قلق متصاعد من انفجار الضفة | رام الله لتل أبيب: معكم في تعقّب الأسرى

الجمعة 10 أيلول 2021

رجب المدهون 

قلق متصاعد من انفجار الضفة | رام الله لتل أبيب: معكم في تعقّب الأسرى
نبّهت السلطة، تل أبيب، إلى تصاعد الدعوات إلى التظاهر والاشتباك في مختلف مناطق الضفة (أ ف ب )

خلافاً لما تُروّج له رسمياً، بدأت السلطة الفلسطينية، فعلياً، التعاون مع إسرائيل من أجل إيجاد الأسرى الستّة المتحرّرين من «جلبوع»، مدفوعةً بخشية هستيرية من انفجار الأوضاع في الضفة بسبب هذه القضية، وهو ما جعلها «تشترط» على تل أبيب الإحجام عن تصفية الأسرى عند العثور عليهم، في حال تَحقّق ذلكغزة | لا تزال الخشية من تجدّد الاحتجاجات الشعبية في الضفة الغربية المحتلة وتصاعدها انطلاقاً من قضية الأسرى الستّة المتحرّرين من معتقل جلبوع، تؤرّق قيادة السلطة الفلسطينية التي وافقت أخيراً على طلب إسرائيل التعاون معها في البحث عن الأسرى. وبحسب مصدر قيادي في السلطة تحدّث إلى «الأخبار»، فإن نقاشاً دار أوّل من أمس بين مسؤولين في «اللجنة المركزية لحركة فتح»، ومسؤولين أمنيين في السلطة، أفضى إلى التوافق على مساعدة تل أبيب في الوصول إلى المحرَّرين، من أجل إنهاء هذا الملفّ الذي يُخشى تطوّره شعبياً وميدانياً، بما لا يخدم موقف رام الله، الساعية إلى تهدئة الوضع لاستكمال مشروع «السلام الاقتصادي» الذي انطلق أخيراً. وجاءت موافقة السلطة على التعاون مقرونة باشتراط ألّا تتمّ تصفية الأسرى، وأن يُكتفى باعتقالهم، بالإضافة إلى تهدئة الأوضاع في السجون بالنظر إلى أن التصعيد الإسرائيلي هناك بدأ يفعل فعله في إثارة الشارع الفلسطيني. وكانت دولة الاحتلال وافقت على طلب تَقدّم به رئيس السلطة، محمود عباس، خلال لقائه وزير الأمن الإسرائيلي، بيني غانتس، قبل أسبوعين، بالإفراج عن بعض الأسرى الفلسطينيين بهدف إعادة تعزيز مكانة السلطة.

See the source image

وعلى الأرض، بدأت بالفعل جلسات التنسيق بين الاحتلال والأجهزة الأمنية للسلطة التي حذرت في لقاء عُقد أوّل من أمس في الضفة بين مسؤول منها ومسؤولين في ما يُسمّى «الإدارة المدنية» في جيش الاحتلال، من اغتيال الأسرى الستّة لأن ذلك قد يؤدّي إلى تفجّر الأوضاع في الضفة، على اعتبار أن قضيّتهم تمسّ عوائل وأوساطاً واسعة هناك، منبّهة إلى تصاعد الدعوات إلى التظاهر والاشتباك مع العدو في مختلف المناطق. وتوافَق تحذير السلطة مع خشية مقابلة لدى جيش الاحتلال وأجهزة أمنه من تدهور الأوضاع في الضفة، في ظلّ تنامي التفاعل الشعبي مع المحرَّرين، واتّخاذ عمليتهم «أبعاداً عالمية وإقليمية»، بحسب ما أوردته إذاعة الجيش الإسرائيلي. وعلى رغم نفي رام الله البدء في مساعدة تل أبيب للوصول إلى الأسرى، كشفت قناة «كان» العبرية أن غانتس طلب من السلطة التعاون، وهو ما وافقت عليه الأخيرة خشية إجراءات وعقوبات من قِبَل الحكومة الإسرائيلية ضدّها في حال عدم استجابتها، ولذا أبلغ وزير الشؤون المدنية، حسين الشيخ، غانتس، أن «السلطة ستبذل جهودها ضمن العمل المشترك».

بالتوازي مع ذلك، وفيما أبدت دولة الاحتلال انزعاجها من دعوة أطراف داخل حركة «فتح» إلى مسيرات مؤيّدة لأسرى «حركة الجهاد الإسلامي» المحرَّرين، تواصلت في القدس والضفة التحرّكات الشعبية المسانِدة لهم والتي قابلها جيش العدو بالقمع وإطلاق الرصاص الحيّ والمطّاطي والغاز المسيل للدموع على المشاركين فيها، ما أدّى إلى إصابة المئات منهم، فيما اندلعت مواجهات في مدن القدس ورام الله ونابلس وجنين، وذلك خلال تظاهرات رافضة للإجراءات الانتقامية الإسرائيلية بحق الأسرى. واعترف جيش الاحتلال بتعرّض قواته في رام الله وجنين ونابلس لعمليات إطلاق نار من دون وقوع إصابات، في وقت تواصلت فيه عمليات البحث عن المحرَّرين في جنين والمناطق القريبة منها. وكانت سلطات العدو قرّرت الدفع بـ3 كتائب قتالية و7 سرايا من الجيش، لمساعدة الشرطة في البحث.

فيديوات متعلقة

مقالات متعلقة

دعماً للأسرى… الفصائل الفلسطينية تدعو لجمعة غضب

الخميس 9 أيلول 2021

الأخبار

دعماً للأسرى... الفصائل الفلسطينية تدعو لجمعة غضب

دعت فصائل فلسطينية، اليوم، إلى اعتبار الجمعة المقبل «يوم غضب» ضد الاحتلال الإسرائيلي، بسبب انتهاكاته بحق الأسرى في السجون بعد عملية فرار ستة أسرى من سجن «جلبوع» شديد التحصين.

وقال عضو اللجنة التنفيذية لمنظمة التحرير، واصل أبو يوسف، إنه تم التوافق بين جميع الفصائل والقوى، على اعتبار الجمعة «يوم غضب» ومواجهة من الاحتلال الإسرائيلي على نقاط التماس، «دعما للأسرى ورفضاً لسياسة التضييق والانتهاكات الإسرائيلية بحقهم».

وفي تصريح نقلته وكالة «الأناضول» للأنباء عن منسّق شؤون الفصائل الفلسطينية، أبو يوسف، قال الأخير إن «المطلوب هو التفاف شعبي كبير في كافة المحافظات، بما فيها مدينة القدس، وقطاع غزة، نصرةً للأسرى». وتابع: «قضية الأسرى توحّد الشعب الفلسطيني في كافة مناطق تواجده».

وندد أبو يوسف بالممارسات الإسرائيلية بحقّ الأسرى داخل السجون، وتجاه عائلات المعتقلين الفارّين، مذكّراً بأن «القيادة الفلسطينية تُجري اتصالات مع جهات دولية ومؤسسات ومنظمات حقوق الإنسان، لوقف الانتهاكات والإجراءات الإسرائيلية بحق الأسرى».

فيديوات متعلقة

فيديوات متعلقة

فلسطين ترسم إيقاع المنطقة

ناصر قنديل

  يتوهّم كثير من المسؤولين في العالم والمنطقة أن الملفات التي يقومون بنقاشها، والسياسات التي يتولون رسمها هي ما يحدد إيقاع الأحداث المقبلة، فمنهم من يعتبر العودة إلى التفاوض حول الملف النووي الإيراني الإشارة الأهم لرسم طريق الاستقرار، ومنهم يعتبر أن تفاهماً روسياً أميركياً حول سورية قد يكون التطور الذي يحكم ما عداه، ومنهم من يعطي الأولوية للحوار الجاري بين السعودية وإيران بصفته المدخل الأبرز لتغيير وجهة العلاقات السياسية وعبرها إيقاع الأحداث في المنطقة، ومنهم من ينظر لما سيلي قمة بغداد على مسار العلاقات العربية والإقليمية مع سورية باعتبارها التحول المعاكس للمسار الذي بدأ قبل عشر سنوات وتسبّب بالاضطرابات التي شهدتها المنطقة، فيغلق المسار ويعكس الاتجاه نحو استعادة التوازن والاستقرار.

كلّ ذلك مهمّ بالتأكيد لكنه يتجاهل حقيقة وجود مسار انفجاري قادم له عنوان واحد هو فلسطين، ولا يوجد ما يستطيع وقفه، وفي حال حدوثه فلا شيء سيبقى على حاله في المنطقة، والانفجار في فلسطين لا يبدو مساراً للمستقبل البعيد ولا المتوسط بل للمستقبل القريب والقريب جداً، فحال الاحتقان ترتفع كل يوم، وما يجري في انتفاضة الأسرى والتفاعل الشعبي معها قد يكون شرارة الانتفاضة المقبلة، ولا يقابلها على مستوى الإجراءات والسياسات في كيان الاحتلال إلا ما يزيد فرص الاشتعال، حيث قيادة الكيان تنطلق في سلوكها ومواقفها من انسداد سياسي وعجز عسكري يضعانها في خانة السعي لاسترضاء المستوطنين ومجموعات التطرف التي تحوّلت منذ سنوات إلى قلب صناعة السياسة وتوازنات الانتخابات في الكيان، مع ضمور وتراجع كل الجماعات الأخرى، بينما على المقابل الفلسطيني فلا ثقة بكلّ حديث عن التفاوض، ولا قبول لكل مفاعيل التنسيق الأمني، وغضب وسخط على سلوك قيادات السلطة متصاعد منذ اغتيال الناشط نزار بنات، ويقين بأنّ المواجهة هي الوصفة الوحيدة لمنع العدوان وتخفيف ثقل قبضة الاحتلال، منذ نتائج معركة سيف القدس وما ظهرته من موازين للردع، واعتقاد بأن اللحظة الدولية المتميزة بالتراجع الأميركي فرصة لا يجب تفويتها، خصوصاً بعد الانسحاب من أفغانستان، والمناخ الإقليمي يسجل صعوداً مؤكداً لصالح محور المقاومة، خصوصاً بعد التأكيدات التي قدّمتها تجربة سفن المقاومة لفك الحصار والتراجع الأميركي- «الإسرائيلي» أمامها.

لحظة الانفجار الآتية حكماً ستتكفل بصناعة اصطفافات تغير وجهة كلّ ما يمكن فعله لصناعة الاستقرار في الملفات التي يعتقد المسؤولون الحكوميون أنها بوابات السيطرة على توترات المنطقة، فلا العودة إلى الاتفاق النووي بين أميركا وإيران، ولا عودة سورية إلى الجامعة العربية، ولا علاقات جيدة بين السعودية وإيران، أو بين واشنطن وموسكو، ستحول دون انقسام المنطقة والعالم حول فلسطين، فعلى الأقلّ لن تستطيع واشنطن ترك تل أبيب تتلقى الصفعات المؤلمة وحيدة، وليس وارداً بالنسبة لطهران ودمشق مجرد التفكير بالمساومة على اللحظة التاريخية الموعودة لنهوض فلسطيني قادم، والإيقاع الذي سيفرضه الحدث الفلسطيني هو الذي يفسّر التباطؤ في الخطوات المطلوبة في المسارات التقليدية نحو الاستقرار، ذلك أن واشنطن وحلفاءها يتساءلون عما إذا كان كلّ انفتاح وتقدم في العلاقات مع محور المقاومة سيتحوّل إلى جوائز مجانية إذا انفجر المشهد الفلسطيني، وليس خافياً حجم السعي لمحاولات مقايضة أيّ تقدم في مسارات الانفتاح السياسي بالحصول على ضمانات تتصل بأمن كيان الاحتلال، بينما لا يمكن تفسير ثبات وتشدّد حكومات وقوى محور المقاومة إلا من باب الحرص على التمسك بإيصال هذه الرسائل للداخل الفلسطيني بأن فلسطين ستبقى البوصلة التي تحدد الخيارات، والتي لا تقبل المساومة.

قد تتحرّك بعض المسارات السياسية ولكن الأرجح أن بلوغها نهايات حاسمة قد لا يكون متاحاً من بوابة مفاجأة فلسطينية كبرى مقبلة، وربما تكون المنطقة وتوازناتها بحاجة لجولة مواجهة تعيد ترسيم موازين القوى كمدخل للتفاوض المقبل بعدها وليس قبلها.

فيديوات متعلقة

مقالات متعلقة

Israeli General: 11-Day Gaza War Just ‘First Stage’ of Wider Campaign

Posted by INTERNATIONALIST 360° on 

Israeli soldiers work at an artillery unit as it fires near the border between Israel and the Gaza strip, on the Israeli side May 17, 2021

Morgan Artyukhina
After the Second Intifada uprising and the 2006 election victory of Hamas in Gaza, Israel was forced to pull all its settlers out of the Gaza Strip, at which time it imposed a cordon sanitaire around the territory that has dramatically impacted access to basic necessities by its more than 2 million Palestinian inhabitants.

During an interview with Israel’s Channel 13 on Thursday, Maj. Gen. Eliezer Toledano, head of the Israel Defense Forces’ Southern Command, said that the IDF limited its recent war in Gaza due to civilian pressure “on the home front,” but noted the military is “totally prepared” to continue if necessary.

“The operation ended, or at least its first stage did. The next stage will happen if we see that the security situation has changed,” Toledano said, according to the Times of Israel. That “first stage” involved roughly 1,500 airstrikes on targets in the Gaza Strip, which the IDF said targeted members of Hamas and the group’s facilities. The group’s militant wing, the Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades, fired more than 4,300 rockets and mortars at Israel during the 11-day war.

While most of Hamas’ projectiles were intercepted by Israel’s Iron Dome air defense system, Gaza has few air defenses and the bombs fell on apartment buildings in the densely populated city, killing 254 people, 67 of whom were children and 80 of whom were militants, according to local health officials and Hamas. In Israel, 12 civilians, including two children, were killed by Hamas rockets.

Toledano said the IDF tried to “make the most” of the conflict while public opinion in Israel was on their side.

“We don’t have operations like this every week or every month because we understand the burden that this puts on civilians, especially on the home front. And therefore when we launched this operation, we had to make the most of it,” he said, adding that “these wars are complicated in terms of the rockets.”

“We are totally prepared to continue from the 11th day, with the 12th day, with the 13th day. It’s all contingent upon the security situation,” he continued. “If we succeeded with this first stage, that’s great. If we didn’t, we’ll have to continue.”

Israel’s previous major military operations in Gaza, in 2009 and 2014, each lasted several weeks and killed thousands of people, the vast majority of them Palestinians in Gaza, but also saw significantly increased numbers of Israeli civilians killed and injured as well.

In the aftermath of the May 20 ceasefire, both the IDF and Hamas have claimed victory. Hamas called the operation “Sword of Jerusalem” and said its intent was to halt the attacks by Israelis police against worshippers at Al-Aqsa Mosque and in the Palestinian neighborhood of Sheikh Jarrah, where several Palestinian families are at risk of being evicted after an Israeli court ruled in favor of Jewish settlers.

However, while the IDF claimed to have destroyed large numbers of stockpiled rockets and Hamas infrastructure and shot down some 90% of the rockets launched, the Times of Israel said after the conflict that the IDF’s “Operation Guardian of the Walls” had not been the resounding victory Jerusalem hoped for.

The wildcard now is the Wednesday formation of a government with New Right chief Naftali Bennett at the helm. While the right-wing figure recently referred to the bombardment of Gaza as part of Israel’s “just war against terrorism,” the kingmaker United Arab List, a small Palestinian party that helped the coalition to reach a majority in the Knesset, could be a moderating factor on some of Bennett’s more aggressive intentions.

A Palestinian party has never before been part of an Israeli government, and leader Mansour Abbas said on Wednesday that he only agreed to join the coalition after reaching “critical agreements on various issues that serve the interests of Arab society,” including education, welfare, employment, economic development, planning, construction, and crime and violence, according to Haaretz, as well as granting official status to Arab Bedouin settlements in the Negev Desert.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has been head of the Israeli government for 12 years, warned right-wing members of the Knesset on Thursday to oppose what he characterized as a “dangerous left-wing government” coming into power, saying it was “selling” the Negev to the Bedouin.

The Third Intifada. Israel’s Crimes. Palestine’s Wrath. Ray of Hope?

Conversations with Richard Falk, Richard Silverstein and Laith Marouf

By Michael WelchRichard FalkRichard Silverstein, and Laith Marouf

Global Research, May 22, 2021

“What they need to do is they need to occupy the bases of the Canadian Armed Forces! They need to occupy the military hardware factories! They need to occupy their courts and stop the shipping of these weapons to apartheid Israel! Anything less than that will not actually cleanse them from the blood on their hands as Canadians!” 

– Laith Marouf, from this week’s interview

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

As of 2:00 am on May 21 by the Israel-Palestine hour this morning, or 7:00pm EDT on Thursday, the two sides of the disputing rivals had ceased hostilities – at least for the time being.[1]

As of 2:00 am on May 21 by the Israel-Palestine hour this morning, or 7:00pm EDT on Thursday, the two sides of the disputing rivals had ceased hostilities – at least for the time being.[1]

By the standard account, the bitter eruption rose up on May 6 when Palestinians rose up in protest to a Supreme Court of Israel ruling on the matter of evicting six Palestinian families from their housing units in Sheikh Jarrah in East Jerusalem. This was followed the next day by Israeli police storming the Al-Aqsa mosque, the third holiest site in Islam and firing stun grenades, rubber bullets and tear gas at the worshippers in attendance.

Then on May 10, Hamas, the militant force governing over Gaza, wanted Israeli security forces removed from Sheikh Jarrah and the Temple Mount complex, location of the holiest site in Judaism which also housed Al-Aqsa Mosque. When Israel refused they fired rockets on targets in Israel. What followed was a campaign of airstrikes by Israel.

What followed was the most destructive period of violence in years.. [2]

The following clip recorded by Middle East Eye is just a sample of what the last two weeks were like:

“I don’t know what to do.”

A 10-year-old Palestinian girl breaks down while talking to MEE after Israeli air strikes destroyed her neighbour’s house, killing 8 children and 2 women#Gaza #Palestine #Israel pic.twitter.com/jnZx8wruaX

— Middle East Eye (@MiddleEastEye) May 17, 2021

Israel-Palestine: The Humanitarian Consequences of an Occupation

Regrettably, violence in the region tends to spring up from time to time. And absent being held to account for past crimes by the UN, Washington, or really anyone, Israel will most likely continue on setting up more shelters on occupied land, and besieging the beleaguered Gaza, and ignoring the human rights of their Palestinian neighbours frankly at levels well beyond the harsh treatment of Blacks in modern day America.

But something is a little different this time. Despite Israel’s ‘Iron Dome’ technology taking out as many as 90 percent of rockets, some projectiles, cruise missiles no less, are punching through and hitting Israel stronger than ever. The Palestinians in Israel are themselves taking action in the streets, in businesses, and synagogues. And even in the United States, while the President continues to disappoint with his tepid remarks about the right of Israel to defend itself, sharp and popular critics in Congress such as Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez are speaking out loudly against continuing to arm Israel despite its ongoing abuses against Palestinians.

Do these and other unique scenarios marking this 11 day period of terror mean things will be different now or in the long term? This is the question running through this Global Research News Hour and its sixty minute broadcast.

On the show in our first half hour, Richard Falk, professor emeritus of law at Princeton university talks to listeners highlighting some of the less talked about elements of the past month, including how it was incited by right wing settlers and during the Islamic holy period known as Ramadan. He also discussed attacks on media and the prospects for victory for Palestinians in the long term.

Following that, we hear from Richard Silverstein, a progressive blogger focused on the Israel-Palestine conflict. He will dwell on the growth in Hamas’ arsenal, the growth of Palestinian solidarity in Israel, and the potential ability of the International Criminal Court to wound Israel’s prospects.

Finally, Palestine activist and commentator Laith Marouf joins us again to dwell on the motives of the new Palestinian resistance, the prospects for the conflict to intensify, and the goals of Canadians wishing to show their solidarity with the damaged but determined victims of 73 years of Israeli confrontation.

Richard Falk is an international law and international relations scholar who taught at Princeton University for forty years and holds the title of professor emeritus. In 2008 he was also appointed by the UN to serve a six-year term as the Special Rapporteur on Palestinian human rights. He contributes regularly to Global Research.

Richard Silverstein is a political writer and commentator. Since 2003 he has authored the progressive Jewish blog Tikun Olam, which focuses on exposing the excesses of the Israeli national security state. He contributes regularly to Middle East Eye, and has contributed in the past to Truthout, Alternet, Haaretz, Mint Press News, Jewish Forward, Los Angeles Times, Comment Is Free and Al Jazeera English.

Laith Marouf is a long time multimedia consultant and producer and currently serves as Senior Consultant at the Community Media Advocacy Centre (www.cmacentre.org) and the coordinator of ICTV, in Canada (www.tele1.ca). Laith derives much of his understanding of Middle Eastern Affairs from his ancestral background of being both of Palestinian and of Syrian extraction. He is currently based in Beirut.

(Global Research News Hour Episode 317)

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

Click to download the audio (MP3 format)

The Global Research News Hour airs every Friday at 1pm CT on CKUW 95.9FM out of the University of Winnipeg. The programme is also podcast at globalresearch.ca .

Other stations airing the show:

CIXX 106.9 FM, broadcasting from Fanshawe College in London, Ontario. It airs Sundays at 6am.

WZBC 90.3 FM in Newton Massachusetts is Boston College Radio and broadcasts to the greater Boston area. The Global Research News Hour airs during Truth and Justice Radio which starts Sunday at 6am.

Campus and community radio CFMH 107.3fm in  Saint John, N.B. airs the Global Research News Hour Fridays at 7pm.

CJMP 90.1 FM, Powell River Community Radio, airs the Global Research News Hour every Saturday at 8am. 

Caper Radio CJBU 107.3FM in Sydney, Cape Breton, Nova Scotia airs the Global Research News Hour starting Wednesday afternoon from 3-4pm.

Cowichan Valley Community Radio CICV 98.7 FM serving the Cowichan Lake area of Vancouver Island, BC airs the program Thursdays at 9am pacific time. 

Notes:

  1. http://www.bbc.com/news/57200843
  2. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-israel-palestinians-idUSKCN2D12SV

Palestine On the Way to Another Intifada – Olmert

1/5/2021

Palestine On the Way to Another Intifada - Olmert

By Staff

In an opinion piece published by the ‘Jerusalem Post’, former Zionist Prime Minister Ehud Olmert wrote that the events that have transpired in occupied al-Quds these last few days are not a coincidental occurrence that will disappear so quickly.

“We are on the brink of a violent awakening that could intensify and lead to violence on our streets. These clashes could end in a significant number of casualties,” according to Olmert.

The former Zionist premier cited the recent days to conclude that new circumstances have arisen, which could drag ‘Israel’ into a new round of ‘violent’ activity, which he described as ‘terrorist’, and bloodshed on both sides.

The first Palestinian Intifada was a sustained series of Palestinian protests and riots in the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and the ‘Israeli’-occupied territories. The protests were against the Zionist occupation of the West Bank and Gaza that had begun twenty years prior, in 1967. The intifada lasted from December 1987 until the Madrid Conference in 1991, though some date its conclusion to 1993, with the signing of the so-called ‘Oslo Accords.’

The intifada began on 9 December 1987, in the Jabalia refugee camp after an ‘Israeli’ occupation force truck collided with a civilian car, killing four Palestinian workers.

The Second Intifada, also known as the Al-Aqsa Intifada, started in September 2000, after then Zionist Prime Minister Ariel Sharon made a highly provocative visit to the holy al-Aqsa Mosque. The visit sparked protests and riots which the occupation police put down with rubber bullets and tear gas.

أبو جهاد خليل الوزير أول الرصاص أول الحجارة…أنا أشتبك.. فأنا موجود!

خليل الوزير “أبو جهاد”

محمد صادق الحسيني

سُمّي بالرجل الثاني للثورة الفلسطينية ونائب القائد العام لقوات العاصفة، وجياب  الثورة الفلسطينية لشدة شباهته بجياب فيتنام، لكننا كما عرفناه في اللحظات الاستثنائية على امتداد سنوات العمل الفدائي فهو الرجل الطاهر وقاهر الجنرالات كللاً ومللاً وإحباطاً ويأساً وقنوطاً…!

الرجل المهذّب والمؤدَّب والخجول الذي يعتني بهندامه ويحرص على تمشيط شعره حتى وهو ذاهب الى معسكر التدريب واهدأ رجال الثورة على الإطلاق وأكثرهم وداعة ووسامة وخُلُقاً في كل أيام السنة حتى لتظنه أبعد ما يكون عن الحرب والسلاح…!لكنه هو نفسه صاحب الروح العاصفة التي تنتفض من داخله وسرعان ما يظهر لك بركاناً ثائراً يمتلئ دفعاً وعنفواناً وروحاً حربية لا تهدأ ولا تكل ولا تمل بعد ثوانٍ من جلوسك إليه..

شخصيته الهادئة هذه لا تقوى على السكينة بعد دقائق من الحوار معه إذ سرعان ما يشي لك بأن كل كيانه يحنّ للاشتباك مع العدو كما يحن الطفل لحليب أمه، وتدفعه المشاعر الجيّاشة للانتقال إلى فلسطين المستولية على وجوده أساً كان المكان أو الزمان الذي تواجد فيهما وهو الذي تنقل في كل الساحات حاملاً هموم شعب الجبّارين الحافلة بالمفاجآت والمتغيّرات…!

وقد تكثّفت كل هذه السمات لدى قائد الفدائيّين الشعبيّ الذي لم يستقرّ له قرار، بطريقة حوّلته عملياً إلى غرفة عمليات متنقلة ومتحرّكة خاصة بعد أن تسلّم، مسؤولية القطاع الغربي – أي فلسطين المحتلة – وهي التسمية التي تعود الى حقبة تمركز الفدائيين الفلسطينيين في الاردن، حيث كانت الجبهة مع العدو مقسمةً الى ثلاثة قواطع، هي: القطاع الشمالي والقطاع الأوسط والقطاع الجنوبي.

فمن المعروف أن الشهيد أبا جهاد كان قد عكف منذ توليه هذه المسؤولية خلفاً للشهيد كمال عدوان، على إحداث انقلاب استراتيجيّ في مفهوم الحرب الشعبية طويلة الأمد وتطويرها وتعميقها، وهي الحرب التي كانت تمارسها قوات الثورة الفلسطينية، منذ انطلاق الثورة بتاريخ 1/1/1965.

وقد تمثلت الفكرة المركزية، لديه، في تطوير هذا المفهوم، في إيجاد أو بناء القاعدة الجماهيرية القادرة على تحويل هذه الفكرة (فكرة الانقلاب الاستراتيجي) الى خطوات عملية تتبلور في كل إنسان فلسطيني، بحيث تتحول شخصية الواحد من السكان الى قوة فاعلة في مواجهة العدو وإضعاف سيطرة الغاصب والمحتل العسكرية على الأرض التي يحتلها، من خلال استنزافه الدائم في معركة لا يمكن له أن ينتصر فيها حتى صارت عقيدة عمله الكفاحية الفدائية تقول: أنا الفلسطيني أشتبك إذن أن موجود.

بدأ أبو جهاد بإعادة هيكلة تنظيم حركة فتح وإنشاء أطر جديدة لهذا التنظيم، كحركة الشبيبة (الفتحاوية)، التي بدأت تنشط في الثانويات والجامعات داخل الأرض المحتلة، تمهيداً لإشراك كل جماهير الشعب الفلسطيني في الأرض المحتلة في استنزاف جيش العدو ومشاغلته والمشاغبة عليه في كل وقت وحين.

وبالتوازي مع بناء التنظيم والخلايا الفدائية المسلحة، داخل فلسطين المحتلة، واصل الجنرال أبو جهاد من موقعه كنائب القائد العام لقوات الثورة الفلسطينية، إلى بناء وتطوير الوحدات القتالية الفدائية القادرة على اختراق إجراءات العدو الأمنية والوصول الى عمق تشكيلات العدو وبنيانه وتنفيذ عمليات فدائية كبرى ضد قواته ومنشآته في فلسطين المحتلة.

ولعل من المفيد في ذكرى استشهاده الثالثة والثلاثين 16 – 4 – 1988 الإضاءة على بعض تلك العمليات الفدائية الكبيرة، التي شكلت ضربات موجعةً جداً للعدو والتي قلبت معادلة الصراع معه، ومن بينها العمليات التالية:

عملية فندق سافوي في تل أبيب، والتي نفّذتها قوة فدائية، قوامها ثمانية فدائيين، بتاريخ 6/3/1975، حيث سيطرت على الفندق، بعدما لم تتمكن من الوصول الى وزارة الدفاع الإسرائيلية والسيطرة عليها، حسب الخطة الأساسية للعملية. حضر إلى مكان العملية كلّ من رئيس وزراء العدو آنذاك، اسحق رابين، ووزير حربه، شمعون بيرس، ورئيس أركان جيشه، الجنرال مردخاي غور، وقاموا بالإشراف شخصياً على محاولات القوات الخاصة الإسرائيلية لاقتحام الفندق وقتل الفدائيين الفلسطينيين، حيث حاولت هذه القوات مرة أولى وثانية وفشلت فيهما، مما جعلها تقوم بقصف الفندق بمدفعيّة الدبابات وتنفيذ عملية إنزال قوات محمولة على سطح الفندق والاشتباك من جديد مع المجموعة الفدائية، التي قاتلت ببسالة حتى نفاد ذخيرتها، واستشهاد سبعةً من أفرادها ووقع الثامن أسيراً بعد إصابته بجراح، في ما قُتل من قوات العدو المهاجمة 56 عنصراً وأصيب ما يربو على 100 جندي بجراح مختلفة، بينهم العقيد عوزي يائيري، ضابط الاستخبارات العسكرية الإسرائيلية، الذي وضع خطة اغتيال القادة الفلسطينيين الثلاثة، كمال عدوان وأبو يوسف النجار وكمال ناصر في بيروت بتاريخ 10/4/1973، والذي شارك في تنفيذ العملية على الأرض أيضاً.

عملية الساحل، بقيادة الفدائية دلال المغربي، والتي تمّ تنفيذها بتاريخ 11/3/1978 وأطلق عليها اسم: عملية الشهيد كمال عدوان، حيث وصلت تلك القوة إلى السواحل الفلسطينية، على متن باخرة تجارية كانت تحمل الزوارق المطاطية التي استخدمها الفدائيّون في الوصول من نقطة انفصالهم عن الباخرة الأم حتى وصولهم إلى ارض فلسطين، شمال تل أبيب، وقيامهم بالسيطرة على عدة حافلات عسكرية إسرائيلية واشتبكوا مع دوريات العدو، التي بدأت مطاردتهم فوراً، الى أن وصلت الحافلات الى منطقة هرتسيليا حيث قامت قوات خاصة إسرائيلية بالهجوم من الجو والبر على الحافلات التي كان يستقلها الفدائيون مع الرهائن الصهاينة.

وقد اشتبك الفدائيّون الفلسطينيون، لمدة تزيد على الساعتين، مع القوات الخاصة والمروحيات العسكرية الإسرائيلية، التي كانت تساند وحدات العدو، وتطلق النار من الجو على الفدائيين، الذين استشهدوا جميعاً باستثناء واحد منهم وقع في الأسر بعد أن نفدت ذخيرته. أما خسائر العدو فقد وصلت إلى 79 قتيلاً بالإضافة الى ما يزيد على 123 جريحًا جرى إخلاؤهم جواً من أرض المعركة.

علماً أن الجيش الصهيوني قد بدأ بعمليات التمهيد الناري، لشنّ هجوم، واسع على قواعد الفدائيين في جنوب لبنان، اذ عمدت مدفعية العدو بفتح نيرانها على طول الحدود اللبنانية مع فلسطين المحتلة، بينما بدأ الطيران الحربي المعادي، عند الساعة الواحدة من فجر 15-3-1978 بتنفيذ غارات جوية كثيفة على أهداف للقوات المشتركة، اللبنانية الفلسطينية، في جنوب لبنان وجنوب العاصمة بيروت، وأتبع ذلك بعمليات إنزال جوي في منطقة العزية/ قضاء صور، وبدأ اجتياحه البري لجنوب لبنان في عملية عسكرية واسعة النطاق أسماها العدو: عملية الليطاني. ولا يخفى على أحد طبعاً أن العملية كان مخططاًلها مسبقاً وبانتظار التنفيذ فقط، إذ لا يعقل أن يجري التخطيط لعملية عسكرية واسعة النطاق وتحريك قوات برية وبحرية وجوية كبيرة خلال ثلاثة أيام فقط.

محاولة الهجوم البحري على ميناء ايلات سنة 1985. وهي عملية تم خلالها تجهيز باخرة، في ميناء من موانئ إحدى الدول العربية، لتنفيذ عملية بحريّة لتدمير ميناء إيلات عن بكرة أبيه وإخراجه من الخدمة لسنوات طويلة، حيث تم تدريب مجموعة من الضفادع البشرية الفلسطينية على قيادة السفينة ثم تم تحميلها بمئات الأطنان من المواد المتفجرة، كي يتم تفجيرها عند دخول الباخرة الى الميناء، بالتزامن مع قصف صاروخيّ، بمئة وستين صاروخ غراد، لمنطقة الميناء، كان يفترض أن ينفذ من منطقة العقبة الأردنية المقابلة لإيلات، لكن تآمر جهاز مخابرات إحدى الدول العربية، المشاطئة لخليج إيلات، ورصدها للسفينة المسلحة ونقل معلومات حولها للعدو، قد أفشل العملية، حيث بادر العدو إلى مهاجمة السفينة على مدخل خليج العقبة واشتبكت معه المجموعة الفدائية لحوالي ساعة ونصف. وقد أسفرت العملية عن استشهاد المجموعة الفدائية المكونة من تسعة مقاتلين وإيقاع عدد من القتلى والجرحى بين جنود العدو.

أما كبرى ثمار جهود الشهيد أبو جهاد المتواصلة لإحداث انقلاب استراتيجي، في المواجهة مع العدو الصهيوني، فقد نضجت في شهر 12/1987 عندما انفجرت الانتفاضة الشعبية الفلسطينية، التي شاركت فيها جماهير الشعب بكل فئاتها وفي كل المناطق المحتلة، في الضفة والقطاع وحتى تلك المحتلة عام 1948 والتي خلدت في التاريخ باسم انتفاضة الحجارة. حيث قام الشهيد أبو جهاد، عبر القيادة الوطنية الموحدة للانتفاضة التي شكلها ورعاها داخل فلسطين المحتلة، بمتابعة كافة التفاصيل الميدانية والعملياتية، بما في ذلك عمليات الإمداد والتمويل والدعم الإعلامي والسياسي والديبلوماسي، على امتداد العالم. حيث قام بإنشاء غرف عمليات قيادة وسيطرة في اكثر من دولة في العالم لمتابعة أدق تفاصيل الانتفاضة بهدف تطويرها ودفعها الى الأمام.

نجح الشهيد أبو جهاد اذاً، في جعل المواجهة مع العدو حرباً شعبية طويلة الأمد، استمرت لسنوات بعد استشهاده، سنة 1988. أي أنه أحدث تحولات استراتيجية عبر انخراط كل جماهير الشعب في العمل الوطني المباشر في الميدان، وإن باستخدام أبسط وسيلة اشتباك ألا وهي الحجارة فق ط.كما أنه نجح، من خلال هذه الانتفاضة بفرض حرب استنزاف طويلة الأمد على جيش العدو الصهيوني، الذي اضطر الى نشر ثلاث فرق كاملة، في الضفة والقطاع، محاولاً قمع الانتفاضة وإخمادها من دون جدوى.

وبعد هذا النجاح الهائل، في إشراك الشعب بأكمله في مقاومة الاحتلال، تابع الشهيد أبو جهاد جهوده لتعزيز الصمود الشعبي وتوجيه المزيد من الضربات العسكرية الموجعة للعدو، تعزيزاً للشعب الثائر ولممارسة المزيد من الضغط على قادة العدو، رئيس الوزراء اسحق شامير ووزير دفاعه اسحق رابين ورئيس الأركان الصهيوني دان شومرون، الذين أمعنوا في تكسير عظام الفلسطينيين وفشلوا في إخماد ثورتهم.

وفي هذا الإطار قام الشهيد أبو جهاد، بوضع خطة لتوجيه ضربة عسكرية استراتيجية، للعدو الصهيوني، من خلال مهاجمة مفاعل ديمونا النووي الإسرائيلي لتكون بمثابة قوة ضاربة في طليعة المواجهة، حيث تمّ تدريب وتجهيز ثلاثة من الفدائيين الفلسطينيين ونقلهم إلى داخل الأرض المحتلة بعد عملية رصد واستطلاع دقيقة لمحيط المفاعل والإجراءات الأمنية الإسرائيلية، المتبعة لحمايته.

وفي صباح يوم 7/3/1988 تمكّن الفدائيون الثلاثة من الوصول الى نقطة، تبعد سبعة كيلومترات فقط عن مركز المفاعل، وقاموا بالسيطرة على حافلة تحمل ضباطاً وخبراء نوويين إسرائيليين وانطلقوا بها الى مركز المفاعل. وعلى الفور تمّ تفعيل اجراءات التأمين وقامت المروحيّات العسكرية الإسرائيلية بمحاصرة الحافلة ومن على متنها بالنيران ثم قاموا بإنزال قوة صهيونيّة مجوقلة عند نقطة اشتباك قريبة من الحافلة. وقد بادر الفدائيون قوات العدو بوابل من النيران واشتبكوا مع قوات العدو لمدة تزيد عن الساعة إلى أن نفدت ذخيرتهم واستشهدوا جميعاً.

كانت تلك هي المرة الأولى التي يتخذ فيها قائد عربيّ قراراً بالهجوم المباشر على هذا الموقع الإسرائيلي الحصين والاستراتيجي وهو ما اعتبرته القيادة العسكرية والسياسية الإسرائيليتان تجاوزاً خطيراً لكل الخطوط الحمر، الأمر الذي أدى بها الى اتخاذ قرار باغتيال الشهيد خليل الوزير / أبو جهاد.

وقد تم تنفيذ عملية الاغتيال في ضواحي العاصمة التونسية، تونس، حيث تم إنزال القوة المكلفة بعملية الاغتيال، وبتواطؤ من أجهزة نظام الرئيس التونسي السابق زين العابدين بن علي، بحراً على شاطئ مدينة المرسى التونسية التي تبعد بضعة كيلومترات فقط عن مقر قيادة الشهيد ابو جهاد. تسللت تلك القوة الى الموقع وقامت باغتيال الحراس الليليين للموقع واقتحمت المبنى، حيث يقيم الشهيد أبو جهاد، والذي تصدّى لجنود العدو بما يملك من أسلحة نارية واشتبك معهم داخل المقر الى أن نفدت ذخيرته وارتقى شهيداً، بعد أن أصيب بثلاث وسبعين رصاصة معادية. علماً أن العقل الذي خطط للعملية وقادها، من على متن طائرة قيادة عسكرية إسرائيلية، كانت تحلق على بعد مئتي كيلو متر شمال مكان العملية، هو الجنرال ايهود باراك، الذي تولى لاحقاً وزارة الدفاع ثم رئاسة الوزراء في كيان العدو.

وعلى الرغم من الخسارة الكبيرة التي مُني بها الشعب الفلسطيني، بشهادة مؤسس وقائد انتفاضة الحجارة الفلسطينية أبو جهاد، إلا ان هذا الشعب قد واصل انتفاضته، بقيادة القائد العام لقوات الثورة الفلسطينية، الأخ الشهيد ابو عمار، الذي قاد هذا الشعب الى عودة جزئيّة الى الوطن المحتل، لا بل الى إقامة سلطة وطنية فلسطينية، مرغماً العدو الصهيونيّ على التفاوض مع قيادة هذا الشعب، ممثلاً بمنظمة التحرير الفلسطينية رغم ما شاب هذه العملية التفاوضية من أخطاء فادحة وعثرات، لكن ما يُكتب لأبي جهاد ومقولته الثورية أنا اشتبك إذن أنا موجود أنه هو مَن أسس عملياً لاعتراف العدو بوجود الشعب الفلسطيني لعقود طويلة من الزمن. الأمر الذي شكل محطة هامة من محطات نضال الشعب الفلسطيني لتحرير وطنه فلسطين وإقامة دولته الوطنية المستقلة على أرضه كل أرضه، طال الزمان أم قصُر.

بعدنا طيبين قولوا الله.

From His Solitary Confinement, Marwan Barghouti Holds the Key to Fatah’s Future

April 7, 2021

By Ramzy Baroud

If imprisoned Palestinian leader, Marwan Barghouti, becomes the President of the Palestinian Authority (PA), the status quo will change substantially. For Israel, as well as for the current PA President, Mahmoud Abbas, such a scenario is more dangerous than another strong Hamas showing in the upcoming Palestinian parliamentary elections.

The long-delayed elections, now scheduled for May 22 and July 31 respectively, will not only represent a watershed moment for the fractured Palestinian body politic, but also for the Fatah Movement which has dominated the PA since its inception in 1994. The once-revolutionary Movement has become a shell of its former self under the leadership of Abbas, whose only claim to legitimacy was a poorly contested election in January 2005, following the death of former Fatah leader and PA President, Yasser Arafat.

Though his mandate expired in January 2009, Abbas continued to ‘lead’ Palestinians. Corruption and nepotism increased significantly during his tenure and, not only did he fail to secure an independent Palestinian State, but the Israeli military occupation and illegal settlements have deepened and grown exponentially.

Abbas’ rivals from within the Fatah Movement were sidelined, imprisoned or exiled. A far more popular Fatah leader, Marwan Barghouti, was silenced by Israel as he was thrown into an Israeli prison in April 2002, after a military court found him guilty of involvement in Palestinian resistance operations during the uprising of 2000. This arrangement suited Abbas, for he continued to doubly benefit: from Barghouti’s popularity, on the one hand, and his absence, on the other.

When, in January, Abbas declared that he would hold three successive rounds of elections – legislative elections on May 22, presidential elections on July 31 and Palestinian National Council (PNC) elections on August 31 – he could not have anticipated that his decree, which followed intense Fatah-Hamas talks, could potentially trigger the implosion of his own party.

Fatah-Hamas rivalry has been decades-long but intensified in January 2006 when the latter won the legislative elections in the Occupied Territories. Hamas’s victory was partly attributed to Fatah’s own corruption, but internal rivalry also splintered Fatah’s vote.

Although it was Fatah’s structural weaknesses that partly boosted Hamas’ popularity, it was, oddly, the subsequent rivalry with Hamas that kept Fatah somehow limping forward. Indeed, the anti-Hamas sentiment served as a point of unity among the various Fatah branches. With money pouring in from donor countries, Fatah used its largesse to keep dissent at a minimum and, when necessary, to punish those who refused to toe the pro-Abbas line. This strategy was successfully put to the test in 2010 when Mohammed Dahlan, Fatah’s ‘strong man’ in Gaza prior to 2006, was dismissed from Fatah’s central committee and banished from the West Bank, as he was banished from Gaza four years earlier.

But that convenient paradigm could not be sustained. Israel is entrenching its military occupation, increasing its illegal settlement activities and is rapidly annexing Palestinian land in the West Bank and Jerusalem. The Gaza siege, though deadly and tragic, has become routine and no longer an international priority. A new Palestinian generation in the Occupied Territories cannot relate to Abbas and his old guard, and is openly dissatisfied with the tribal, regional politics through which the PA, under Abbas, continues to govern occupied and oppressed Palestinians.

Possessing no strategies or answers, Abbas is now left with no more political lifelines and few allies.

With dwindling financial resources and faced by the inescapable fact that 85-year-old Abbas must engineer a transition within the movement to prevent its collapse in case of his death, Fatah was forced to contend with an unpleasant reality: without new elections the PA would lose the little political legitimacy with which it ruled over Palestinians.

Abbas was not worried about another setback, like that of 2006, when Hamas won majority of the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC)’s seats. Until recently, most opinion polls indicated that the pro-Abbas Fatah list would lead by a comfortable margin in May and that Abbas would be re-elected President in July. With his powers intact, Abbas could then expand his legitimacy by allowing Hamas and others into the PLO’s Palestinian National Council – Palestine’s parliament in the Diaspora. Not only would Abbas renew faith in his Authority, but he could also go down in history as the man who united Palestinians.

But things didn’t go as planned and the problem, this time, did not come from Hamas, but from Fatah itself – although Abbas did anticipate internal challenges. However, the removal of Dahlan, the repeated purges of the party’s influential committees and the marginalization of any dissenting Fatah members throughout the years must have infused Abbas with confidence to advance with his plans.

The first challenge emerged on March 11, when Nasser al-Qidwa, a well-respected former diplomat and a nephew of Yasser Arafat, was expelled from the movement’s Central Committee for daring to challenge Abbas’ dominance. On March 4, Qidwa decided to lock horns with Abbas by running in the elections in a separate list.

The second and bigger surprise came on March 31, just one hour before the closing of the Central Election Commission’s registration deadline, when Qidwa’s list was expanded to include supporters of Marwan Barghouti, under the leadership of his wife, Fadwa.

Opinion polls are now suggesting that a Barghouti-Qidwa list, not only would divide the Fatah Movement but would actually win more seats, defeating both the traditional Fatah list and even Hamas. If this happens, Palestinian politics would turn on its head.

Moreover, the fact that Marwan Barghouti’s name was not on the list keeps alive the possibility that the imprisoned Fatah leader could still contest in the presidential elections in July. If that, too, transpires, Barghouti will effortlessly beat and oust Abbas.

The PA President is now in an unenviable position. Canceling the elections would lead to strife, if not violence. Moving forward means the imminent demise of Abbas and his small but powerful clique of Palestinians who benefited greatly from the cozy political arrangement they created for themselves.

As it stands, the key to the future of Fatah is now held by a Palestinian prisoner, Marwan Barghouti, who has been kept by Israel, largely in solitary confinement, since 2002.

– Ramzy Baroud is a journalist and the Editor of The Palestine Chronicle. He is the author of five books. His latest is “These Chains Will Be Broken: Palestinian Stories of Struggle and Defiance in Israeli Prisons” (Clarity Press). Dr. Baroud is a Non-resident Senior Research Fellow at the Center for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA) and also at the Afro-Middle East Center (AMEC). His website is www.ramzybaroud.net

⁨انتخابات كلٌ يغني على ليلاه – New Elections or a Third Intifada?⁩

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

انتخابات كلٌ يغني على ليلاه

عمرو علان - Amro 🇵🇸 (@amrobilal77) | Twitter
*كاتب فلسطيني وباحث سياسي

عمرو علان

عربي 21، الجمعة 29 يناير\كانون الثاني 2021

تدخل القوى الفلسطينية معترك انتخابات المجلس التشريعي التي تم التوافق على إجرائها وكلٌ يغني على ليلاه، فمحمود عباس يسعى من وراء هذه الانتخابات إلى الحصول على إقرار بكونه الممثل الشرعي لكل الفصائل الفلسطينية في الضفة وقطاع غزة، وعينه على طاولة مفاوضات جديدة تُعْقَد بمباركة إدارة جو بايدن الأمريكية، وعلى استئناف تلقي المخصصات من الولايات المتحدة الأمريكية والكيان الصهيوني، فهو لم يَعُدْ عنده أي شيء آخر ليقدمه للفلسطينيين، سوى ربما المزيد من تنسيقه الأمني “المقدس” مع قوات الاحتلال وبلا أدنى خجل، ولا يحتاج الإنسان إلى الكثير من العناء لتوقُّع مصير هذه المفاوضات، فيكفي النظر إلى تجربة الثلاثة عقود المنصرمة، وإذا كان هذا غير كافٍ فيمكن الاستئناس بما قاله جو بايدن مؤخرا عندما بشّرنا بأن التوافق بين أطراف النزاع يحتاج إلى المزيد من الوقت، وطبعا الكيان الصهيوني مستمر أثناء ذلك في تنفيذ مشروعه بقضم القليل المتبقي من أراضي الضفة عبر زيادة الاستيطان، وصولا إلى تهجير من تبقّى من سكان الضفة لأن الصهيوني يريد الأرض دون البشر الذين عليها، ويقدر أحد أصحاب الرأي بأنه لن يمضي الكثير من الوقت قبل أن يبدأ المستوطنون بحملات الإرهاب ضد سكان الضفة، حملات بدأت بوادرها بالظهور من خلال القتل الاعتباطي لبعض سكان أراضي 67، ولِما لا والسلطة الفلسطينية صارت وظيفتها الوحيدة حفظ أمن المستوطنين موفرةً بذلك للكيان الغاصب أرخص احتلال عرفه التاريخ، هذا ولم نتحدث عن الانتشار المريب للسلاح غير المنضبط بين أيادي بعض المشبوهين من أهالي 48، الذي أدى إلى حصول عدة جرائم في الشهور الماضية.

إن كل ما شهدناه من سياسة الحرد التي اتبعها محمود عباس فترة حكم دونالد ترامب، وصولا إلى اجتماع أمناء الفصائل الفلسطينية في بيروت لم يكن إلا مجرد مناورات تكتيكية، والمضحك المبكي أنه كان يُصرّح طيلة تلك الفترة عن تمسكه باستراتيجية المفاوضات العقيمة، لكن هناك على الساحة الفلسطينية من لا يريد أن  يسمع.

أما حركة حماس فهي تأمل من وراء هذه الانتخابات الخروج من المأزق الذي وضعت نفسها فيه بعد خوضها انتخابات عام 2006، لعلها تستطيع تخفيف وطأة الحصار الظالم على قطاع غزة، وهنا يُطرح السؤال الوجيه الذي يرِدْ على لسان الكثيرين: كيف لانتخابات جديدة أن تؤدي إلى انهاء الانقسام بينما كان منشأ الانقسام انتخابات 2006 بالأصل؟

واهمٌ من يظن أن حصار فصائل المقاومة الفلسطينية في قطاع غزة سببه الانقسام، الحصار يا سادة سببه تمسك المقاومة الفلسطينية بالحقوق والثوابت الوطنية، وحملها عبء قضية فلسطين المقدسة، ومربط فرس الحصار عند كيان الاحتلال لا عند سواه، لذلك أي محاولات لفك الحصار أو تخفيفه لا تمر عبر الاشتباك مع العدو الذي يفرض الحصار لن تكون ذات جدوى، ولن تفضي إلا إلى المزيد من تعمق الأزمة وإضاعة الوقت والجهود.

تشهد الضفة هذه الفترة حالة غليان لا يمكن تجاهلها، والعمليات الفردية والبطولية المستمرة تدلل عل أن النار تحت الرماد، فلا يمر أسبوع دون حصول عملية أو اثنتين، فأيهما أجدى؟ تأطير هذه الطاقات وتفعيل الحراك الشعبي وصولا إلى الانتفاضة، أم تنفيس هذا الغضب الشعبي الكامن عبر دخول انتخابات غير مقتنع بجدواها غالبية الشعب الفلسطيني؟

شعبنا بعمومه مدرك لكون فكرة انتخابات تحت حراب الاحتلال الذي يتحكم بكل مفاصل الحياة في الضفة الغربية ما هي إلا مزحة سمجة، لكن أحد أخطر عواقب هذه المزحة السمجة إدخال الإحباط في نفوس الشباب الغاضب في الضفة وتثبيط هممه.

خروج المقاومة الفلسطينية من أزمتها وتخفيف الحصار الظالم المفروض عليها لن يكون عبر سلوك الطريق الأسهل غير المجدي بل من خلال الطريق الأنجع حتى ولو كان الأصعب، والانتفاضة الثالثة سيكون من شأنها قلب المعادلات وتغيير الوقائع، ناهيكم عن فرصتها الحقيقية في دحر الاحتلال عن أراضي 67 دون قيد أو شرط في ظل حالة التراجع التي يعيشها العدو الصهيوني، والتي باتت تتحدث عنها مراكز دراسات العدو ذاته، ولا يغرنكم حالة التذمر الشعبي من صلافة العيش وضيق الحال، فلتبدأ الخطوات الجدية اتجاه حراك شعبي منظم وانتفاضة جديدة وستجدون خلفكم مارد اسمه الشعب الفلسطيني، يعض على الجراح ويربط الحجَر على المَعِدة لكتم الجوع – متمثلا بالرسول الأعظم – في سبيل الهدف الوطني الأسمى. 

New Elections or a Third Intifada?

Amro Allan

عمرو علان - Amro 🇵🇸 (@amrobilal77) | Twitter
*Palestinian writer and Political researcher

Arabi 21, Friday January 29 2021

On the 15th of January Mahmoud Abbas called for new elections to be held in the next couple of months in the occupied territories. But let us ignore the fundamental contradiction of holding a poll in an occupied territory under the watch of the occupation forces for now, and try to look in the motives behind this step.

We believe that each of the Palestinian factions is planning to run in this elections with a different ulterior motive.

First, Mahmoud Abbas is seeking  recognition as the legitimate representative of all Palestinian factions in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. And all he has in mind is a new negotiating table held with the blessing of the new Joe Biden administration, and to resume receiving financial support from the United States of America and the Zionist Entity.  That is because he no longer has anything else to offer  to the Palestinians, except perhaps more security coordination with the occupation forces without any hint of shame. 

The outcome of this new negotiations is predictable, at least from the experience of the last three decades. And if this is not enough, we can draw on what Joe Biden has said recently when he warned that a consensus between the parties to the conflict needs more time. Of course, the Zionist Entity will continue to implement its project of annexing the little that remains from the West Bank lands by increasing settlement activities, with the aim to displace the remaining Palestinians in the West Bank. The Zionist Entity wants the land without the people on it. One expert envisages that it will not be long before the settlers start a campaigns of terror against the inhabitants of the West Bank; campaigns that began to appear through the arbitrary killing of some of the inhabitants of the territories occupied in 1967. And why not, when the Palestinian Authority sole function has become to maintain the security of the settlers. Thus, providing  the usurped entity the cheapest  occupation  in  history.

And we have not mentioned the suspicious appearance of uncontrolled weapons in the hands of some shady individuals in the territories occupied in 1948, which led to several homicides in the past few months alone.

All the steps that we witnessed from Mahmoud Abbas hinting to the withdrawal from the Oslo Accord during the days of Donald Trump was nothing but   a tactical maneuver. And the irony is that he was openly reaffirming all along his adherence to his futile strategy of negotiations.

Turning to Hamas, we find that it hopes that the new elections will break the deadlock in which they set themselves up after the last elections in 2006. Also, they hope to ease the unjust blockade on the Gaza Strip as they believe that a new elections will lead to unity between Hamas and Fatah. But here the valid question arises: how can new elections lead to an end to the division between Hamas and Fatah, when the elections of 2006 was what caused the current division in the first place?

In any case,, all who think that the siege of the Palestinian  resistance  factions in the Gaza Strip is because of the current division are deluded. The siege, gentlemen, is because of the Palestinian resistance’s adherence to the Palestinian’s national rights and principles, as well as carrying the burden of the holy cause of liberating Palestine.

The siege locks are in the hands of the Occupation Entity and not in Abbas’s hands nor any one else. Thus, any attempts to dismantle or ease the siege do not pass through the clash with the occupation which imposes the blockade will be sterile, and will only lead to further deepening of the crisis and wasting more time and efforts.

We have been witnessing a boiling situation over the passed year or two in the West Bank that cannot be ignored, and the continuous individual and heroic operations almost on a weekly bases clearly indicate that the fire is under the ashes. So which is more useful then, Framing  these energies and activating the popular movement to the intifada, or venting this underlying popular anger by running a new elections? 

The Palestinians in their majority are not convinced of the usefulness of this new elections. Our people in general are aware that the idea of elections under the bayonets of the occupation, which controls every detail of the life in the West Bank, is nothing but a joke. But one of the most serious consequences of this silly joke is to introduce dismay in the hearts of angry youth in the West Bank and discourage them.

The Palestinian resistance’s exit from its crisis, and the easing of the unjust siege imposed on it will not be through the easier and useless way, but through the most effective way, even if it is the more difficult one. And a third intifada will change the status-quo and the facts on the ground. Not to mention its real chance to force the occupation withdrawal from the 1967 territories without conditions.

Today the Zionist Entity is witnessing a real deterioration due to many reasons. Even ‘Israel’ thinktanks and strategic  centers acknowledge this deterioration , and it would be wise of the Palestinians to build on these new conditions. 

Finally, to the Palestinian resistance factions we say, do not be fooled by the discontent displayed by many Palestinians because of the present harsh economic situation in Palestine, let the serious steps towards an organised popular movement and a new intifada begin, and you will find behind you a giant called the Palestinian people, who will bear their wounds, and tie the stone on the stomach to bate the hunger as Prophet Muhammad, peace be on him, once did, for the sake of the supreme Palestinian national goal.

‘What Binds Us Together’: On What It Means to Support Indigenous Liberation

December 20, 2020

A depiction by the Navajo artist Remy of 16-year-old Fawzi al-Junaidi arrested by Israeli soldiers. (Photo: File)

By Benay Blend

In a recent interview with Michael Arria, Sumaya Awad and Brian Bean discuss their book Palestine: A Socialist Introduction (2020). The collection argues that socialism should be viewed as an important element in the struggle to liberate Palestine.

“What binds us together,” concludes Awad, “is our class politics. The working class together is what will build a new kind of world and a different system. And what that means is standing with the oppressed outside of our borders and with Palestine.”

While class is a clear connection around which to build campaigns, there are other avenues to explore. For example, in “The Liberation of Palestine Represents an Alternative Path for Native Americans,” Nick Estes (Lower Brule Sioux Tribe) describes Palestine as “the moral barometer of Indigenous North America,” thus adding the Indigeneity that Awad touches on to the commonalities that bind activists to the cause of Palestine.

Responding to the controversy that erupted in Santa Fe, New Mexico over a series of pro-Palestinian murals drawn by a local Navajo artist, Elena Ortiz (Ohkay Owingeh) expands on the historical connections between the Indigenous here and in Occupied Palestine.

“The images on that stucco wall,” explains Ortiz, “show the truth of settler colonialism and the effects it has on indigenous people. They were put there to show solidarity with our Palestinian relatives in the face of brutal occupation; to illuminate injustice and shed light on this nation’s complicity in Israel’s treatment of the Palestinian people.”

In that vein, she stresses the importance of acknowledging that the founding of the United States was a process that involved displacing and exploiting Indigenous nations that were living on the land prior to European conquest, a process very similar to the establishment, too, of the state of Israel.

Elaborating on the contradictions between Santa Fe’s reputation as a liberal “art center and home to vibrant Native cultures,” Ortiz asks how a Native-installed art exhibit could cause so much controversy. “Because it illuminates a truth that many people do not want to face?” she speculates, or, perhaps, it offends a lot of people?

In reality, those most offended were local Zionists who assumed the role of victim. “Why is Israel singled out as an aggressor when there are many troubled spots in the world?” asked Rabbi Berel Levertov of the Santa Fe Jewish Center-Chabad. “There are many facets to the story and to highlight Israel is just anti-semitic propaganda.”

Preferring a portrayal that depicts “normalization” of relations between the two—a “work of art depicting…Jews and Arabs living in Peace”—Levertov offered up an image very fitting, too, of Santa Fe, a City Different that hides its racism beneath a veneer of faux adobe.

Several months later another controversy arose when Native people and their comrades succeeded in taking down a memorial ostensibly to Union soldiers. As Elena Ortiz explains, those same combatants participated in massacring Native people and removing them from their homelands.

“Under the shadow of that obelisk,” Ortiz asserts, “on Tewa homelands, in a place we call O’gha Po’geh, we still exist,” despite ongoing efforts by some to prove the opposite.

Alan Webber, the liberal mayor of Santa Fe who might seem a likely ally, proposed a belated Cultures, Histories, Art, Reconciliation and Truth committee. Tasked with replacing other controversial monuments with alternate public art, the commission bears resemblance to similar efforts towards “normalizing” Israeli/Palestinian relations.

Indigenous activists know better, specifically that there can be no peace until there is substantive justice. Elena Ortiz, daughter of the late Alphonso Ortiz, an anthropology professor who was my mentor at the University of New Mexico, says that “the city’s mood and dialogue” have exposed much deeper problems.

“Santa Fe, with its pseudo-liberal, left-leaning politics, thinks it’s somehow above” racial tensions that elsewhere have been exposed.

“But when you look at the vitriol that has come out since the obelisk, we’re peeling back this onion and we’re showing the racism that is endemic in Santa Fe. And we’re showing that, hey, Donald Trump doesn’t have anything on Santa Fe and this racism is so systemic.”

A city that bears a liberal façade, but in which racist and anti-Palestinian sentiments have exploded, Santa Fe is a perfect example of the ways in which Indigeneity unites solidarity activists around the cause of liberation, but at the same time exposes that sometimes a wing of the left-liberal camp declines to be on board.

Finally, President-elect Joe Biden’s selection of New Mexico Congressmember Deb Haaland (Laguna Pueblo) as secretary of the interior owes much to Indigenous movements who organized around land back as well as an end to fracking on and around Native land. An historic first, Haaland’s appointment marks a significant turn-around for an agency that for much of the nation’s history played a central role in the dislocation and abuse of all Indigenous tribes.

“That was a very, very important step for the Biden administration,” says Winona LaDuke, executive director of Honor the Earth, rural development economist and Native American activist. “Indian people know how to take care of this land.” ·

According to the Red Nation, Haaland’s nomination is also significant because she hails from a state that ranks fifth in the country for oil and gas production, much of which is on Indigenous land claimed by the federal and state governments. Moreover, the group explains,

“these conditions, and ongoing struggle against them, put NM at the center of the land back movement — in which a first step is returning public lands back to Indigenous people for any kind of sound environmental policy. Because of this context, Haaland’s appointment is significant.”

Because Haaland has taken a position against fracking on public land and has supported Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls (MMIWG) legislation, her selection plays out within this context.

“We have yet to see, however, how this will all play out when she becomes secretary of DOI,” concludes the Red Nation statement. “Regardless, movements are pushing in this direction.”

“While there is widespread agreement among Native people that European colonialism and Indigenous genocide is criminal and immoral,” writes Nick Estes, “there are a surprisingly high number of Native politicians, elites, and public figures who don’t extend the same sympathies to Palestinians, Arabs, and Muslims.” He continues that the term “anti-Palestinian opportunism” describes “how profitable and career-advancing it is for Indigenous people to align with the Zionist project.”

The future Secretary of the Interior falls into this category. “It’s profound to think about the history of this country’s policies to exterminate Native Americans and the resilience of our ancestors that gave me a place here today,” Haaland said.

Nevertheless, she does not view Palestine in the same light. For example, during her campaign for US Congress, Haaland compared Native Americans getting the right to vote in New Mexico in 1948 to the creation of the state of Israel. Reflecting on this statement, Estes concludes that “Haaland’s opportunism demonstrates that she is anything but an ally to Palestine and more of an opportunist willing to throw Palestinians under the bus when it benefits her political career.”

Recalling a panel in which she participated during the Palestine Writes festival, author and activist Susan Albuhawa explained that “true solidarity has a cost. What is it really worth to the oppressed if it’s easy and cheap and popular? Solidarity matters most when it’s hard, unpopular, and costly.”

Hopefully, in her upcoming appointed position, Haaland will use her platform to point out the ties that bind the Indigenous in this country with their relatives the Palestinians. Both have undergone ethnic cleansing and displacement, parallel experiences that should be called for what it is, crimes against humanity.

Recounting how the Intifada changed the political trajectory of the Palestinian people, Ramzy Baroud explains that “thanks to the Intifada, the Palestinian people have demonstrated their own capacity at challenging Israel without having their own military, challenging the Palestinian leadership by organically generating their own leaders, confronting the Arabs and, in fact, the whole world, regarding their own moral and legal responsibilities towards Palestine and the Palestinian people.”

Perhaps it is this acknowledgment of the need for a grassroots struggle against colonialism that is the tie that binds Indigenous resistance around the world. Commemorating the 2020 election which saw the ouster of Donald Trump, the Red Nation put out the following statement. Regarding what needs to be done, it puts forward the following view on socialism as the tie that binds.

“The battle of ideas against the ideology of greed and individualism, and the need for communal organization are key…Indigenous peoples, peoples of tribal nations, peoples of Maroon communities, peoples of the land have lived before capitalism and against capitalism. They have cultivated relations with each other and the land that do not rely on conquest and surplus but bring abundance and joy and dignity to all. These communal forms should be developed and become schools for freedom. We call these schools for Indigenous socialism. Join us in the struggle to create a better future.”

“To be a socialist you must be a principled champion for Palestine (p. 6),” write Awad and Bean. Their book bears out that certainly, this is true.

– Benay Blend earned her doctorate in American Studies from the University of New Mexico. Her scholarly works include Douglas Vakoch and Sam Mickey, Eds. (2017), “’Neither Homeland Nor Exile are Words’: ‘Situated Knowledge’ in the Works of Palestinian and Native American Writers”. She contributed this article to The Palestine Chronicle.

When the People Rose up: How the Intifada Changed the Political Discourse on Palestine

December 16, 2020

December 8 marks the 33rd anniversary of the First Palestinian Intifada. (Photo: File)

By Ramzy Baroud

December 8 came and went as if it was an ordinary day. For Palestinian political groups, it was another anniversary to be commemorated, however hastily. It was on this day, thirty-three years ago, that the First Palestinian Intifada (uprising) broke out, and there was nothing ordinary about this historic event.

Today, the uprising is merely viewed from a historic point of view, another opportunity to reflect and, perhaps, learn from a seemingly distant past. Whatever political context to the Intifada, it has evaporated over time.

The simple explanation of the Intifada goes as follows: Ordinary Palestinians at the time were fed up with the status quo and they wished to ‘shake off’ Israel’s military occupation and make their voices heard.

Expectedly, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) quickly moved in to harvest the fruit of the people’s sacrifices and translate them into tangible political gains, as if the traditional Palestinian leadership truly and democratically represented the will of the Palestinian people. The outcome was a sheer disaster, as the Intifada was used to resurrect the careers of some Palestinian ‘leaders’, who claimed to be mandated by the Palestinians to speak on their behalf, resulting in the Madrid Talks in 1991, the Oslo Accords in 1993 and all other ‘compromises’ ever since.

But there is more to the story.

Thousands of Palestinians, mostly youth, were killed by the Israeli army during the seven years of Intifada, where Israel treated non-violent protesters and rock-throwing children, who were demanding their freedom, as if enemy combatants. It was during these horrific years that such terms as ‘shoot to kill’ and ‘broken-bones policies’ and many more military stratagems were introduced to an already violent discourse.

In truth, however, the Intifada was not a mandate for Yasser Arafat, Mahmoud Abbas or any other Palestinian official or faction to negotiate on behalf of the Palestinian people, and was certainly not a people’s call on their leadership to offer unreciprocated political compromises.

To understand the meaning of the Intifada and its current relevance, it has to be viewed as an active political event, constantly generating new meanings, as opposed to a historical event of little relevance to today’s realities.

Historically, the Palestinian people have struggled with the issue of political representation. As early as the mid-20th century, various Arab regimes have claimed to speak on behalf of the Palestinian people, thus, inevitably using Palestine as an item in their own domestic and foreign policy agendas.

The use and misuse of Palestine as an item in some imagined collective Arab agenda came to a relative end after the humiliating defeat of several Arab armies in the 1967 war, known in Arabic as the ‘Naksa’, or the ‘Letdown’. The crisis of legitimacy was meant to be quickly resolved when the largest Palestinian political party, Fatah, took over the leadership of the PLO. The latter was then recognized in 1974 during the Arab Summit in Rabat, as the ‘sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people’.

The above statement alone was meant to be the formula that resolved the crisis of representation, therefore drowning out all other claims made by Arab governments. That strategy worked, but not for long. Despite Arafat’s and Fatah’s hegemony over the PLO, the latter did, in fact, enjoy a degree of legitimacy among Palestinians. At that time, Palestine was part and parcel of a global national liberation movement, and Arab governments, despite the deep wounds of war, were forced to accommodate the aspirations of the Arab people, keeping Palestine the focal issue among the Arab masses as well.

However, in the 1980s, things began changing rapidly. Israel’s invasion of Lebanon in 1982 resulted in the forced exile of tens of thousands of Palestinian fighters, along with the leaderships of all Palestinian groups, leading to successive and bloody massacres targeting Palestinian refugees in Lebanon.

The years that followed accentuated two grave realities. First, the Palestinian leadership shifted its focus from armed struggle to merely remaining relevant as a political actor. Now based in Tunis, Arafat, Abbas and others were issuing statements, sending all kinds of signals that they were ready to ‘compromise’ – as per the American definitions of this term. Second, Arab governments also moved on, as the growing marginalization of the Palestinian leadership was lessening the pressure of the Arab masses to act as a united front against Israeli military occupation and colonialism in Palestine.

It was at this precise moment in history that Palestinians rose and, indeed, it was a spontaneous movement that, at its beginning, involved none of the traditional Palestinian leadership, Arab regimes, or any of the familiar slogans. I was a teenager in a Gaza refugee camp when all of this took place, a true popular revolution being fashioned in a most organic and pure form. The use of a slingshot to counter Israeli military helicopters; the use of blankets to disable the chains of Israeli army tanks; the use of raw onions to assuage the pain of inhaling teargas; and, more importantly, the creation of language to respond to every violent strategy employed by the Israeli army, and to articulate the resistance of Palestinians on the ground in simple, yet profound slogans, written on the decaying walls of every Palestinian refugee camp, town or city.

While the Intifada did not attack the traditional leadership openly, it was clear that Palestinians were seeking alternative leadership. Grassroots local leadership swiftly sprang out from every neighborhood, every university and even in prison, and no amount of Israeli violence was able to thwart the natural formation of this leadership.

It was unmistakably clear that the Palestinian people had chosen a different path, one that did not go through any Arab capital – and certainly not through Tunis. Not that Palestinians at the time quit seeking solidarity from their Arab brethren, or the world at large. Instead, they sought solidarity that does not subtract the Palestinian people from their own quest for freedom and justice.

Years of relentless Israeli violence, coupled with the lack of a political strategy by the Palestinian leadership, sheer exhaustion, growing factionalism and extreme poverty brought the Intifada to an end.

Since then, even the achievements of the Intifada were tarnished, where the Palestinian leadership has used it to revive itself politically and financially, reaching the point of arguing that the dismal Oslo Accords and the futile peace process were, themselves, direct ‘achievements’ of the Intifada.

The true accomplishment of the Intifada is the fact that it almost entirely changed the nature of the political equation pertaining to Palestine, imposing the ‘Palestinian people’, not as a cliche used by the Palestinian leadership and Arab governments to secure for themselves a degree of political legitimacy, but as an actual political actor.

Thanks to the Intifada, the Palestinian people have demonstrated their own capacity at challenging Israel without having their own military, challenging the Palestinian leadership by organically generating their own leaders, confronting the Arabs and, in fact, the whole world, regarding their own moral and legal responsibilities towards Palestine and the Palestinian people.

Very few popular movements around the world, and throughout modern history, can be compared to the First Intifada, which remains as relevant today as it was when it began thirty-three years ago.

 – Ramzy Baroud is a journalist and the Editor of The Palestine Chronicle. He is the author of five books. His latest is “These Chains Will Be Broken: Palestinian Stories of Struggle and Defiance in Israeli Prisons” (Clarity Press). Dr. Baroud is a Non-resident Senior Research Fellow at the Center for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA) and also at the Afro-Middle East Center (AMEC). His website is www.ramzybaroud.net

Syria’s Mufti calls for unifying ranks to confront the Israeli enemy instead of normalising relations with it مفتي سوريا يدعو إلى توحيد الصفوف لمواجهة العدو الإسرائيلي بدلا من تطبيع العلاقات معه

ST

 Tuesday, 08 December 2020 17:42

BEIRUT, (ST)_ The 6th World Conference of the International Union of Resistance Scholars kicked off on Tuesday in Beirut under the slogan “Nation’s Uprising against Normalization Conspiracies and Elimination Schemes”. 

Addressing the participants in the confence via video, Syria’s Grand Mufti Sheikh Badereddin Hassoun, condemned the normalization of relations between some Arab countries and the Zionist enemy, which is still occupying Arab lands and  imprisoning hundreds of people and continuously storming al-Aqsa Mosque. 

He called for unifying ranks to confront the Israeli enemy instead of normalizing relations with it. 

The Mufti affirmed that Syria, whose army and people have been targeted  over the past 10 years, remained steadfast  and has achieved victory over conspirators. 

Syria will stay with the resistance in the same trench, Sheikh Hassoun added. 

On his part, Chairman of  the International Union of Resistance Scholars Sheikh Maher Hammoud said that resistance against the Zionist entity has become firmer. 

“33 years after the start of the Palestinian uprising, it has been proven that stone is more effective than bullet and that the belief in right and future is stronger than occupation,” he stated. 

Sheikh Hammoud pointed out that the United States frankly announced that it paid billions of dollars to distort the image of resistance and to strike Syria, Iraq and Libya. 

He asserted that the axis of resistance will foil all conspiracies and achieve victory. 

Hezbollah’s Deputy Secretary General Sheikh Na’eem Qasem said that despite the conspiracy, which has targeted Palestine since The Balfour Declaration in 1917, the consecutive generations continue to work on liberating Palestine. 

He referred to the fact that the Israeli occupation entity’s record is full of crimes, chaos and destruction acts. 

“Stability will never be achieved in the region as long as the Israeli entity exist.. We have to be stronger in order to achieve balance in  detterance that led to victory,” Sheikh Qasem stressed during the conference held to mark the 33rd anniversary of the Uprising (Intifada) of the Palestinian People. 

Basma Qaddour

مفتي سوريا يدعو إلى توحيد الصفوف لمواجهة العدو الإسرائيلي بدلا من تطبيع العلاقات معه

الثلاثاء, 08 ديسمبر 2020 17:42

بيروت، (ST)_ انطلقت اليوم الثلاثاء في بيروت أعمال المؤتمر العالمي السادس للاتحاد الدولي لعلماء المقاومة تحت شعار “انتفاضة الأمة ضد مخططات التطبيع والقضاء”.

وندد مفتي سوريا الشيخ بدر الدين حسون في كلمة امام المشاركين في هذا الملتقى عبر الفيديو بتطبيع العلاقات بين بعض الدول العربية والعدو الصهيوني الذي لا يزال يحتل الاراضي العربية ويسجن مئات الاشخاص ويقتحم المسجد الاقصى باستمرار .

ودعا الى توحيد الصفوف لمواجهة العدو الاسرائيلي بدلا من تطبيع العلاقات معه.

وأكد المفتي أن سوريا التي استُهدف جيشها وشعبها خلال السنوات العشر الماضية، ظلت صامدة وحققت انتصاراً على المتآمرين.

واضاف الشيخ حسون ان سوريا ستبقى مع المقاومة في خندق واحد.

من جهته، قال رئيس الاتحاد الدولي لعلماء المقاومة الشيخ ماهر حمود ان المقاومة ضد الكيان الصهيوني اصبحت اكثر حزما.

وقال “بعد 33 عاما من بدء الانتفاضة الفلسطينية، ثبت أن الحجر أكثر فعالية من الرصاصة وأن الإيمان بالحق والمستقبل أقوى من الاحتلال”.

وأشار الشيخ حمود إلى أن الولايات المتحدة أعلنت بصراحة أنها دفعت مليارات الدولارات لتشويه صورة المقاومة وضرب سوريا والعراق وليبيا.

وأكد أن محور المقاومة سيحبط كل المؤامرات ويحقق النصر.

وقال نائب الأمين العام لـ “حزب الله” الشيخ نعيم قاسم إنه على الرغم من المؤامرة التي استهدفت فلسطين منذ وعد بلفور عام 1917، فإن الأجيال المتعاقبة لا تزال تعمل على تحرير فلسطين.

وأشار إلى أن سجل كيان الاحتلال الإسرائيلي مليء بالجرائم والفوضى وأعمال التدمير.

واضاف ان “الاستقرار لن يتحقق ابدا في المنطقة طالما ان الكيان الاسرائيلي موجود”.. يجب ان نكون اقوى من اجل تحقيق التوازن في النزاهة الذي ادى الى النصر”.

بسمة قدور

فيديوات ذات صلة

مقالات ذات صلة

Scholars of Resistance Unite behind Palestine, Denounce Normalisation as Betrayal

December 8, 2020

Source: Al-Manar English Website

مؤتمر مواجهة التطبيع .. فلسطين والمقاومة راسختان

The International Union of Resistance Scholars assembled Tuesday in Beirut, expressing ultimate support to Palestine and voicing firm rejections to all forms of normalization with Zionist entity.

Entitled “The Uprising of the Ummah (nation) in Face of Normalization Conspiracies”, the Sixth Conference of the International Union of Resistance Scholars convened in Beirut on Tuesday.

Sheikh Maher Hammoud

The Head of the International Union of Resistance Scholars Sheikh Maher Hammoud stressed that the First Intifada which took place in December 33 years ago proved that Palestinian people in no need of Arab armies and Arab “shameful” summits.

“33 years on First Intifada, the stones are still more powerful than bullets.”

Sheikh Hammoud denounced all forms of normalization of ties between Arab regimes and Zionist entity.

“Normalization came after all conspiracies against Resistance in 2006 and in Syrian War have been foiled.”

Sheikh Naim Qassem

مؤتمر مواجهة التطبيع .. فلسطين والمقاومة راسختان

Hezbollah Deputy Chief Sheikh Naim Qassem said “Despite conspiracies since Balfour declaration, generations are still sticking to Palestine, its liberation.”

Slamming Gulf regimes, Sheikh Qassem said they have never stood by Palestine, “they have backed all schemes of surrender.”

“Normalization has exposed all traitors and revealed those who support Resistance,” he said via video link, stressing: “Either to stand by Resistance, or by normalization, no third choice!”

“Axis of Resistance has secured promising achievements thanks to steadfastness and firm will to liberate Palestine.”

Sheikh Qassem vowed that the Resistance will work hard to develop its capabilities on basis of military, politics and media.

Ziad Nakhale

مؤتمر مواجهة التطبيع .. فلسطين والمقاومة راسختان
النخالة یدعو لإعادة الحسابات الفلسطینیة واستنهاض الأمة

Ziad Nakhale, the Secretary General of Islamic Jihad Palestinian Resistance movement, said the Zionist entity has broken all moral, human and religious norms.

He slammed Palestinian Authority for “fleeing forward,” stressing that this policy won’t retrieve rights, but rather will set up new formula on the field.

Touching upon the assassination of Iranian scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, Nakale said the enemies have been trying to deprive us from everything including scientific capabilities,” Nakhale addressed the conference via video link.

“Assassination of Fakhrizadeh is part of Israel’s revenge from Iran for its stance towards Palestine.

Mahmoud Zahhar

Hamas official Mahmoud Zahhar stressed that the Resistance in Gaza stands dignified against the Israeli enemy.

He warned that the enemies of this Ummah have been dedicating capabilities in a bid to weaken the Resistance.

Zahhar, meanwhile, noted that the last battle in which Palestine will be liberated is ‘inventible’ hoping to be one of the soldiers in such battle.

“Our weapons have been developed from the stones to missiles. This proves that we will go ahead until the elimination of the occupation entity,” the official in the Palestinian Resistance movement addressed the conference attendees via video link.

Sheikh Ahmad Badreddin Hassoun

مؤتمر علماء المقاومة.. حسون: سوریة ستبقى حاضنة المقاومة

For his part, Grand Mufti of Syria Sheikh Ahmad Badreddin Hassoun slammed some Arab regimes over normalizing their ties with Zionist entity.

“Some rushed to normalize ties as they failed to keep the Resistance,” the Syrian Mufti addressed the conference vie video link.

He called for unity on Palestine between Arab and Muslim countries.

Related Videos

“نصرٌ كبير”.. ماهر الأخرس نحو الحرية

المصدر: الميادين نت

6 تشرين ثاني 07:44

الأسير ماهر الأخرس يعلن وقف إضرابه عن الطعام بعد 103 أيام من المعاناة، التي أرغمت قوات الاحتلال على الموافقة على إطلاق سراحه، بعد تلقيه العلاج المناسب.

أعلن نادي الأسير الفلسطيني أن الأسير المضرب عن الطعام ماهر الأخرس، علّق إضرابه الذي استمر لـ103 أيام، بعد اتفاق يقضي بإطلاق سراحه في 26 تشرين الثاني/ نوفمبر، حيث سيقضي المدة المتبقية حتى الإفراج عنه، بتلقي العلاج في المستشفى.

وقال الأسير الأخرس في مقابلة خاصة مع الميادين، إنه خاض الإضراب عن الطعام “نيابةً عن شعبنا وأسرانا”، مضيفاً أن “الشعب المسكين يقتل ويسجن ولا أحد يسأل عنه”. 

وأكد أن الاحتلال “فُضح” من خلال هذا الإضراب، معرباً عن شكره لكل من تضامن مع قضيته ووقف معه.

وتابع: “خطوة إنهاء الإضراب عن الطعام جاءت استجابةً لطلبات أبناء شعبي بعد تحقيق النصر الكبير”، مؤكداً أن “الموت أسهل من سجون الاحتلال”. 

وأعلن الأخرس في حديثه للميادين، أن “القهر الذي زرعه الاحتلال في قلوبنا، سينفجر في انتفاضة قريباً”، وأضاف: “نريد أن نكون أحراراً وذلك يتطلب منا تقديم التضحيات”. 

وأصدر “نادي الأسير” بياناً، اليوم الجمعة، قال فيه أنه وبعد 103 أيام من “الإضراب البطولي عن الطعام الذي خاضه الأسير المناضل ماهر الأخرس، والذي أعاد قضية الحركة الأسيرة والاعتقالات الإدارية إلى الواجهة.. وبعد أن أوصدت الأبواب أمام ما يسمى الجهاز القضائي الإسرائيلي، ليمارس دوره بإنهاء هذا الاعتقال الإداري الظالم، انتصرت إرادة السجين على ظلم السجّان”.

وبأتي هذ الإعلان، بعد ساعات من تصريح رئيس “نادي الأسير” قدورة فارس للميادين، بوجود جهود قد تفضي “قريباً جداً” إلى الإفراج عن الأسير الأخرس. 

وبذلك يكون الأسير الأخرس، والذي تدهورت أوضاعه الصحية بشدة خلال الأيام الأخيرة، قد حقق انتصاراً على قرار المحكمة العليا التابعة للاحتلال، والتي رفضت كافة الالتماسات التي تقدمت بها محاميته للمطالبة بالإفراج الفوري عنه، وكان آخرها في 29 تشرين الأول/ أكتوبر الماضي.

يذكر أن الأخرس اعتقل بتاريخ 27 تموز/ يوليو، وجرى نقله بعد اعتقاله إلى معتقل “حوارة” وفيه شرع بإضرابه المفتوح عن الطعام، ونقل لاحقاً إلى سجن “عوفر”، ثم جرى تحويله إلى الاعتقال الإداري لمدة 4 شهور، حيث ثبتت المحكمة أمر الاعتقال في وقت لاحق.

Trump’s Middle East triumphs will soon turn to disaster

David Hearst

David Hearst is the editor in chief of Middle East Eye. He left The Guardian as its chief foreign leader writer. In a career spanning 29 years, he covered the Brighton bomb, the miner’s strike, the loyalist backlash in the wake of the Anglo-Irish Agreement in Northern Ireland, the first conflicts in the breakup of the former Yugoslavia in Slovenia and Croatia, the end of the Soviet Union, Chechnya, and the bushfire wars that accompanied it. He charted Boris Yeltsin’s moral and physical decline and the conditions which created the rise of Putin. After Ireland, he was appointed Europe correspondent for Guardian Europe, then joined the Moscow bureau in 1992, before becoming bureau chief in 1994. He left Russia in 1997 to join the foreign desk, became European editor and then associate foreign editor. He joined The Guardian from The Scotsman, where he worked as education correspondent.

Trump’s Middle East triumphs will soon turn to disaster

29 October 2020 12:11 UTC | Last update: 22 hours 22 mins ago

Palestinian demonstrators burn posters of the US president in Bethlehem’s Manger Square after he declared Jerusalem as Israel’s capital on 6 December 2017 (AFP)

Every US president leaves his mark on the Middle East, whether he intends to or not. 

The Camp David accord between Egypt and Israel, the Iranian revolution, and the Iran-Iraq war, launched in September 1980, all started under Jimmy Carter.

His successor, Ronald Reagan, supported then Iraqi ruler Saddam Hussein, and went on to witness the assassination of Egyptian president Anwar Sadat in October 1981; the Israeli invasion of Lebanon and the expulsion of the PLO from Beirut in 1982, and the Sabra and Shatila massacres in September of the same year – a period which ended with and led up to the First Intifada.

George H W Bush picked up with the First Gulf War and the Madrid Conference in 1991.

The shadow cast by George W Bush over the region is longer still: the destruction of Iraq, a once-mighty Arab state, the rise of Iran as a regional power, the unleashing of sectarian conflict between Sunni and Shia, and the rise of the Islamic State group. Two decades of conflict were engendered by his decision to invade Iraq in 2003.

The grand deception

For a brief spell under president Barack Obama, the flame of a fresh start with the Muslim world flickered. But the belief that a US administration would support democracy was quickly extinguished. Those who dared to hope were cruelly deceived by the president who dared to walk away . Once in power, Muslims were dropped like a hot stone, as were fellow black Americans.

Two pillars of US policy emerge: an unshakeable determination to support Israel, whatever the cost, and a default support of absolute monarchs, autocrats and dictators of the Arab world

On two moments of high tension – the Egyptian military coup of 2013 and the murder of US journalist James Foley in 2014 – Obama, a Nobel Peace Prize laureate for his “extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between people,” returned to a game of golf. 

Obama refused to call the overthrow of Egypt’s first democratically elected president a military coup, and his secretary of state John Kerry would have dipped into the same playbook had Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan not narrowly escaped an assassination squad and the coup there succeeded.

The history of US diplomatic and military intervention in the Middle East was one of serial failure and the list of failed states only grew with each inauguration.

The military retreat that Obama sounded after “leading from behind” in Libya and an “intervention-lite” in Syria resembled Napoleon’s long march from Moscow. Throughout the tumult, two pillars of US policy emerge: an unshakeable determination to support Israel, whatever the cost, however much its prime ministers and settlers undermined peace efforts. And a default support of absolute monarchs, autocrats and dictators of the Arab world.

  US President Barack Obama walks with Middle East leaders in the East Room of the White House in Washington, DC, USA, on 1 September, 2010 (Reuters)
US president Barack Obama walks with Middle East leaders in the East Room of the White House in Washington, DC, USA, on 1 September 2010 (Reuters)

Wicked witch

Now enter, stage right, the Wicked Witch of this pantomime.

Trump set about tearing up the rule book on the Middle East, by giving full rein to the Jewish nationalist religious right. This came in the shape of two settler ideologists and funders: Jared Kushner, Trump’s son in law and senior adviser, and David Friedman, his ambassador to Israel.

Trump set about destroying the consensus on the Middle East, by giving full rein to the Jewish national religious right

Under the guise of blue sky thinking, they tore apart the consensus that had powered each previous US administration’s search for a settlement to the Palestine conflict – borders negotiated on 1967 lines, East Jerusalem as capital, the right of refugees to return.  

They erased 1967 borders by recognising the Golan Heights and the annexation of settlements, recognised an undivided Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, and defunded Palestinian refugee agency UNWRA. This culminated in what proved to be the coup de grace for a Palestinian state –  the recognition by three Arab states (UAE, Bahrain and Sudan) of Israel in the territory it currently occupies.

This meant recognition of 400,000 settlers in nearly 250 settlements in the West Bank beyond East Jerusalem; recognition of laws turning settlements into “islands” of the State of Israel; recognition of a third generation of Israeli settlers. All of this, the UAE, Bahrain and now Sudan have signed up for.

Changing the map 

“When the dust settles, within months or a year, the Israeli-Arab conflict will be over,” Friedman boasted. Friedman’s undisguised triumphalism will be as short-lived and as ill-fated as George W Bush’s was after he landed on an aircraft carrier sporting the now notorious banner proclaiming “mission accomplished” in Iraq.US election: Mohammed bin Salman braces for the loss of a key ally Read More »

I part company with those who consign the Abraham Accords to the dustbin of history.

But they are indeed rendered meaningless when Israel’s Ministry of Strategic Affairs found that 90 percent of social media in Arabic condemned the UAE’s normalisation; the Washington Institute recorded just 14 percent of Saudis supported it.

Plainly on these figures, Friedman is going to have to wait a long time before Arab public opinion arrives in the 21st century, as he puts it.

But the absence of public support across the Arab world for normalisation does not mean that it will have no effect. It will indeed change the map of the Middle East but not quite in the way Friedman and the settlers hope. Until he and his like seized control of the White House, Washington played on a useful disconnect between the two pillars of US policy – unconditional support for Israel on the one hand and Arab dictators on the other.

It allowed Washington to claim simultaneously that Israel was the “only democracy” in the Middle East and thus entitled to defend itself in “a tough neighbourhood,” while on the other hand doing everything it could to keep the neighbourhood tough, by supporting the very ruling families who suppressed parliaments, democracy, and preyed on their people.

These are classic tactics of colonial masters, well-honed by the British, French, Dutch and Spanish sea-born empires. And it has worked for decades. Any US president could have done what Trump did, but the fact that they did not meant that they – at least – foresaw the dangers of fusing support for Israel with support for volatile and revolution-prone Arab dictatorships.

Trump is both ignorant and profoundly oblivious, because all that matters to him in this process is him. An adult who displays all the symptoms of infantile narcissistic injury, Trump’s only demand from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was that he, Trump, alone should be hailed as the saviour of Israel.

Speaking to Netanyahu on a speakerphone in front of the White House press corps, Trump asked: “Do you think Sleepy Joe could have made this deal, Bibi? Sleepy Joe? Do you think he would have made this deal somehow? I don’t think so.” Netanyahu paused long and hard. “Uh, well… Mr President, one thing I can tell you is… um, er, we appreciate the help for peace from anyone in America… And we appreciate what you have done enormously.”

Going for broke

By going for broke, the era of useful ambiguity in US Middle East policy has now come to an end. Israeli occupiers and Arab despots are now  openly in each other’s arms. This means the fight against despots in the Arab world is one and the same thing as the fight to liberate occupied Palestine. Israel’s deals with the Gulf are a disaster for Egypt Read More »

One might think this is of little consequence as the Arab Spring, which caused such upset in 2011, has been committed to the grave long ago. But it would be foolish to think so, and certainly Israel’s former ambassador to Egypt Yitzhak Levanon is not a fool.

Writing in Israel Hayom, Levanon asked whether Egypt is on the verge of a new uprising: “The Egyptian people dreamed of openness and transparency after the overthrow of Mubarak, who was perceived as a dictator. The Muslim Brotherhood are exiled and persecuted. There is no opposition. A change in the law allows Sisi to serve as president until 2030, and the laws make it possible to control by draconian means, including political arrests and executions. Recent history teaches us that this may affect the whole area.”

Another former Israeli ambassador has voiced his concerns about Trump’s effect on Israel. Barukh Binah, a former ambassador to Denmark and deputy head of mission in Washington, observed that the peace treaties Trump signed were with Israel’s existing friends and did nothing to solve the diplomatic impasse with its enemies.

A Palestinian demonstrator holds a sign during a protest against the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain's deal with Israel to normalise relations, in Ramallah in the Israeli-occupied West Bank September 15, 2020
A Palestinian demonstrator holds a sign during a protest against UAE deal with Israel to normalise relations, in Ramallah on 15 September (Reuters)

“Trump is seen by many as Israel’s ultimate friend, but just as he has done in the US, he has isolated us from the Western community to which we belong. Over the past four years, we have become addicted to a one-of-a-kind powerful psychedelic called ‘Trumpion’ – and the moment the dealer leaves the White House, Israel will need to enter rehab.”

An important lesson

In the Camp David accords, Egypt became the first Arab country to recognise Israel in 1978. In 1994 Jordan became the second, when King Hussein signed a peace treaty at the Wadi Araba crossing. It is one more sign of the lack of thought and planning behind the second wave of recognition that the two Arab states who formed part of the first wave are losing out so heavily.

The new alliance between Israel and the Gulf states has generated other alliances determined to defend Palestine and Muslim rights

One wave of recognition is swamping another. This is not the work of a people who have thought this through. 

Jordan is gradually losing control of the Holy Sites in Jerusalem. Egypt is losing money and traffic from the Suez Canal, which is being bypassed by a pipeline about to transfer millions of tons of crude oil from the Red Sea to Ashkelon. Plans are also afoot to build a high-speed railway between the UAE and Israel. Egypt is about to be bypassed by land and sea.

In 1978 Egypt was the most powerful and populous Arab state. Today it has lost its geopolitical importance. It’s an important lesson that all Arab leaders should learn.

Some regional leaders have understood these lessons. The new alliance between Israel and the Gulf states has generated other alliances determined to defend Palestine and Muslim rights. Just watch how close Turkey is getting to Iran and Pakistan. And how close Pakistan is to abandoning its long-standing military alliance with Saudi Arabia.

The lesson for Palestine

Nor is the West Bank any less volatile than Egypt is. As part of their efforts to coerce Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president, to accept the deal, Arab aid to the Palestinian Authority (PA) had dropped by 81 percent in the first eight months of this year from $198m to $38m.

The PA refuses to accept taxes Israel collects on its behalf, since Israel began deducting the money the PA spent on supporting the families of dead Palestinian fighters. If the PA did accept Israel’s deduction, it too would be dead on arrival. The EU has refused to make up the shortfall.

Abbas would not be minded to suppress the next outbreak of popular discontent, as he has done consistently in the past

With most security co-ordination frozen, and nightly Israeli arrests in the West Bank, the enclave is a tinderbox. Abbas would not be minded to suppress the next outbreak of popular discontent, as he has done consistently in the past. 

Palestinians waited a long time after the creation of the state of Israel to get serious about forming a campaign to regain their lost land. They waited from April 1949 to May 1964, when the PLO was founded to restore “an independent Palestinian state”.

They have now waited even longer for the principle of land for peace to deliver their land back to them. Trump, Kushner and Friedman have pronounced it dead, as they have the two-state solution. The two words they were careful to avoid in all the conferences and presentations of their plans were “Palestinian state”.

 Once again, Palestinians are on their own and forced to recognise that their destiny lies in their hands alone.

The conditions which recreated the First Intifada are alive and kicking for a generation of youth who were yet to be born on 8 December 1987. It is only a matter of time before another uprising will materialise, because it is now the only way out of the hellish circle of Israeli expansion, Arab betrayal, and international indifference, which remains open to them. 

Recognising Israel does not work. Nor does talking. 

This is Trump’s legacy. But it is also, alas, the legacy of all the presidents who preceded him. The Abraham Accords will set the region in conflict for decades to come.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.

This article is available in French on Middle East Eye French edition.

Related

ضابط الشاباك «إيلان»: يحيى عياش كشف غباءنا

كانت لديه قدرة كبيرة على النجاح.. وكاريزما غير عاديّة وهو قائد بالولادة

نشر موقع صحيفة معاريف الصهيونية، أمس، مقابلة كان أعدّها سابقًا مع يتسحاق إيلان نائب رئيس جهاز «الشاباك» الأسبق الذي أعلن عن وفاته أمس بفيروس كورونا.

وتحدّث إيلان والذي قاد الشاباك خلال الانتفاضة الأولى كمحقق في رام الله، وخلال عملية «السور الواقي» مسؤولًا عنه بالضفة الغربية، إلى جانب مسؤوليته عن التحقيق مع الأسرى، حول عمليات اغتيال واعتقال كبار المقاومين.

وأشار الموقع إلى أنه كان مسؤولًا عن إحباط العمليات «الاستشهادية» لعناصر من المقاومة.

وبحسب الموقع، فإن إيلان من أصول جورجية، وكان على علاقة ممتازة برئيس وزراء الكيان الأسبق أرئيل شارون، ويتقن 5 لغات، ويوصف بأنه أكثر شخصية صهيونية درست «حقيقة العرب»، وعمل 9 سنوات في الانتفاضة الأولى محققًا في رام الله، وأنه كان مسؤولًا عن جلب معلومات حول القيادي في القسام محمود أبو الهنود الذي اغتيل لاحقًا.

وقال إيلان إنه كانت له ذكريات سيئة مثل هجوم دولفينايوم الذي نفذه الاستشهادي سعيد الحوتري من كتائب القسام، قائلًا «لن أنسى ذلك السبت الرهيب، كنا نعرف السائق الذي أوصل الحوتري لكن بأوامر من شارون لم نستطع قتله لأنه كان في مناطق (أ) التابعة للسلطة ولا يريد الإضرار بالاتفاقيات، لكن بعد هجوم فندق بارك الذي نفذه عبد الباسط عودة صدر القرار باحتلال الضفة من جديد»، بحسب زعمه.

وزعم أنه كان يعرف أن عودة سينفذ هجومًا وأنه اتصل بوالده لتحذيره، لكن لم يتم منع الهجوم بسبب تخفي عودة الذي كان سيفجر نفسه في فندق في منطقة هرتسيليا لكن تم منعه من الدخول، فوصل إلى فندق بارك الذي كان يعمل فيه، وفجر نفسه هناك وقتل نحو 30 مستوطناً.

وأشار إلى أن عملية اعتقال عباس السيد القيادي في القسام الذي كان مسؤولًا عن عملية فندق بارك، كانت معقدة في بداياتها لأن كان التركيز منع قتله، لأنه يحمل الجنسية الأميركية ولأن شارون لم يكن يريد خلافات في هذا الوقت مع الإدارة الأميركية، لذلك تم التخطيط بعناية كبيرة حتى يتم اعتقاله من دون قتله، وكانت هناك ملفات واضحة تدينه بالعملية، مشيرًا إلى أن الشاباك رفض بشدة إطلاق سراحه خلال صفقة تبادل الأسرى مع حماس «شاليط».

وكشف إيلان أنه كان جزءًاً مهمًا من عملية اغتيال يحيى عياش قائد القسام عام 1995، وكان حينها مسؤولًا في جهاز الشاباك في منطقة قطاع غزة.

وقال عن عياش «كان لديه قدرة كبيرة على النجاح.. لديه كاريزما غير عادية.. زعيم بالولادة.. حذر للغاية.. كانت تمر ليلتان لا ينام فيهما..».

وردًا على سؤال حول كيفية وصول عياش لغزة، قال «كان بغباء منا، كنا نفتش من يخرج من غزة وليس من يدخل إليها، لم نعتقد أبدًا أنه كان سيدخل للقطاع أو يجرؤ أحد على فعل ذلك».

وحول عملية اغتياله، قال إيلان «قتلناه بعد أن حصلنا على صورة في منزل والديه لأشخاص في الجامعة وحللنا من هؤلاء الشخصيات حتى وصلنا لمعلومات متتالية سواء عبر زوجته التي وصلت لغزة لاحقًا، وكانت البداية الفعلية بعد أن رصدنا مكالمة لشخص اتصل به عياش في الضفة، لكن لم يكن هذا ناشطًا في حماس أو من عائلة تنتمي إليها، وطلب عياش منه أن يشتري هاتفًا له، ونحن دبرنا طريقة ليشتري الهاتف الذي نريد وأتت من هنا بالصدفة فكرة وضع متفجرات في الهاتف بعد أن حولنا هذا الشخص إلى وكيل أحمق بدون أن يشعر.. وجعلناه يشتري الهاتف المخصص للعملية واتصل به عياش مرة أخرى للتأكد من أنه اشترى الهاتف، وأكد له ذلك وتبقى فقط نقله لغزة.. وسخرنا مصدرنا الخاص (العميل) الذي أوصل الهاتف لغزة وأوصل الهاتف لعياش ثم قتلناه».

وأطلق على عملية تهريب الهاتف ووصوله لغزة باسم «طبيب أمراض النساء» وكان لمدار أسبوع كامل تتم متابعة العملية لمعرفة مصير الهاتف وهل سيصل بنجاح، حتى وصل ونفذت المهمة، حيث اتصل بوالده ثم انفجر الهاتف وبات مضرجًا بدمائه.

وقال «كانت هذه إحدى العمليات الأكثر روعة، والروس سمعوا عنها وقلّدوها، وقتلوا زعيم الثورة الشيشانية بطريقة مماثلة».

ووفقًا للموقع فإنه كان مسؤولاً عن اغتيال رائد الكرمي قائد كتائب الأقصى في الضفة الغربية، وقيل حينها إن عملية اغتياله كانت سببًا في تفجّر الانتفاضة وتنفيذ سلسلة عمليات «استشهادية» وغيرها، وهو ما رفضه إيلان وأكد أن اغتياله كان ضرورة ملحّة خلال المقابلة ذاته.

وقال إيلان «إن الكرمي رفض عرضًا أوروبيًا لوقف الهجمات بعد أن نقلت فتح العرض له لدراسته»، مشيرًا إلى أن شارون شخصيًا كان مهتمًا باغتياله.

وأضاف «شارون كان يوميًا يتصل بديختر (آفي ديختر رئيس الشاباك حينها)، ويسأله لماذا الكرمي على قيد الحياة حتى الآن، اقتلوه فورًا».

وادعى إيلان أن الكرمي كان يخطط لهجوم كبير في نتانيا واغتياله منع الهجوم، مشيرًا إلى أنه نجا من عمليتي اغتيال سابقة ونجحت الثالثة.

شهر أيلول شهر التناقضات السياسية والميدانية الكبرى في الصراع العربي الصهيوني

د. ميادة إبراهيم رزوق

تتزاحم أحداث أيلول في الذاكرة العربية والفلسطينية الجمعية، من محطات سوداء قاتمة في مجزرة صبرا وشاتيلا، واتفاقيات أوسلو، وصولاً إلى أيلول 2020 وتوقيع اتفاقيات تطبيع الأسرلة، إلى محطات مضيئة مشرقة بتأسيس جبهة المقاومة الوطنية اللبنانية إلى انتفاضة الأقصى وانسحاب الكيان الصهيوني من قطاع غزة حتى أيلول 2020 الذي أسدل ستاره وكيان الاحتلال الصهيوني على اجر ونص، ورئيس حكومته بنيامين نتنياهو مع أجهزته الإعلامية والاستخبارية يتلقى صفعة جديدة من الأمين العام لحزب الله السيد حسن نصرالله وعلى الهواء مباشرة ليثبت كذبه ويبطل مفاعيل هدفه في المسرحية الهزلية التي استعرضها من على منبر الجمعية العامة للأمم المتحدة.

إنه شهر الانكسارات والمفاوضات والانتصارات وفي ما يلي أهمّ محطاته بتفصيل موجز:

أولاً– شهد العامان 1970 و1971 صراعاً وتوتراً في العلاقة بين السلطة الأردنية والفصائل الفلسطينية التي اضطرتها نكسة حزيران عام 1967 للتراجع إلى شرق نهر الأردن بانتظار فرصة استجماع الأنفاس العربية باستعادة فلسطين، فانتهت بنهر من الدماء العربية بلغت ذروتها في شهر أيلول عام 1970 «أيلول الأسود» حيث تحوّل الخلاف بين إخوة الدم إلى مواجهة مسلحة لخصها رئيس منظمة التحرير الفلسطينية الراحل ياسر عرفات بقوله «هذه مؤامرة، من كان وراءها وخطط لها ودفع إليها هو وكالة المخابرات المركزية الأميركية»، أو بصورة أدقّ، إنّ الرجل الذي لعب دوراً مركزياً في وضع الخطة الأميركية لتفجير الوضع في الأردن، هو مستشار الأمن القومي آنذاك الداهية هنري كيسنجر، بوصفة سحرية لضرب المقاومة الفلسطينية والجيش الأردني بحجر واحد، فتحوّل المشهد إلى نهر من الدماء العربية، وانتهت المواجهة بإخراج الفصائل الفلسطينية من الأردن وانتقالها إلى لبنان حيث تجدّدت الحروب ووقعت مجازر أخرى شهيرة في التاريخ الإنساني حملت توقيع جيش كيان العدو الصهيوني.

ثانياً– بعد اجتياح جيش الكيان الصهيوني بيروت عام 1982 بهدف حماية الحدود الشمالية لكيانه المحتلّ من هجمات الفدائيين الفلسطينيين واقتطاع شريط من الأراضي اللبنانية على طول الحدود مع فلسطين المحتلة بعمق يتراوح بين 10 و 30 كلم، والسيطرة على نهر الليطاني ومياهه، وإنهاء المقاومة الفلسطينية في لبنان، والقضاء على أكبر عدد من الشعب الفلسطيني، بدأت أحداث المجزرة الأليمة في مخيمي «صبرا وشاتيلا» قبل غروب يوم السادس عشر من أيلول عام 1982، عندما فرض جيش الاحتلال الصهيوني حصاراً مشدّداً على المخيمين، ليسهل عملية اقتحامهما من قبل ميليشيات لبنانية مسلحة موالية له، أودت بحياة أكثر من ثلاثة آلاف معظمهم فلسطينيون على مدار 48 ساعة بمشاهد مروعة – من الذبح وبقر البطون الحوامل واغتصاب النساء– لا تزال ماثلة كذكريات قاسية وقاحلة في الوجدان الجمعي العربي والفلسطيني، وبوصمة عار على جبين الإنسانية.

ثالثاً– تلا تلك المجزرة بعدة أيام عملية الويمبي في 24 أيلول عام 1982 قام بها البطل القومي خالد علوان والذي بلغ من العمر 19 عاماً، حيث وصل إلى مقهى الويمبي في شارع الحمراء أحد الأحياء الغربية لمدينة بيروت، وفتح النار على الضباط والجنود الصهاينة في الويمبي فقتل ضابطاً صهيونياً بمسدسه وأصاب جنديين صهيونيين يرافقان الضابط، فأصيب أحدهما في صدره والآخر في الرقبة، وأعلنت جبهة المقاومة الوطنية اللبنانية مسؤوليتها عن العملية، التي تميّزت بأهمية رمزية قوية حيث مثلت بداية الأعمال المقاومة ضدّ قوات الاحتلال الصهيوني في بيروت، ودفعت بسكان المدينة الآخرين للمشاركة في المواجهات مع قوات الاحتلال الصهيوني، واستمرت هذه الأعمال حتى انسحاب القوات الصهيونية من العاصمة بيروت في 27 و28 أيلول عام 1982 تحت تأثير الضغوط السياسية الخارجية، وضربات المقاومة الوطنية اللبنانية، التي أنزلت بها هي وقوات مشاة الأسطول الأميركي «المارينز» والقوات الفرنسية خسائر فادحة بعمليات استشهادية، فانقلبت الانتصارات الصهيونية مأزقاً، كان أول ضحاياه هم قادة الحرب في كيان العدو الصهيوني، إذ في أوائل عام 1984 اعتزل مناحيم بيغن بعد عدة أشهر من الاعتكاف، وذكر أنه أصيب بالإحباط بسبب فشل سياسته، وأجبر وزير الدفاع أرييل شارون على الاستقالة بعد أن أدانته لجنة قضائية «لجنة كاهان»، وعزل رئيس أركان العدو الصهيوني رفائيل ايتان، لينسحب جيش كيان العدو الصهيوني في نهاية عام 1985 من معظم الأراضي التي احتلها، وبقي الشريط الحدودي الذي تحرّر في عام 2000.

رابعاً– تمّ توقيع اتفاقية أوسلو1 في 13 أيلول عام 1993، وهي أول اتفاقية مباشرة بين الكيان الصهيوني ممثلاً بوزير خارجيته آنذاك شمعون بيريز ومنظمة التحرير الفلسطينية ممثلة بأمين سر اللجنة التنفيذية محمود عباس، وقد التزمت منظمة التحرير الفلسطينية وعلى لسان رئيسها ياسر عرفات بـ «حق» الكيان الصهيوني بدولة (إسرائيل) على 78٪ من الأراضي الفلسطينية «أي كلّ فلسطين ما عدا الضفة الغربية وقطاع غزة» للعيش بـ» أمن وسلام والوصول إلى حلّ لكلّ القضايا الأساسية المتعلقة بالأوضاع الدائمة من خلال المفاوضات، وطبقاً لهذه الاتفاقية أدانت منظمة التحرير الفلسطينية استخدام الإرهاب وأعمال العنف وأخذت على عاتقها إلزام كلّ عناصر أفراد منظمة التحرير بها، ومنع انتهاك هذه الحالة وضبط المنتهكين، فأدانت حالة المقاومة المسلحة، وحذفت البنود التي تتعلق بها في ميثاقها الوطني كالعمل المسلح وتدمير (إسرائيل)، كما اعترف الكيان الصهيوني بمنظمة التحرير الفلسطينية بأنها الممثل الشرعي للشعب الفلسطيني، وبحق الفلسطينيين بإقامة حكم ذاتي «وليس دولة مستقلة ذات سيادة» على الأراضي التي ينسحب منها من الضفة الغربية وقطاع غزة على مراحل خلال خمس سنوات، مع التأكيد أنّ الكيان الصهيوني هو المسؤول عن أمن منطقة الحكم الذاتي من أيّ عدوان خارجي «لا يوجد جيش فلسطيني للسلطة الفلسطينية»، وبعد ثلاث سنوات تبدأ مفاوضات الوضع الدائم بشأن القدس «من يتحكم بالقدس الشرقية والغربية والأماكن المقدسة وساكنيها إلخ…»، واللاجئون «حق العودة وحق التعويض إلخ…» والمستوطنات في الضفة الغربية وقطاع غزة «هل تفكك أم تبقى أو تزيد زيادة طبيعية، ومن يحميها السلطة أم الجيش الصهيوني»، الترتيبات الأمنية «كمية القوات والأسلحة المسموح بها داخل أراضي الحكم الذاتي، والتعاون والتنسيق بين شرطة السلطة الفلسطينية والجيش الصهيوني، مما أدّى إلى انقسام وانشقاق بين الفصائل الفلسطينية، ففي الوقت الذي مثلت حركة فتح الفلسطينيين في المفاوضات وقبلت إعلان المبادئ، اعترضت عليها كلّ من حركة حماس والجهاد الإسلامي والجبهة الشعبية لتحرير فلسطين والجبهة الديمقراطية لتحرير فلسطين وجبهة التحرير الفلسطينية فاعتبروه اتفاقاً باطلاً ووصفوه بـ «المشؤوم» كونه أعطى الاحتلال الحق باغتصاب 78٪ من أرض فلسطين التاريخية.

خامساً– أما اتفاقية أوسلو2 بشأن الاتفاق الانتقالي للضفة الغربية وقطاع غزة أو اتفاقية طابا فقد تمّ التوقيع عليها في مدينة طابا المصرية في شبه جزيرة سيناء من قبل الكيان الصهيوني ومنظمة التحرير الفلسطينية في 24 أيلول عام 1995وبعد أربعة أيام في 28 أيلول تمّ التوقيع الرسمي على الاتفاقية في واشنطن من قبل رئيس وزراء حكومة العدو الصهيوني إسحاق رابين ورئيس منظمة التحرير الفلسطينية ياسر عرفات، ووضعت الاتفاقية تصوّراّ لتأسيس حكومة ذاتية انتقالية فلسطينية في الأراضي الفلسطينية، لكنها لم تتضمّن وعود بإقامة دولة فلسطينية مستقلة، بل أسست أوسلو2 المناطق «أ، ب، ج» في الضفة الغربية، ومنحت السلطة الفلسطينية بعض السلطات والمسؤوليات المحدودة في المنطقة «أ» و»ب» مع إمكانية عقد مفاوضات حول التسوية النهائية حسب قراري مجلس الأمن رقم «242 و 338»، ولم تتضمّن الاتفاقية ما يحدّ من استمرار عملية بناء المستوطنات في الضفة الغربية عامة وفي القدس بصفة خاصة، علماً أنه سبقت هذه الاتفاقية مجموعة أحداث دامية تركت أثرها عليها، منها مجزرة الحرم الإبراهيمي، وعدة عمليات فدائية هزت عمق المجتمع الصهيوني، وأعقبها اغتيال رئيس الوزراء الصهيوني إسحق رابين.

سادساً– بدءاً من نهاية عام 1999 ساد شعور بالإحباط لدى الفلسطينيين لانتهاء الفترة المقررة لتطبيق الحلّ النهائي بحسب اتفاقيات أوسلو، والمماطلة وجمود المفاوضات بين الطرفين الفلسطيني والصهيوني، واستمرار الصهاينة بسياسة الاغتيالات والاعتقالات والاجتياحات لمناطق السلطة الفلسطينية ورفض الأفراج عن الأسرى الفلسطينيين، بالإضافة إلى استمرار بناء المستوطنات واستبعاد عودة اللاجئين، واستبعاد الانسحاب لحدود حزيران 1967، مما جعل الفلسطينيين متيقنين بعدم جدوى عملية السلام للوصول إلى تحقيق الاستقلال الوطني، وفي ظلّ هذا الشعور العام بالإحباط والاحتقان السياسي، قام رئيس وزراء كيان الاحتلال السابق أرييل شارون باقتحام المسجد الأقصى وتجوّل في ساحاته مصرّحاً أنّ الحرم القدسي سيبقى منطقة (إسرائيلية)، مما أثار استفزاز المصلين الفلسطينيين، فاندلعت المواجهات بين المصلين وجنود الاحتلال في ساحات المسجد الأقصى، فارتقى سبعة شهداء وجرح المئات وأصيب 13 جندي صهيوني وكانت بداية أعمال الانتفاضة التي أدّت إلى تطوّر قدرات وإمكانيات الفصائل الفلسطينية وخاصة بصنع الصواريخ (صاروخ قسام، قدس4، صمود، أقصى 103، ناصر)، وبناء جدار الفصل العنصري الصهيوني، وتحطيم مقولة الجيش الذي لا يُقهر في معركة مخيم جنين الذي قتل فيه 58 جندي صهيوني وجرح 142، بالإضافة إلى ضرب السياحة واقتصاد المستوطنات الصهيونية، واغتيال وزير السياحة الصهيوني (زئيفي) على يد أعضاء من الجبهة الشعبية لتحرير فلسطين.

سابعاً– تحت ضغط الواقع الأمني المتردّي والعجز في اخماد أعمال المقاومة المتصاعدة في قطاع غزة والضفة الغربية خاصة ما عرف بحرب الأنفاق ضدّ مواقع حصينة للجيش الصهيوني وارتفاع الكلفة الأمنية على حكومة الاحتلال، وخاصة بعد بناء جدار الفصل العنصري، قرر رئيس الوزراء الصهيوني آنذاك أرييل شارون في 11 أيلول عام 2005 الانسحاب من 25 مستوطنة في قطاع غزة والضفة الغربية ضمن عملية أطلق عليها فكّ الارتباط مع الفلسطينيين بعد احتلال للقطاع استمرّ لمدة 38 عاماً.

وأخيراً تتضارب أحداث أيلول 2020 بين اتفاقيات تطبيع الأسرلة أو تحالف الحرب العسكري الأمني الاستخباري بين الأنظمة العربية الرجعية المطبعة في الإمارات والبحرين، وكيان الاحتلال الصهيوني ضدّ إيران وبالتالي محور حلف المقاومة، وتنصل جامعة الدول العربية من مسؤولياتها تجاه القضية الفلسطينية، في وقت تتحد فيها كلمة الفصائل الفلسطينية على طريق تنامي مقاومة أو انتفاضة جديدة في الأراضي الفلسطينية، وليسدل أيلول 2020 الستار على مزيداً من فضائح رئيس حكومة العدو الصهيوني بنيامين نتنياهو المأزوم داخلياً وخارجياً هو وكيانه الغاصب الذي لا زال يقف على اجر ونص بعد فشله باستدراج حزب الله إلى عملية ردّ محدودة، أو تفجير الحاضنة الشعبية له في لبنان، وبالتالي تغيير قواعد الردع والاشتباك التي كرّسها وأرسى دعائمها محور حلف المقاومة.

Ex-IOF Cmdr.: By Responding With Force to 2nd Intifada “Israel” “Won the Battle But Lost the War”

Ex-IOF Cmdr.: By Responding With Force to 2nd Intifada “Israel” “Won the Battle But Lost the War”

By Staff, Sputnik

“Israel” has learned a lot from the second intifada, which erupted in September 2000, says a retired colonel, who back then served as deputy commander of the combat intelligence corps. The primary lesson was to prevent a repeat of such bloody events, something that the “Israeli” entity has managed to master.

It was a decision that sparked mass protests against the entity, triggering a fire.

Twenty years ago, on 28 September, then head of the “Israeli” entity’s opposition Ariel Sharon paid a visit to al-Haram Sharif [Temple Mount] in al-Quds [Jerusalem].

The official reason for the visit was to inspect the construction work that has been done in the area, but Palestinians regarded it as an attack on their holiest of holies and didn’t want it to go unnoticed.

A day after the visit, the Palestinian Authority [PA] announced three days of mourning and the fire of the Second Intifada, or the Palestinian popular uprising, lit by Sharon, started spreading, just 13 years after the first intifada.

Protests in Jerusalem inspired more protests by Palestinians across the West Bank and even Arabs within Israel. In the eight days following the visit, 13 Palestinians were killed amid violent clashes with Israeli security forces. Hundreds on both sides were wounded.

No Surprise

But the events didn’t catch the entity’s military by surprise.

Miri Eisin, now a retired colonel, who back then served as deputy commander of combat intelligence corps, says the army has been preparing for a possible Palestinian uprising from late 1990s, collecting information and following the Palestinian leaderships’ movement.

For her, as well as the security apparatus she represented, the question was not if the riots would start but rather when and what would ignite them.

Apparently, Sharon’s visit provided that spark, but Palestinian leaders have admitted that that was only an excuse and that the violent uprising would have happened regardless, with or without his move.

The entity’s response was quick and harsh, and Eisin says that magnitude probably “ignited an additional cycle [of violence]” that could have been avoided otherwise.

“In the first few months we were harsh against different types of events that started the intifada. They were instigating and we were responding”.

Programed to Respond with Force

During that time, the “Israeli” Occupation Forces [IOF] fired back at young people that threw stones at “Israeli” soldiers and responded violently in clashes with the Palestinian security forces.

It also rounded up and jailed hundreds of those who planned attacks or simply those who obstructed regular life, filling up “Israeli” prisons with Palestinian inmates.

Back then, Eisin admits, the IOF was programed to treat such events as a security challenge, and cared little about the media factor and the public diplomacy that has been used by the Palestinians to tilt international opinion in their favor.

As a result, “‘Israel’ was winning the battle but losing the war,” because while the entity was effective in combating Palestinian operations, it was condemned far and wide in the international arena.

The mass media gave the Palestinian riots a central stage in their coverage, whereas NGOs were scrutinizing the entity’s conduct and published reports on its human rights violations.

During the years of fighting, the “Israeli” entity lost more than 1,100 people. Over 8,000 were injured in Palestinian operations.

Hezbollah vs Israel 2006: Who has upper hand 14 years on?

Hezbollah vs Israel 2006: Who has upper hand 14 years on?

Original links:
Part 1: http://middleeastobserver.net/hezbollah-vs-israel-2006-who-has-upper-hand-14-years-on-pt-1/
Part 2: http://middleeastobserver.net/hezbollah-vs-israel-2006-who-has-upper-hand-14-years-on-pt-2/

Description:

Senior Lebanese political analyst Nasser Qandil explores what has changed between Hezbollah and Israel over the last 14 years since the ‘July War’ or ‘The Second Lebanon War’ in 2006.

After tracing the major changes and transformations in the military balance of power between the two sides over the last 14 years, Qandil then explores the current challenges facing Hezbollah inside Lebanon, particularly regarding the deepening economic and political crises in the country.

Note: we have added our own sub-headings in the below transcript to make for easier reading

Source: Al Mayadeen News

Date:  July 12, 2020

(Important Note: Please help us keep producing independent translations for you by contributing as little as $1/month here: https://www.patreon.com/MiddleEastObserver?fan_landing=true)

Transcript:

Hezbollah 14 years on from the July War

Nasser Qandil:

Actually, regarding (Hezbollah’s) achievement of liberation (in the year 2000) free from any conditions or negotiations, any analyst can figure out that after the year 2000, the region was involved in a race between the Resistance and (Israeli) Army of occupation in which both (sides) tried to reinforce the reality that they wanted to reflect on May 24, 2000 (i.e. just before the liberation).

Israel wanted to say that it has positioned itself on the borders with the purpose of protecting the interior (of Israel); that the era of (the war of) attrition has ended; and that it is moving into a stage where it is able to direct (its) deterrent capacity at will. In contrast, the Resistance wanted to say that Israel has humiliatingly and forcefully withdrawn (from Lebanon); and that this withdrawal is not only the beginning of a countdown of the (Israeli) entity’s capacity to hold onto (occupied) land, but also (its capacity) to go to any (new) war again as well.

Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza in 2005 and the Al Aqsa Uprising (“Al Aqsa Intifada”) certified what the Resistance was saying. (Israel’s) 2006 war on Lebanon was the contest that had to settle the previous contests and the (side) who wins this round, cements what it has said. Israel has worked on a plan, theory, mechanisms and appraisals, that is, it didn’t go haphazardly to war (in 2006). In short, Israel counted on “air warfare” theory and put it into practice the (2006) war. However, the Resistance was aware of that, so it opted to strengthen its power on land, in order to cancel out the theory of air warfare, and to bring the enemy to the land to fight, engage in (battles) of attrition, and (ultimately) defeat it.

The Resistance was the victor. This was the outcome (of the war), because when we talk about ‘victory’ we are not referring to the historic and final defeat. Rather, we are just discussing this war (in 2006) in which the Resistance achieved victory and Israel was defeated again. As in the Lebanon war of the year 2000, or (more accurately) as reflected by the liberation in the (year) 2000, Israel lost its first pillar, that is, its ability to occupy (Lebanon) and remain in it. It also lost its second pillar in the 2006 war, which is its ability to wage war and achieve the goals (that it sets) as it wills.

After the 2006 war, the issue (between both sides) persisted. They entered a totally new and different race. The entity of the (Israeli) occupation is fighting to restore its honor and rehabilitate its image, whereas the Resistance is fighting the battle of becoming a regional power able to make the deterrence weapon (itself as) the policymaker. Since the year 2006, America put its weight behind (Israel’s goals) since Israel is not able to survive any longer without American protection and support. America went to Iraq after realizing that Israel superiority is (gradually) being eroded, and that it is important to rehabilitate its power and control through the American military presence to compensate for the deficiency in Israel’s ability that came about after Lebanon’s liberation in the year 2000 and the Al Aqsa intifada.

Host:

We all remember Condoleezza Rice and the ‘New Middle East Project’.

Nasser Qandil:

Exactly, and this was at the heart of the 2006 war. However, before this (war), America went to Iraq in order to redress the imbalance occurred after Lebanon’s liberation in 2000 and the Al Aqsa intifada, but they failed. The “July War” (2006) came as a second rehabilitation supported by American pressure, calculations and backing. It was a new failure that was added to the accumulated record of failures.

The only available alternative (choice) then was going to a great war, i.e. to topple Syria. This was like Armageddon. Nevertheless, other different battles, the Yemen war and the battle over the future of Iraq, occurred alongside the war (in Syria). They were no less important than the (war in Syria). Today, 14 years after the July War (in 2006), we can talk about facts and not about general trends only. The resistance (movements) transformed from being a resistance force into an Axis of Resistance. This becomes a fact; it is not just words. Today, when his eminence Sayyed (Hassan Nasrallah) speaks and says “I will kill you” – we’ll discuss this later – this (statement) reflects the (powerful reality) of the Axis of Resistance, from Beirut, to Palestine, to Iraq, to Yemen, to Iran and to Syria. This is the first major transformation that occurred between the years 2006 to 2020 during the heat of the several wars that raged over the map of the region.

The second (major transformation during these years): the ‘missile belt’ is now able to strike – from any point (within the Axis of Resistance) – any target in occupied Palestine (i.e. Israel). This means that as the resistance in Palestine is able to target all (areas of Israel) north of Gaza, the resistance in south Lebanon can target the entire (area of Israel) south (of Lebanon); the resistance from Iraq is even able to reach the (Mediterranean) sea; the resistance in Yemen can cover the whole territory of Palestine; and that’s besides (the missiles capabilities of) Syria and Iran.

The Host:

The entire Israeli intelligence efforts have lately been centered on the missile capabilities of the resistance.

Nasser Qandil:

This ‘(missile) belt’ has been completed; it is not a subject of discussion anymore.

The third (major) development is the entrance of the drones (UAVs).  The use of this weapon is not restricted to the Lebanese front line. Israel has evidence that confirms that. How many times were drones sent by the resistance from Lebanon? How many times were the Israelis lost because they failed to track the drones sent from Gaza? (Further evidence lies in) the drones in Yemen, and the achievement of the Aramco attack (in Saudi Arabia) that the godfather of the Dimona (Israeli nuclear program) and Thomas Friedman wrote about it an important article in the New York Times. The article states that what happened in Aramco (can be) repeated on all American military bases in the Middle East, and can be repeated (in a strike) on Dimona. Moreover, one of the Israeli generals quoted by Thomas Friedman during a telephone conversation says that it seems that we must now relinquish the status of being the number one technicians in the Middle East, (and cede that status) to Hezbollah and its allies, and (we ought to) call upon our people to carry hand rifles  in any coming wars in which drones are used.  Henceforth, the third factor is the drones.

The fourth (major) new factor is the precision-guided missiles which formed the center of the struggle during the last two or three years of the Syrian war. The Israeli (air) raids which initially aimed at stopping the supply of weapons to the resistance (from Syria to Lebanon) turned into a specific goal (during these years) which became ‘preventing the resistance from the possibility of transforming their missiles into precision-guided ones’. Today, the Israelis speak about precision-guided missile factories and this signifies that they have surrendered to this fact.

The last issue we are ignorant of was revealed by the video published (recently) by (Hezbollah’s) military media which says “Mission accomplished”. Certainly, it is not referring to the precision-guided missiles because his eminence Sayyed (Hassan Nasrallah) has already announced clearly and publicly that ‘yes, we have enough precision-guided missiles to hit any vital Israeli military installation in occupied Palestine’.  But we still don’t know what is meant by “Mission accomplished”. This will stay one of the resistance’s surprises in the coming wars.

Israel 14 years on from the July War

Nasser Qandil:

What have Israel and America achieved in return? Their situation now is similar to that in the July War (2006); they go to war today on one foot only. It was the air force in (the) July (War) that they relied upon, and it is the financial sanctions (that they rely upon) today. Did the Resistance succeed in breaking this foot?  I say “Yes, and we will expand on this discussion later.

Host:

We will continue discussing why the resistance succeeded…

Nasser Qandil:

In the first section we talked about the progress achieved by the resistance (Hezbollah) from 2006 to 2020. Israel also worked (on building its power) during these 14 years. Let u see what it did.

Host: …and of course (Israel) was given a green light by the US.

Nasser Qandil:

First of all, Israel focused on the home front. Its main aim was not to draw up a plan to seize the initiative, but to face the fallout of the July War. The resistance (Hezbollah) has risen higher and higher in its level of readiness, its networking capabilities (i.e. greater integration of the Resistance Axis across the region), and its ability to wage war. Meanwhile, what did the (Israeli) entity do?

(First), the Iron Dome that (Israel) was preparing (in order to intercept) Katyusha missiles is now threatened by precision-guided missiles and drones. (The Israelis) went back to saying that they will shoot down missiles with hunting rifles!

(Second), the (Israeli) home front has further collapsed, and now in the time of Corona, it is even worse.

Third, political fragmentation, which is one of the repercussions of the July War. Since the July War, the (Israeli) entity has been mired in its inability to reestablish a historical (political) bloc capable of leading the entity politically. This fragmentation reached its peak with three (consecutive) repeats of the election.

The last point that (Israel) has discovered (over the last 14 years) is that there is no solution to is broken spirit, because we are not only talking about equipment, armies, weapons and logistical plans, we are talking about human beings, about their mental condition. The resistance (Hezbollah) is now becoming more and more confident that it can bring down the (Israeli) entity. When his eminence Sayyed (Nasrallah) comes out and says in one of his recent appearances that there is a real possibility that the (Israeli) entity will collapse without war, and that this generation is going to witness the liberation of Jerusalem…On the other hand, we find the (Israeli) entity in a state of frustration. No matter how many (Israeli) generals say “We will win. Victory is ours in the coming war. We are waiting for the right opportunity to wage war”…what are you (Israelis) waiting for? You and the Americans said: “Time is not in our favor. Yesterday’s war is better than a war today, and a war today is better than a war tomorrow.”

Host:

Who is going to achieve Israel’s goals today? Who is the principal agent? The US? Because, as you said in one of your articles, Sayyed Nasrallah’s recent speech on 7/7/2020, presents the most vivid example of the (resistance’s) ability to defeat the Israeli occupation and American hegemony. But how is he (Nasrallah) able today to combine this (military) resistance with economic resistance?

The third pillar of the Resistance: economic reconstruction

Nasser Qandil:

What I want to get to is that in one of his appearances, his eminence Sayyed Nasrallah cut to the chase and said: “The resistance (Hezbollah) has already overtaken Israel. Israel is still standing thanks to US protection.” In 1996, the Resistance discovered – and this was the secret behind the liberation in the year 2000 – that the Israelis remained (in Lebanon) because they were under the illusion that the border buffer zone (that Israel established within Lebanese territory) protects the (Israeli) entity from the missiles of the resistance. So if (Israel) realizes that the border (buffer zone) is pointless and that the entity will be targeted no matter what, it will withdraw. And this is what happened (in the year 2000).

Today, his eminence Sayyed (Nasrallah) tells us that the resistance is certain that the (Israeli) entity continues to survive only because of the American presence (in the region), and that the decisive battle with the entity is a battle to expel the Americans from the region.

Whoever analyses the (American) sanctions and the logic behind them will discover that they are not aimed at escalating the situation such that it provokes a full-scale confrontation. This is nothing but propaganda. In fact, these sanctions have direct political goals. I mean, (Lebanese) parties affiliated to the US (in Lebanon) are proposing (very high demands such as) the disarmament (of Hezbollah) and the implementation of Resolution 1559 because this is the American approach. Just as they (Americans) did in 1983 with (Lebanese) President Amine Gemayel when they told him that they were (about to attack) Syria at the same time in which they were engaged in negotiations with (Syria). Two months later, McFarlane) the special US envoy to the Middle East) was asked: “why did you back out (of the attack)? You would have put (Gemayel) in big trouble.” McFarlane answered: “if we told (Gemayel) that we were (negotiating) with Damascus, he would have beat us to it. We trick our allies to make them think that we are escalating for the sake of imposing stronger terms in the negotiations.”

What do Americans want from the Caesar Act? Why are the Americans putting pressure on Lebanon, blocking access to US dollars in the (Lebanese) market, preventing the transfer of dollars to the country, and closing lines of credit – via the Central Bank of Lebanon’s accounts -for the purchase of fuel? What do they want? The Americans are not hiding (their intentions). They told us what they want. James Jeffrey (US Special Representative for Syria Engagement) told us. Why the Caesar Act? He said in the live appearance he made in which he spoke about the Act. He said ‘we wish to go back to (the balance of power) that existed before 2011. What does he mean by “before 2011”? He means the time when “we (Americans) will acknowledge the victory of President Assad. We were not present (in Syria before 2011), but Hezbollah and Iran were not there either. We leave (Syria), but (Hezbollah and Iran must) leave too.”

So he (Jeffrey) wants to ensure the security of the (Israeli) occupying entity in southern Syria by hinting at sanctions against Russia as the main target of the Caesar Act. Syria will be hit by sanctions anyway and Iran is drowning in a sea of sanctions. Therefore, these sanctions are actually against Russia. The Caesar Act was introduced originally at the beginning of 2016 in order to reach a compromise with Russia in relation to the battle in Aleppo. However, (the Caesar Act) now aims at reaching an agreement with Russia over the terms of the withdrawal of US forces from Syria and is not aimed at (prolonging) their stay.

Second, regarding Lebanon, David Schenker (US Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs) publicly appeared on TV and said that Hezbollah is involved in ‘corruption, smuggling, money laundering, causing devastation, and that it is the cause of the crisis (in Lebanon)’ etc. Give it to me directly (Schenker), what do you want? He (Schenker) told us directly that “you are suffering greatly (due to the economic crisis). You have promising gas reserves in the (Mediterranean) sea, but they are in a region that is the subject of a dispute with Israel. We (the US) presented you with a plan, so accept it! So the US wants an exit strategy that provides the (Israeli) occupying entity with a security belt on the Syrian and the Lebanese fronts, and (the US seeks to achieve this) by exerting “maximum pressure on the resistance”.

———

Nasser Qandil:

This is the third pillar of the power of the Resistance. The first pillar is military capability. The second pillar is the political front, meaning the Axis of Resistance. The third pillar is economic reconstruction. Without a resistance economy, the resistance cannot speak of an ability to maintain a level of cohesion within its support base and environment. What I want to say here is that the measures and steps taken by the resistance are not new. It is not true that the resistance, being under pressure at the moment, is now discovering or searching (for solutions). This was in fact its original program. Its original program was and is ‘Openness to the East’, that (Lebanon) have multiple sources (for economic, financial, and political relations). Its original program is aimed at breaking the borders (created by) Sykes-Picot between the countries of the region to form a single (economic) market. Its original program is aimed at relying on industry, agriculture and the national currency for exchange with neighboring countries and where possible. This is the original plan of the resistance. But this plan is now being put into action. It is not a negotiating weapon to lure Americans into easing conditions. If the Americans want to cooperate they are welcome, but if they don’t we will proceed (with this plan). Either way, this plan is not subject to review. Industry and agriculture are objective needs (of Lebanon).

In terms of industry and agriculture, Lebanon … Lebanon, by the way – in the year 1960, the Iraqi market was running 60% of the Port of Beirut and 30% of Lebanese industrial production. Today, Lebanon, which used to export milk, cheese, juice, clothing and shoes to the Gulf, imports 200 million dollars worth of milk and cheese only! Thus, the revival of the agricultural and manufacturing sectors, which were destroyed by the rentier economy, was and is the original plan. We are not talking about a knee-jerk reaction.

Host:

Has the goal (behind the sanctions) become counter-productive? Because the Lebanese internal consensus over the economic resistance that Sayyed Nasrallah called for was remarkable. I want you to comment briefly because we exceeded the time allocated for this file. The Patriarch (Bechara Boutros) al-Rahi said today: “The Lebanese people today do not want any majority (group in Lebanon) to tamper with the constitution and to keep them away from (Lebanon’s) brothers and friends.” This is noteworthy as well Mr. Nasser, is it not?

Nasser Qandil:

The truth is, the speech of his Beatitude (al- Rahi), at certain points, was vague and unclear. It seemed like he was targeting the resistance by talking about neutrality and keeping Lebanon out of conflicts. However, today there may be another direction. I think the Lebanese people know that when we talk about buying oil products in Lebanese pounds… if you don’t want to buy them from Iran, then buy them from Saudi Arabia. Aren’t you friends with Saudi Arabia and the UAE? Let these countries sell us oil products in Lebanese pounds. Half of the demand for dollars in the Lebanese market is because of oil imports. We are depleting the reserves of the Central Bank of Lebanon. They will last us for five years instead of ten if we keep using them for oil imports.

His eminence Sayyed Nasrallah announced that Iran is ready to help, and since oil imports are consuming half of the budget, the resistance is proposing to remove half of the pressure on the US dollar, meaning (that the exchange rate) would return to 3000 or 4000 (Lebanese pounds per dollar) if we buy these oil products in Lebanese pounds. We are not bound to (importing) from Iran exclusively. Bring any offer from any other country.

Host:

True…for the Americans, the (economic) war was aimed at Hezbollah. However, the entirety of Lebanon is suffering the consequences of this war.

Nasser Qandil:

Here, I want to say something so we can put things in the right perspective. When the uprising began in October (2019), Pompeo and his team went beyond warnings. (Jeffery) Feltman (Former Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs) said before the American Congress: “Do not overestimate the influence of this uprising. Let’s not allow Lebanon to become prey for China and Russia.” He said frankly that China wants Lebanon to be a base for its 5G (technology) in the Middle East.

The Americans are backtracking from this (maximum economic pressure) approach not only because of economic (considerations). Do not be mistaken. This is because a highly powerful security message was delivered to the Americans about what the resistance might do if the situation (in Lebanon) deteriorated further.

—————-

Nasser Qandil:

When someone with the great prominence, status, and figure of Sayyed Nasrallah comes out and says: “I will kill you, I will kill you, I will kill you” … These words were written down (on paper). He did not say them out of anger during his speech. He was establishing a (new) equation. He said: “You are making me choose me between hunger or death. My answer is: I will kill you, I will kill you, I will kill you.” Mediators received questions asking them “what is going on? (what does Nasrallah mean here by ‘I will kill you’)” Then they got the answer. The answer might be – I do not know the answer, only the resistance knows it – but it might be in the form of strong military strike that the US and Israel would never expect. Is it the announcement of the zero hour for the expulsion of US forces from Iraq and Syria? Maybe. Is it a precision guided missile attack on the Dimona (nuclear reactor in Israel), for example? Maybe. Is it a (codeword) for opening up the (military) front in the south of Lebanon, and the Golan Heights front (from Syria) under the title of liberating the Shebaa Farms and the Golan Heights in one go? Maybe. This is the level and size (of the warning that Nasrallah directed).

The resistance will not stand idly by while its people suffer (from the deteriorating economic crisis). It will fight hunger by establishing the foundations of economic reconstruction because this is its project. This (economic reconstruction) has nothing to do with merely fighting (US) sanctions. (The resistance) found an opportunity to launch this project. Other (Lebanese parties) did not accept these proposals (before). Now it is the chance (to put them forward).

Do we want to change Lebanon’s identity by (economically) cooperating with China and giving rise eastern totalitarianism and who knows what, as some (in Lebanon) claimed? No. But does it make sense that the NATO (member) Turkey dares to go to Russia and buy S400 (missile systems), while we (Lebanese) don’t dare to buy Kalashnikov bullets that former Prime Minister Saad Hariri pledged to buy but did not dare to allocate funds for? We have 10 billion dollars’ worth of offers from China to build power plants, factories and tunnels under BOT (Build–operate–transfer) contracts, but we don’t have the courage to accept these offers because we are afraid that the US might be upset with us!

Host: Saudi Arabia itself is now negotiating with China over avenues of cooperation…

Nasser Qandil:

Everyone is turning to China. (Check) the Boston Harbor now, all the equipment for loading, operating, and unloading are Chinese!

Host: This all goes back to the American-Israeli concerns, Mr. Nasser.

Nasser Qandil:

This is the economic vision of the resistance. The (military) dimension (of this whole picture) is something else. The (military) dimension is the following: when they raise the bar of the financial threat, we raise the bar of the military-security threat.

The Hopelessness Discourse: How Palestinian Pessimism Could Spark a Much-Needed Rebellion

By Ramzy Baroud

Source

Palestine’s biggest challenge is not the failure of the people to register as a factor in the liberation of their own land, but their quisling leadership’s inability to appreciate the immense potential of harnessing the energies of Palestinians everywhere to stage a focused and strategic, anti-colonial, liberation campaign.

In a recent TV discussion, a respected pro-Palestine journalist declared that if any positive change or transformation ever occurs in the tragic Palestinian saga, it would not happen now, but that it would take a whole new generation to bring about such a paradigm shift.

As innocuous as the declaration may have seemed, it troubled me greatly.

I have heard this line over and over again, often reiterated by well-intentioned intellectuals, whose experiences in researching and writing on the so-called ‘Palestinian-Israeli conflict’ may have driven some of them to pessimism, if not despair.

The ‘hopelessness discourse’ is, perhaps, understandable if one is to examine the off-putting, tangible reality on the ground: the ever-entrenched Israeli occupation, the planned annexation of occupied Palestinian land in the West Bank, the shameful Arab normalization with Israel, the deafening silence of the international community and the futility of the quisling Palestinian leadership.

Subscribing to this logic is not only self-defeating but ahistorical as well. Throughout history, every great achievement that brought about freedom and a measure of justice to any nation was realized despite seemingly insurmountable odds.

Indeed, who would have thought that the Algerian people were capable of defeating French colonialism when their tools of liberation were so rudimentary as compared with the awesome powers of the French military and its allies?

The same notion applies to many other modern historic experiences, from Vietnam to South Africa and from India to Cuba.

However, the ‘hopelessness discourse’ is not as innocent as it may seem. It is propelled by the persisting failure to appreciate the centrality of the Palestinian people – or any other people, for that matter – in their own history. Additionally, it assumes that the Palestinian people are, frankly, ineffectual.

Interestingly, when many nations were still grappling with the concept of national identity, the Palestinian people had already developed a refined sense of modern collective identity and national consciousness. General mass strikes and civil disobedience challenging British imperialism and Zionist settlements in Palestine began nearly a century ago, culminating in the six-month-long general strike of 1936.

Since then, popular resistance, which is linked to a defined sense of national identity, has been a staple in Palestinian history. It was a prominent feature of the First Intifada, the popular uprising of 1987.

The fact that the Palestinian homeland was lost, despite the heightened consciousness of the Palestinian masses at the time, is hardly indicative of the Palestinian people’s ability to affect political outcomes.

Time and again, Palestinians have rebelled and, with each rebellion, they forced all parties, including Israel and the United States, to reconsider and overhaul their strategies altogether.

A case in point was the First Intifada.

When, on December 8, 1987, thousands took to the streets of the Jabaliya Refugee Camp, the Gaza Strip’s most crowded and poorest camp, the timing and the location of their uprising was most fitting, rational and necessary. Earlier that day, an Israeli truck had run over a convoy of cars carrying Palestinian laborers, killing four young men. For Jabaliya, as with the rest of Palestine, it was the last straw.

Responding to the chants and pleas of the Jabaliya mourners, Gaza was, within days, the breeding ground for a real revolution that was self-propelled and unwavering. The chants of Palestinians in the Strip were answered in the West Bank, and echoed just as loudly in Palestinian towns, including those located in Israel.

PALESTINIAN UPRISING 1987

The contagious energy was emblematic of children and young adults wanting to reclaim the identities of their ancestors, which had been horribly disfigured and divided among regions, countries and refugee camps.

The Intifada – literally meaning the “shake off” – sent a powerful message to Israel that the Palestinian people are alive, and are still capable of upsetting all of Israel’s colonial endeavors. The Intifada also confronted the failure of the Palestinian and Arab leaderships, as they persisted in their factional and self-seeking politics.

In fact, the Madrid Talks in 1991 between Palestinians and Israelis were meant as an Israeli- American political compromise, aimed at ending the Intifada in exchange for acknowledging the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) as a representative of the Palestinian people.

The Oslo Accords, signed by Yasser Arafat and Israel in 1993, squandered the gains of the Intifada and, ultimately, replaced the more democratically representative PLO with the corrupt Palestinian Authority.

But even then, the Palestinian people kept coming back, reclaiming, in their own way, their importance and centrality in the struggle. Gaza’s Great March of Return is but one of many such people-driven initiatives.

Palestine’s biggest challenge in the movement is not the failure of the people to register as a factor in the liberation of their own land, but their quisling leadership’s inability to appreciate the immense potential of harnessing the energies of Palestinians everywhere to stage a focused and strategic, anti-colonial, liberation campaign.

This lack of vision dates back to the late 1970s, when the Palestinian leadership labored to engage politically with Washington and other Western capitals, culminating in the pervading sense that, without US political validation, Palestinians would always remain marginal and irrelevant.

The Palestinian leadership’s calculations at the time proved disastrous. After decades of catering to Washington’s expectations and diktats, the Palestinian leadership, ultimately, returned empty-handed, as the current Donald Trump administration’s ‘Deal of the Century’ has finally proven.

I have recently spoken with two young Palestinian female activists: one is based in besieged Gaza and the other in the city of Seattle. Their forward-thinking discourse is, itself, a testament that the pessimism of some intellectuals does not define the thinking of this young Palestinian generation, and there would be no need to dismiss the collective efforts of this budding generation in anticipation of the rise of a ‘better’ one.

Malak Shalabi, a Seattle-based law student, does not convey a message of despair, but that of action. “It’s really important for every Palestinian and every human rights activist to champion the Palestinian cause regardless of where they are, and it is important especially now, ” she told me.

“There are currently waves of social movements here in the United States, around civil rights for Black people and other issues that are (becoming) pressing topics – equality and justice – in the mainstream. As Palestinians, it’s important that we (take the Palestinian cause) to the mainstream as well,” she added.

“There is a lot of work happening among Palestinian activists here in the United States, on the ground, at a social, economic, and political level, to make sure that the link between Black Lives Matter and Palestine happens,” she added.

On her part, Wafaa Aludaini in Gaza spoke about her organization’s – 16th October Group – relentless efforts to engage communities all over the world, to play their part in exposing Israeli war crimes in Gaza and ending the protracted siege on the impoverished Strip.

“Palestinians and pro-Palestinian activists outside are important because they make our voices heard outside Palestine, as mainstream media does not report (the truth of) what is taking place here,” she told me.

For these efforts to succeed, “we all need to be united,” she asserted, referring to the Palestinian people at home and in the diaspora, and the entire pro-Palestinian solidarity movement everywhere, as well.

The words of Malak and Wafaa are validated by the growing solidarity with Palestine in the BLM movement, as well as with numerous other justice movements the world over.

On June 28, the UK chapter of the BLM tweeted that it “proudly” stands in solidarity with Palestinians and rejects Israel’s plans to annex large areas of the West Bank.

BLM went further, criticizing British politics for being “gagged of the right to critique Zionism and Israel’s settler-colonial pursuits”.

Repeating the claim that a whole new generation needs to replace the current one for any change to occur in Palestine is an insult – although, at times, unintended – to generations of Palestinians, whose struggle and sacrifices are present in every aspect of Palestinian lives.

Simply because the odds stacked against Palestinian freedom seem too great at the moment, does not justify the discounting of an entire nation, which has lived through many wars, protracted sieges and untold hardship. Moreover, the next generation is but a mere evolution of the consciousness of the current one. They cannot be delinked or analyzed separately.

In his “Prison Notebooks”, anti-fascist intellectual, Antonio Gramsci, coined the term “pessimism of the intellect, optimism of the will.”

While logical analysis of a situation may lead the intellect to despair, the potential for social and political revolutions and transformations must keep us all motivated to keep the struggle going, no matter the odds.

%d bloggers like this: