements, although already during the negotiations it was possible to calculate the heavy price and the serious error involved in not having prepared the economic grounds for peace.

The former Minister of Treasury, Mr. Yigal Holwitz, stated that if it were not for the withdrawal from the oil fields, Israel would have a positive balance of payments (9/17/80). That same person said two years earlier that the government of Israel (from which he withdrew) had placed a noose around his neck. He was referring to the Camp David agreements (Ha’aretz, 11/3/78). In the course of the whole peace negotiations neither an expert nor an economics advisor was consulted, and the Prime Minister himself, who lacks knowledge and expertise in economics, in a mistaken initiative, asked the U.S. to give us a loan rather than a grant, due to his wish to maintain our respect and the respect of the U.S. towards us. See Ha’aretz1/5/79. Jerusalem Post, 9/7/79. Prof Asaf Razin, formerly a senior consultant in the Treasury, strongly criticized the conduct of the negotiations; Ha’aretz, 5/5/79. Ma’ariv, 9/7/79. As to matters concerning the oil fields and Israel’s energy crisis, see the interview with Mr. Eitan Eisenberg, a government advisor on these matters, Ma’arive Weekly, 12/12/78. The Energy Minister, who personally signed the Camp David agreements and the evacuation of Sdeh Alma, has since emphasized the seriousness of our condition from the point of view of oil supplies more than once…see Yediot Ahronot, 7/20/79. Energy Minister Modai even admitted that the government did not consult him at all on the subject of oil during the Camp David and Blair House negotiations. Ha’aretz, 8/22/79.

 10. Many sources report on the growth of the armaments budget in Egypt and on intentions to give the army preference in a peace epoch budget over domestic needs for which a peace was allegedly obtained. See former Prime Minister Mamduh Salam in an interview 12/18/77, Treasury Minister Abd El Sayeh in an interview 7/25/78, and the paper Al Akhbar, 12/2/78 which clearly stressed that the military budget will receive first priority, despite the peace. This is what former Prime Minister Mustafa Khalil has stated in his cabinet’s programmatic document which was presented to Parliament, 11/25/78. See English translation, ICA, FBIS, Nov. 27. 1978, pp. D 1-10.

According to these sources, Egypt’s military budget increased by 10% between fiscal 1977 and 1978, and the process still goes on. A Saudi source divulged that the Egyptians plan to increase their militmy budget by 100% in the next two years; Ha’aretz, 2/12/79 and Jerusalem Post, 1/14/79.

 11. Most of the economic estimates threw doubt on Egypt’s ability to reconstruct its economy by 1982. See Economic Intelligence Unit, 1978 Supplement, “The Arab Republic of Egypt”; E. Kanovsky, “Recent Economic Developments in the Middle East,” Occasional Papers, The Shiloah Institution, June 1977; Kanovsky, “The Egyptian Economy Since the Mid-Sixties, The Micro Sectors,” Occasional Papers, June 1978; Robert McNamara, President of World Bank, as reported in Times, London, 1/24/78.

 12. See the comparison made by the researeh of the Institute for Strategic Studies in London, and research camed out in the Center for Strategic Studies of Tel Aviv University, as well as the research by the British scientist, Denis Champlin, Military Review, Nov. 1979, ISS: The Military Balance 1979-1980, CSS; Security Arrangements in Sinai…by Brig. Gen. (Res.) A Shalev, No. 3.0 CSS; The Military Balance and the Military Options after the Peace Treaty with Egypt, by Brig. Gen. (Res.) Y. Raviv, No.4, Dec. 1978, as well as many press reports including El Hawadeth, London, 3/7/80; El Watan El Arabi, Paris, 12/14/79.

 13. As for religious ferment in Egypt and the relations between Copts and Moslems see the series of articles published in the Kuwaiti paper, El Qabas, 9/15/80. The English author Irene Beeson reports on the rift between Moslems and Copts, see: Irene Beeson, Guardian, London, 6/24/80, and Desmond Stewart, Middle East Internmational, London 6/6/80. For other reports see Pamela Ann Smith, Guardian, London, 12/24/79; The Christian Science Monitor 12/27/79 as well as Al Dustour, London, 10/15/79; El Kefah El Arabi, 10/15/79.

 14. Arab Press Service, Beirut, 8/6-13/80. The New Republic, 8/16/80, Der Spiegel as cited by Ha’aretz, 3/21/80, and 4/30-5/5/80; The Economist, 3/22/80; Robert Fisk, Times, London, 3/26/80; Ellsworth Jones, Sunday Times, 3/30/80.

 15.  J.P.  Peroncell  Hugoz,  Le  Monde,  Paris  4/28/80;  Dr.  Abbas  Kelidar,  Middle  East  Review,  Summer  1979;

Conflict Studies, ISS, July 1975; Andreas Kolschitter, Der Zeit, (Ha’aretz, 9/21/79) Economist Foreign Report, 10/10/79, Afro-Asian Affairs, London, July 1979.

 16. Arnold Hottinger, “The Rich Arab States in Trouble,” The New York Review of Books, 5/15/80; Arab Press Service, Beirut, 6/25-7/2/80; U.S. News and World Report, 11/5/79 as well as El Ahram, 11/9/79; El Nahar El Arabi Wal Duwali, Paris 9/7/79; El Hawadeth, 11/9/79; David Hakham, Monthly Review, IDF, Jan.-Feb. 79.

 17. As for Jordan’s policies and problems see El Nahar El Arabi Wal Duwali, 4/30/79, 7/2/79; Prof. Elie Kedouri, Ma’ariv 6/8/79; Prof. Tanter, Davar 7/12/79; A. Safdi, Jerusalem Post, 5/31/79; El Watan El Arabi 11/28/79; El Qabas, 11/19/79. As for PLO positions see: The resolutions of the Fatah Fourth Congress, Damascus, August 1980. The Shefa’amr program of the Israeli Arabs was published in Ha’aretz, 9/24/80, and by Arab Press Report 6/18/80. For facts and figures on immigration of Arabs to Jordan, see Amos Ben Vered, Ha’aretz, 2/16/77; Yossef Zuriel, Ma’ariv 1/12/80. As to the PLO’s position towards Israel see Shlomo Gazit, Monthly Review; July 1980; Hani El Hasan in an interview, Al Rai Al’Am, Kuwait 4/15/80; Avi Plaskov, “The Palestinian Problem,” Survival, ISS, London Jan. Feb. 78; David Gutrnann, “The Palestinian Myth,” Commentary, Oct. 75; Bernard Lewis, “The Palestinians and the PLO,” Commentary Jan. 75; Monday Morning, Beirut, 8/18-21/80; Journal of Palestine Studies, Winter 1980.

 18. Prof. Yuval Neeman, “Samaria–The Basis for Israel’s Security,” Ma’arakhot 272-273, May/June 1980; Ya’akov Hasdai, “Peace, the Way and the Right to Know,” Dvar Hashavua, 2/23/80. Aharon Yariv, “Strategic Depth–An Israeli Perspective,” Ma’arakhot 270-271, October 1979; Yitzhak Rabin, “Israel’s Defense Problems in the Eighties,” Ma’arakhot October 1979.

 19. Ezra Zohar, In the Regime’s Pliers (Shikmona, 1974); Motti Heinrich, Do We have a Chance Israel, Truth Versus Legend (Reshafim, 1981).

 20. Henry Kissinger, “The Lessons of the Past,” The Washington Review Vol 1, Jan. 1978; Arthur Ross, “OPEC’s Challenge to the West,” The Washington Quarterly, Winter, 1980; Walter Levy, “Oil and the Decline of the West,” Foreign Affairs, Summer 1980; Special Report–“Our Armed Forees-Ready or Not?” U.S. News and World Report 10/10/77; Stanley Hoffman, “Reflections on the Present Danger,” The New York Review of Books 3/6/80; Time 4/3/80; Leopold Lavedez “The illusions of SALT” Commentary Sept. 79; Norman Podhoretz, “The Present Danger,” Commentary March 1980; Robert Tucker, “Oil and American Power Six Years Later,” Commentary Sept. 1979; Norman Podhoretz, “The Abandonment of Israel,” Commentary July 1976; Elie Kedourie, “Misreading the Middle East,” Commentary July 1979.

 21. According to figures published by Ya’akov Karoz, Yediot Ahronot, 10/17/80, the sum total of anti-Semitic incidents recorded in the world in 1979 was double the amount recorded in 1978. In Germany, France, and Britain the number of anti-Semitic incidents was many times greater in that year. In the U.S. as well there has been a sharp increase in anti-Semitic incidents which were reported in that article. For the new anti-Semitism, see L. Talmon, “The New Anti-Semitism,” The New Republic, 9/18/1976; Barbara Tuchman, “They poisoned the Wells,” Newsweek 2/3/75.

 

Jamal Wakim: US, Israel Attempting to Exacerbate Lebanese Economic Problems to Rattle Gov’t, Hizbullah

Jamal Wakim: US, Israel Attempting to Exacerbate Lebanese Economic Problems to Rattle Gov't, Hizbullah

TEHRAN (FNA)- Lebanese University professor Jamal Wakim says the political elites’ neglect of industry and agriculture as well as their focus on banking have led to the economic crisis in his country, stressing that the US and Israel are making utmost efforts to exacerbate the crisis in a bid to destabilize the state and strike at Hizbullah.

Speaking in an exclusive interview with FNA, professor Wakim mentioned the US’s destabilizing role in Lebanon, and said, “It wanted to cause problems in Lebanon so that it could be a source of destabilization to Syria in order to undermine its national security; and the same applies to Iraq to keep Iran busy.”

Jamal Wakim is a Professor of International Relations at the Lebanese University. Also, he has worked as a reporter and correspondent for various Middle East media outlets, including Dubai Television, Azzerman Kuwaiti Magazine and New Television Beirut. He has published a number of articles on topics related to Syria and to the history of Arab-Islamic Civilization.

Below is the full text of the interview:

Q: The protests which began over the taxes for WhatsApp have morphed into wide protest in the country, representing years of economic grievances that the Lebanese have had. Why and how did it get to this point?

A: This was only the straw that broke the camel’s back, but the Lebanese economy has been facing structural problems for 3 decades due to the political elite’s neglect of productive sectors like industry and agriculture and its focus on the banking sector and financial speculations, accumulating debts which reached 200 percent of national GDP, and corruption of the political elite. All this caused an economic crisis that got aggravated in the past few years and touched the middle class and poorer sections of society.

Secondly, the United States knew well the precariousness of the Lebanese economic situation, and now that things got almost stabilized in Syria, it wanted to cause problems in Lebanon so that it could be a source of destabilization to Syria in order to undermine its national security; and the same applies to Iraq to keep Iran busy.

A third reason is the pressure exerted on the Lebanese government to undermine Hizbullah and isolate it on the Lebanese political scene, by destabilizing a government that is much supported by it and by its ally the Free Patriotic Movement headed by MOFA Gibran Bassil.

Q: The government reforms, which also included a cut in salaries in half and the return of money to the treasury, have failed to appease the protesters at this point. Do you believe if Prime Minister’s resignation will do any better to the status quo?

A: I believe that the reforms proposed are short of achieving any tangible result, because these reforms do not touch the core of the problem which is the structural deformation of the Lebanese economy whose GDP relies heavily on remittances from Lebanese people abroad, and on getting foreign loans, in addition to financial speculations.

I believe that the new person who will be nominated as prime minister will follow the same pattern in economy with minor reforms that will heavily rely on further privatization and shrinking of the public sector. This might serve in cutting public expenditure but it will lead to further problems as the private sector would not be able to absorb the work force moving from the public to the private sector.

The economic situation will be aggravated by spring 2020 which would lead to chaos in Lebanon unless extreme measures are taken.

Q: How do you believe the domestic chaos would lead to harms to Lebanon’s foreign policy?

A: I definitely believe so as the USA and Israel would benefit from chaos to implicate Hizbullah in it and divert its attention and resources away from Israel, and away from supporting the Palestinian resistance groups as to help pass the deal of the century aiming to liquidate the Palestinian cause and the Palestinian national rights.

In addition, they will benefit from chaos to keep Syria busy in a neighboring unstable region and forbid Lebanon from playing the role of the channel between international capital and Syria in its reconstruction phase.

سقط النظام الطائفي ولا بدّ من: مؤتمر وطني تأسيسي لبناء دولة مدنية ديمقراطية

أكتوبر 21, 2019

د. عصام نعمان

تحت وطأة تظاهرات جماهيرية عفوية كاسحة وغير مسبوقة عمّت كلّ المناطق والطوائف والعقائد يظلّلها علم لبنان الواحد، ونتيجةَ معاناة أزمةٍ مزمنةٍ خانقة اقتصادية واجتماعية ومعيشية، وحالٍ متمادية من اللادولة، تهاوى النظام الطائفي الفاسد بكلّ أهله وأجهزته وجلاوزته. عجّلت في ذلك ثلاثة عوامل: أوّلها، انقسام الشبكة السياسية المتحكّمة على نفسها وخروج بعض أركانها على أحكام الدستور ووثيقة الوفاق الوطني الطائف ومثابرة بعضهم الآخر على الإذعان لتدخلات سافرة من قوى خارجية معادية. ثانيها، تشتت القوى الوطنية والتقدّمية المفترض بها ان تشكّل معارضةً فاعلة وبديلاً للنظام الطائفي الفاسد. ثالثها، احتدام الصراع في الإقليم بعد انهيار النظام العربي الإقليمي، واعتزام الولايات المتحدة و إسرائيل تصفية قضية فلسطين من خلال ما يُسمّى صفقة القرن والفتن المذهبية والحروب الأهلية.

في غمرة هذه التظاهرات والتحديات، صدر عن أهل القرار موقفان حاسمان: الأول لرئيس الحكومة سعد الحريري، والثاني لأمين عام حزب الله السيد حسن نصرالله. الحريري أمهل نفسه وشركاءه في السلطة 72 ساعة للتوافق على خطة متكاملة للإصلاح والإنقاذ، مقرونة بتهديد ضمني بالإستقالة اذا ما تعذّر تبنّيها. نصرالله أيّد مطالب المتظاهرين المحقة، لكنه عارض إسقاط العهد والحكومة، داعياً أهل السلطة والقرار الى تحمّل مسؤولياتهم والمبادرة الى مواجهة خطر الانهيار المالي والاقتصادي، ومهدّداً بنزول حزب الله وجمهوره الى الشارع في كلّ مناطق البلاد اذا ما أحجم أهل القرار عن تحمّل المسؤولية وبذل الجهود الكفيلة بتفادي الانهيار.

الى أين يتجه المشهد اللبناني؟

لن يبتئس اللبنانيون إذا ما تمكّن الحريري وشركاؤه في السلطة من النجاح في تحقيق خطته الإنقاذية. لكن تعاظم الإنتفاضة الشعبية ضدّ النظام الطائفي من جهة، وانقسام أهل السلطة في ما بينهم وضيق هامش المناورة أمامهم من جهة أخرى يجعلان فرص الحريري بالنجاح محدودة. هذا الاحتمال الراجح يعزز قدرات وحظوظ خصوم النظام الطائفي الفاسد المطالبين بإسقاطه وبإصلاح جذري نهضوي شامل.

لتحقيق الإصلاح النهضوي المنشود، تستطيع قوى التغيير سلوك مسار سياسي إصلاحي قوامه الأسس والإجراءات الآتية:

أولاً، عدم التورّط مع الشبكة السياسية المتحكمة في ايّ صيغةٍ تسووية لتوافق وطني مصطنع يُراد منه إعادة انتاج النظام او تجديد مؤسساته وآلياته بل دعوة القوى الوطنية والتقدمية الحيّة الى إعمال الفكر وتفعيل الحوار بغية إنتاج برنامج أولويات سياسية واقتصادية واجتماعية متكاملة لمعالجة حال لبنان المستعصية والإنتقال به، من خلال جبهة وطنية عريضة، الى حال الحرية والوحدة والنهضة وحكم القانون والعدالة والتنمية والإبداع.

ثانياً، الضغط على أهل القرار في جميع المستويات والمؤسسات للتسليم بأنّ البلاد تمرّ في ظروفٍ صعبة واستثنائية، وانّ الظروف الإستثنائية تستوجبُ بالضرورة تدابير استثنائية للخروج منها، وانّ ذلك يستوجب بدوره اتخاذ التدابير الآتية:

أ تنحية الشبكة المتحكّمة وتأليف حكومة وطنية جامعة قوامها قياديون اختصاصيون من خارج أهل النظام لمعالجة القضايا والمشكلات الأكثر إلحاحاً وأهمية، واتخاذ القرارات والتدابير الاستثنائية اللازمة بشأنها.

ب قيام الحكومة الوطنية الجامعة بالدعوة الى عقد مؤتمر وطني تأسيسي مؤلّف من مئة شخصية وطنية مقتدرة.

ج يتكوّن المؤتمر من: أربعين عضواً من الكتل البرلمانية التي يضمّ كلّ منها أربعة أعضاء على الأقلّ، يمثلون واقعياً وافتراضياً نسبة الـ 49 في المئة من اللبنانيين الذين شاركوا في الانتخابات الأخيرة بحسب بيان وزارة الداخلية،

وستين عضواً من الأحزاب والنقابات وتشكيلات المجتمع المدني يمثلون نسبة الـ 51 في المئة من اللبنانيين الذين قاطعوا الانتخابات النيابية الأخيرة.

د تسمّي قيادات الكتل البرلمانية والأحزاب والهيئات المشار اليها في الفقرة جـ ممثليها في المؤتمر. واذا تعذّر عليها التوافق ترفعُ اقتراحاتٍ بأسماء شخصياتٍ مقتدرة في صفوفها الى الحكومة الوطنية الجامعة كي تقوم بإختيار أعضاء يمثلونها من بينهم.

هـ تتمّ عملية تكوين عضوية الهيئة العامة للمؤتمر الوطني التأسيسي في مهلة أقصاها شهر واحد من تاريخ انطلاقها، على أن تدعو الحكومة الوطنية الجامعة فور انتهاء المهلة الى عقد المؤتمر بالأعضاء الذين تمّت تسميتهم شرط ألاّ يقلّ نصابه عن خمسين من مجموع أعضائه المئة.

و يعقد المؤتمر الوطني التأسيسي جلسات متواصلة لإنجاز مهامه في مهلة أقصاها شهر واحد.

ثالثاً، يهدف المجلس الوطني التأسيسي في عمله الى تحقيق المبادئ والإصلاحات التغييرية النهضوية الآتية:

أ الخروج من النظام الطائفي الفاسد بإرساء قوعد الدولة المدنية الديمقراطية.

ب اعتبار قوانين الإنتخاب المتعاقبة منذ الإستقلال غير دستورية، وانّ اعتماد قانون انتخاب يؤمّن صحة التمثيل الشعبي وعدالته شرطٌ ومدخلٌ لبناء الدولة المدنية الديمقراطية ومنطلقٌ لإقرار سائر القوانين والإصلاحات السياسية والاقتصادية والاجتماعية النهضوية.

جـ إقرار قانون جديد للإنتخاب وفق أحكام الدستور، لا سيما المادتين22 و27 منه.

د اعتماد النسبية في دائرة انتخابية وطنية واحدة.

هـ يكون مجلس النواب مؤلفاً من 130 نائباً، مئة 100 منهم يُنتخبون بموجب لوائح مرشحين مناصفةً بين المسيحيين والمسلمين من دون التوزيع المذهبي للمقاعد، ويُنتخب الثلاثون 30 الباقون وفق التوزيع المذهبي على ان يكون لكلّ ناخبٍ صوت واحد.

و يجتمع النواب المنتخبون جميعاً في هيئة مشترعة واحدة ويقومون بتشريع قانونين:

الأول يقضي بإعتبار النواب المئة المنتخبين على أساس المناصفة من دون التوزيع المذهبي للمقاعد قوامَ مجلس النواب المنصوص عليه في المادة 22 من الدستور، واعتبار الثلاثين نائباً المنتخبين على أساس التوزيع المذهبي قوامَ مجلس الشيوخ وفق المادة عينها. الثاني يقضي بتحديد صلاحيات مجلس الشيوخ بإعتماد معظم المواضيع المعتبرة أساسية في الفقرة 5 من المادة 65 دستور.

رابعاً، يُطرح مشروع قانون الإنتخاب الديمقراطي الجديد مع مشروع قانون تعديل أحكام الدستور استكمالاً لمضمون المادتين 22 و 27 منه على استفتاء شعبي عام، ويكون هذان القانونان شرعييْن ومستوجبيْن التنفيذ، ويُعتبر مجلس النواب القائم منحلاً بموجبهما بمجرد نيْل الاستفتاء موافقة لا أقلّ من خمسين في المئة من أصوات المشاركين.

خامساً، تقوم الحكومة الوطنية الجامعة بإجراء انتخابات تشريعية وفق أحكام قانون الإنتخاب الجديد وإنتاج مفاعيله الدستورية والقانونية.

ماذا لو تعذّر، لسبب أو لآخر، سلوك هذا المسار التغييري النهضوي الديمقراطي؟

انّ القوى الحيّة عموماً والقوى الوطنية والتقدمية خصوصاً المؤتلفة في جبهة وطنية عريضة مدعوّة الى اعتماد خيار العصيان المدني ومباشرة تنفيذ متطلباته ضدّ مؤسسات النظام الطائفي الفاسد والقائمين بإدارته، وتصعيد الضغط الشعبي لغاية تسليم المسؤولين ذوي الصفة بتنفيذ برنامج التغيير الديمقراطي النهضوي بمبادئه وأسسه وإجراءاته جميعاً.

إنّ البقاء في حال الطائفية والفساد والحروب الأهلية موتٌ بطيء ومحتّم، فيما الإنطلاق الى التغيّر والتغيير الديمقراطي النهضوي ارتقاء الى حياة حضارية جديدة وإبداعية، وقد آن الآوان.

وزير سابق

خياران متصادمان في العراق: الدولة/ اللادولة وأميركا/ اللاأميركا

أكتوبر 7, 2019

د. عصام نعمان

الصراع في العراق وعليه ليس في الشارع وحسب بل بين أهل السلطة ايضاً. في الشارع، لم يكن للمتظاهرين قائد. في أروقة السلطة ثمة قادة كثر من دون ان يكون اولٌ بينهم. انها ظاهرة فريدة وغير مسبوقة.

المتظاهرون كان لهم دعاة لا قادة. كانت ثمة دعوة للتظاهر تداولتها وسائل التواصل الإجتماعي وفعلت فعلها بسرعة قياسية. الناشطون في الشارع اطلقوا شعاراً لافتاً: لا للسياسيين، لا للمعمَمين . مطلقو الشعار لم يحددوا هوية معيّنة للسياسيين والمعمَمين المطلوب إستبعادهم. ذلك سمح للمراقب الحصيف باستنتاج سريع: المتظاهرون يعارضون، وربما يعادون، كل المسؤولين الناشطين في المشهد السياسي منذ احتلال أميركا للعراق سنة 2003.

ثمة دليل على صحة هذا الإستنتاج: لم يَسْلَم من التخريب مقرّ ايّ حزب او تنظيم مشارك في السلطة في مناطق عدّة من البلاد. ربما لهذا السبب امتنعت المرجعية الدينية العليا ممثلةً بآية الله العظمى السيد علي السيستاني في الايام الثلاثة الاولى للحراك الشعبي عن التعليق على ما رافقه من حوادث واحداث.

الى ذلك ثمة ظاهرات اخرى استوقفت المراقبين:

أكثف التظاهرات كانت في مدن الجنوب الشيعي الكبرى: البصرة والنجف وكربلاء والناصرية، ناهيك عن الحلّة في الوسط.

امتناع التيار الصدري، بقيادة السيد مقتدى الصدر، عن المشاركة في التظاهرات. إلاّ ان الصدر طوّر قراره لاحقاً بإعلانه سحب كتلته، سائرون ، من البرلمان ومطالبته الحكومة بالإستقالة وإجراء انتخابات نيابية مبكرة.

معظم الاحزاب ايّد، بادئ الأمر، مطالب المتظاهرين إلاّ ان عمار الحكيم، زعيم تيار الحكمة، ورئيس الوزراء السابق حيدر العبادي حزب الدعوة سارعا لاحقاً الى تأييد مقتدى الصدر في دعوته الحكومة الى الاستقالة وإجراء انتخابات.

حتى رئيس الوزراء عادل عبد المهدي – ابن الناصرية – ايّد مطالب المتظاهرين، وحرص على القول بأنّ البلاد تقف امام خيارين: الدولة او اللادولة . في مفهومه، الدولةُ تعني الأمن والنظام كما تعني ايضاً الفئة الحاكمة التي تقبض على ناصية السلطة.

معظم المتظاهرين وضعوا اهل النظام كلهم في سلة واحدة وطالبوا بإسقاطهم. أقسى التهم الموجهة اليهم واكثرها رواجاً هي الفساد والسطو على المال العام. لعل احداً لا يجادلهم بأن الفساد في العراق سلطان. ثمة تقارير رسمية تكشف انه، منذ إسقاط نظام صدام حسين بفعل الإحتلال الأميركي، ابتلع الفساد نحو 450 مليار دولار من الأموال العامة، ايّ أربعة اضعاف ميزانية الدولة وأكثر من ضعفيّ الناتج المحلي الإجمالي للبلاد. مفكر وباحث عراقي يساري رصين من اهل النجف اكّد لي انّ دخل العراق من النفط منذ 2004 فصاعداً تجاوز مبلغ تريليون ألف مليون دولار، ومع ذلك لا اثر لمردود مجزٍ لهذا الدخل في ايٍّ من ميادين الصناعة او الزراعة او الخدمات العامة، اذ ما زالت مناطق عدّة في البلاد بلا كهرباء وبلا مياه نظيفة للشرب، وما زال اكثر من 30 في المئة من الشباب عاطلين عن العمل، واكثر من 25 في المئة من العراقيين تحت خط الفقر.

اذ يتضح عداء الشعب العراقي، في معظمه، لأميركا وما جرّته على البلاد منذ احتلالها من ويلات، استوقفت المراقبين فورة الغضب التي تبدّت في تظاهراتٍ عمّت مدن الجنوب الشيعية ما يحمل على التساؤل عمّا اذا كانت هذه الغضبة تطال ايضاً إيران والاحزاب التي تدعم انصارها في السلطة. في هذا السياق، أشار مراقبون الى أحزابٍ معادية لأميركا والسعودية اكدت ثبوت قيام موظفي السفارة الأميركية في بغداد بتحريض منظمات المجتمع المدني المدعومة من قبلها على المشاركة في التظاهرات وإطلاق شعارات ضد إيران وضد حكومة عبد المهدي.

الحقيقة ان ثمة اختلافاً وانزعاجاً متبادلين بين أميركا وعادل عبد المهدي سببهما خطوات خمسة اعتبرتها واشنطن استفزازية اتخذها الرجل وحكومته في الآونة الأخيرة تتمحور حول امورٍ خمسة:

اولاها، زيارته الصين منتصفَ الشهر الماضي وتوقيعه اتفاقات معها لبناء وتطوير بنى تحتية عراقية.

ثانيها، تنديده بـ صفقة القرن واتهامه إسرائيل بالوقوف وراء استهداف عدد من مقار الحشد الشعبي خلال شهريّ تموز/ يوليو وآب/ اغسطس الماضيين.

ثالثها، قيامه بتوقيع اتفاقيات مع شركة سيمنس الالمانية لتطوير قطاع الطاقة الكهربائية، مستبعداً بذلك شركة جنرال الكتريك الأميركية.

رابعها، توجهه الى روسيا لشراء منظومات دفاع جوي من طـراز أس 400 بعد اتهامه إسرائيل بإستهداف مقار الحشد الشعبي .

خامسها، قيامه بكسر اكبر المحظورات الأميركيـة وهو إفتتاح معبر القائم – البوكمال الحدودي مع سورية، معبّداً بذلك طريق طهران بغداد دمشق – بيروت ما يدعم لوجستياً قوى المقاومة العربية الناشطة ضد إسرائيل .

التطور الأهم تخلّي المرجعية الدينية العليا عن موقف الصمت. آية الله السيستاني أصدر بياناً أيّد فيه مطالب المتظاهرين المحقة ودعا الحكومة الى استجابتها بلا إبطاء، مؤكداً على وجوب تأليف لجنة خاصة من خبراء اختصاصيين من خارج الحكومة وخارج محيط الاحزاب المؤيدة لها مهمتها درس الاوضاع الإقتصادية والإجتماعية وتحديد مفاصل الاصلاح الشامل ومتطلبات مكافحة الفساد. عادل عبد المهدي سارع الى تأييد موقف السيستاني ومطالبه والإشادة بمرجعيته كصمام امان للبلاد.

إذ حدّد السيستاني لأهل السلطة طريق الخروج من الأزمة التي عصفت بالبلاد وهدّدت الدولة الهشة بالإنهيار، فإنّ عبد المهدي أدرك بلا شك أنّ ما حدث هو حصيلة سنوات طويلة من صراعات اهل السلطة أنفسهم الذين عاد معظمهم بمواكبة الأميركيين مع احتلال البلاد، وان تهافتهم على إحتلاب مواردها وتقاسم خيراتها أنهك بنيتها الاجتماعية ومؤسساتها الاقتصادية، وأغرى قوى خارجية متعددة بإبتزازها واتخاذها ساحة لتصفية حسابات اقليمية ودولية. ولا يفوت عبد المهدي ايضاً الإدراك بأنّ القوتيّن الابرز في الصراع داخل العراق وفي الاقليم هما الولايات المتحدة وإيران، وانّ تداعيات الصراع بينهما وتكالب أهل السلطة على المال والنفوذ وضع البلاد أمام خيارات متصادمة، وانّ شراسة ادارة ترامب، ومن ورائها إسرائيل ، في مواجهة إيران مداورةً بمحاصرتها اقتصادياً، ومباشرةً بالضرب في عمق حلفائها الأقربين سورية والمقاومات اللبنانية والفلسطينية والعراقية دفع الى واجهة الصراع خياراً إضافياً لعله الأكثر إلحاحاً وأهمية هو وجوب بناء عراق بلا أميركا بعدما تمكّن العراقيون الأحرار، او كادوا، من تحرير العراق من الإرهاب والإرهابيين.

اجل، المطلوب من أحرار العراق اعتماد خيارين متكاملين: الدولة القوية الديمقراطية، وعراق متحرر من أميركا المستبطنة دائماً عدوانية صهيونية فاجرة، ومتحرر من مخططات ومطامع اقليمية ماثلة.

Related Videos

Related Articles

MbS ‘ready to recognize Israel in return for US help’

Source

In this file photo, taken on May 20, 2017, US President Donald Trump (C-R) and the then-Saudi Deputy Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman take part in a bilateral meeting at a hotel in Riyadh. Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, is seen standing to the right of the US president. (By AFP)

In this file photo, taken on May 20, 2017, US President Donald Trump (C-R) and the then-Saudi Deputy Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman take part in a bilateral meeting at a hotel in Riyadh. Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, is seen standing to the right of the US president. (By AFP)

Tue Oct 1, 2019

A new documentary has revealed that Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman — also known as MbS — had promised US President Donald Trump to recognize Israel and normalize ties with the regime if the United States helped him “defeat Iran and take control of the Middle East.”

According to PBS documentary ‘The Crown Prince,’ which was broadcast on Saturday, the kingdom’s de facto ruler made the pledge in a meeting with President Trump during his visit to Riyadh in May 2017.

Martin Smith, the presenter of the documentary, said that bin Salman had asked Trump to ensure “the United States’ assistance in defeating Iran while supporting the prince’s ambitions to become the key player in the Middle East.”

In return, bin Salman offered to help Trump and his son-in-law and advisor Jared Kushner, solve the decades-long Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

David Ignatius, The Washington Post’s columnist and military analyst, who was interviewed in the documentary, quoted bin Salman as saying that “I see a Middle East where Israel is a part of … I am ready to recognize and have trade relations with Israel.”

Ignatius explained that bin Salman’s proposal “tempted the US administration and became the focus of the plan that Kushner keeps on advocating.”

He was referring to Trump’s controversial proposal for “peace” between the Israeli regime and Palestinians, dubbed “the deal of the century.” Kushner and Jason Greenblatt, the US president’s special adviser for international negotiations, are reportedly the main architects of the plan.

The so-called deal of the century, a backchannel plan to allegedly reach a peace settlement between Israel and the Palestinians, was proposed by the Trump administration in 2017. Although the plan has not been released, leaks signal that it would mainly include the same tried-and-failed ideas of the past.

In recent years, Israel has been working to improve ties with Persian Gulf Arab states such as Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain.

While little is known about Trump’s plan, leaks have suggested that it regards Jerusalem al-Quds entirely as an Israeli territory. This can be problematic since Palestinians view the eastern sector of the occupied city as the capital of their future state.

The US-drafted plan is believe to call for keeping borders and security under Israeli control, while keeping a decision over the final borders of Israeli settlements for later negotiations.

According to the Times of Israel, the Israeli regime has been conducting extensive diplomatic negotiations with Saudi Arabia and other Arab governments over the past months in a bid to convince them to establish diplomatic relations with the regime more than half a century after the Six-Day War which saw Israel occupy the West Bank and the Golan Heights.

The kingdom has expanded secret ties with Israel under the young crown prince, who has made it clear that he and the Israelis stand on the same front to counter Iran and its growing influence in the Middle East.

In highly controversial comments during an April 2018 visit to the US, bin Salman told the Atlantic that he recognized Israel’s “right to exist,” distancing himself from the kingdom’s longtime policy of opposing Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories.

He is also widely reported to be working behind the scenes to force the Palestinians into accepting Trump’s hugely pro-Israel deal. The crown prince has even tried in vain to bribe Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas to that effect.

Related Videos

Related Stories

 

%d bloggers like this: