The Iranian Parliament Speaker says Iran will use its tools to counter decisions such as the European Parliament’s anti-IRGC decision.
Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf
Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf underlined on Sunday that Iran will designate European armies as terrorists in response to the European Parliament’s decision to pass a resolution calling on the European Union to classify Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guard Corps (IRGC) as a “terrorist” organization.
During an open parliament session, Qalibaf condemned the European Parliament’s decision and considered it showed that the pro-Zionist front has caused European countries to commit serious miscalculations.
The Iranian Parliament Speaker stressed that his country will use its tools to counter such decisions, adding that European countries have taken the wrong way against Iran’s interests.
Qalibaf noted that the IRGC and regional people have overthrown the US-backed ISIS terrorist group, highlighting that the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps is the most unique anti-terrorist organization in the world that eliminated ISIS’ global threat.
Elsewhere, the Iranian official condemned the European countries’ sponsoring of media terrorism against Iran during the recent riots in the country.
Any anti-IRGC moves are doomed to failure: Raisi
Iranian President Ebrahim Raeisi said on Sunday that the IRGC plays a key role in combating the terrorists.
Iran’s President made the remarks in the Iranian parliament in reaction to the recent move by the European Parliament to designate the IRGC as a “terrorist” entity.
Any anti-IRGC moves are doomed to failure, he stressed, and no armed forces have combatted the terrorists like the IRGC did and still does, he further noted.
Regional armies admit the reality, he said, noting that any measures against the IRGC, like the other miscalculations of Europe, are doomed to failure.
The region would witness a different situation if the IRGC and martyr Soleimani were not on the scene, he underlined.
European Parliament shot itself in the foot: Amir-Abdollahian
On his part, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Islamic Republic of Iran Hossein Amir-Abdollahian warned that Tehran will respond to the European Union Parliament’s blacklisting of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC).
Referring to his presence in a closed session of the Iranian parliament (Majlis) on Sunday, FM Amirabdollahian said on Twitter that the European Parliament shot itself in the foot by proscribing the IRGC in a vote held earlier this week.
“The Majlis plans to reciprocate by including army elements of the European countries in (Iran’s) terrorism list,” said the Minister in his tweet that was written in Farsi, adding that parliament members had appreciated efforts by the IRGC to protect Iran’s national security.
امروز در جلسه غیرعلنی مجلس شورای اسلامی حضور یافتم.نمایندگان در حضور سردار سلامی از تلاش این نهاد حاکمیتی برای حفظ امنیت ملی قدردانی کردند. مجلس در اقدامی متقابل در صدد قرار دادن عناصر ارتش کشورهای اروپا در لیست تروریستی است. پارلمان اروپایی به پای خود شلیک کرد.پاسخ ، متقابل است.
— H.Amirabdollahian امیرعبداللهیان (@Amirabdolahian) January 22, 2023
During their meeting at the Iranian presidential compound, Raisi, Qalibaf, and Mohseni-Ejei condemned the decision and underlined support for the IRGC.
“The IRGC is a part of the military power and armed forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran, which has been the source of meritorious service with a brilliant record in the defense of the glorious land of Iran for more than 40 years,” the three said in their statement.
On Friday, a member of the Iranian parliament’s presidium, Ahmad Naderi, also warned that the Iranian parliament will enforce legislative amendments that would recognize the armed forces of EU member states under the category of terrorist organizations if the EU proceeds to place the IRGC on its “terror list”.
Former commander of NATO’s forces in Europe Wesley Clark
Commemorating the third martyrdom anniversary of General Qassem Suleimani and Hajj Abu Mahdi Al-Muhandis in a ceremony, Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah indicated on Tuesday that the American project seeks hegemony, domination, and control of wealth and oil.
Sayyed Nasrallah added that throughout two decades, Haj Qassem faced two versions of the American schemes in the region.
Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah
“The first version of the American scheme in the region, which was confronted by martyr Suleimani and other leaders, is the “New Middle East” project in Lebanon and Palestine,” the Hezbollah leader indicated. He explained that 9/11 (September, 11 attacks) served as an impetus to the American plan to enter Afghanistan and Iraq and get closer to Iran and Syria.
“In 2006, attempts began to unleash in order to strike the resistance in Palestine and Lebanon, and the objective was to invade and impose multinational forces at the airport, ports, and borders,” Sayyed Nasrallah said. “At that time, Hajj Qassem Suleimani set foot in frontlines as a leader; Iran stood firm, and Syria, too, leaving the enemy with dilemma in July war,” he added.
“Had the Zionists won the war on Lebanon, it would have expanded towards Syria, but that did not happen thanks to martyr Suleimani.”
Sayyed Nasrallah lauded Shiite and Sunni resistance factions in Iraq who fought the occupation forces with utmost sincerity; where exceptional operations targeting the American occupation forces took place, imposing on occupation forces to set a timetable for withdrawal. He said that when occupation forces faltered, the operations increased until they forced them to leave.
“If we combine what the Iraqi resistance has done with the steadfastness of Iran, Syria, along with the resistance in Lebanon and Palestine, we conclude that the first version of the American scheme has ended and failed,” Sayyed Nasrallah asserted.
The result of the first version of the American scheme, the Hezbollah leader said, is that [Former US President Donald] Trump was forced to go secretly to Iraq despite spending 7 thousand billion dollars on this scheme.
In confirmation, the former commander of NATO’s forces in Europe, Wesley Clark, said he met a senior military officer in Washington in November 2001 who told him the Bush administration was planning to attack Iraq first before taking action against Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia and Sudan.
Former commander of NATO’s forces in Europe Wesley Clark
The general’s remarks surfaced in a book, The Clark Critique, excerpts from which appeared in the latest edition of the US magazine Newsweek.
Clark said after the 11 September 2001 attacks, many Bush administration officials seemed determined to move against Iraq, invoking the idea of state sponsorship of terrorism, “even though there was no evidence of Iraqi sponsorship of 9/11 whatsoever”.
Turning to the second phase which began with the tenure of Former US president Barak Obama, Sayyed Nasrallah said that when they (the US administration) discovered that large-scale wars are doomed to failure, and that relying on ‘Israel’ in wars is a fiasco, wars took on an internal turn; with the eruption of inner and sectarian strife after the emergence of Takfiris.
“This version was the version of destroying countries and peoples, so that America will come out as the ‘savior’. In this arena, Suleimani and Al-Muhandis were present in public because they were supposed to be in the field to fight off this scheme,” Sayyed Nasrallah said, stating that before these two major and historic failures, Trump decided to deal a decisive blow to the resistance axis by assassinating both commanders (Suleimani and Al-Muhandis).
Clark acknowledged Iranian and Syrian support for resistance groups such as Lebanon’s Hezbollah and the Palestinian movement Hamas.
“But neither Hezbollah nor Hamas were targeting Americans,” he wrote. “Why not build international power against Al Qaeda?”
Instead, Clark pointed the finger at what he called “the real sources of terrorists – US allies in the region like Egypt, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia”.
Clark blamed Egypt’s “repressive policies”, Pakistan’s “corruption and poverty”, as well as Saudi Arabia’s “radical ideology and direct funding” for creating a pool of angry young men who became “terrorists”.
Hezbollah’s secretary general said that with a two million-man funeral held for martyr Suleimani, the largest in history, and his emergence as an inspiration and symbol for Iranians, the scheme had an adverse effect on America, adding that after the martyrdom of Suleimani, the “deal of the century” fell through, Lebanon established the rules of deterrence, and victory was achieved in the issue of demarcating the maritime borders.
Former head of IRGC’s Al-Quds Force General Martyr Qassem Suleimani and Deputy Head of the Hashd Shaabi Committee Hajj Martyr Abu Mahdi Al-Muhandis
Ahmad Farhat, Translated and Edited by Mohammad Salami
Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah warned during a speech on October 1, 2022, against the anti-Iran propaganda promoted in Iraq, underlining the Iranian support to the Iraqis in their fight against ISIL terrorist group.
The two civilizations of Iraq, Mesopotamia, and Iran, Persia, are said to be among the most ancient civilizations throughout history. Iraqis and Iranians have been sharing joys and griefs and confronting the foreign interventions, especially the British influence on Shah regime in Iran and the US invasion of Iraq in 2003.
Numerous are the Iraqi civilization’s, Mesopotamia, feats, including Hammurabi code of laws, and the geographical location of features exposed Iraq to the foreign greedy attacks in light of the oil excavations in the twenties of the twentieth century.
The ambitions of the enemies and the foreign sides have been endless and concentrated on partitioning Iraq and divide its population over sectarian segments in order to plunder the Iraqi resources.
The historical paradox lies in the fact that the states which supported Saddam Hussein’s war on the Islamic Republic were the same that backed the US invasion of Iraq in addition to Britain.
The same paradox extends and shows that the same states are stirring sedition between Iraq and Iran and instigating the Iraqis against improving the relations with the Islamic Republic, knowing that some of those Arab regimes participated in besieging the Iraqi people and imposing the oil-for-food program.
In this regard, the former Iraq foreign minister, Naji Al-Hudaithi, exposed many of the scandals of the oil-for-food program, indicating that $50 billion had been plundered to fund the UN agencies and compensate the foreign states which supported Saddam Hussein in his war on Iran.
The UN agencies and inspectors used to waste huge amounts of money to purchase new gadgets and devices even before the old ones break down, Al-Hudaithi said.
Those countries did not stop at that limit; Saudi, for instance, dispatched 5000 suicide bombers to carry out attacks in Iraq and facilitated the movements of the two terrorist groups of Al-Qaeda and ISIL.
The former Iraqi premier Haidar Abadi announced a related Saudi confession:
After the Iraqis managed in 2011 to expel the US occupation forces, the entire Middle East witnessed the advent of the so-called Arab Spring which turned to be a black winter in Iraq.
Head of the Badr Organization Hadi Al-Ameri and the former premier Nuri Al-Maliki reflect on the Iranian support to Iraq:
108374
The enemies wanted Iraq to confront solely the terrorist era; however, the fraternal relations with the Islamic Republic were stronger than the colonial schemes.
The Iranian military support to Iraq moved swiftly into the front of confrontation with the US occupation, and the former head of IRGC’s Al-Quds Force General Martyr Qassem Suleimani coordinated with the Deputy Head of the Hashd Shaabi Committee Hajj Martyr Abu Mahdi Al-Muhandis all the operations.
Many questions can be raised in this domain about Iraq’s destiny, ruling system, political creed, defense capabilities and economic situation it in case the terrorist groups or the US occupation have prevailed.
A thorough look at the scene affirms that the endeavor to demonize Iran betrays the history, present and the future of Iraq. Those attempts have been launched by some Arab and Western states, which supported the Saddam Hussein’s war on Iran and the US invasion of Iraq, via media outlets.
Nevertheless, the majority of the Iraqi people rejects this approach and underscores the fraternal relations between Iraq and Iran, knowing that this stance is always reiterated by the Iraqi officials.
Aerial footage shows the heavy participation in the popular event marking the first anniversary of the martyrdom of the two leaders, Suleimani and Al-Muhandis
The Islamic Republic blocked all the schemes to destroy the Iraqi state and displace its people, sending the military personnel and equipment to help the Iraqi army and popular forces to overcome the ISIL terrorists.
Martyrs Suleimani and Al-Muhandis participating in relieving Al-Basra and Khuzestan locals in Iraq
While, the martyr leaders Suleimani and Al-Muhandis and their brethren in the IRGC as well as Hashd Shaabi fighting the terrorist groups, certain Arab regimes were dispatching suicide bombers to commit massacres against the Iraqis.
Iran sacrificed its elite commanders and fighters, headed by General Suleimani who has been a great symbol for the Iranian and most of the Iraqis.
The two leaders Suleimani and Al-Muhandis embraced martyrdom together in the US drone attack on their convoy near Baghdad airport on January 3, 2020, underlining the US keenness on the Israeli interests and the Iraqi fuel.
The United States has continued to intervene in all the local Iraqi politics and plundering the Mesopotamian resources. Whereas, the Islamic Republic has been offering Iraq economic aids and investment projects.
The Islamic Republic of Iran has never requested any Iraqi services in return. Its intention has been always concentrated on defending the sanctities and supporting the vulnerable against oppression, which in consecrated in its Constitution.
Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution in Iran Imam Sayyed Ali Khamenei highlights the importance of the fight against ISIL terrorists in protecting Imam Hussein (P) Holy Shrine in Karbala City. Martyr Suleimani, moreover, indicates that the terrorists plotted to destroy the Holy Shrines in Iraq.
البحر الأبيض المتوسط وفرص إضعاف الحصار على لبنان وغزَّة
عمرو علان
من المعلوم أن عمليات الإعداد وتطوير القدرات التسليحية للقوى العسكرية لا تكون بطريقة اعتباطية.
رغم دخول الحروب العصرية مرحلة “حروب الجيل الخامس”، بحسب تقديرات البعض، والحديث المتزايد عن دور الذكاء الاصطناعي في حروب المستقبل، بما يوحي أحياناً بأنَّ الحرب باتت مختلفة في الجوهر عن حروب الحقب الماضية، فإنَّ واقع الحال يشير إلى عدم تبدُّل الأهداف الإستراتيجية للنزاعات الدولية كثيراً، فتأمين مصادر الطاقة والسيطرة على ممرات النقل، لا سيما البحرية منها، ما زال يؤدي دوراً حاسماً في صعود القوى الدولية وهبوطها.
لذلك، خلال المرحلة الدولية الراهنة التي يتم فيها رسم معالم نظام عالمي جديد، ويترتب على نتيجة مسار الأحداث فيها صعود حضارات وهبوط أخرى، نجد أنَّ القوى الدولية الكبرى، وتلك الإقليمية الفاعلة، تولي عملية التحكّم في المضائق والممرات المائية الحيوية اهتماماً خاصاً، كمضيقي هرمز وباب المندب، وبحري آزوف والأبيض المتوسط، ولا يبدو أنَّ تبدُّلاً حقيقياً سيطرأ على هذه الأهداف الإستراتيجية للنزاعات الدوليَّة قبل أن تصل الحضارة الإنسانية إلى مستوى “النوع الأول” من الحضارات على “مقياس كارداشيف لتصنيف الحضارات”، وقبل أن تقطع شوطاً معتبراً فيه على أقل تقدير، وذلك لن يتحقق إلا لقرون قادمة.
من هنا، نلحظ أن خيار تطوير القدرات الهجومية العسكرية البحرية التي أولتها دول “محور المقاومة” وحركاته اهتماماً ملموساً في السنوات الأخيرة ضمن تكتيكاتها القتالية بات يعطي مفاعيله في عمليات رسم معادلات الحرب وتحقيق المكاسب الميدانية.
وقد تجلى ذلك في عدَّة محطات مهمة خلال الأعوام الماضية. مثلاً، كانت قدرات إيران العسكرية البحرية قد شكَّلت إحدى وسائل الردع الفعَّالة التي اعتمدتها في مواجهة الولايات المتحدة الأميركية، لثنيها عن الإقدام على عدوان عسكري عليها، إذ كان باستطاعة إيران في تلك الحالة تعطيل حركة الملاحة عبر مضيق هرمز؛ ذلك الممر المائي الحيوي الذي يمر عبره ما يزيد على 20% من صادرات موارد الطاقة الأحفورية في العالم.
وفي محطة مهمة أخرى، نجد أنَّ التنافس على السيطرة على مضيق “باب المندب” يعد واحداً من الخلفيات الرئيسة للحرب التي تشنها السعودية على اليمن. لذلك، كان من ضمن إستراتيجية صنعاء العسكرية تطوير قدرات بحرية هجومية مؤثرة يمكن الاعتماد عليها في التأثير في حركة الملاحة البحرية في باب المندب والبحر الأحمر.
أما في لبنان، وفي محطة ترسيم الحدود البحرية مع العدو، وسعي الدولة اللبنانية لفرض حقّها في استخراج الغاز الطبيعي من حقول شرقي المتوسط واستثماره، نجد أنَّ قدرات حزب الله البحرية الهجومية كان لها الدور الحاسم في حصول الدولة اللبنانية على مسودة تفاهم حول ترسيم الحدود البحرية مع العدو، وحول حقّه في استخراج موارده الغازية واستثمارها، بصرف النظر عن الجدل القائم حول إذا ما كانت تلك المسودة قد أعطت للبنان كامل حقوقه.
ما يهم في هذا المقام، بعيداً من النقاش الدائر حول خطوط الترسيم البحرية اللبنانية: الخط 29، والخط 23، وخط “فريدريك هوف”، والخط “الإسرائيلي” رقم 1 البري، بعيداً من هذا النقاش، على أهميته ووجاهته، يبقى واقع الحال أن الكيان الموقّت ما كان ليعطي لبنان أياً من حقوقه لولا تلويح حزب الله بقدراته البحرية العسكرية.
ولولا إمكانات حزب الله البحرية العسكرية تلك، القادرة على استهداف مصادر استخراج الطاقة في شرقي المتوسط، والقادرة على عرقلة حركة نقل الطاقة عبر البحر الأبيض المتوسط أيضاً، ما كان الأميركي في وارد السماح للبنان بالاستفادة من ثرواته من الغاز الطبيعي، بما يتضمَّنه ذلك من ضرب لأساسات سياسة الحصار غير المعلن التي ينتهجها الأميركي ضد لبنان منذ حين.
إذاً، بناءً على الوقائع السالفة الذكر، يمكن أن نخلص إلى أنَّ الجهد الذي صرفته دول وحركات المقاومة على تعزيز قدراتها البحرية العسكرية وحسن توظيف تلك القدرات تكتيكياً في الميدان أثمر نتائج ملموسةً في مصلحتها، وحقّق لها مكاسب ميدانيةً وسياسيةً، ولا سيما في الحالة اللبنانية. وبناءً على هذه الخلاصة، يبرز تساؤلٌ عما إذا كان من الممكن لفصائل المقاومة الفلسطينية الاستفادة من هذه التجارب في فك الحصار المفروض على غزة.
بدايةً، من المعلوم أن عمليات الإعداد وتطوير القدرات التسليحية للقوى العسكرية لا تكون بطريقة اعتباطية، بل تكون استجابةً للإستراتيجيات والتكتيكات العسكرية المرسومة، وضمن الإمكانات المتاحة وظروف الميدان؛ فمن خلال تتبع مسيرة دول “محور المقاومة” وحركاتها نجد أنها عملت منذ البدايات على توظيف سلاح “صواريخ أرض أرض” بطريقة مميزة، بهدف التغلب على معضلة التفوق الجوي الكاسح لمصلحة العدو. وقد كان ذلك ضمن إستراتيجية “الحرب غير المتكافئة” الشاملة التي اعتمدتها قوى المقاومة في مواجهة الأعداء عموماً.
وقد تم تعميم تجربة “صواريخ أرض أرض” بعد نجاحها في جنوب لبنان إبان الاحتلال الإسرائيلي، فصارت إيران بعد ذلك من أكبر القوى الإقليمية من ناحية قدراتها الصاروخية، وباتت فصائل المقاومة الفلسطينية في غزَّة تتمتع بقدرة صاروخية يحسب لها الحساب، إذ استنسخت تكتيكات إطلاق الصواريخ من منصات مخفية وتحت الأرض.
وعقب حرب لبنان في تموز/يوليو 2006، التي اختبر فيها حزب الله بنجاح باهر تكتيكات ميدانية ضد سلاح المدرّعات الإسرائيلي، وذلك باستخدام سلاح “كورنيت” الروسي المضاد للدروع، اتخذ قائد حرس الثورة الإسلامية آنذاك، الشهيد اللواء قاسم سليماني، قراراً بنقل تلك التجربة إلى فصائل المقاومة الفلسطينية في غزة، بالتعاون مع كل من حزب الله والدولة السورية التي زودت القطاع بهذا النوع من السلاح من مخزون الجيش العربي السوري في ذلك الوقت. وقد كان لتكتيك استخدام سلاح “كورنيت” في القطاع دورٌ أساسيٌ في تحديد نتائج حروب غزَّة اللاحقة.
أما راهناً، وفي ظلِّ التوتر الدولي القائم حول الطاقة، وحول الممرات البحرية لنقلها، وارتفاع أهمية أسلحة البحر الهجومية بناءً على ذلك التوتر، ربما بات من المجدي أن تبدأ فصائل المقاومة الفلسطينيّة، وبالتعاون مع أركان “محور المقاومة”، بتسخير الموارد من أجل تعزيز قدرات القطاع البحرية العسكريّة، سواء بالعتاد المطلوب أو بالتقنيات اللازمة لتصنيع العتاد المناسب؛ فإذا كان “محور المقاومة” قد نجح في هذه العملية في اليمن، فلا بد من وجود إمكانية لتكرار الأمر في غزة.
ويدور الحديث هنا بالنسبة إلى غزَّة عن خطة متوسطة المدى أو قصيرة المدى في أفضل الأحوال، بحسب ظروف الميدان، إلا إذا كانت غزَّة قد تسلَّحت بالفعل على هذا الصعيد، مع العلم بأن لا مؤشرات تدل على هذا الأمر.
في كلِّ الأحوال، لا يجوز إهمال أمرين مفصليين عند التفكير في تكتيك استخدام البحر كوسيلة لتخفيف الحصار عن غزة، قياساً على تجربة حزب الله الأخيرة في لبنان. أولاً، لا يجوز بحال تجاهل حقيقة أنَّ حساب “موازين القوى” يختلف إلى حد بعيد من عدة أوجه بين الساحتين اللبنانية والفلسطينية.
لا ينسحب هذا على صعيد قدرة حزب الله التسليحية المتفوقة نوعاً وكماً فحسب، والفروق في طبيعة الميدان التي تتيح للحزب هامشاً أعظم في المناورة، واستفادة الحزب من خطوط إمداد فعالة، لكن أيضاً يجب أن يوضع بالاعتبار، عند حساب “موازين القوى”، حساسية ساحة فلسطين بالنسبة إلى الاحتلال مقارنةً بأي ساحة “معادية” أخرى، فسقف المعادلات التي يمكن إرغام الإسرائيلي على تجرُّعها من دون الدخول في جولة حرب قاسية يعد أعلى من السقف الذي يمكنه قبوله في فلسطين من دون الدخول في حرب يكون من شأنها تبديل التوازنات القائمة بصورة جوهرية.
وبناءً عليه، يمكن القول إنَّ المراهنة على السلاح البحري الهجومي وحده تعد مراهنةً واقعيةً، إذا ما كان الهدف هو تخفيف الحصار، لا إنهاءه بشكل كلِّي عن القطاع، مع أنَّ تخفيف الحصار، الذي يمكن لفصائل المقاومة في غزَّة تحقيقه في هذه الحال، وضمن الظروف الإقليمية والدولية الراهنة، قابلٌ لأن يكون تخفيفاً حقيقياً وذا آثار ملموسة على حياة سكان القطاع.
أما الأمر الثاني، فهو أنه لا يجوز بأي حال أن يتحول تكتيك تطوير السلاح البحري الهجومي في غزَّة إلى بديل من تكتيك المقاومة في تفعيل العمل المقاوم في الضفة، فساحة الضفة لا تزال تحظى بموقع الصدارة من الناحية الإستراتيجية في مشروع التحرير المركزي، ناهيك بأنه ضمن ظروف العدو الموضوعية المستجدة، وضمن تراجع القبضة الأمنية لسلطة “التنسيق الأمني” في رام الله، إضافة إلى الظروف الإقليمية والدولية الراهنة المحيطة، بات من الممكن لساحة الضفة تحقيق إنجاز يفوق بكثير أي إنجاز يمكن لساحة غزَّة تحقيقه على مستوى المشروع الوطني.
ختاماً، يفتح الاشتباك العالمي الدائر بين الدول العظمى آفاقاً جديدةً أمام فصائل المقاومة الفلسطينية، بما يجعل فرص تخفيف مفاعيل الحصار المفروض على غزَّة بصورة ملموسة أكثر واقعيةً، وذلك عبر المناورة على عقدة الطاقة والممرات المائية، لكن يبقى إنهاء الحصار عن غزَّة بصورة كلية أمراً يلزمه تغيير في “موازين القوى” الحاكمة حالياً، والطريق الأقصر لذلك، والأكثر جدوى وطنياً وإستراتيجياً، يمر عبر تصعيد الفعل المقاوم في الضفة، وتحويل المقاومة فيها إلى حال يحاكي مقاومة غزة، وهذا بات أمراً متاحاً ضمن المستجدات الفلسطينية والإقليمية.
“Hitting, succeeding, and capturing, all these things, if they are not with a spiritually sacred dimension, they are nothing but defeat.”[1]
– Imam Khomeini
Russia’s military operation in Ukraine, a response to a larger compound war that had percolated for several years, has been the subject of much quasi analyses. A vast majority of the compositions involves ad hoc cursory descriptions that concentrate on the “mechanics” of sub-operations within the operation, laical aims beneath the goal, secularly-defined methods & means, and varied temporal aftereffects discharged into a future material outcome that is concealed for now. In all these though, the critical “quintessence” has gone AWOL.
By critical “quintessence”, I mean careful and calculated use of a different kind of compass to navigate and approach the analyses and evaluation of methods, means, and outcomes. The sort of compass that actively and willfully transforms the nature of an exploration into relevant questions. Questions like: How do you measure “success” in a war, or in a battle, or in a military operation? What are the indicators by which you measure that success? Is success defined by the tangible and measureable superiority in domains of land, sea, air, inner space, outer space, and cyberspace? Is it measured by the square kilometers of land that is acquired and brought under control? Or, is it calculated by the number of hearts and minds captured, the number of injured produced, or the number of dead bodies accumulated? Is it in the number prisoners you take? Or, is it, perhaps, measured in Euro, Pound, Dollar, Rial, Yuan, Ruble, gold, silver, bitcoin, cubic feet of oil and gas, fluctuations in stock prices, and the like? Or, is it defined by how fast you announce “Mission Accomplished” while attired in a body gear that has been engineered to cause artificial ‘inflation’ in order to deflect attention from severe defects and shortcomings?
Source: Stephen Jaffe/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images. The guy in the middle is George W. Bush Jr. on the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln where he delivered his “Mission Accomplished” speech regarding the illegal war of aggression against Iraq on May 1, 2003.
“It was doomed from the beginning by the Kremlin’s ridiculous assumption that Washington would permit the operation to be limited. The widening of the war was guaranteed. The fact that the war has widened is now understood by Russian TV hosts who say the proxy war in Ukraine between the US and Russia is over and Russia now faces a real direct war with the US and its NATO puppets. For Russia to continue in Ukraine, the Kremlin must fight a real war and knock out the government in Kiev and the governmental and civilian infrastructure that permits Ukraine to conduct war without Russian interference and which permits supply avenues for ever more dangerous Western weapons to be acquired by Ukraine. It is stunning that Putin thought he could drive Ukrainian troops out of Donbas and then sign an agreement ending the conflict.”
It appears what the author is essentially suggesting that Russia should have invoked a Russian version of ‘shock and awe’ operation, perhaps similar to what the US executed in Iraq three weeks after which it announced its mission as ‘accomplished’. How did that sort of “real war”, the sort that “knocked out the government and destroyed the governmental and civilian infrastructure” in Iraq worked out for you? How did it work for you in Afghanistan? How has it worked out for your parasitic Zionist regime in West Asia?
At any rate, I am referring to type of exploration that questions the questions and detonates their underlying usual and customary assumptions. To put all that into cognitively more accessible terms to fit my purpose, I may say, anybody can wage a war – that is easy. But to wage a war with the right adversary and to the right proportion and at the right time and for the right purpose, and in the right way – that is not within everybody’s power and is not easy (adapting a rhetorical prose attributed to Aristotle).
But who is the right adversary? What is the right proportion? When is the right time? What is the right purpose? And most important of all, how is the right way determined?
The short answer is it depends. A bit longer answer is that it depends on your worldview, belief system, and ethical and moral framework based on which you are engaged in a war and the criteria according to which those belief systems and worldviews define success, and measure and evaluate its key indicators.
Here, I would like to focus on two major competing worldviews (from among several) that define and determine what that “right” is. One of the two worldviews belongs to Estekbar Jahani, or Global Arrogance, represented by US-Anglo-Zionist-West. The other worldview is that of Moghavemat, or the Resistance, represented by the Islamic Revolution of Iran and the nations and groups that are in this camp.
The rationale for examining the first worldview, belonging to the Global Arrogance, is quite obvious. For the most part, this worldview has wreaked havoc on our entire plant and has championed indiscriminate death and destruction anywhere it had been allowed to penetrate. We examine the second worldview, that of the Resistance, for two specific reasons. Firstly, it is the worldview that has been solidly standing up to the first worldview and limiting its spread for some time now. Secondly, it is the worldview that has currently formed a strategic partnership with Russia in her war against US-NATO (which is a segment of US-Anglo-Zionist-West).
I would also like to limit the focus of the essay regarding the indicators of ‘success’ in a war or military operations, on three specific indicators: the right purpose, the right method & tools, and the right proportion.
On with it. We have ample evidence that the first group, the Global Arrogance, believes itself to be the owner of the entire planet and everyone and everything in it. Thus, it arrogates to itself the right to consider anyone, anytime, and anywhere to be the right person, the right time, and right place to attack to get anything it wants if it can do so by getting away at minimum socio-political and economic cost to its clique. They prefer a hit and run sort of approach and pave their paths with blood and tears.
The report card, for the past few decades, of the representatives of the Global Arrogant worldview (US-Anglo-Zionist-West) is colorfully marked by illegal and aggressive wars and military operations against Lebanon (1982-1984), Grenada (1983), Libya (1986), Islamic Republic of Iran, Persian Gulf (1987-1988), Panama (1989-1990), Iraq Persian Gulf (1990-1991), Iraq (1991-2003), Somali (1992-1995), Serbia (1992-1995), Haiti (1994-1995), Yugoslavia (1992-1995), Afghanistan (2001-Present), Yemen (2002-Present), Iraq (2003-Present), Pakistan (2004-Present), Somalia (2007-Present), Libya (2011-Present), Uganda (2011-Present), Sudan (2011-Present), and Syria (2014-Present), just to be brief.
For this camp, the right purpose has been $, Power, Oil; the right Methods & Means has been wholesale killing, stealing, lying, cheating, sanctions, torture –pardon me, ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’—of prisoners, terror, chemical, biological, nuclear, and you name it; any means and methods, in short. The most savage, the better. As far as the right proportion is concerned, the limits appear quite limitless:
Leslie Stahl: “We have heard that half a million [Iraqi] children have died. I mean, that is more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?”
So, this is another definition of “success” for the Global Arrogance:
Source: Images are a selection from a study titled “Living near an active U.S. military base in Iraq is associated with significantly higher hair thorium and increased likelihood of congenital anomalies in infants and children,” (2019). The study was conducted by a team of independent medical researchers. This photo was extracted from the Intercept, available online at: https://theintercept.com/2019/11/25/iraq-children-birth-defects-military/
The more one stirs up the US wars and operations, the worse it stinks. So, let’s move on.
I have better access to evidence regarding the indicators I mentioned with respect to the worldview of the Moghavemat, the Resistance, which is, as stated, represented by the Islamic Revolution of Iran and the nations and groups that are aligned in it. I will therefore draw on field evidence and demonstrate how we might determine the right purpose, the right method & tools, and the right proportion as well as how we evaluate and measure success in various operational domains, within the specific framework rooted in our belief system.
The Sacred Defense (Iraq-Iran war 1980-1988). Saddam of then Iraq, encouraged, fully supported, equipped to his teeth, and financed to no end by the West, the East, and the Middle, attacked the newly constituted Islamic Republic of Iran on Shahrivar 31, 1359 [September 22, 1980]. The attack was illegal, unjustified, and unprovoked. It was a coordinated attack along a 1,280 Kilometer Iran-Iraq border from the north most borderline to the south most shorelines plus the Persian Gulf and several major inner cities’ important infrastructures. The West provided him with the chemical and biological weapons for use and he did not say no.
Naturally, Iran had to defend itself. Let me add here that any religion, school of thought, charter, moral and ethical framework that does not recognize self-defense as an obligation (and not merely as a legitimate right) is not worth the paper on which it is written. Why? Because, people, when they view something as a right, they have this propensity to give up their legitimate and God-given rights easily, willingly, and rather foolishly. However, if they are taught to think of something as a duty and obligation, then they cannot easily let go of their obligation without expecting severe consequences. That expectation of severe consequence has great deterrent value—so we are taught by the Quran:
“Would you not fight a people who broke their oaths and intended to expel the Messenger, and they were the first to begin their attack on you? Do you fear them? But Allah has more right that you should fear Him, if you are true believers.” [Tawbah (Chapter 9, Verse 13]
From this verse, we understand that there are at least three types of people with whom we must fight: 1) People who willfully break their oaths, contracts, and any agreement they have made with us. 2) People who attempt to expel us from our land and dislocate us. 3) People who initiate an attack and aggress against us.
In our Sacred Defense against Saddam of Iraq, not just one but all three conditions were met. He tore up the 1975 Algiers agreement; he attacked our land and killed and displaced millions of our people; and he began to actually occupy segments of our land. In response, we had the duty to: 1) Fight him and his army and his allies. 2) Don’t fear any them. 3) Fear only God. So, the motivation, or the purpose for this war, on this end, for the people of Iran was, first and foremost, to fulfill their duties and defend their nation against the aggressors.
With respect to defense, Ayatullah Khamenei has a very interesting elucidation that I’d like to quote here. He says:
“Defense is a part of the identity of a nation that is alive. Any nation that cannot defend itself is not alive. Any nation that does not recognize the importance of defense is not alive, in a manner of speaking, it is not alive. We cannot have eyes and power of analysis to see deep and hostile plot of the Arrogance against Islam, the Revolution, and the Islamic System, yet not think about defending ourselves. God forbid the day this nation and its elected officials to neglect wretched and hostile aggression of Global Arrogance headed by the United States of America.”[2]
As far as material “how,” or material methods & means were concerned, in the Sacred Defense, we did not have the luxury of choosing from among many ways and means. We had inherited a nation that had been entirely dependent on the Global Arrogance headed by the US-West, LLC for its military equipment and training. Billions of dollars sent by Shah to purchase military crafts and the like were blocked by the same entity. After the Revolution, even nails and barbed wires had been put on the list of sanctions. Quite amusingly, it was the only war over which the communist Soviet Union and the capitalist US-West had come together and had formed a perfect and united alliance against Iran. So, the Iranians did the best they could with what they had. And they succeeded. Iran’s territorial integrity remained intact.
What stands out the most for us, what is most valuable for us, however, is that the Islamic Republic of Iran did not use just any means. Weapons of mass destruction were out of question. Chemical and biological weapons were out of question. Hitting cities, towns, and people was out of question. When the Iranian cities and towns were being bombarded and innocent civilians were being killed, some voices from within Iran were asking for exact retaliation. Top officials went to visit Imam Khomeini to ask permission to respond in kind. Imam Khomeini, however, outright refused and said,
“You must take great care not to ever get angry and, due to the fact that they are bombing your cities and killing your loved ones, become inclined to respond in kind. But this way, you are not taking revenge from him [Saddam]. You must take your revenge from Saddam and the Baath regime, and you are doing that. Be careful though that not even a bullet is shot toward their cities. These are cities that are oppressed just like our Behbahan [a city in Iran] is oppressed. Basra, too, is oppressed. So is Mandali. All of them are under oppression. We must protect the human aspect of this to the end. We must protect the human aspects until our martyrdom or death and don’t submit to this anger that since he is doing this, we, too, must hit one of their cities. No, it’s not like this. The principles are Islam’s principles. This is Islamic Republic. Here, Islam rules. So, be mindful of yourself, of those who have power, of the government that has power, of the Guard that has power, of the military that has power, of Basij that has power, those who have power must, more than others, protect the human aspects, the Islamic aspects. They must spend this power in the right place and never violate its boundaries.”[3]
We prostrate before God and thank Him for Imam Khomeini who helped protect and keep the soul of our nation unblemished. When he is talking about spending the power in the right place, he is in fact talking about the quintessential right method & means and the right proportion based on our beliefs. Thank God that this spirit manifested itself in the battlefields during the Sacred Defense.
Eight year of Iraq-Iran war also taught the Iranians to be self-sufficient in everything and taught the US-West, LLC a valuable lesson. It taught them that a war with Iran would not be a walk in the park. And the Iranians learned to become quite self-sufficient in bi**h-slapping the United States of America when the opportunities have presented themselves.
Source: Khabar Online News Agency. The arrest of US navy personnel near Farsi Island in Persian Gulf within the Iranian territorial water by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard on January 12, 2016. Photo was accessed online at: khabaronline.ir/x6fSc
Source: IRNA. Remains of the United States RQ-4A Global Hawk BAMS-D surveillance drone that had violated the Iranian air space over the Strait of Hormuz by IRGC on June 20, 2019.
Source: Image from Ayn al-Asad US airbase in Iraq after Operation Martyr Soleimani on Jan. 8, 2020 @ 1:20 am. Transcript and translation of a CBS interview by Bashgah Khabarnegaran Javan News Agency. Accessed online at: https://www.yjc.news/00WwDI
These are noteworthy events if we also note that in 2020, the military expenditure for the United States was 801 billion dollars (38% of the world total on military expenditure) and the Islamic Republic of Iran’s was 24.6 billion dollars (1.2% of World’s total)[4]. That is, the US spent 33 times more on all things military than Iran, yet, when slapped by Iran in Ayn al-Asad while the whole world was watching, the Commander in Chief of the United States of America’s most significant response was: “it didn’t hurt.” Well, that’s not exactly what we heard.
It perhaps is an opportune moment here to hear directly from Sardar Hajizadeh, the IRGC Commander who gave the order for Ayn al-Asad’s strike, about exactly how that event on January 8, 2020 proceeded. I have translated for you segments of an interview he gave on this topic last year. The full video in Persian could be accessed here.
Interviewer: We would like to re-visit that day when you heard he [Martyr Soleimani] had been martyred. What happened? Did you form a meeting? If you could, please talk about any of them that is not classified or is not a security issue.
Sardar Hajizadeh: There were discussions. At that point, we gave the highest probability for a direct fire exchange with [the United States of] America, hit some of their bases and they in turn to react to it. That high probability was expected among all groups, the political figures and the military figures. We considered all aspects. But it was impossible for us not to give a direct respond. Also, the honorable people of Iran must pay attention to this matter that [the US] America, after the World War II, after 75 years, during all these times, no nation had ever had any direct battle with them, or hit them. No one had done that. That is, no one had dared to do that.
After that operation, too, when I would meet with top military commanders from many countries, all of them would ask at the very beginning of the meeting, their first question of me would be this, ‘how did you possibly made this decision?!’
Sardar Hajizadeh: So, [US] Americans realized that Iran intends to do something and they began to issue threats.
Interviewer: The Americans?
Sardar Hajizadeh: Yes. It was the second day, the day after their terror act, Trump came and issued a direct threat. He said, ‘If Iran responds, we will hit 52 locations in Iran. So, it is under these circumstances that you are deciding to hit [US] America. And many people from many places [foreign officials & international organizations] were sending messages to us not to escalate, to cool down, or to do something later, and so on and so forth…
Interviewer: So, what happened next? They said they’ll hit 52 locations but the decision here did not change?
Sardar Hajizadeh: No, it did not. They would say quite solidly that they would absolutely hit 52 locations and we, too, made the solid decision to absolutely hit. Until the night before the operation, our decision was to hit Taji Camp. It is near Baghdad, near Kazmain. But the night before we changed our decision and decided to hit Ayn al-Asad.
Interviewer: Who had information that you were going to target Ayn al-Asad?
Sardar Hajizadeh: Very limited number of people had it. Just a few commanders of the Revolutionary Guard, for example, and the head of the Command Center, Major General Bagheri. Very limited number of people knew, we and only seven or eight other high commanders.
Interviewer: Did you inform Iraq? How long before the operation did you notify them?
Sardar Hajizadeh: See, there has been this ambiguity about this and they said something like…
Interviewer: …people say they [the US Americans] knew, they evacuated the location, they left….
Sardar Hajizadeh: Well, we will show you photographs and you will broadcast them. Almost in all US bases, they were on high alert and they did not know where exactly we were going to hit. But they were anxious. From Persian Gulf to Strait of Hormuz to Kuwait, from there to Iraq and to Jordan…everywhere they were giving high probability that we would respond. That day, after Hajj Qasem’s martyrdom, they distanced themselves about 500 kilometers from Makron shores. That is, they went outside of Hormuz Strait.
Interviewer: They were giving a high probability you hit, and they left.
Sardar Hajizadeh: Yes. So, all these talks that the Americans knew and all that, no, [the US] America did not know where we were going to hit. Decidedly they did not know.
[Videos and films were shown by Sardar Hajizadeh in the program that clearly showed the US forces had evacuated the Persian Gulf and had dispersed their planes to different locations in their various bases.]
Sardar Hajizadeh: Now you see the photographs of Al-Hodaid and A-Zahrra, when you look, before they martyred him [Martyr Soleimani], these fighter jets [pointing to photos] have their regular arrangements. The fighters are all lined up together. But after they martyred him [pointing to other photos], as they were worried about attacks from Iran, they spread them all over the taxiway, in different disparate locations. They spread it around. That means they adopted a full defensive posture. You see these navy ships here [pointing to Persian Gulf], these are from before their terror act. Now you see after the martyrdom, all of them are gathered up here. You see here is fully evacuated. This shows that they are worried they might be attacked. The same situation applies to their air bases.
Interviewer: When did we let the Iraqi’s know?
Sardar Hajizadeh: Half an hour before firing the missiles. Either through Quds Force or the Foreign Ministry, they informed the Iraqi Prime Minister that we intend to hit an airbase in Iraq.
Interviewer: Half an hour?
Sardar Hajizadeh: Half an hour. However, they did not know which base.
Interviewer: They did not even know which base?
Sardar Hajizadeh: No they didn’t. This half-an-hour notice, too, was only out of respect for the Iraqis since it was their land, they had decided to let them know half an hour before the strikes.
Interviewer: Had the number of missiles been determined, too?
Sardar Hajizadeh: We fired and hit them with 13 missiles.
[A video of the exact moment Sardar Hajizadeh is giving the go ahead for the strikes by phone is shown. I took a screenshot of the video [images below] at two separate moments. The first image is the moment Sardar Hajizadeh is giving the go ahead for the strike by phone and the second image is moments after that.]
The moment Sardear Hajizadeh is giving the order for the strikes on Ayn al-Asad: “Hit. Hit baba, Bismillah.”
Sardar Hajizadeh, having just ordered them by phone to fire the missiles, is explaining to those present in the command room: “You see we are firing one at a time [with pause] so that their people would have time to escape because we are not after mass killing. But that evil Trump committed such crime. Even at the time they were striking Haji’s vehicle with their missiles, the strikes on the two cars were done within a second from one another. He had not given them any opportunity [to get away].”
The fine point Sardar Hajizadeh is raising here is noteworthy because he is referring to a code in the rules of combat among the Iranian fighters and commanders. When striking a place where there are a lot of low-ranking soldiers, you fire in a way they would have an opportunity to run if you are able to provide them that opportunity, like Ayn al-Asad strikes. However, Trump had ordered striking Sardar Soleimani and Abu Mohandis Al-Mahdi and their companions while they were not even in a battlefield, or in a military base, or on high alert.
The interview continues…
Interviewer: Was Ayn al-Asad Operation complete success?
Sardar Hajizadeh: Yes. All missiles hit precisely where they were directed to hit. Precisely where they were meant to hit.
[Here, the interview has incorporated videos reports from Persian-language stations like BBC and the like about the strikes.]
Interviewer: One thing they say is this, ‘there was nothing at Ayn al-Asad when we hit it. What was the use of hitting Ayn al-Asad? The damage to [the US] Americans was not that significant.’ Could you expand on this a bit more?
Sardar Hajizadeh: You see, they could have killed Sardar Soleimani without admitting they did this. Why did they claim responsibility? Why? Because they wanted to say, ‘We have power. We hit and you cannot do anything.’ That was the whole story. And we RESPONDED, we HIT to say, ‘It is not like you can hit and run. If you hit, you will definitely be hit.’
[The interview is moved to a different location.]
Sardar Hajizadeh: You see, all of these have been destroyed. Here is the control center for UAVs. It’s destroyed.
Interviewer: Did they have any people who were killed?
Sardar Hajizadeh: Yes, they had people who were killed. The Iraqi people who were there they reported to us about the dead bodies they [the US Americans] were putting into bags. And they managed to kick out all of them [the Iraqis] within the first hours. Even when they were pulling out the dead bodies from underneath the rubbles. First they kicked out the Iraqis, then, they pulled the dead bodies out.
Interviewer: Themselves?
Sardar Hajizadeh: Yes, themselves.
[Toward the end of the interview, the interviewer asks, “Was this the retaliation/revenge?”]
Sardar Hajizadeh: This was the beginning of the revenge. I believe it was an important beginning and it demolished [the US] American’s grandiosity. But it is not yet finished.
Interviewer: Once we hit them, what happened next? What else were we ready for?
Sardar Hajizadeh: We were ready, in the event they responded, to start hitting the US bases. The beginning was Ayn al-Asad but the continuation was to be all bases in the region. That is, we had to hit all of them. We had prepared 400 missiles for the initial moments. We had prepared ourselves to escalate and continue the fight. But, well, the [US] Americans did not decide on continuing.
Interviewer: Did they even try to destroy any of our incoming missiles?
Sardar Hajizadeh: No. You see, these people have some capabilities. But we, too, know how to fight. We have learned a thing or two in these few years. We hit both their shield and themselves. All the bases they have in the region, you can do simultaneous strikes with 500 missiles, you can completely decommission them and hit them rather hard in a manner that would be hard for them to rehabilitate.
Sardar Hajizadeh: One day, I had a meeting with high commander of the Russian aerospace division, who had come to Iran. I showed him the videos of the Persian Gulf and was explaining to him how with drones we fly right overhead the US navy ships. He asked, “Don’t they hit? Don’t they see you? Aren’t you afraid?” I said [smiling], “General, test them!” He flew [the drone] over the US navy ship. I told him not to worry. You see, others are learning these moves. The head of Russian aerospace asked, “how come they don’t hit you?” I answered, “if they hit, we’ll hit back.”
Sardar Hajizadeh: At any rate, hitting Ayn al-Asad was not some small task. Some claim we coordinated things with them. If we were the sort to coordinate [chuckle] things with them, then, we wouldn’t have been having all these battles!
In the second episode of Al Mayadeen’s documentary The Heroes, the stories of Gilboa’s prisoners and their lives inside and behind the bars are narrated. What are the Jenin Brigade and the secret of The Fifth Room?
Second episode of The Heroes on Al Mayadeen
By Al Mayadeen English
On the right side of the prison yard is a cluster of cells, one of which will become the scene of a momentous event; cell number 5. That is what the Israeli occupation called one of the prison cells in Gilboa. However, the Palestinian prisoners had another name for the cell that later became an integral part of the history of the Palestinian struggle.
In the second episode of The Heroes, commander Mahmoud Al-Aridah tells Al Mayadeen the story of General Qassem Soleimani’s room, the martyr of Al-Quds’ room. It is the room of the hour in the story of Operation Freedom Tunnel. Strategic at heart, this naming was a message to the Israeli occupation.
That is what martyr General Qassem Soleimani’s daughter confirmed when she found out what the prisoners decided to call the cell they were using to break from the Israeli occupation’s chains and send a jolt of lightning through the occupation’s so-called being. They decided to name the landmark cell after her martyred father.
She saw that this reflected the deep connection General Soleimani had with the Palestinian freedom fighters, prisoners, and people as a whole. It shows that General Qassem was a part of them, and he will forever be embedded in their memory, perceived as living among them. “These people who are dear to us see that martyr Soleimani has a hand in these operations.”
Prisoner Mahmoud Al-Aridah, the man dissatisfied with the Israeli occupation’s chains so much so he tried to break out from its unjust prisons several times, forcing the Israeli occupation to transfer him repeatedly throughout occupied Palestine until he ended up in Gilboa. Al-Aridah’s stay in this prison, in particular, was set up as a challenge by the Israeli prison administration, as it thought that he could never leave its four reinforced walls.
However, commander Mahmoud planned with determination, and then he struck, executing a freedom operation the likes of which have never been seen by the occupation.
Prisoners succeeded as free people failed
There was a consensus on prisoner Zakaria Al-Zubaidi becoming a part of The Heroes. The consensus showed Palestinian unity, for Zakaria, as a fellow Palestinian from Jenin, The Heroes were quick to embrace him as one of their own, sending a message of great success from inside the walls of the Israeli occupations’ prisons as those outside them failed to unite.
In the second episode of The Heroes, Al Mayadeen narrates prisoner Zakaria Al-Zubaidi’s story and talks about him and his feats. Zakaria constitutes a certain kind of symbolism. Being the commander of the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade in the Jenin refugee camp, Al-Zubaidi becoming a party to the operation and a part of the team was influential on the Palestinian public and freedom fighters.
Al-Zubaidi fought against the Israeli occupation forces several times and participated in several operations. He was behind a bombing in “Tel Aviv” in 2004, which sent the Israeli occupation rabidly searching for him for long stretches of time. His home was raided numerous times, which prevented him from seeing his family all at once. He has not since 1988 seen all of his brothers together, as at least one person would be in prison at any point.
Ayham Kamamji: The poet freedom fighter
“In 2003, he went on a mission in a booby-trapped car. He got unlucky. The car malfunctioned, and he has been wanted ever since,” said Fouad Kamamji, prisoner Ayham’s father.
Ayham has two bachelor’s degrees from Al-Aqsa University in Gaza and the Open University in Al-Quds, as well as a master’s degree from the University of Cairo. During his detention, he was known to have always been occupied with teaching young prisoners.
“Kamaji is a kind-hearted man. If you are ever in trouble, he will help you. He solves problems in prison and helps the men in there to read and write,” people close to Ayham Kamamji said in episode two of The Heroes.
Kamaji killed an illegal Israeli settler in Ramallah, or so is reported. But in reality, he was not any settler; he was an officer in the Israeli occupation’s airforce. Additionally, Kamamji was supposed to stand trial at the hands of the Palestinian Authority, but the Israeli occupation tricked him and arrested him while on trial.
In Gilboa, during his public trial following Operation Freedom Tunnel, Kamamji was the sound voice of reason, speaking eloquently and bravely about his roots in the resistance.
Munadel Nafi’at: A man of many feats
Mahmoud Al-Aridah told Al Mayadeen that back in 2018, he met Munadel Nafi’at, who was arrested and released several times before ending up in Gilboa and choosing to become a member of the team.
The Israeli occupation executed its revenge on Nafi’at’s family, arresting his brother Qaisar directly after arresting him. Qaisar is currently in solitary confinement. Meanwhile, his brother Majdou was sentenced to 22 months in prison a few months back, and he is not deprive of visitations.
He was arrested for the first time before he was liberated through the Loyalty of the Free prison swap deal on December 18, 2011, between the Israeli and Palestinian sides. It saw 1,400 Palestinian prisoners liberated from the Israeli occupation’s prisons. Ever since, he got arrested back to back.
Nafi’at spent around seven years in the Israeli occupation’s prisons, including through administrative detention. He was also arrested for being a member of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad.
Who is Mahmoud Chreim?
The laborers; that is what Mahmoud Al-Aridah calls him. They had a major role in digging the tunnel and executing Operation Freedom Tunnel. Munadel Nafi’at, Mohammad Al-Aridah, Mahmoud Chreim, and Mohammad Abu Bakr. They were hardworking laborers.
During the same month as Operation Freedom Tunnel, Mahmoud Chreim was supposed to get out of prison. However, he chose to stay and be part of the operation, which landed him an additional four years in prison.
Mahmoud Chreim’s brother, Youssef, describes him as a “calm person who loved to fight and resist for the liberation of liberating Al-Aqsa mosque. He is a great person who did not care for any harm that he would endure for carrying out this operation, even if it meant that he would have to stand trial and face a longer sentence. All he cared about was these six prisoners facing a life sentence and contributing to their liberation. That is all he cared about.”
A hero that cut through the Israeli occupation’s prison bars is how Mahmoud Al-Aridah described him. That is Chreim, alongside Qusai Merhi, who was arrested before finishing his studies and was also sentenced to four more years in prison for helping The Heroes.
Jenin
Liberated prisoner Mohammad Jaradat talks in the second episode of The Heroes about Jenin. Why Jenin? Why are all the prisoners who participated in the operation from Jenin?
“These questions underline that there is a connection between the tunnel and these brothers’ plan to reach Jenin refugee camp, as well as some of them making it there, not to mention the inclination toward resistance in the Jenin refugee camp. That is a sentiment that is still present until now, even if it was between two tides, it is still a thorn in the side of the Israeli occupation’s security,” Jaradat underlined.
“Everyone is talking about Jenin today as the city spearheading the Palestinian resistance in the West Bank. Nablus, despite all its greatness and might, and despite being the most populated area in the West Bank, has lost its standing to [Jenin]. Martyr Ibrahim Nabulsi’s mother is from Jenin, and Jenin’s residents dealt with his martyrdom as if it occurred there. Therefore, the Jenin Brigade is a prime example of Palestinian resistance that can be used as a model for resisting the occupation on the level of the Palestinian cause, and this is what everyone is closely following,” he added.
Palestinian Islamic Jihad Secretary-General Ziyad Al-Nakhalah called the Jenin Brigade the “Tunnel Brigade” so that Operation Freedom Tunnel remains a symbol of resistance in the occupied West Bank.
The digging began. Those who should know found out, as other inmates believed that the whole operation was just to find a safe place for them to stash their phones, and they went out for recess as some of the heroes went to the cell where the whole thing took place. This is the beginning of the operation.
To know more details about Operation Freedom Tunnel, watch the upcoming episodes of The Heroes on Al Mayadeen at 21:00 Al-Quds time.
Hezbollah Secretary General His Eminence Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah delivered a speech during Al-Quds Platform event in commemoration of Al-Quds International Day.
At the beginning of his speech, Sayyed Nasrallah praised the fact that “Day by day we discover the wisdom of Imam Khomeini’s declaration of an international day for al-Quds.”
“The Palestinian cause is being revived and finding more supporters and resistance fighters who are willing to sacrifice for its sake,” he added.
His Eminence further recalled that “The enemy’s strategy was based on betting on time during which peoples might forget the Palestinian cause.”
However, the Resistance assured that “The opposite happened thanks to the faith and insight conveyed by the countries and peoples of the Axis of Resistance.”
“Due to Jihad, faith, work and steadfastness, the Palestinian cause returned to be the central cause for all the Axis of Resistance,” Sayyed Nasrallah confirmed.
In parallel, Sayyed Nasrallah viewed that “The growing Axis of Resistance should be also named the Axis of al-Quds since al-Quds is its central and unifying point.”
“Al-Quds today is back, having a sword in Gaza that defends it as the previous year during Operation ‘Al-Quds Sword’,” he underlined, noting that “Al-Quds today has an axis that is united to make its strong and solid regional equation to defend it first and liberate it in the second place.”
Meanwhile, His Eminence underlined that “Hezbollah considers itself at the forefront in defending our brothers in the Palestinian resistance factions.”
“All those who belong to the path and the Axis of Resistance are subjected to sanctions and blockade that aim to abandon al-Quds, Palestine, and the logic of resistance,” he stated, pointing out that “We consider defying the restrictions, the blockade, and terrorism as an essential part of the battle of resistance.”
Sayyed Nasrallah also vowed that “We will break all the limits and thwart all conspiracies, we will defeat all daggers that attempt to stab us in the backs and from the front.”
In addition, he recalled that “Our pledge is to the prominent martyrs of Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Iran, and Yemen, atop of them is the martyr of al-Quds Hajj Qassem Soleimani.”
“We and all the honorable people in this nation will perform our prayers in al-Quds, and this is a pledge from all of us. We are looking forward to the day when al-Quds will return to its people and to the nation,” His Eminence pledged.
At the end of his speech, Sayyed Nasrallah asserted: “The usurping Zionist occupier must leave at the end. God’s willing, we are standing on the edge of the great and final victory that we’ll witness very soon. We and all the honorable people in this nation will perform our prayers in Al-Quds, and this is a pledge from all of us.”
Related Videos
Israeli concern over images of young men wrapping their foreheads with bandages that read “O Jerusalem, we are coming”
Hezbollah Deputy Secretary-General Sheikh Naim Qassem weighs in on a number of topics, including Riyadh’s accusations and the Lebanese elections.
Sheikh Naim Qassem delivered a speech, addressing Saudi Arabia and the coming Lebanon elections.
Today, Thursday, Deputy Secretary-General of Hezbollah Sheikh Naim Qassem said, “Recently, Saudi King Salman bin Abdulaziz announced an unjust stance against Hezbollah, deeming the organization terrorist, as Saudi Arabia has been classifying it for years.”
Sheikh Qassem, in his speech in South Lebanon, during the second anniversary marking the martyrdom of the two leaders, Qassem Soleimani and Abu Mahdi Al-Muhandis, said that “this description at this particular time and from the King of Saudi Arabia bears bad connotations, especially since the description is directed toward heroic fighters who sacrificed their blood, as both men and women sacrificed themselves for the liberation of the land, for Palestine, and for the dignity of the ummah.”
Qassem contended that “this accusation against a wide segment of Lebanese society, against an effective and influential resistance group in the region, a deterrent of suspicious plots, is to incite the Lebanese against each other to stir up tension between them and to incite the people against the resistance that has a major role in the renaissance of Lebanon and its liberation.”
“They say that Lebanon must be Arab, and we tell them that we believe in the Arabness of Lebanon.” He asked: “Yemen is Arab and Saudi Arabia is Arab, and if we support Yemen, that means we support an Arab country, and if we are ever to support Saudi Arabia, how can we do so when it is attacking the other Arab country?”
He stressed that “Hezbollah must support those who are attacked, those who bear the right, those who offer martyrs, and those whose country is being destroyed by the hand of an Arab and an international tool that is trying to change the balance of power in the region.”
Qassem stressed that “a terrorist is the one who kills dissenting opinions in his country, attacks his neighbors in Yemen, and normalizes with Israel using various deceptive methods.”
Sheikh Qassem clarified that “freedom of opinion and expression is clear in the constitution under Article 13, and it is guaranteed as per the law.”
He stressed that “our response to Saudi Arabia will be decisive.”
He addressed Saudi Arabia, saying, “You, yourselves, are terrorism, and we are the resistance, and we will not take your harm without responding to you armed with facts and logic.”
Last Monday, the Secretary-General of Hezbollah, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, said in a speech on the anniversary of Soleimani’s martyrdom, “We did not assault Saudi Arabia, nor did we attack it. Rather, it was an actor in the global war on the region, and we had the honor of fighting the organizations that Saudi Arabia brought,” saying that “the terrorist is the one who sent thousands of Saudi takfiris to Syria and Iraq.”
Election alliance with the FPM
Sheikh Qassem revealed that there is an understanding with the Free Patriotic Movement, headed by the Gebran Bassil, saying, “We have allies in Lebanon, and we reached an understanding with the Free Patriotic Movement, and the reason for this understanding is that there are strategic and domestic issues and we found that there is an overlap of convictions and opinions.”
He stressed, “We will be with the Free Patriotic Movement in the parliamentary elections… and we have started holding meetings at all levels in order to prepare for the parliamentary elections.”
He also pointed out that “the future electoral scene will be similar to the previous ones with regard to the alliances we made with everyone. Hezbollah will naturally cooperate with its allies in the parliamentary elections.”
The Deputy Secretary-General of Hezbollah also stressed that “Hezbollah’s relationship with the Amal movement is a stable and solid strategic relationship, stressing, “We are working together to preserve Lebanon as a sovereign, independent nation away from foreigners and to prevent naturalization and deter normalization with Israel.”
It has been two years since the murders of Martyrs Soleimani and Al-Muhandis at Baghdad airport. A lot has happened since then, but nothing has changed in the region. Still the same US occupation of Syria, and regular Israeli airstrikes on Syria. Still the same threats of “pre-emptive” attacks on Iran, still talks of US sanctioning this and that person in Iran. Still there’s a war of terror going on against the Yemeni people.
For the second anniversary of the assassinations, many authors have praised and remembered the martyred General’s achievements in life, but it is also important to remember his achievements in death.
The cowardly killings of Martyrs Soleimani and Al-Muhandis and its aftermath at the Ain-al Assad military base marked a massive signal in terms of how Washington viewed the Islamic Republic. Previous US administrations, while just as arrogant and self-worshipping as any other US administrations, wouldn’t have dared to kill these men no matter what the Zionist regime wanted. It was just too much of a risk for them to make such a stupid move. The Trump administration however, believed that the Islamic Republic wouldn’t, or didn’t have the strength to respond to such a heinous act of terror. This is also why Trump wanted to assure himself that such was the case when he posted those bizarre tweets where he threatened to destroy cultural heritage sites in Iran. Well as everybody knows by now, when Iran responded and practically destroyed the Ain al-Assad base, he didn’t follow up on his threats.
Instead he doubled down on his “maximum pressure” campaign, in the hopes of forcing Iran back to the negotiations table to negotiate a new deal, one which includes the Islamic Republic’s missile arsenal. This takes us to where we are today. A new administration is in charge of the White House, and nobody could seriously say that they are surprised that the policy of maximum pressure towards the Islamic Republic has remained, with new audacious demands and accusations towards Tehran.
Ayatollah Khamenei once said “America is America, this or that person or party doesn’t matter. Any president assuming power over there will not do us any good, they’ll only find other ways to antagonize us.”
Washington and its vassals are currently trying to push Tehran in Vienna, to accept a new JCPOA deal. As Tehran has shown that it won’t negotiate anything more than the original JCPOA deal and won’t accept anything less than full sanctions removal, Washington and Tel Aviv have threatened to use “other options”. These “other options” threats are getting old, they’ve repeated these same threats over the past two decades and yet they’ve done nothing.
Washington is afraid, and everybody knows this. Our side knows this, the Russians know this, the Chinese know this, but most importantly, Washington’s allies know this. Even the average person who doesn’t follow world events too much is becoming aware of this.
In West Asia, the Resistance Axis poses a serious threat to Anglo-Zionist hegemony yet they do not dare to attack the Islamic Republic, the main pillar of the Resistance Axis. Both Washington and Tel Aviv have continuously threatened Tehran with airstrikes on Iran’s nuclear sites, yet none of them have ever followed through with their empty threats. The fact that Washington seeks to include the Iranian missile arsenal into a new JCPOA deal, together with their empty threats, shows that their side is worried and fearful of the Islamic Republic’s growing might. And frankly, why shouldn’t they be?
The Resistance Axis hasn’t been weakened by the deaths of Martyrs Soleimani and Al-Muhandis as some western “think tank” analysts believed or rather had hoped for, just as the Resistance Axis wasn’t weakened by the wars in Iraq and Syria. Aside from direct military aggression, every possible conspiracy imaginable have been directed towards the Resistance front. Most people don’t know that the Islamic Revolution in Iran, contrary to what many people believe to be Shiite-inspired, actually drew inspiration from many different Islamic thinkers from different sects over the past 1400 years. Such a pan-Islamic ideology posed a great threat to the US and Israeli plans for the region. So, the Anglo-Zionist side had to do something to create sedition and division among Muslims by using Takfiri extremists to present the Islamic Revolution as a Shiite revolution and create a sectarian war mainly between Arabs and Iranians.
Despite their best attempts to destroy and weaken the Resistance front, the Zionist regime is ever more threatened by Hezbollah’s power, the US hegemony in the region is in decline, as evidenced by their shameful withdrawal from Afghanistan, and the Gulf client states are having more trouble containing the revolutionary Yemeni forces than ever. Today, the Resistance front enjoys widespread support among both Muslims and Christians in West Asia as we saw how people from all sects and movements came out to condemn and commemorate the slain Martyrs. Even the Taliban held a commemoration in General Soleimani’s honour.
Where the Arab nationalists had previously failed, the Islamic Republic succeeded in transcending not only ethnic, but also sectarian and ideological differences and grievances in the region and the Islamic world. Through a pragmatic approach, it has managed to secure its own survival and build a powerful alliance across the region that now truly threatens the Zionist regime.
Of course, the fight is far from over, the Zionists and their American tools still maintain a large presence in the region and I don’t expect them to admit defeat anytime soon either. In fact, they’re already hatching new plots against the Resistance front. One example is the continuation of the so called “normalization’ deals with Israel from the Trump administration’s era, which Biden’s administration is currently pushing hard for.
Recently, a high-ranking official at the Israeli ministry of foreign affairs was quoted as saying that “Israel is working behind the scenes towards normalization of diplomatic relations with Indonesia and Saudi Arabia”. US media outlet Axios first reported that the administration of US President Joe Biden “is trying to build on the Trump-era Abraham Accords, and in this case, looking beyond the Middle East to the largest of the countries that don’t recognize Israel.”
These “normalization” deals serve several purposes. One purpose is to restore the damaged Israeli image in the world. More and more people are recognizing “Israel” for what it is- an apartheid state engaged in terrorism and oppression against not only Palestinians, but the entire region, and dare I say, the world. Another purpose is to isolate the Resistance front by formally and officially announcing these deals as “big steps towards peace”, leaving anyone who refuses to “normalize” relations with Israel being labelled as terrorists or “radical Islamists” in the eyes of the “international community”. A third purpose is for Washington and Tel Aviv to unite all its vassals against the Resistance front. When the UAE and Bahrain shamefully announced their respective deals with the Zionist regime, they also “officially” joined the “unofficial alliance” against Iran and its allies. This wasn’t news for the observer who already has some insight into West Asian geopolitics and knows about the long history of hostility between the Persian Gulf states and Iran, but in terms of symbolism, it shows that for whatever reason, be it as a sign of strength or a reaction against the strengthening of China-Russia-Iran ties, the enemy’s vassals are ready to fully reveal themselves openly now.
In their dream of besieging Iran, Washington moved away from invading and occupying neighbouring countries, seeing as how they failed in Iraq and Afghanistan, and after having seen how sanctions failed to break the Resistance front. Instead, Washington is trying to politically besiege the Islamic Republic in a new way. Just like before, this too shall fail. Since Washington doesn’t give a damn about the people of the Islamic world, they cannot comprehend that their treacherous vassal regimes are highly unpopular among the Muslim population.
No matter how much the Western media attempts to hide and suppress the public outrage and protests going on in countries like Bahrain and Sudan, the reality is that most of these treacherous vassal regimes in the region are completely dependent on US support for survival. Normalizing relations with the apartheid state, will only hasten their inevitable downfall because of the simple fact that if they join Israel and the US in an eventual war with the Resistance front, they will quite simply be destroyed. Seeing as how the Saudis and the other Gulf vassals cannot contain the Houthi forces in Yemen, despite massive support from the West, Takfiri terrorist forces and mercenaries on the ground and the air superiority that they enjoy, it is not a far stretch to imagine virtually all of Saudi Arabia ending up in flames if Riyadh decides to wage war on the Islamic Republic.
Washington has not achieved anything in the region through the killings of Martyrs Soleimani and Al-Muhandis and nothing has changed. By committing this grave mistake, the US has made their shameful exit from the entire region an inevitable fact. They thought they could isolate and besiege the Islamic Republic, but fate has a way of being ironic. Instead of besieging Iran, the Iranians besieged them in the region.
I finish this piece with a quote from the Islamic Revolution: “From the blood of the martyrs, victory will grow”
Qassem Soleimani was far from being just a military leader. He was a revolutionary, jumping from one angle of the region to the other overnight. His sole goal seemed to be fighting off the US-Israeli aggression that the people of West Asia suffered.
When security officials told him not to advance against terrorists in Syria, he retorted, “Are we terrified of a few bullets?” and proceeded to go to the fighting line
Many called him the “Shadow commander,” by others “Haj’ Qassem,” or “Sardar Soleimani” or just “Haji” depending on the describer’s perspective, or his political views. This is the story of a revolutionary, of Qassem Soleimani, the simple man and the hero from Kerman.
Born to a poor farmer in 1957, Soleimani joined the Ranks of the IRGC following the victory of the Islamic revolution in Iran in 1979. He quickly moved up the ranks as he was described as shrewd and courageous by his peers, even commanding a full division, the 41st Tharallah Division, during the Infamous Iran-Iraq war of the 80s when he was only in his 20′.
After the US-instigated war on the nascent revolution, Soleimani became the Head of the well-known al-Quds elite force in the IRGC in 1997. His main aim was focused on creating a regional basis from which the peoples of the region could rise and resist the western dominion that only produced war, death, and destruction for these people and their livelihood.
“Gen. Soleimani created very good relations between battlefield and diplomacy”
Quds force Commander, General Esmail Qaani
On the eve of his martyrdom anniversary, Soleimani is described in the words of his successor Brigadier General Esmail Qaani, as being “a man of logic” that “promoted ideas and theories.” In the words of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei Soleimani embodied two words “One was honesty and the other was sincerity.” A man down to earth, rarely cared for his safety, as described by many of those who had the fortune to know him. A real hero, like the revolutionary icons that broke the barrier of the limited time they lived on this earth to bust the doors of eternity.
It is hard not to resort to poetry when speaking about revolutionaries, Ghassan Kanafani, the Palestinian revolutionary writer spoke about revolution and imagination, where both elements organically correlate. There can be no revolution without imagination. To rebel against the established unjust order, one needs to have the capability to imagine a better world. General Soleimani was a Man of vision, or else, how can a human rebel against it in the first place?
Lebanon, 2006
The martyr Qassem Soleimani had announced that he was in Lebanon during the war in an interview 3 months before his assassination. He just could not stay away from the heat of the combat, standing side by with his companions in the face of what he described as an attempt to change the demography of Southern Lebanon by brut force. Solemani shared the dangers and the challenges of the perilous journey with Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, moving from cover to cover, sustaining the Israeli bombing that was trying to find them. Soleimani told Sayyed Nasrallah “I either live with you or die with you.”
Following the War, Soleimani had a major role in the reconstruction efforts. The Quds Force commander returned to Tehran after the war and arranged aid to help build houses destroyed by the Israeli aggression. From the military aspect, he worked hastily to rebuild the resistance’s capabilities after the war, as he perceived another aggression from their warmongering was always around the corner.
Syria, Iraq, West Asia
The story of General Soleimani in the Western-backed war that engulfed western Asia during the last few years can be reassured in on incident:
Breaking the arduous siege of Amerli was one of the most famous feats that General Soleimani and his brother-in-arms Abu Mehdi al-Muhandis (who was assassinated alongside General Soleimani) spearheaded. Amerli, a town encircled by Daesh terrorists, had roughly 20,000 families inside who had mounted a valiant armed fight against the jihadists.
General Soleimani and Abu Mehdi al-Muhandis, developed a plan that saw 50 armed Iraqi Hezbollah Brigades members airdrop into the town by helicopter. The insiders and the outsiders worked together to defeat the terrorists and break the siege. 20,000 inhabitants were prevented from being slaughtered and their women and children were most likely to be kidnapped, as Daesh had already done to other Iraqi Isolated communities.
Immediately after the siege of Amerli was broken, emotional footage showed Hezbollah Brigades officers crying with pleasure, including Abu Fadek (who replaced Abu Mehdi al-Muhandis following the latter’s martyrdom), being embraced by General Soleimani.
When security officials told him not to advance against terrorists in Syria, he retorted, “Are we terrified of a few bullets?” and proceeded to go to the first fighting line. Never he was observed with a flak Jacket or body armor at the front lines. “I don’t care if I fall as long as someone else picks up my gun and keeps on shooting,” Che Guevara, the international revolutionary, once said, General Soleimai was an embodiment of such belief. He melted in a sea of soldiers that were unknown to him. Iraqis, Iranians, Lebanese, Syrians… all cheered with joy when Soleimani rushed the front lines with them, equating himself with the most humble soldiers.
A Brother-in-arms
“In the 22 years that I knew General Soleimani, he or the Islamic Republic of Iran never asked anything from us ever,” Sayyed Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah had once said. He always stressed that neither Iran nor General Soleimani had treated the resistance in Lebanon and like proxies, but as allies, brothers-in-arms fighting for the same cause.
The only time when Soleimani had made a request to the Lebanese resistance was he asked for military advisors to assist the Iraqi people in defending themselves against the Daesh terrorists. “I don’t want any fighters, just advisors to train the Iraqis,” Brigadier General Qassem Soleimani told the Lebanese resistance leader.
“He was very affected by what was happening in Iraq… and he was ready to die in Iraq a thousand times.”
Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, the Secretary General of Hezbollah
A New Reality: the West overmatched
In an article published in The NewYorker, Kenneth McKenzie Jr., a Marine general who headed US forces across the West and South Asia, spoke about an “overmatch.” This “overmatch” is defined by the article as “a level of capability in which a country has weaponry that makes it extremely difficult to check or defeat.” The Islamic Republic in Iran reached this level according to the US General. McKenzie stated that “Iran’s strategic capacity is now enormous,” the US General added, “They’ve got overmatch in the theatre—the ability to overwhelm.”
The US, a global hegemon, imagined that by illicitly assassinating a General of its adversary on the territory of a third country while he was on a diplomatic mission, will be able to flip the tables, but it failed to do so. The leader of the Islamic revolution in Iran, Ali Khamenei, said: “Today in our region, Soleimani is a symbol of hope, self-confidence, and bravery and a manifestation of resistance and victory. As some people have correctly pointed out, ‘Martyr’ Soleimani is more dangerous than ‘General’ Soleimani for his enemies.”
“Martyr Soleimani is more dangerous than ‘General’ Soleimani for his enemies.” Ali Khamenei, The leader of the Islamic revolution in Iran
The heavy price of resistance
In such a lengthy and costly fight against the biggest and wealthiest empire the world has ever seen, the “weaker” party is expected to give huge sacrifices. Against an empire that thrives off arms sales, pirating, colonization, the destruction of people’s dreams, hopes, and progress to eliminate competition, a huge price is due. Qassem Soleimani, the altruistic revolutionary, was ready to pay that price.
“He spent many nights crying when he remembered the martyrs,” Sayyed Nasrallah says in a speech commemorating General Soleimani’s martyrdom, continuing that was always eager to meet his friends and companions that he missed dearly, and that had departed in that path long ago.
He lived like the hero who inspired people, and he died like a legend that peoples across civilizations write poetry, songs, and stories to tell their children, the children that are due to live and grow in peace after the hard battle with the colonizers is won, as Suleimani promised and predicted.
UPROOTED PALESTINIANS: SALAM ALQUDS ALAYKUM 