Jordan-UAE-“Israel” Deal Proves ‘2-State Solution’ Dead For Arab Reactionary Regimes

1 Dec 2021

Source: Al Mayadeen Net

Robert Inlakesh

This agreement constitutes, not only a move against a two-State solution that Jordan claims to achieve but also an act of Arab collaboration with a usurper entity that seeks to impoverish and erase the native Palestinian inhabitants of the land.

Stirring tensions between the Jordanian public and its rulers, Amman signed its biggest ever cooperation deal with Tel Aviv and Abu Dhabi. As protesters opposing the deal took to the streets, facing arrests and beatings, Jordanian King Abdullah II continued to ignore the violations carried out against not only Palestinians but Jordanians, in East Jerusalem by “Israel”.

Whilst “Israel” continues to violate the sanctity of the Third Holiest site in Islam, the al-Aqsa Mosque, which is supposed to be under the special custodianship of the Hashemite ruler of Jordan, the King completely ignores the site and instead signs a historic energy-water swap deal. 

In recent years, a legacy of tension between former Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, and King Abdullah II of Jordan, had come to a boiling point after speculation caused the King to believe Saudi Arabia may take over his nation’s custodianship of Jerusalem’s Holy Sites. Yet since the current Israeli PM, Naftali Bennett, had organized a secret meeting this July, the Israeli-Jordanian relationship seems to have been restored, after a three-year period of no high-level contact.

To add insult to injury, “Israel” has been raising one of the oldest Islamic-Palestinian burial sites, the Al-Yusofiya Cemetery, in recent months and had unearthed the remains of Jordanian soldiers in the process. The desecration of graves in the area comes so that “Israel” can build Jewish sites for settlers on top of it. Not only has the Jordanian King refused to act to prevent further unearthing of graves at the site, but has continued to ignore the house demolitions, settler home takeovers, and settler raids into the al-Aqsa Mosque, all taking place in East Jerusalem.

On November 22, a deal between Jordan-UAE-“Israel” was signed, which would see an Emirati firm, called Masdar, construct a massive solar panel farm on Jordanian territory. The Solar Farm will be designed to generate energy for “Israel”, not Jordan, creating roughly 180 million dollars in revenue each year, half of which will be made by Amman and the other half belonging to Masdar. “Israel” in return has agreed to provide Jordan with 200 million cubic meters of water, which the Israelis will desalinate and draw from the Mediterranean sea.

Although the deal only serves the UAE, Jordan, and “Israel”, the plan was actually first presented by an NGO, called ‘EcoPeace Middle East’, that the Palestinian Authority (PA) be involved in some meaningful way, yet this has not come to fruition as of yet. The West Bank currently has a major water crisis for Palestinians who are prevented from accessing their water from the Basin below them. In Gaza, “Israel” purposely destroyed Gaza’s primary aquifer and has allowed seawater intrusion, making it irreparable. Gaza’s water is currently 97% undrinkable, essentially making it so that Palestinians are forced to bathe in and drink contaminated water, causing rampant illness. Therefore, this agreement constitutes, not only a move against a two-State solution that Jordan claims to achieve but also an act of Arab collaboration with a usurper entity which seeks to impoverish and erase the native Palestinian inhabitants of the land.

The joke of the century is that “Israel”, which exploits the resources of the West Bank and the Leviathan gas fields off the occupied Palestinian coast, is working on this project with the joint aim of combating climate change. According to the Brookings Institute – a think-tank based in Washington DC – this is a good move as it utilizes clean energy and represents a push by “Israel”, the UAE, and Jordan towards a climate-wise future. It is ironic that “Israel”, which constantly drops thousands of tons of explosives all over the Middle East and has created an environment in the Gaza Strip – that it illegally besieges – which according to experts at the UN has been uninhabitable for human beings since the start of 2020, is now viewed as a progressive State on climate. The mainstream dialogue on Climate Change, between Western powers and their Arab reactionary allies, is not only a farce, it’s an attempt to brainwash their populations into believing that they are led by responsible leaderships. You can’t drop millions of tons of toxic explosives and then turn around claiming to care about the impact of the emissions let off by conventional energy consumption.

In reaction to this move by the Jordanian regime, students of the Hashemite University of Jordan gathered in protest of the move, singing a popular Arab Nationalist song ‘Mawtini’. Another demonstration was organized at the University of Jordan, calling on their authorities to release protesters who have been arrested for voicing opposition to the deal and urging them to abandon the agreement, which implicates Jordan in the Trump-era normalization deals. The Jordanian public overwhelmingly reject Arab normalization with “Israel” and regard the ‘peace treaty’ signed between “Israel” and Jordan in 1994 as a betrayal.

Jordan’s Minister of Water, Mohammed Al-Najjar, says that “Jordan is not building its water strategy on this declaration, if it is turned into an agreement, it will be presented to the parliament for approval.” Whilst Al-Najjar says it is not connected to the normalization deals, this is clearly not seen as being the case by fellow Jordanian officials who have come out strongly against the move. For many Jordanians, the fact that “Israel” had historically benefited from the diversion of the Jordan River leaves a bad taste in their mouth and so now relying on “Israel” for their water supply is not only a matter of pride, but also puts the nation in a very weak position.

But the Amman-Tel Aviv cooperation doesn’t end there. The Palestinian Authority (PA), led by President Mahmoud Abbas, is facing an economic crisis in the West Bank, amidst an environment descending into outright rejectionism of its altruistic self-rule. Palestinians in Nablus, Jenin, Al-Khalil, and elsewhere are taking it upon themselves to form armed groups to resist “Israel’s” occupation, which the PA fears will turn on its own security forces. “Israel” has pursued all avenues necessary, including giving the PA a 155 Million dollar loan in August, as well as calling on foreign powers like the EU to increase their funding. Taking this further, “Israel’s” ‘Minister of Economy’ Orna Barbivai and Jordan’s ‘Minister of Industry, Trade and Supply’ Yousef Al-Shamali, met earlier this month and secured a deal on West Bank export to the PA from Jordan. The deal secured is speculated to boost West Bank bound exports from Jordan annually, meaning that the 150 million dollars of exports will increase to as much as 700 million dollars worth.

Although Jordan claims to care for a “Two-State Solution”, the Hashemite ruler continues to demonstrate that he couldn’t care less. It’s a matter of words over reality, King Abdullah II doesn’t have a sense of pride on the matters of Jerusalem or the Palestinian people, it’s simply an act and his cooperation with the occupation shows this clearly.

The opinions mentioned in this article do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Al mayadeen, but rather express the opinion of its writer exclusively.

Bahaa Abou Al-Ata…A Name Deeply Engraved within the Israeli Mind

Nov 20, 2021

Source: Al Mayadeen

By Hassan Lafi

Abou al-Ata was responsible for removing the “Master of Israeli Security” from the podium in an embarrassing fashion, which Netanyahu viewed as a personal insult.

اخبار لبنان من لبنان - أخبار كل يوم
Martyr Bahaa Abou el-Ata

The decision taken by “Israel” to assassinate Bahaa Abou al-Ata, the leader of the northern region in the Quds Brigades – the military faction of the Islamic Jihad Movement in Palestine -, was certainly not a normal event. It took place on the dawn of Tuesday, 12 November 2019, and showcased a string of complicated Israeli calculations given that this assassination would be the first targeting a resistance commander since 2012, and occurred amidst a lack of tension or war.

Thus, the two Israeli institutions, the political and military, were aware that taking this decision would certainly break the equation sanctified by the Palestinian resistance, which stipulates that any assassination equals a war.

Subsequently, the assassination of Abou al-Ata, for “Israel”, was a declaration of a military battle with the resistance in Gaza. And certainly, the Israeli intelligence assessments know very well that the shrapnel of the Gaza rockets in that battle will not be confined to the borders of the settlements around the Gaza Strip and the south, but will rather reach deep into the “Gush Dan” area, the most densely populated center in the occupied lands.

Nonetheless, this scenario occurred in the battle of “Sayhat al-Fajr” (The Cry of Dawn) which the al-Quds Brigades fought against “Israel.”

Two years after the assassination of Bahaa Abou al-Ata, the question still remains: what was the Israeli view of the Palestinian leader’s personality? And what did it represent in the Israeli mindset of both military and political institutions? 

Amos Gilad, head of the Israeli Institute for Policy and Strategy (IPS) and former director of policy and political-military affairs at the Ministry of Security, answered when asked about Bahaa Abou el-Ata by saying: “He was the chief motivator for the Islamic Jihad’s operation, and possesses a strong and bold personality.” 

Israeli Occupation Army Spokesman Heidi Zilberman did not diverge from Gilad’s assessment, saying to journalists following the assassination of Abou al-Ata that “Israel” understands well that the martyr was “a wild element, mostly working according to a point of view paradoxical to regional interests.” This confirms that the occupation dealt with the resistance leader as a major hurdle to its regional plans, the most important of which were:

First: “Israel” was in need of cooling down the Gaza front through understandings of instilling calm in exchange for humanitarian facilitations (on a humanitarian level). This approach turned, two years after the assassination of Abou al-Ata, into a full-fledged plan put forward by the Israeli foreign minister Yair Lapid, and adopted by his government, titled “Security in exchange for Economy”, away from any political dimensions related to the Palestinian rights as a people under occupation.

Second: The political leadership of the Israeli occupation at the time, represented by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, considered that the continuation of the “ninth hour” strategy, of which martyr Abou al-Ata was the icon, that maintains a state of perpetual conflict through engagement with “Israel,” negatively affects the impetus of some normalizing countries to steer towards “Tel Aviv”, which Netanyahu considered a major goal in his regional policies. Moreover, the name of Bahaa Abou al-Ata was engraved deeply in Netanyahu’s mind at two instances that had great impact on his policies and personality. 

The first instance was Abu al-Ata’s crucial role in sanctifying the eye for an eye equation with the occupation, which came in defense of the peaceful protesters who were being assaulted during their “Return Marches” by the IOF. This equation engendered successive rounds of military escalations, becoming the main reason behind the toppling of Netanyahu’s government in November 2018 following the resignation of the then-Minister of Security, Avigdor Lieberman, who opposed accepting a ceasefire with the resistance in Gaza right after the “Ashkelon Hell” battle. Lieberman viewed this “compromise” as a capitulation on the part of Netanyahu’s government. 

The second instance was al-Ata’s responsibility for removing Netenyahu, the so-called “master of Israeli security,” from the podium in an embarrassing fashion in front of his electoral audience in “Ashdod”. This incident was considered by the former PM as a personal insult to him that affected his entire political future, especially with the wide circulation of Abou al-Ata’s picture in Israeli media. Although this circulation aimed to send a threat to the Palestinian leader in order to hinder his work, the continuation of “Al-Quds Brigades”, under his leadership, in the engagement strategy, made him a permanent presence in the Israeli media. Every time Bahaa Abou al-Ata’s photo is published, the Israeli public recalls the humiliation of Netanyahu and his escape from Abou al-Ata’s missiles to the shelter. 

Third: At the time, “Israel” was seeking to focus its efforts on the northern front and the Iranian nuclear project, taking advantage of the presence of US President Donald Trump in office. However, as the Gaza front continued to heat up through the engagement strategy, the occupation considered that the Islamic Jihad, as an effective part of the resistance axis, impeded these Israeli endeavors. Therefore, the Israeli occupation planes tried to assassinate in Damascus the commander of the military department in the Islamic Jihad movement, Akram al-Ajouri, whom “Tel Aviv” calls the military mastermind of the al-Quds Brigades, in tandem with their assassination of Abou al-Ata, who was considered the most powerful executive commander in the Brigades. Thus, “Israel” would have dealt a simultaneous double blow to the military mind and arm of the Islamic Jihad, in order to paralyze the military capacity of the al-Quds Brigades.

This strategy echoes the mistakes made in 1995 when former Israeli PM Yitzhak Rabin decided to assassinate the founder of the Islamic Jihad movement and its first secretary-general, Dr. Fathi Shaqaqi, believing that the movement was solely based on the person of Shaqaqi.

However, less than six months later, the Islamic Jihad was carrying out its first operations in “Tel Aviv,” in response to the assassination of martyr Shaqaqi, under the leadership of Dr. Ramadan Shallah back then, may God have mercy on him.

In the case of Bahaa Abou al-Ata, the Jihad movement, led by its Secretary-General Ziad al-Nakhala, did not wait extensively to prove to “Israel” the failure of its expectations: Half an hour after Abou al-Ata’s assassination, al-Quds Brigades fired a rocket barrage in the direction of the “Gush Dan” area, announcing the start of the “Sayhat al-Fajr” battle.

Likud: Netanyahu was Mocking Bennett, Not Biden, in Facebook Video (VIDEO)

September 20, 2021 

Benjamin Netanyahu mocks US President Joe Biden. (Photo: Video Grab)

Following a video broadcast on Facebook by former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the Likud party found itself forced to issue a clarification to avoid annoying US President Joe Biden.

Netanyahu appeared in a video on Facebook on Saturday speaking about the meeting between Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett and Biden that took place last month.

Repeating reported news that Biden was sleeping during the meeting, Netanyahu said in the video: “I heard that Biden was very attentive, very, very attentive during the meeting”, then chuckled before dropping his head and closing his eyes.

This video became the subject of widespread criticism on social media, forcing Likud to release a statement.

“Contrary to the distorted picture broadcast in the media, former prime minister Netanyahu did not criticize President Biden, whom he has known and cherished as a friend of Israel for 40 years.”

However, the statement added, “his criticism was directed exclusively at Naftali Bennett, who during his visit to the White House spoke at length about nothing.”

Video footage from Bennett’s meeting with Biden appeared to show the US president dozing off, however, it was later revealed that the images had been manipulated by social media users.

(MEMO, PC, Social Media)

NYT: “Israel’s” Spy Agency Snubbed the US, Trust Broken

August 28, 2021

NYT: “Israel’s” Spy Agency Snubbed the US, Trust Broken

By Staff, Agencies

A new report says the “Israeli” regime gave the administration of US President Joe Biden a last-minute notice before an act of sabotage that caused a power outage at Iran’s Natanz nuclear facility earlier this year.

Citing unnamed American and “Israeli” sources, the New York Times reported that former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu ordered “Israeli” security officials to reduce the information that they conveyed to the US about planned operations in Iran.

On April 11, when the attack took place at Natnaz nuclear site, the “Israeli” entity’s Mossad spy agency gave the US less than two hours’ notification, far too short a time for Washington to assess the operation or ask Tel Aviv to call it off, according to the report.

“Israeli” sources said they concealed information from their American counterparts because there had been leaks regarding earlier attacks.

Senior Biden administration officials said the “Israelis” violated an unwritten agreement to inform the United States of covert operations.

After the Natanz attack, CIA director William Burns called Mossad chief Yossi Cohen, expressing concern over the snub, the report said.

Cohen claimed that the belated notification was due to operational constraints and uncertainty about when the attack would take place.

One day after the “Israeli” act of nuclear terrorism, White House press secretary Jen Psaki said Washington “was not involved in any manner.”

The US, however, has a history of collaborating with the “Israeli” entity in sabotage acts against Iran.

For example, the Stuxnet computer virus is widely believed to have been developed jointly by the United States and the entity. It was the first publicly known example of a virus being used to attack industrial machinery. It was discovered in 2010 after it was used to attack a uranium enrichment facility at Natanz, Iran.

The April attack occurred less than a week after the first talks began in the Austrian capital, Vienna, on a potential revival of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action [JCPOA], something the “Israeli” entity opposes.

Former US president Donald Trump abandoned the agreement and reimposed the anti-Iran sanctions that the JCPOA had lifted. He also placed additional sanctions on Iran under other pretexts not related to the nuclear case as part of the “maximum pressure” campaign.

Following a year of strategic patience, Iran resorted to its legal rights stipulated in Article 26 of the JCPOA, which grants a party the right to suspend its contractual commitments in case of non-compliance by other signatories.

Now, the Biden administration says it wants to compensate for Trump’s mistake and rejoin the accord, but it is showing an overriding propensity for maintaining some of the sanctions as a tool of pressure.

Tehran insists that all sanctions should first be removed in a verifiable manner before the Islamic Republic reverses its remedial measures.

The last-minute notification of the Natanz operation was the starkest example that the entity had changed its procedures since the Trump presidency.

For the American-“Israeli” intelligence relationship, it was another a sharp turnabout.

Before They Preach to us about White Privilege

 

BY GILAD ATZMON

Stanford University study reveals: “Some 80% of (Jews of colour) respondents said that they had ‘experienced discrimination’ within Jewish settings, including synagogues, congregations, and Jewish spiritual communities.”
Stanford University study reveals: “Some 80% of (Jews of colour) respondents said that they had ‘experienced discrimination’ within Jewish settings, including synagogues, congregations, and Jewish spiritual communities.”

By Gilad Atzmon

 People who are familiar with the history of Zionism are aware of the rich history of White Jewish (AKA Ashkenazi) abuse towards Arab and Sephardi Jews in Israel. In the years after the creation of the Israeli state hundreds of babies went missing. Their parents, mostly Jewish immigrants from Yemen, were told their children had died, but suspicions linger that they were secretly given away to White Jewish childless families. The Israeli government approved earlier this year a NIS162 million settlement with the families of these ‘vanishing’ children.

Volunteering the Israeli population as guinea pigs wasn’t invented by Netanyahu or/and Pfizer. Blood samples drawn from Yemenites Jews in the 1950s were tested to determine whether they had “Negro blood.” According to the Times of Israel “60 hearts were harvested from the bodies of new immigrants from Yemen post-mortem for purposes of medical research, in a project purportedly funded by the US.” Also in the same period, the Jewish state irradiated children who arrived from North Africa and the Middle East en masse in an attempt to fight ringworm. In the years to follow many of these children died from cancer. In 1995 the Israeli government decided to compensate the victims and families of the Ringworm Affair.

In the late 1950-1960s Jewish immigrants from Morocco were sprayed with DDT as soon as their feet touched the ‘promised land.’ For them, this bitter departure was merely an introduction to decades of abuse and humiliation that is still taking place.

It took the Israeli Government more than a few decades to lift its 1977 ban preventing Jews from Ethiopia donating blood.  This late immigration wave of African Jews sent their children to serve in the army and to die for Israel but apparently their blood wasn’t as good as their fellow Israelis.

The Yemenites, Moroccans and Ethiopians have something in common. They are ‘Jews of colour,’ not exactly the most privileged Jews in Israel. Just slightly above the Palestinians and the African non-Jewish immigrants.  Some anti-Zionists may insist that this is exactly what we should expect from a racist criminal State. However, the fate of American Jews of colour isn’t any better, in fact it is far worse.

The Jerusalem Post reported yesterday on a study conducted by researchers at Stanford University that delved into the experiences of American Jews of Color. The new report titled Beyond the Count revealed large and systemic discrimination and scrutinization based on race in the Jewish Society.

The data was gathered at Stanford University by a multi-racial team of researchers, with over 1,118 respondents participating. It revealed that “Some 80% of respondents said that they had ‘experienced discrimination’ within Jewish settings, including synagogues, congregations, and Jewish spiritual communities.”

“Additionally, respondents indicated that they had previously experienced an increased sense of awareness regarding how others perceive them because of either their race or their Jewishness.” Some participants admitted they found it “more difficult for their identities to co-exist in predominantly white Jewish spaces than in Black indigenous people of color spaces.” Furthermore, 44% said they had changed how they dress or speak in white Jewish spaces, and 66% reported feeling “disconnected from their Jewish identities at times.”

I wouldn’t dare to ask Jews or anyone else to morph, to become more tolerant or harmonious, as that is not my task in life. I wouldn’t expect anyone who upholds racist and/or white supremacist views to change their spots. I just expect Jews in general and Jewish institutions (such as the ADL or AIPAC) in particular, to look in the mirror twice before they preach to us about ‘race’ in general or white privilege in particular.  

Donate

 

60 Days in Palestine: The Indigenous Ghettos Win Vs Israeli Apartheid Regime Cracks

August 12, 2021

Daniel Lobato

Source: Al Mayadeen

The events of those 60 days have shown a new scenario in the historical stage of Palestine under apartheid.

Between April 12 (beginning of Ramadan) and June 13 (the establishment of the Israeli Government) we have witnessed a small chapter in the story of 100 years of war on Palestine. The events of those 60 days have shown a new scenario in the historical stage of Palestine under apartheid.

There seems to be no way to differentiate these events of 2021 of those from 2014, 2012 or 2008 if you just list the facts: 250 Palestinians in Gaza were killed, including 67 children and 2000 injured; 11 Israelis were killed and 1000 Palestinians arrested.

And again this scenario was coinciding with a political crisis in Tel Aviv after 4 elections in two years, and the coming threats of a fifth election; another election campaign of repression and massacres, as an Israeli MP denounced on CNN

However, many changes have been in sight even if the beginning was similar to other conflict escalations.

On April 12, “Israel” permitted several ‘goodwill gestures’ at the start of Ramadan with a brightly lit Tel Aviv: “Happy Ramadan to our residents and friends”. 21% of “Israel’s” citizens are native Palestinians, most of them Muslim, and in that message their state was alienating them: for almost 2 million of its indigenous citizens, their “state” called them “residents”. “Israel” applies 65 segregation laws to them and furthermore sent them this poisoned greeting by downgrading their citizenship to a “residency” of outsiders in their own land. Alongside this, Tel Aviv deployed its armed forces to intensify repression in Jerusalem as soon as Ramadan arrived.

The Battle of Damascus Gate

In the first days of Ramadan, Israeli forces charged to clear the steps of Damascus Gate and cut off electricity to the Al Aqsa Mosque. It prevented the popular evening food distribution that celebrates the end of the daily fast. In addition, in Al-Quds without tourists, “Israel” sought further militarization of the Damascus Gate and Al-Aqsa Mosque by besieging the place with barriers and metal detectors. This battle was already lost by “Israel” in 2017 when it tried to cage Al Aqsa mosque and went so far to close it as a sign of pressure. “Israel” tried again in April 2021, the police crackdown was joined by groups of Israelis going around “Jerusalem” shouting “death to Arabs” and lynching with impunity any Palestinian they encounter. As the days passed, such Israeli mobs were repeated in Al-Quds and other cities beating and murdering Palestinians. “Israel” funds racist marches of this kind with more money every year.

As in 2017, the battle of Damascus Gate resulted in a small Palestinian victory, however, the battle of Al-Aqsa evolved into another dimension.

The Battle of Sheikh Jarrah and Silwan

Israeli courts have no legal competence to determine private property in a militarily occupied territory. Despite this, in a decades-old farce of a judicial process, its judges ruled that the Palestinian neighborhood of Sheikh Jarrah in “Jerusalem” must be vacated by May 2, 2021, and handed over to a settler organization. This organization promised to take over the entire neighborhood and expel all Palestinians. This act of dispossession has been the Israeli DNA: in 1948, European settlers owned only 6% of the land in Palestine while 94% belonged to the natives. Today the natives own only 3% of the land inside “Israel”. Dispossession continues in the West Bank and Al-Quds with the natives confined in disconnected ghettos. As one US settler said to the Palestinian Mona el Kurd:  “if I don’t steal it, someone else is going to steal it”. This settler was fleeing his crimes in the US by adopting a fraudulent Jewish identity in order to obtain the prize of a free Palestinian house. In Sheikh Jarrah, harsh police repression included spraying toxic water and tear gas inside homes and Palestinians were threatened by the Israeli deputy mayor of Jerusalem.

Emptying Sheikh Jarrah of Palestinians is important for “Israel” because it allows it to connect illegal settlements. Just as the Spanish railway company CAF does in “Jerusalem”: connecting with its tramway the colonies in occupied territory and extending apartheid Made in Spain in Palestine.

Another Palestinian neighborhood in Al-Quds, Al Bustan, has a demolition order from the Israeli municipality, knowing that “Israel” has no legitimacy and destroys the IV Geneva Convention. In Al Bustan 1500 natives, 60% children, will be dispossessed under disguises of legalism. Ethnic cleansing against the natives (“temporary residents”) is camouflaged by sophisticated judicial, electoral, administrative, town planning, archaeological, religious and economic strategies. The aim is to eliminate all Palestinians, as in “West Jerusalem”, where the houses of the natives are still standing but occupied by Israeli settlers. The owners were thrown into refugee camps. This gives material reality to their mythology and their strategy of fraudulently Judaizing the city. Tourists strolling through the Old City of “Jerusalem” do not know that the Jewish Quarter is a fake. “Israel” erected it in 1968 after razing to the ground the historic Maghreb quarter built in the time of Saladin almost a thousand years ago.

The Israeli army, courts, settlers and bulldozers are always ready to act anywhere in the Palestinian territory. As in Beita, Nablus, where in just a few weeks the invaders have erected a city in the olive groves of the Palestinian people. Sometimes “Israel” gives up a colony in order to put the media spotlight there, and try to hide 73 years of dispossession of the natives.

The Battle of Al-Aqsa

In the midst of Ramadan when mosques are usually crowded, Israeli forces turned the esplanade into a theatre of war with repeated assaults day and nightinside the mosques. It is strategic for “Israel” to harass the mosques in order to provoke Muslim anger around the world. In this way, colonization would be disguised in the media as an unresolvable religious battle. In addition, Israeli groups demand the demolition of the Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock in order to build a Jewish “Third Temple” in their place. 

This continued Israeli oppression of Al-Quds made Palestinian demonstrations explode throughout the territory. In cities within the Israeli state (Jaffa, Nazareth, Haifa, Lod, Acre or Uhm al Fahem), natives with Israeli citizenship lowered Tel Aviv flags and raised Palestinian banners. The Israeli mayor of Lod acknowledged that he had lost control of the situation and Netanyahu declared a state of emergency.

This united Palestinian revolt terrorized Israeli settler society and mobs lynched Palestinians with impunity.

The demonstrations showed the victory of the united native identity over the fragmentation sought by the Israeli government. The Western media also used submissive categories for Palestinians in “Israel”, such as desert Bedouin, Druze, Galilean Christians, Israeli Arabs, etc.

The Unity Intifada

This unitary revolt finally exploded with the  call for an indigenous general strike on May 18 for the three pieces into which historic Palestine is temporarily divided: “the state of Israel”, the West Bank ghettos and the Gaza ghetto. The call did not come from any political faction. It was youth and grassroots organizations from “Jerusalem” and “the state of Israel”. From Haifa to Galilee, Nablus or Gaza, there was a massive turnout. The whole of Palestinian society connected with its 1936 uprising against British and Zionist oppression, when native dispossession began with the arrival of European settlers. The Manifesto for Dignity and Hope swept across Palestine in those days expressing the significance of the reunification of Palestinian national consciousness. The physical separations and categorical prisons imposed by the colonial regime were destroyed: the prison of the West Bank ghettos, the prison of apartheid citizenship in the “Israeli state”, the prison of Gaza, and the prison of “Jerusalem”. It was set as a unitary goal to end all Zionist colonial structures.

The battle across Palestine

In the face of intense repression in “Jerusalem”, a warning was issued from Gaza on June 10 that rocket fire would begin. “Israel” ignored the warning and launched a large-scale operation against Gaza.

To describe these clashes as a war between “Israel” and “Hamas” is a manipulation. It is “Israel” against Gaza, or against Palestine. Why is a political party cited on only one side?

The Israeli operation “The Guardian of the Walls” announced the death of hundreds or thousands of people in the caged strip. It’s worthy of note that the two million people surviving in Gaza were stripped, crowded and locked up in that Israeli coastal prison.

Handcrafted rockets were pitted against a 21st century military technology for 10 days. The entire world’s media daily quantified the hundreds of rockets launched by the natives but never gave us the number of missiles and bombs dropped by “Israel”. 

“Israel” announced that it was going to step on the gas with its inhumane Dahiya doctrine of maximum devastation and disproportionate force on civilians. It consists of setting the attacked territory “back 20 years”, or even “to the stone age“. This military doctrine is part of the curriculum of Tel Aviv University, with which universities around the world partner rather than boycott. Following this strategy, “Israel” has sought to destroy as much of the infrastructure and economy of the Gaza ghetto as possible. When international donors once again funded the reconstruction of Gaza, the Israeli economy took a cut. Israeli destruction in Gaza included the only COVID laboratory, banks, shops, factories, bookstores, news agency buildings and hospital entrances.

Furthermore, “Israel” has repeated another doctrine started in 2014: intentionally eliminating entire families by bombing the house when the largest number of members are inside. Thus, four generations of the Al Qawlaq family with 21 members, from 90 years old to 6 months old, were exterminated. The survivor Shoukry Al Qawlaq listed his murdered family members for 33 seconds. The families Abu al Auf, Ashkontana, and up to 19 families were exterminated too. 

But unexpectedly within 10 days, Palestinians took over the situation. The Israeli regime thought that the Palestinian “residents” will be “leaving Gaza in complete silence“, to suddenly stopping with a ceasefire. “Israel” could have killed thousands of Palestinians as in 2008 or 2014 without accountability.

The Israeli military gives us the answer by frustratingly acknowledging that the quantity and technology of rockets from Gaza increases inexorably year after year despite the blockade on the strip. The myth of Israeli defenses (Iron Dome) collapsed when the number of rockets launched daily from Gaza quadrupled compared to 2014. Washington’s metropolis came to the rescue of its protectorate with two extra aid packages: one during the battle of $735 million in missiles, and another after the ceasefire of $1 billion to replenish “Israel’s” depleted defense system in just 10 days. Israeli estimates the rocket stockpile in Gaza for several months of continued fighting, with superior models not yet in use. 

Tel Aviv airport was closed for a week, compared to only a few hours in 2014. Eilat airport at more than 200km from Gaza also had to be closed. Israeli industrial facilities and ports were attacked and also closed. Attacks on Israeli cities and the death of 11 civilians instilled terror.

On the other hand, Israeli tanks and soldiers not only did not dare to enter the coastal prison, but did not even dare to approach the wall. A single Israeli soldier was killed by an anti-tank rocket fired from the Gaza ghetto. It was enough of a message for a specialized army in the repression and execution of civilians than in warfare.

Despite this evidence, the Israeli army issued its victory proclamation calling the 67 Palestinian children killed “neutralized terrorists”. But even the extremist Israeli media, which also called the Palestinian babies terrorists, were fearful for the future. Others assumed that the balance of power was shifting. Some media wondered what would happen if Lebanon were to join a joint action with Palestine in the future. The answer came from this Israeli analyst revealing the fear in the military leadership.

The meaning of the Palestinian victory by combining forms of resistance

“Israel” would have liked to be a liberal democracy like Australia or the US after having wiped out the indigenous people. Failing that, its fate will be the same as South Africa’s apartheid regime.

The indigenous demographic superiority (51%) over the settler society (49%) between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean has already been exceeded years ago and is increasing, not counting refugees from abroad, despite the ongoing ethnic cleansing. Furthermore, “Israel’s” 73-year effort to fragment Palestinian identity and territory has failed as the entire native society has been reunified in these two months of resistance.

Around the world there were massive demonstrations of solidarity that reveal the failure of Zionist lobbies and Western governments trying to suppress that support. In Madrid, thousands of people surpassed all expectations

The Palestinian victory on different fronts has generated multiple repercussions.

The price for the apartheid regime

The Israeli army dreams of an operation against Gaza to raze it and send the Palestinians to the Sinai desert. The reality is that this army no longer dares to approach the strip, and furthermore, it is not any more the 1948 era. “Israel” cannot expel or kill two million people. It can only reinforce the inhuman blockade, regularly bombing and killing in order to delay the inevitable fate as long as possible. 

It is the Israeli settler society that has been shocked by the message that its apartheid society and native ghettos have an end date, something its elites already knew. Israeli civilian casualties are “regrettable”, but the settler society must understand that the longer it sustains the regime the higher it will pay the price. The Palestinian defense killed 11 Israeli civilians in one week; in 2014 it was half that number in much longer. Israeli society has never lived under the terror and real death that it has imposed on the societies around it. Damascus and Syrian territory continue to be bombed by “Israel” on a regular basis. Lebanon’s civilians know that price. The new Prime Minister, Naftali Bennett, when he was a commander ordered the massacre in 1996 of civilians sheltering in a UN building in the village of Qana, Lebanon. More than a hundred were hacked to death in their sleep, half of them women and children, and Bennett has always been proud of this. Civilians in Jordan, Egypt, Iraq and other countries have also paid a heavy price in the past.

Naftali Bennett was elected leader of the colonial government at the end of this 60-day cycle. For the first time “Israel” has needed to co-opt an indigenous opportunist to emerge from the political crisis  unleashed by rivalry between Zionist political clans. Two indigenous people of the same surname help sustain the crimes and apartheid: one in the Tel Aviv government, Mansour Abbas, and one inside the ghettos, Mahmoud Abbas. Also the South African Bantustan kinglets temporarily helped sustain the apartheid regime in Pretoria. This new government will be a continuation of the previous ones, because the engine is the same: to capture more land with less indigenous people and by whatever means necessary. But it will need more and more violence to achieve less and less results, with a higher and higher price to pay as Afrikaner society paid in South Africa.

The impact on the Western Metropolis

The Western powers are the colonial metropolis of the Israeli artefact. During this time they have recited “Israel’s” right to defend its apartheid regime. They put pressure on the indigenous colonial administration of Mahmoud Abbas (called Palestinian Authority) to suppress the revolts. The new normalizers of the apartheid regime (Emirates, Bahrain, and Morocco) played no role in this crisis. The usual regimes (Jordan, Egypt and Qatar) were pressured to cooperate in suffocating protest and resistance. But the West has no options left. The EU has long been making initiatives to try to co-opt Hamas as the PLO did in 1991. Two years ago the EU removed Hamas from the European list of terrorist groups. Somehow the West seeks to bring Hamas to the table to accept a future of ghettos and apartheid in exchange for money. For this reason, a close ally of the US and EU, the Moroccan regime, invited the Hamas leader a few days after the ceasefire.

But the eternally promised and delayed future of ghettos and apartheid that is called the “Palestinian state” no longer exists. The West can continue to recite the leitmotiv of the “two-state solution” in international institutions and media. Palestinian reunification has buried the coffin containing that ancient corpse of two states.

The international impact

Mass demonstrations, articles, statements, direct actions against Israeli companies and the blockade of Israeli ships all over the world have continued to increase solidarity with Palestine.

In 1991, world solidarity with Palestine declined due to several factors: the fall of the USSR and the new world hegemony, the PLO negotiating with the apartheid regime in Tel Aviv while simultaneously the apartheid regime in Pretoria was collapsing, the forced revocation in the UN of its Resolution 3379 declaring Zionism as a racist ideology, the Oslo Accords, the creation of the indigenous colonial administration called Palestinian Authority, etc.

From 2004 and 2005, solidarity began to recover with the sentence of the Hague Court against the apartheid wall and the launching of the international boycott campaign against “Israel”, BDS.

Today, all over the world, the consensus on Israeli apartheid is spreading and its role as the colonizer of Palestine is being restored. “Israel” is losing the social and legal war despite the efforts of Israeli lobbies in many countries to silence criticism and gain legitimacy through repressive law fare.

The ICC proceedings will continue to move forward with only two paths: issue arrest warrants against Israeli leaders, or close the case by demonstrating that it is a Western court to prosecute only those whom the West decides. Both decisions will have many repercussions and both will damage “Israel” in the eyes of the world’s people.

Antonio Guterres deleted from the UN website in 2017 an internal report singling out “Israel” as an apartheid regime, but other reports are beginning to pile up, and even Western governments are timidly beginning to use the term

It will become the norm to describe “Israel” as an apartheid regime with varying degrees of oppression against the native Palestinians, depending on where they are.

In the war dimension, the victory of the Palestinians against the Israeli nuclear regime’s army also has resonances in the region. The vulnerability of settler society has been exposed. It is no coincidence that a few days after the Gaza ghetto victory, and a Palestinian military spokesman’s thanks to Iran, Antony Blinken said that the US will maintain hundreds of sanctions against Iran, regardless of what happens to the Nuclear Deal. In other words, the Nuclear Deal will not survive because Iran will not agree to add new concessions, whether to its missiles or its relationship with its allies.

The impact on Palestinian society

We have already seen some of the meanings of this 60-day process for Palestinian society.

Internationally, the Palestinian Authority has been further exposed as a subordinate Department of Indigenous Affairs of the West and “Israel”. Mahmoud Abbas dares not accuse the apartheid regime of the crime of apartheid. Its main function is to exercise subcontracted repression, with mass arrests or assassination of grassroots activists. The Palestinian Authority leadership operates in the midst of political and economic corruption, and will do anything to perpetuate itself and sustain the colonial structure. In the midst of these 60 days, Abbas cancelled the theatre of a supposed election because of the risk of someone else taking his seat. But his days as the indigenous governor of the ghetto are about to end, and not only because of his age. After his outrageous repression of the Palestinians, the West is hypocritically condemning Abbas while deciding on his replacement. Abbas will not be honored by the West despite having played his mandated role in stifling Palestinian rights. 

At the end of this 60-day period, on June 12, the Palestinian Polling Centre conducted one of its regular polls. 80% of Palestinians said that Gaza had won the confrontation with “Israel”. They rated each focus of insurrection and resistance positively: 89% approved of the actions of Palestinians in “Jerusalem”, 86% supported the protests of Palestinian citizens of “Israel” and 77% supported the armed resistance of Palestinians in Gaza. The tiny number of Palestinians who support the Palestinian Authority (11%) and Abbas (8%) represent the privileged class that lives by it.

The Palestinian writer murdered by “Israel”, Ghassan Kanafani, warned that one of the enemies of the Palestinian people is the indigenous oligarchies.

The Palestinian people have been reunified but have no political subject in the form of a new national liberation movement. The PLO committed suicide in 1991. Next October marks the 30th anniversary of the fateful Madrid Conference that led to the Oslo Accords. Coinciding with that date, a first attempt will be made to launch a new Palestinian national movement to break with Oslo and apartheid: the alternative route, Masar Badil. Sooner or later a new Palestinian movement will be born.

We in the West have forgotten many lessons. One is that when a people is determined to be free it will apply the maximum of its own suffering during its struggle, however unfavorable it may be to the hostility of the oppressor. 

A fraudulent consensus has been installed in the West, by an ego of white saviors, that only the boycott ended apartheid in South Africa. This is coupled with revisionism of Nelson Mandela and other indigenous South African leaders. In the 1960s, the African National Congress decided to respond to the massacres of the Pretoria regime with armed struggle. To this end it created an autonomous armed wing, Umkhonto weSizwe (MK). Indigenous armed self-defense has been indispensable in decolonization struggles, as it was in South Africa. Colonial societies or occupying entities have paid a price in physical insecurity, as in Algeria or Vietnam. Israeli society knows that the price to be paid will be higher and higher.

Palestine solidarity organizations and the boycott movement do not have to try to appease the West or conform to the frameworks of legitimacy that the West designs. In the face of the criminalization of indigenous resistance in any form, declaring the boycott movement terrorist, or armed self-defense, international legality must be remembered. Especially the preamble of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights or Resolution 3070: “The General Assembly reaffirms the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples to free themselves from foreign colonial domination by all possible means, including armed struggle”.The opinions mentioned in this article do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Al mayadeen, but rather express the opinion of its writer exclusively.

محاولات التحوّل من حائر إلى قائد

 سعادة مصطفى أرشيد _

يحتاج نفتالي بينيت رئيس وزراء (إسرائيل) الهابط من عالم الإعمال والتجارة إلى عالم السياسة، أن يبدو بمظهر قوي، قادر على الاشتباك وتحقيق انتصارات عزيزة وبعيدة عن قدراته، وهو قد تسلّم الحكم من بن يامين نتياهو المتمرّس والذي استطاع حفر اسمه عميقاً في تاريخ دولته القصير، بما يملك من دهاء وقدرات استثنائية، وها هو مستمر في دوره كقائد للمعارضة، قادر على نصب الكمائن وإحاكة المؤامرات بهدف إسقاط خصومه الكثر، الذين لا يجدون ما يجمعهم سوى رغبتهم في إخراجه من عالم السياسة سواء كرئيس وزراء أو كزعيم معارضة، ومن جانب آخر، فإنّ الأغلبية البرلمانية الداعمة للحكومة هشة وهزيلة وقابلة للسقوط إنْ خرج عضو واحد من التحالف، لا بل انْ غاب عن جلسة برلمانية بدواعي المرض أو السفر أو حتى إنْ تأخر بسبب أزمة سير، والدعم الذي يتلقاه بينيت من الإدارة الأميركية على أهميته للبقاء، وكيديته المفرطة تجاه نتنياهو، إلا انه غير قادر على رسم صورة الزعيم القوي.

حاول بينيت الدفع باتجاه الاشتباك مع إيران متخذاً من حوادث السفن ذريعة لإقامة تحالف انجليزي – أميركي – (إسرائيلي) وبالطبع عربي، ولكن الإدارة الأميركية كان لها رأي آخر، فهي تريد الابتعاد عن المنطقة ومشاكلها والتركيز على الصين وبحرها وطريق حريرها السياسي والاقتصادي، وهي ترى أنّ عدم الوصول إلى اتفاق مع إيران، أمر يضرّ بخططها الإستراتيجية، فيما الوصول إلى كلمة سواء وصيغة مقبولة للتعامل مع إيران أمر بالغ الضرورة، خاصة لدرء مخاطر تحول إيران وانفتاحها بشكل واسع على الصين وروسيا وكوريا الشمالية، فكان لا بدّ لنفتالي بينيت ان يبتلع أقواله واتهاماته، ومعه الانجليز الذين تخلوا عن حذرهم التقليدي وبالغوا في حماستهم للمواجهة مع إيران، ولكن ذلك أمر لم تدركه حتى الآن بعض فضائيات الخليج مثل «العربية» و»الحدث» ومثيلاتهما، التي لا تزال تنفخ في نار المواجهة .

 رأى بينيت أنّ لديه فرصة في لبنان، فالوضع الداخلي قد بلغ مرحلة حرجة من التدهور، تشكيل الحكومات يتعذر ويتعرقل بفعل داخلي وضغوط خارجية، وتحقيقات قاضي تحقيق تفجير المرفأ تثير من الغموض أكثر مما تكشف من حقائق، وفي مشاريع الفتنة والشقاق أخذت تصدر عن مرجعيات دينية – طائفية عليا، كان آخرها ما صدر عن بكركي، وسعر صرف الليرة ينهار برعاية حاكم مصرف لبنان ودولته المالية العميقة، وقد أوصل اللبنانيين إلى حدود العوز والفاقة، فيما نفذت الأدوية والمستلزمات الطبية من سوق الدواء بعد أن توقف استيرادها بسبب عدم توفر النقد الأجنبي، والإشكالات اليومية غير البريئة تؤذن في حال لم تتمّ محاصرتها من فورها بالتطور نحو اشتباك واسع قد يصل إلى الحرب الأهلية، كما حصل في الشمال وخلده وشويّا. مجموع هذه المعطيات جعلت من بينيت يفكر بتجريب حظه مع لبنان ومقاومته، ويفترض أنّ بإمكان جيشه الاشتباك مع إيران من هذه الخاصرة، وأنّ باستطاعته أيضاً العودة إلى مرحلة ما قبل حرب 2006، عندما كان «الإسرائيلي» يملك القدرة على توجيه ضرباته إلى لبنان عند كلّ حاجة أمنية أوسياسية، أو حتى عند أيّ شعبية انتخابيه مؤقتة، وذلك عندما يفرض قواعد اشتباك جديدة من موقع القوي، بدل قواعد الاشتباك المعمول بها منذ أكثر من عقد ونصف العقد.

اخذ بينيت قراره، وأخذت المقاومة إجراءها التحذيري، والنتيجة أنّ الاشتباكات بين المقاومة اللبنانية و(إسرائيل) بقيت محدودة والقصف المتبادل على جانبي الحدود طال مناطق غير مأهولة، وأرست المقاومة في نهاية الاشتباك بردودها الحاسمة قواعد الاشتباك المعمول بها، يضاف إلى ذلك أن الإدارة الأميركية، وإن كان لا مانع لديها من تغيير قواعد الاشتباك لصالح (إسرائيل) وربما ترغب في ذلك، إلا أنّ لديها كما ورد آنفاً، ما يدعوها لان تكون راغبة عن هذا التوتر، ثم ترى أنها مطمئنة إلى تموضعها الجديد، وبما صنعت من عوامل اقتتال داخلي وما زرعت من صواعق تفجير في بلادنا، كفيلة بظنّ الاستراتيجية الأميركية على إبقاء المنطقة غارقة في صراعاتها التي تحول دون قيامها بأي فعل ايجابي لصالح قضاياها الكبرى وأمنها القومي .

 لما كان نفتالي بينيت قد فشل في استغلال حادث السفينة، وفشل في تغيير قواعد الاشتباك مع لبنان ومقاومته، فهل يجد ضالته في غزة؟ وهي التي خسرت جزئياً مع خسارة حركة النهضة موقعها في تونس، ولا تجد حماساً عالياً لدى الأتراك مؤخراً، ولا يعطيها حليفها القطري أكثر من حقيبته الشهرية، ولم تستطع أن تحوّل انتصارها في حرب «سيف القدس» إلى إنجازات على الأرض، فيرفع الحصار عنها، وتصلها الكهرباء ووقودها، ويُعاد إعمارها، وغير ذلك مما تعهّد به الوسيط المصري الذي لدغ غزة ومقاومتها لا مرتين فحسب.

*سياسي فلسطيني مقيم في الكفير – جنين – فلسطين المحتلة

“جيروزاليم بوست”: حزب الله يختبر “إسرائيل” وحتى الآن ينجح Hezbollah is testing Israel and so far it’s succeeding – analysis

أغسطس 9 2021

المصدر: جيروزاليم بوست

سيث فرانتزمان

صحيفة “جيروزاليم بوست” الإسرائيلية تنشر مقالاً للكاتب “سيث فرانتزمان” يقول فيه إن رد “إسرائيل” على صواريخ حزب الله يمكن أن يضع حدود لبنان في نفس وضع حدود غزة.

“جيروزاليم بوست”: التوازن الصحيح لكيفية الرد سيكون من الصعب العثور عليه

نشرت صحيفة “جيروزاليم بوست” الإسرائيلية مقالاً للكاتب سيث فرانتزمان، تحت عنوان: حزب الله يختبر “إسرائيل” وحتى الآن ينجح.

وفيما يلي نص المقال المنقول إلى العربية: 

ردّ “إسرائيل” على صواريخ حزب الله يمكن أن يضع حدود لبنان في وضع حدود غزة نفسه. في يوم الإثنين الماضي، ألقى رئيس الوزراء نفتالي بينيت كلمة في الكنيست. قوبل بوابل من الصراخ والإزعاج والتسميات. 

وقال: “لنتحدث عن نتائج الحكومة الأخيرة” في غزة، أظهرتم ضبط النفس في مواجهة الهجمات الصاروخية بينما نهاجم كل بالون حارق. لقد تركتم حزب الله بعشرة أضعاف الصواريخ التي يمكن أن تصل إلى أي مكان في “إسرائيل” ولهذا السبب يجب أن تكون ميزانية الأمن كبيرة”.

لم يكن بينيت مخطئاً. عاد بنيامين نتنياهو إلى رئاسة الوزراء في سنة 2009، بعد ثلاث سنوات من حرب لبنان الثانية.

في ذلك الوقت، كان لدى حزب الله ما يُقدّر بنحو 30 أو 40 ألف صاروخ. في الوقت الحاضر، يُعتقد أن لديه أكثر من 150 ألف صاروخ. 

هل هذا خطأ نتنياهو؟ إنه قابل للنقاش، لكن ليس هناك شك في أن “إسرائيل” اتخذت في عهده قراراً واعياً بعدم توجيه ضربة استباقية لوقف التعزيز العسكري للوكيل الإيراني. سمحت “إسرائيل” باستمراره في التسلح رغم علمها أن هدف الصواريخ هو استخدامها ضدها في يومٍ من الأيام. 

في الغالب، كان القرار متسقاً مع العقيدة العسكرية الإسرائيلية. لم تتخذ “إسرائيل” إجراءات استباقية لوقف التعزيزات العسكرية التقليدية. اعتُمد هذا الخيار في حالتين عندما سعى العراق 1981 وسوريا 2007 للحصول على أسلحة نووية. نووية، نعم. صواريخ عادية، لا.

لكن ما سيتعلمه بينيت هو أنه من السهل التكلم لكن التصرف أصعب. هذا على الرغم من حقيقة أن أحد كبار أعضاء حكومته الائتلافية والأمنية، وزير القضاء غدعون ساعر، هو من أنصار العمل الوقائي منذ فترة طويلة ضد حزب الله. 

في سنة 2018 حذّر ساعر من أن لـ”إسرائيل” نافذة ضيقة لمهاجمة حزب الله لمنعه من الحصول على ذخائر دقيقة التوجيه. 

كل هذا مهم يجب أخذه في الاعتبار بعد هجوم حزب الله الصاروخي على “إسرائيل” في يوم الجمعة. صلية من نحو 20 صاروخاً جاءت بعد يومين فقط من إطلاق ثلاثة صواريخ باتجاه كريات شمونة. الفرق هو أن الصواريخ يوم الأربعاء قيل إن مجموعة فلسطينية مارقة أطلقتها. في يوم الجمعة، أعلن حزب الله مسؤوليته بشكل علني.

كان رد فعل “إسرائيل” حتى الآن معتدلاً. بعد هجوم يوم الأربعاء، قصف سلاح الجو مناطق مفتوحة في جنوب لبنان حيث تم إطلاق الصواريخ. بعد صلية يوم الجمعة، ردت “إسرائيل” بقصف مدفعي باتجاه مصدر النيران. بحلول ليلة السبت، بدا أن الأمر انتهى عند هذا الحد. 

ما نعرفه هو أنها طريقة خطيرة للتفكير منذ أن سمحت “إسرائيل” لحدودها الشمالية بالتحول إلى الطريقة التي تسير بها الأمور على طول الحدود مع غزة. هناك، على مدى سنوات، ضبطت “إسرائيل” نفسها بعد الهجمات الصاروخية. وفي حال ردّت، استهدفت الكثبان الرملية أو نقاط المراقبة المؤقتة التابعة لحماس. لا شيء خطير جداً.

هذه القذائف الصاروخية، التي أصبحت طبيعية، أُطلقت على سيادة “إسرائيل”. طالما لم يصب أو يقتل أحد، وطالما كان إطلاق الصواريخ متقطعاً، يمكن لـ”إسرائيل” أن تتمالك نفسها. هل كان لهذا معنى؟ يمكن. وهل قوّضت أيضا قوة الردع الإسرائيلية؟ قطعاً. 

هذا ما يحدث على طول الحدود الشمالية أيضاً. يمكن تفسير تعليق كوخاف على أنه تطبيع لإطلاق الصواريخ الآن من لبنان.

ليس بالضرورة. ما قد تفعله تعليقات مثل تعليقات كوخاف عندما تقترن برد عسكري معتدل، هو خلق شعور لحزب الله بأنه، مثل حماس، يمكنه تطبيع الهجمات الصاروخية ضد شمال “إسرائيل”. 

سيكون هذا كارثياً لـ”إسرائيل” ولكن من الصعب إيقافه. قد يؤدي الرد القوي جداً إلى تصعيد أكبر، وهو أمر لا تريده “إسرائيل”، في حين أن الرد الضعيف جداً قد يؤدي إلى تعلم حزب الله درساً سيئاً، وهو أمر لا تريده “إسرائيل” أيضاً. 

التوازن الصحيح لكيفية الرد سيكون من الصعب العثور عليه. بناءً على أحداث يوم الجمعة، يتعين على الحكومة أن تفعل ذلك بسرعة.

Hezbollah is testing Israel and so far it’s succeeding – analysis

AUGUST 7, 2021 21:09

Streaks of light are seen from Ashkelon as the Iron Dome anti-missile system intercepts rockets launched from the Gaza Strip on May 20, 2021. (photo credit: AMIR COHEN/REUTERS)
Streaks of light are seen from Ashkelon as the Iron Dome anti-missile system intercepts rockets launched from the Gaza Strip on May 20, 2021.(photo credit: AMIR COHEN/REUTERS)

Israel’s response to the Hezbollah rockets could put the Lebanon border in the same situation as the Gaza border.

By YAAKOV KATZ   

On Monday, Prime Minister Naftali Bennett spoke at the Knesset. He was met by a volley of yelling, heckling and name calling. 

“Let’s talk about the results [of the last government],” he said. “In Gaza, you showed restraint in face of rocket attacks while we attack for every incendiary balloon. You left Hezbollah with ten times more rockets that can reach any place in Israel and because of that the defense budget needs to be big.

”Bennett was not wrong. Benjamin Netanyahu returned to the premiership in 2009, three years after the Second Lebanon War. At the time, Hezbollah had an estimated 30 or 40 thousand rockets. Nowadays, they are believed to have over 150,000.

Was it Netanyahu’s fault? That is questionable, but there is no doubt that under his tenure Israel made a conscious decision not to launch a preemptive strike to stop the Iranian proxy’s military buildup. Israel allowed the armament to go on even though it knew that the rockets were intended to be used one day against it.

For the most part, the decision was in line with Israeli military doctrine. Israel has not launched preemptive action to stop a conventional military buildup; that has been reserved for two instances when Iraq (1981) and Syria (2007) were pursuing nuclear weapons. Nuclear, yes. Regular rockets, no.

What Bennett will learn though is that it is easy to talk but harder to act. This is despite the fact that one of the senior members of his coalition and security cabinet, Justice Minister Gideon Sa’ar, is a longtime proponent of preemptive action against Hezbollah. 

In 2018, Sa’ar warned that Israel had a narrow window to attack Hezbollah to prevent it from obtaining precision-guided munitions.

This is all important to keep in mind following Hezbollah’s rocket attack against Israel on Friday. The barrage of about 20 rockets came just two days after three rockets were launched toward Kiryat Shmona. The difference was that the rockets on Wednesday were said to have been fired by a rogue Palestinian group. On Friday, Hezbollah openly took responsibility.

Israel’s response until now has been mild. After Wednesday’s attack, the Air Force bombed open areas in southern Lebanon from where the rockets had been fired. After Friday’s barrage, Israel responded with artillery fire in the direction of the source of the fire. By Saturday night, that seemed to be it. 

This is dangerous and complicated. IDF Spokesperson Brig.-Gen. Ran Kochav went so far as to explain that the fact Hezbollah fired its 20 rockets into open fields meant that the Lebanese terrorist group was deterred and scared of a larger conflict with Israel. If that wasn’t the case, he told reporters in a briefing on Friday, it would have attacked population centers. Is this true? We don’t know.

What we do know, is that it is a dangerous way to think since it sets up Israel to allow its northern border to turn into the way things are along the border with Gaza. There, for years, Israel restrained itself after rocket attacks. If it responded, it hit sand dunes or makeshift Hamas observation posts. Nothing too serious.

This normalized rocket fire into sovereign Israel. As long as no one was hurt or killed and as long as the rocket fire was sporadic, Israel could restrain itself. Did it make sense? Maybe. Did it also erode Israel’s deterrence? Definitely. That is happening along the northern border as well. Kochav’s comment could be interpreted as normalizing rocket fire now from Lebanon. No one was killed and no one was hurt so that must mean that Hezbollah is deterred. 

Not necessarily. What comments like Kochav’s potentially do when coupled with a mild military response, is create for Hezbollah a feeling that it – like Hamas – can normalize rocket attacks against Israel’s North. 

This would be disastrous for Israel but difficult to stop. Too strong a response could lead to a larger escalation – something Israel does not want – while too weak a response could lead Hezbollah to learn a bad lesson, something Israel also does not want. 

That right balance of how to respond and is going to be hard to find. Based on Friday’s events, the government needs to do so fast.

Related

How to Undermine a Diplomatic Triumph

About me

26 July 2021

by Lawrence Davidson

Part I—The Backstory

The true status of current negotiations to reinstate the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with Iran is unknown to the American public—most of whom are tragically indifferent to the outcome. This is so even though the successful negotiation of this deal with Iran back in 2015 represents one of the greatest triumphs of diplomacy in the last hundred years. What we do know is this triumph was followed by tragedy—a premeditated tragedy—the sort of tragedy only fools can produce. But very few Americans care. That is the way it is with foreign policy. On the one hand, you can start wars to great public acclaim, and on the other, you can destroy hard-won diplomatic achievements almost without public notice. 

At the end of President Obama’s term of office (January 2017) the JCPOA was complete and in force. In exchange for a lifting of “nuclear-related sanctions,” Iran undertook not to pursue research that might allow her to develop nuclear weapons. Up until May of 2018 “Iran’s compliance has been repeatedly verified by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which oversees the most intrusive inspections regime ever negotiated.” It was in May of 2018 that Donald Trump, perhaps the most despicable human being to hold the presidency since Andrew Jackson, withdrew from the JCPOA, apparently for two reasons: (1) was the treaty was completed by Obama and Trump wanted to destroy the achievements of his non-white predecessor, and (2) Trump thought he could bully the Iranians into a “better deal.” It is important to note that the other signatories to the treaty did not initially follow Trump’s lead. “The leaders of France, the United Kingdom, and Germany issued a joint statement on behalf of their countries that reemphasized their support for the deal and its importance to the nonproliferation regime.” The United Nations expressed “deep concern” over Trump’s decision and released a statement in support of the JCPOA. Russia’s Foreign Ministry also reiterated its support for the JCPOA, and further stated that “U.S. actions compromise international trust in the IAEA.”

How did the Iranians react to Trump’s withdrawal from the treaty and reimposition of harsh sanctions? At first, Tehran suggested that if the other signatories to the agreement would remain loyal to their obligations, Iran too would keep to the treaty. Unfortunately, most of the European nations involved would soon succumb to U.S. economic pressure and cease to hold to their obligations. Nonetheless, it was not until a year following Trump’s irresponsible act that Iran announced that “The Islamic Republic of Iran in reaction to the exit of America from the nuclear deal and the bad promises of European countries in carrying out their obligations will restart a part of the nuclear activities which were stopped under the framework of the nuclear deal.” Even while the Iranian government took this position, it insisted that if at any time the United States returned to the treaty and removed all nuclear-related sanctions, Iran too would return to its obligations. Tehran even suggested a process whereby the U.S. and Iran would take simultaneous steps to that end. 

Everyone but Trump devotees, Israel and its supporters, and those Iranian exiles who would like to see the return of the country’s monarchy recognized that the U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA had been a mistake. Accordingly, in the campaign run-up to the 2020 presidential election in the U.S., the Democratic candidate, Joe Biden, promised that upon election he would rejoin the treaty if Iran returned to compliance as well. 

Biden did win, but he has not yet fulfilled his promise. Instead, he entered an extended period of negotiations that is still ongoing. At first it was said that these were about “who goes first” when it comes to returning to requirements of the treaty. Was Iran to give up the small steps in nuclear enrichment since the Trump withdrawal, or was the U.S. going to go first in removing the draconian sanctions placed on Iran by the Trump administration? It was Iran who realized the childish nature of this question and offered a simultaneous return to the compliance mentioned above. While the Biden administration rejected this offer, it has been reported that now both sides are working toward “simultaneous, sequential steps” back to requirements of the treaty. 


Part II—Misleading the American Public


In the meantime, the Biden administration has been releasing misinformation to the public. For instance, Biden has insisted that sanctions relief depends on Iran “returning to compliance.” But, of course, for anyone familiar with the relevant events, it was Washington that broke the treaty and needed to return to compliance. Any subsequent Iranian actions following Trump’s folly were, and still are, perfectly legal under the terms of the JCPOA. Joe Biden can continue to justify draconian economic sanctions in this way—sanctions that are ruining the lives of millions—only because he is addressing an ignorant American audience. 

When Iran failed to be bullied, Biden’s diplomats adopted a “shift the blame” tactic. In May 2021, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said “Iran, I think, knows what it needs to do to come back into compliance on the nuclear side, and what we haven’t yet seen is whether Iran is ready and willing to make a decision to do what it has to do. That’s the test and we don’t yet have an answer.” Translation: the American people should know that we, the Biden administration, are trying, but those Iranians seem to be too thick-headed to do what is necessary. So if the whole thing fails, it is their fault and not ours. 

Blinken went on, “If both sides can return to the original deal, then we can use that as a foundation both to look at how to make the deal itself potentially longer and stronger—and also [to] engage on these other issues, whether it’s Iran’s support for terrorism [or] its destabilizing support for different proxies throughout the Middle East.”

That scenario will not encourage the Iranians. They have repeatedly stated that the JCPOA, and the present negotiations, are about two things: sanctions and the scope of nuclear development. It is not about Iranian foreign policy, which has been so blandly assumed to be “terrorism” by both Trump and Biden. If Mr. Blinken keeps tagging on these extras, we will still be running in circles come Christmas.   

What is the diplomatic aim of the Biden administration? Is it to pursue the Democrats’ traditional, and bankrupt, aim of sounding as tough on foreign policy as the Republicans? That irrelevant goal (remember most Americans don’t care about foreign policy) would not be surprising coming from a professional Democratic politician of Joe Biden’s generation. However, after all the work that has gone into the JCPOA and all the suffering endured by the Iranian population due to brutal U.S. sanctions, such a petty motive reflects the mentality of a street gang competing with rivals, rather than the peaceful ends of an alleged civilized society. 

With statements like this, Secretary of State Blinken transforms himself into someone we might mistake for a

Fox News TV anchor. It would seem that many who pride themselves on eschewing Fox’s lies are ready to swallow whole Mr. Blinken’s bunk. 

Part III—An Israeli Connection?

We know that ex-Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and ex-President Trump were in agreement on Iran policy. In this regard, all the yelling and screaming about Iran’s nuclear program carried on by both men hid their real goal. Particularly for Netanyahu, the hyperbole was aimed at creating a “credible reason” to force regime change in Iran, even if it meant a U.S. invasion. Essentially, the model here was Iraq. Netanyahu was ready to pursue this end till the last dying American soldier. Obviously, the JCPOA was a major obstacle in that path. So was Barack Obama, who thought he was helping Israel and the world in general by negotiating the treaty. 

Now Netanyahu and Trump are gone from office. However, why should we believe that the new Israeli government has changed the ultimate goal? And why should we believe that Joe Biden—who is, as he never fails to remind us, an “ironclad” Zionist—will really follow in Obama’s footsteps?

In June, Israel sent some of its highest-ranking leaders to see Biden. These included Israeli President Reuven Rivlin and Defense Minister Benny Gantz. Both meetings were basically about Iran. “Iran will never get a nuclear weapon on my watch,” Biden told Rivlin. This was billed as a “stark warning” to Iran—a country which has, for religious as well as other reasons, disavowed the desire for such a weapon. How many Americans know this? Does President Biden know this?

Many scholars and other experts in Middle East policy believe that “Mr. Biden’s calculations are rooted in a different era of American-Israeli relations—when Israel’s security concerns commanded far more attention than Palestinian grievances.” This is true. But there is a more personal connection. Biden personally identifies with Israel like no other U.S. president since Lyndon Johnson. He collects yarmulkes and is reported to have knelt down in an impromptu “show of respect” after learning that Rivka Ravitz, President Rivlin’s Orthodox chief of staff, was the mother of 12 children. The Israeli Orthodox Jews often have such large families out of fear of a “demographic holocaust”—that is, the consequences of the Palestinians’ much higher birth rate than that of most Israeli Jews. Finally, Biden has completely accepted the highly debatable notion that world Jewry, many of whom are not Zionists, cannot be safe apart from the existence of Israel. 

Those same experts also believe that, when it comes to Israel, President Biden’s approach has much to do with domestic politics. Thus, getting back to the JCPOA is less important than catering to the desires of the Israel Lobby. This only makes sense for a politician born and bred to the power of that lobby.

Part IV—Conclusion


The U.S. and Israeli leaders are suffering from a group-think environment and tunnel vision, all shaped in good part by political pressure generated by dominant special interests.  At least in this instance, one cannot say the same for the Iranians who, though led by a rigid religious elite, broke through their tunnel vision and joined the JCPOA treaty. The present stalemate is the work of American ideologues tied hand and foot to a major U.S. lobby. 

Outside the tunnel one can see the obvious answer to the present stalemate. Having been polite and empathetic toward Rivlin and Gantz, Joe Biden should ask over to the Oval Office an outsider, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres. At the end of June Guterres said, “I appeal to the United States to lift or waive its sanctions outlined in the plan.” He also appealed to Iran to return to full implementation of the deal. Right from the beginning of Biden’s election, the Iranians have been willing to follow Guterres’s lead. It is Biden who has temporized while being encouraged by his confidants from Jerusalem. 

‘Israeli’ Occupation of Syrian Golan Heights Illegitimate, Invalid – UN

July 23, 2021

Visual search query image

By Staff, Agencies

The United Nations emphasized Syria’s sovereignty over the ‘Israeli’-occupied Golan Heights, stressing that annexation measures imposed by the Tel Aviv regime in the territory are invalid and illegitimate.

The UN Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia [ESCWA] made the announcement in a periodic report distributed in Beirut, Syria’s official SANA news agency reported on Thursday.

“The compliance with the international law and the absence of impunity are two prerequisites for achieving peace and justice for all the peoples of the region,” the UN body added.

In 1967, the Zionist occupation waged a full-scale war against Arab territories, during which it occupied a large swathe of Golan and annexed it four years later, a move never recognized by the international community.

In 1973, another war broke out and a year later, a UN-brokered ceasefire came into force, according to which Tel Aviv and Damascus agreed to separate their troops and create a buffer zone in the Heights.

The Zionist entity has over the past decades built dozens of settlements in the Golan Heights in defiance of international calls for the regime to stop its illegal construction activities.

Syria has repeatedly reaffirmed its sovereignty over the Golan Heights, saying the territory must be completely restored to its control.

The United Nations has time and again emphasized Syria’s sovereignty over the territory.

In March 2019, former American president Donald Trump controversially signed a decree recognizing ‘Israeli’ “sovereignty” over the Golan Heights during a meeting with then Zionist Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Washington.

The ESCWA report, which covers the period from April 2020 to March 2021, further stressed that it is impossible to achieve sustainable development in the occupied Palestinian territories in light of the continuing ‘Israeli’ occupation and the policies and practices pursued by the entity.

The UN commission also emphasized the necessity of halting such Zionist measures that hinder efforts to combat the COVID-19 pandemic and to provide additional humanitarian aid to the Palestinians.

The report also stressed that the measures and policies adopted by the Zionist regime in Arab territories, occupied since 1967, including the blockade imposed on the Gaza Strip and settlement expansion in the occupied West Bank, are all in sheer violation of international law.

Elsewhere in the report, ESCWA said that last year was one of the worst years in the Palestinian economy since 2002, as it shrank by 11.5 percent.

The UN commission prepares a report for the UN chief every year on the economic and social repercussions of the ‘Israeli’ occupation on the conditions of the Palestinians in the occupied territories and also the conditions of the Syrians in the Golan Heights.

The Globalization of the Twelve Tribes of Israel

 BY GILAD ATZMON

12 tribes.jpg

By Gilad Atzmon

Israeli Foreign Minister Yair Lapid spoke on Wednesday at the seventh Global Forum for Combating Antisemitism. He said that antisemitism was part of a broad family of hatreds, and that antisemites start by attacking Jews but “always” move on to focus their hate and violence on other groups as well.

Lapid insisted that antisemitism was akin to other hatreds, such as ones held by those “who participated in the slave trade.”  Presumably the ignoramus isn’t aware that some historians assert that there were Jews prominent in the African slave trade. Lapid also pointed at the “Hutu massacres of Tutsis in Rwanda.”  Someone should mention to him that the 1948 Palestinian Nakba was launched with a manifold of Jewish paramilitary massacres of indigenous people. These horrendous actions led to an orchestrated ethnic cleansing of Palestine.

Lapid maintained that “Antisemitism isn’t the first name of hate, it’s the family name.” I would advise the Israeli foreign minister that if racism is the appropriate family name for most forms of bigotry towards the Other, then chosenness (racial supremacy) should be considered its definitive first name.

If you allowed yourself for a second to believe that Lapid was motivated by a genuine humanist and a universalist agenda to fight racism and hatred, you were obviously wrong. Lapid devised a plan for the goyim: “Jewish people need allies and to enlist everyone who believes it is wrong to persecute people just because of their faith, sexuality, gender, nationality, or the colour of their skin…We need to tell them that antisemitism never ends with the Jews. It will always move on to the next target.”

According to Lapid, the survival of the Jewish nationalist project is dependent on the of the breaking up of the universe into identarian segments, while making sure they all adhere to the Jewish state and the Jewish people’s interests.  While the old Jewish Left pushed for a cosmopolitan agenda that removed barriers and borders between people regardless of their race, gender or nationality, the new Jewish progressive agenda is the complete opposite. It is there to divide us by means of gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, race, etc. We are basically witnessing a globalized version of the Twelve Tribes of Israel.

Lapid reckons that “the fight isn’t between antisemites and Jews: The fight is between antisemites and anyone who believes in the values of equality, justice and liberty.” But the truth of the matter is that not many states in the world are as removed from ‘values of equality, justice and liberty’ as the Jewish state. Look how Israel treats its African asylum seekers or the black Hebrews. Can you think of any other state that locks millions of people in open air prisons for decades and make them subject to endless brutal blockades?    

Many in Israel didn’t approve of Lapid’s speech. Opposition leader Benjamin Netanyahu has accused the Foreign Minister of “minimizing” the concept of antisemitism and diminishing its uniqueness. Lapid was basically accused of trivializing the Holocaust. He isn’t the first; the ADL accuses yours truly of pretty much the same ‘crime.’

“Even though antisemitism, hatred of Jews, is part of the general human phenomenon of hatred of the foreigner, it is different from that in its strength, its durability over thousands of years and its murderous ideology that has been nourished throughout the generations in order to pave the way for the destruction of Jews.” Netanyahu argued. For a change, I agree with Netanyahu. Jewish history is indeed a chain of catastrophes. Jews have been experiencing rejection and abuse throughout their entire history.

Early Zionism, as such, was indeed a unique and refreshing movement that was destined to change the Jewish path and destiny. It vowed to ‘amend’ the Jews, to make them beloved and respected.  No one understood this revolutionary intellectual and spiritual shift in the Jewish mindset better than Benjamin Netanyahu’s father, who wrote what I believe to be one of the best historical dissections of the Early Zionist project. But the truth on the ground and the rise of antisemitsm are probably the best indication that Zionism failed catastrophically. Over time, it is clear that Zionism achieved the complete opposite.

If there are any true Zionist thinkers left in the Jewish world, they should look in the mirror and ask what Israel does to provoke antisemitism. What is it that Jewish lobby groups do that alienate so many people? Such an approach may prove to be more helpful on the long run than Lapid’s tactical offering to make identitarians worldwide into a new league of Zionist mercenaries.   

Donate

Family Separation Law: Israel’s Demographic War on Palestine Intensifies

July 14, 2021

Palestinians waiting at Qalandia Checkpoint (Photo: Patrick Edgar, Supplied)

By Ramzy Baroud

When the Israeli Knesset (parliament) failed to renew what is commonly referred to as the Family Reunification Law, news reports and analyses misrepresented the story altogether. The even split of 59 MKs voting in favor of the law and 59 against it gave the erroneous impression that Israeli lawmakers are equally divided over the right of Palestinians to obtain permanent residency status or citizenship in Israel through marriage. Nothing could be further away from the truth. 

Originally passed in 2003, the Citizenship and Entry Law was effectively a ban on Palestinian marriage. Under the guise of ‘security’, the law prohibited Palestinians in the West Bank, who marry Israeli citizens, to permanently move to Israel, obtain work, permanent residency and, ultimately, citizenship. 

The law was never made permanent as it was subjected to an annual vote, which successfully renewed it 17 times, consecutively. The 18th vote, on July 6, however, ran into an obstacle. Contrary to the perception given by media coverage, those who voted against the renewal of the ban did so for purely political reasons and not out of concern for the tens of thousands of Palestinian families that have splintered and broken up since the law came into effect.

Since the ousting of former Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, at the hands of his protégé, current Prime Minister, Naftali Bennett, Israel’s former leader has been determined to topple Bennett’s already fragile coalition. Bennett’s government allies cobble up extreme right-wing parties, including Yamina, the party of the prime minister himself, centrist and even leftist parties, the likes of Meretz. It even hosts an Arab party, United Arab List, or Ra’am, of Mansour Abbas. A coalition of this nature is unlikely to survive long, considering Israel’s tumultuous politics, and Netanyahu – eager for an early election – will do everything in his power to facilitate what he sees as an imminent collapse.

Netanyahu’s Likud party and its allies in the opposition voted against renewing the discriminatory law to score a political point. Their justification, however, was more appalling than the law itself. The Likud wants the temporary law to become a permanent fixture, a Basic Law, to be added to dozens of other similar racially motivated laws that target the very fabric of Palestinian society. 

Welcome to Israel’s demographic war on the Palestinian people. This one-sided war is situated in the belief among Israel’s Jewish majority, that Israel’s greatest challenge is sustaining its demographic advantage which, thanks to a decided campaign of ethnic cleansing that began over seven decades ago, has been held by Jews over Palestinian Arabs. 

Israel’s main fear is not simply a decisive Palestinian majority between the River Jordan and the Mediterranean Sea. Israel’s Jewish ruling classes are also rattled by the real possibility of the growing political influence of Israel’s Palestinian Arab constituency, and are doing everything in their power to ensure Palestinian holders of Israeli citizenship are kept at a minimum. The Citizenship and Entry Law was designed specifically to keep this population in check. 

The general elections of March 2020, in particular, provided a taste of what a doomsday scenario would look like.  Arab Israeli parties unified under the single ticket of the Joint List and emerged with 15 seats, making it the third-largest political bloc in the Israeli Knesset, after Likud and Blue and White. If Palestinian Arabs mastered this much influence, though they represent only 20% of the overall Israeli population, imagine what they could do if the demographic tide continues to shift in their favor.

For Israel, the future of Jewish majority – read: supremacy – is dependent on keeping the population equation in favor of Israeli Jews at the expense of Palestinian Arabs. Most of the laws that discriminate against Palestinians, regardless of where they reside – in fact, anywhere in the world – is motivated by this maxim.  

According to the Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel (Adalah), Israel’s Palestinian Arab population is targeted with 65 different government laws and regulations, which ensure Palestinian Arabs do not prosper as a community, remaining politically disempowered, socio-economically disadvantaged and constantly threatened with the loss of their residency, and even citizenship. 

Palestinians elsewhere suffer an even worse fate. For example, Palestinians living in Jerusalem, who supposedly hold permanent residency status, are subjected to different types of legal harassment, so that Jerusalem can maintain its current Jewish majority. When Israel illegally occupied East Jerusalem in 1967, the city was almost entirely Palestinian Arab. Through numerous tactics, the city’s Arab population is now an ever-shrinking minority. Worse still, in 2018 Israel passed a law that granted the Ministry of Interior the right to revoke the residency of Jerusalemites based on the murky accusation of ‘breach of loyalty’.  

The occupied West Bank and Gaza are confined, as only Israel determines who remains and who is permanently exiled. The Israeli military occupation of these regions has taken population control to a whole new level; it is almost an exact science.

This is also precisely why Israelis abhor the very discussion of the Right of Return for Palestinian refugees, for they consider it an implicit call for the ‘destruction of Israel as a Jewish state’. According to this logic, if millions of Palestinian refugees are allowed to return to their homes and lands in historic Palestine, Israel will no longer exist in its current form, as a Jewish state, but will become a democratic state for all of its citizens, instead.

What is likely to happen next is that Israel’s Interior Ministry will continue to find caveats in Israel’s ever-flexible laws to block the reunification of Palestinian families, until the Knesset officially renews the Citizenship and Entry Law or, worse, make it permanent. Either way, Israel’s demographic war on Palestinians is likely to intensify in the future. Considering that it is a war that cannot rationally be won, Israel is likely to delve deeper into the abyss of apartheid.

As Israel continues to experiment with controlling the Palestinian population, it would be shameful if the international community continued to remain silent. This moral outrage must end. 

 – 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

How will US disengagement shape the Middle East? “ميدل إيست آي”: “محور المقاومة” هو المؤهل لملء الفراغ بعد الانسحاب الأميركي

Iranians destroy a US flag during a demonstration in Tehran in January 2020 (AFP)

24 June 2021 10:54 UTC

Marco Carnelos

So far, the entity best positioned to fill the power vacuum is the ‘axis of resistance’ led by Iran

The Middle East has always proudly claimed its own culture and, above all, a certain resistance to so-called western modernity. But over the past two decades, reading its tea leaves has become increasingly difficult.

The past two decades have been cataclysmic, and those to come could be even more worrisome. A power vacuum is looming, especially amid multiple signals of a US political and military disengagement from the region. With the notable exception of Israel, it is not certain that Washington’s other local partners will be able to adjust to the new strategic environment.

In the summer of 2000, the Clinton administration believed for a moment that the circle of the historical Israeli-Palestinian conflict could be squared – only to discover, just months later, that this was not on the cards.

The so-called US-led peace process has become essentially an international PR strategy for managing the conflict

At the time, the Americans and Israelis concluded that, no matter how effective their marketing strategies, a bantustan could not be sold to the Palestinians as the state they had claimed and sought for decades to fulfil their unquestionable right to self-determination. Since then, the so-called US-led peace process has become essentially an international PR strategy for managing the conflict. It has given breath and time to a creeping Israeli annexation of the sliver of historical Palestine not yet under Israel’s control.

The Trump administration – more honestly, or less hypocritically, if you prefer – tried to solve the issue by siding openly with Israel, aiming to impose a “bantustan solution” under a different name: the Abraham Accords. To succeed, the formula required the formal adhesion of certain Arab countries, primarily Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. Yet, while some Arab states quickly established diplomatic relations with Israel, the absence of Riyadh has left an aura of uncertainty around the ambitious project.

Turmoil in Israel-Palestine

The latest conflict in the streets of Jerusalem, inside Palestinian communities of Israel, and in the Gaza Strip, has likely buried the viability of such a “solution”. Most certainly, it has shown that the Palestinian question is still alive and kicking.

Israel is now in the paradoxical situation of being the strongest regional military and technological power, while facing a highly polarised political framework and a somewhat crumbling internal front. In order to finally remove former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu from power, Israeli politicians cobbled together the most heterogeneous coalition in the country’s history. The most extremist prime minister ever, Naftali Bennett, had to rely on the support an Arab party with Islamist roots in order to narrowly win power.

Palestinians protest in the occupied West Bank village of Salem on 15 May 2021 (AFP)
Palestinians protest in the occupied West Bank village of Salem on 15 May 2021 (AFP)

Meanwhile, Palestinians are mired between an increasingly ineffective official leadership in Ramallah, the Palestinian Authority, and an increasingly popular but “terrorist”-designated leadership in Gaza, Hamas.

After 9/11, the main western political driver for the region changed. The US-led “war on terrorism” aimed to impose, once and for all, a Pax Americana in the region, focusing on Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Iran, and Yemen.

Two decades later, this strategy is crumbling. The US is withdrawing from Afghanistan without accomplishing anything significant, and after spending trillions in Iraq, the US has been asked by Baghdad’s parliament to leave. A tiny enclave in eastern Syria remains under US control, but all the “useful” parts of the country are again under the control of President Bashar al-Assad.

Spreading anxiety

US disengagement from the region, whether real or perceived, is spreading anxiety, with the sense of an incoming power vacuum that needs to be filled. So far, the only entity sufficiently organised and determined to do so appears to be the “axis of resistance”: Iran and its regional allies, including Syria, Lebanon’s Hezbollah, Yemen’s Houthis and Shia militias in Iraq.

Since its 1979 revolution, Iran has been the main opponent of western modernity and, particularly, a Pax Americana in the region. Tehran’s nuclear ambitions and regional activities have been a constant source of concern for Washington and its regional allies, both Arab and Israeli.

A temporary and partial truce, the 2015 nuclear deal, was quickly removed from the strategic equation in 2018. A heavy sanctions campaign, the Trump administration’s “maximum pressure” strategy, did not achieve its claimed objectives: Iran has changed neither its regime nor its behaviour.America Last: Coming to terms with the new world order

As another US administration now attempts to rejoin the nuclear deal, hoping to improve some of its clauses, Iran – with the recent election of Ebrahim Raisi as the country’s next president – is firmly under the control of conservatives, while also seeking a deal with the US and regional rivals. While Major-General Qassem Soleimani might have been eliminated, his regional master plan was not.

There are also other spoilers keen to take their slice of the cake. Turkey seems to be rediscovering its Ottoman past, and combined with its links to the Muslim Brotherhood, it is still viewed as an existential threat to many Arab ruling families.

Russia’s policy has been smarter and more effective, relying on diplomacy reinforced by military power – contrary to Washington’s approach, which used diplomacy only to justify the use of military force. Moscow has held its ground in Syria, obtained important leverage in Libya, and maintained good relations with all regional actors. Two decades ago, Russia was barely relevant in the area; now it is a player. It holds poor cards, but can use them far more effectively than others.

China, as usual, is approaching the region pragmatically, not ideologically. It aspires to leverage the power vacuum to smoothly build up the southern leg of its ambitious Belt and Road Initiative, aiming to create the world’s biggest economic and trading bloc outside of US political and financial control.

Looming pressures

On a regional scale, the so-called Arab Spring, an overdue and legitimate rallying cry by ordinary people exhausted by a systemic lack of governance, basic services and political rights, turned quickly into an Islamic awakening. It fuelled bloody civil wars in Syria, Libya and Yemen, while achieving only a single, partially accomplished political transition in Tunisia. The rest was an autocratic counter-spring, resembling the concert of powers mustered at the Congress of Vienna after the French Revolution and Napoleonic Wars.

The Middle East during the past two decades of American unilateralism has been a mess. Could it be even worse without it?

While the US seems engaged in naively challenging both China and Russia, Europe, as usual, is torn by the dilemma over how to position itself. The Middle East may descend further into chaos, with Covid-19, migration and environmental pressures presenting just a few of the challenges that lie ahead.

One self-proclaimed enabler of the vaguely defined “rules-based world order”, the G7, has again failed to display the necessary leadership, which requires not only power, but also intellectual honesty and self-criticism. Its latest communique outlines no inspirational vision for the Middle East, failing to address the bombs that have already exploded (in Israel-Palestine) or the ones still ticking (the forthcoming collapse of Lebanon).

The Middle East during the past two decades of American unilateralism has been a mess. Could it be even worse without it? That’s doubtful, but it would be best to fasten your seatbelts anyway.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.Marco CarnelosMarco Carnelos is a former Italian diplomat. He has been assigned to Somalia, Australia and the United Nations. He has served in the foreign policy staff of three Italian prime ministers between 1995 and 2011. More recently he has been Middle East Peace Process Coordinator Special Envoy for Syria for the Italian government and, until November 2017, ambassador of Italy to Iraq.

“ميدل إيست آي”: “محور المقاومة” هو المؤهل لملء الفراغ بعد الانسحاب الأميركي

Visual search query image
القوات الامريكية تنسحب من افغانستان بحلول سبتمبر المقبل

الكاتب: ماركو كارنيلوس

المصدر: ميدل إيست آي


كتب الدبلوماسي الإيطالي السابق ماركو كارنيلوس مقالة في موقع “ميدل إيست آي” البريطانيا قال فيها إن الشرق الأوسط كان دوماً يدعي بفخر أنه يمتلك ثقافته الخاصة، وقبل كل شيء، أنه لديه مقاومة ما لما يسمّى بالحداثة الغربية. لكن العقدين الماضيين، كانا كارثيين، ويمكن للعقدين المقبلين أن يكونوا أكثر إثارة للقلق. 

وأوضح الكاتب سبب ذلك بأنه يلوح في الأفق فراغ في السلطة، خاصة وسط إشارات متعددة لفك الولايات المتحدة الأميركية ارتباطها السياسي والعسكري بالمنطقة. فباستثناء “إسرائيل”، ليس من المؤكد أن شركاء واشنطن المحليين الآخرين سيكونون قادرين على التكيّف مع البيئة الاستراتيجية الجديدة.

في صيف عام 2000، اعتقدت إدارة الرئيس الأميركي بيل كلينتون للحظة أنه يمكن تربيع دائرة الصراع الإسرائيلي الفلسطيني التاريخي، كي تكتشف، بعد أشهر فقط، أن هذا لم يكن مطروحاً على الورق. فقد خلص الأميركيون والإسرائيليون أنذاك إلى أنه، بغض النظر عن مدى فعالية استراتيجياتهم التسويقية، لا يمكن بيع “البانتوستان” للفلسطينيين كدولة طالبوا بها وسعى لعقود من الزمان لتحقيق حقهم غير المشكوك فيه في تقرير المصير. منذ ذلك الحين، أصبحت عملية السلام المزعومة، بقيادة الولايات المتحدة، استراتيجية علاقات عامة دولية لإدارة الصراع. لقد منحت هذه العملية نفساً ووقتاً لقيام “إسرائيل” بضم زاحف لبقية فلسطين التاريخية التي لم تخضع بعد لسيطرة الاحتلال الإسرائيلي.

وأضاف كارنيلوس: حاولت إدارة الرئيس الأميركي السابق دونالد ترامب – بصراحة أكثر، أو أقل نفاقاً – حل المشكلة بالانحياز صراحة إلى “إسرائيل”، بهدف فرض “حل البانتوستان” تحت اسم مختلف: اتفاقات أبراهام. ولتحقيق النجاح، تطلبت الصيغة الانضمام الرسمي لبعض الدول العربية، وفي مقدمتها السعودية والإمارات العربية المتحدة. ومع ذلك، في حين أن بعض الدول العربية أقامت بسرعة علاقات دبلوماسية مع “إسرائيل”، فإن غياب الرياض ترك هالة من عدم اليقين حول المشروع الطموح.

هبة القدس

وأشار الكاتب إلى أن الصراع الأخير في شوارع القدس، وداخل التجمعات السكانية الفلسطينية في الكيان الإسرائيلي، ومع قطاع غزة، قد يكون قد دفن جدوى مثل هذا “الحل”. لكنه بالطبع، أظهر أن القضية الفلسطينية لا تزال حية وتنطلق. فـ”إسرائيل” اليوم في وضع متناقض لكونها أقوى قوة عسكرية وتكنولوجية إقليمية، لكنها تواجه إطاراً سياسياً شديد الاستقطاب وجبهة داخلية متداعية إلى حد ما. فمن أجل الإطاحة برئيس الوزراء السابق بنيامين نتنياهو أخيراً، قام السياسيون الإسرائيليون بتجميع أكثر تحالف غير متجانس في تاريخ الكيان. كان على رئيس الوزراء الأكثر تطرفاً، نفتالي بينيت، الاعتماد على دعم حزب فلسطيني ذي جذور إسلامية من أجل الفوز بالسلطة بفارق ضئيل.

واعتبر الدبلوماسي الإيطالي أنه في المقابل، فإن الفلسطينيين غارقون بين قيادة رسمية غير فعالة في رام الله، هي السلطة الفلسطينية، وقيادة شعبية ولكنها مصنفة “إرهابية” في غزة، هي حركة حماس. وقال إنه بعد 11 أيلول / سبتمبر 2001، تغير المحرك السياسي الغربي الرئيسي للمنطقة، إذ هدفت “الحرب على الإرهاب” بقيادة الولايات المتحدة إلى فرض “السلام الطويل المدى” الأميركي في المنطقة لمرة واحدة وأخيرة، مع التركيز على لبنان وسوريا والعراق وإيران واليمن.

لكن بعد عقدين من الزمن، هذه الاستراتيجية تنهار. إذ تنسحب الولايات المتحدة من أفغانستان من دون تحقيق أي شيء مهم، وبعد إنفاق تريليونات الدولارات في العراق، طلب البرلمان العراقي من الولايات المتحدة المغادرة. لا يزال جيب صغير في شرق سوريا تحت سيطرة الولايات المتحدة، لكن جميع الأجزاء “المفيدة” من البلاد أصبحت مرة أخرى تحت سيطرة الرئيس بشار الأسد.

ورأى الكاتب “أن فك ارتباط الولايات المتحدة بالمنطقة، سواء كان حقيقياً أو متصوراً، ينشر القلق، مع إحساس بفراغ القوة الذي سيأتي والذي يجب ملؤه. حتى الآن، يبدو أن الكيان الوحيد المنظم والمصمم على القيام بذلك هو “محور المقاومة”: إيران وحلفاؤها الإقليميون، بما في ذلك سوريا وحزب الله اللبناني والحوثيين والميليشيات الشيعية في العراق”.

منذ ثورة 1979، كانت إيران الخصم الرئيسي للحداثة الغربية، وعلى وجه الخصوص الهيمنة الأميركية في المنطقة. لطالما كانت طموحات طهران النووية وأنشطتها الإقليمية مصدر قلق دائم لواشنطن وحلفائها الإقليميين، العرب والإسرائيليين.

وقد تم إلغاء الهدنة المؤقتة والجزئية، الاتفاق النووي لعام 2015، بسرعة من المعادلة الاستراتيجية في عام 2018. ولم تحقق حملة العقوبات الأميركية الشديدة، استراتيجية “الضغط الأقصى” لإدارة ترامب، أهدافها المعلنة حيث أن إيران لم تغيّر لا نظامها ولا سلوكها.

وقال الكاتب إنه بينما تحاول إدارة أميركية أخرى الآن الانضمام إلى الاتفاق النووي، على أمل تحسين بعض بنوده، فإن إيران – مع انتخاب إبراهيم رئيسي كرئيس مقبل للبلاد – تخضع بشدة لسيطرة المحافظين، بينما تسعى في الوقت نفسه إلى إبرام اتفاق مع المنافسين الأميركيين والإقليميين. وفي حين أن اللواء قاسم سليماني قد اغتيل، إلا أن خطته الرئيسية الإقليمية لم تتم الإطاحة بها.

وقال الكاتب إن تركيا تعيد اكتشاف ماضيها العثماني، وإلى جانب صلاتها بجماعة الإخوان المسلمين، لا يزال يُنظر إليها على أنها تهديد وجودي للعديد من العائلات العربية الحاكمة.

وأضاف: كانت سياسة روسيا أكثر ذكاءً وفاعلية، حيث اعتمدت على الدبلوماسية التي تعززها القوة العسكرية، على عكس نهج واشنطن، الذي استخدم الدبلوماسية فقط لتبرير استخدام القوة العسكرية. احتفظت موسكو بموقفها في سوريا، وحصلت على نفوذ مهم في ليبيا، وحافظت على علاقات جيدة مع جميع الأطراف الإقليميين. فقبل عقدين من الزمن، كانت روسيا بالكاد ذات صلة بالمنطقة. الآن هي لاعب، تحمل بطاقات رديئة، ولكن يمكنها استخدامها بشكل أكثر فاعلية من غيرها.

أما الصين، فهي كالعادة تقترب من المنطقة بطريقة براغماتية وليس أيديولوجية. وتطمح للاستفادة من فراغ السلطة لبناء بسلاسة الجزء الجنوبي من “مبادرة الحزام والطريق” الطموحة، والتي تهدف إلى إنشاء أكبر كتلة اقتصادية وتجارية في العالم خارج السيطرة السياسية والمالية الأميركية.

ضغوط تلوح في الأفق

وقال الكاتب: بينما يبدو أن الولايات المتحدة منخرطة في تحدي كل من الصين وروسيا بسذاجة، فإن أوروبا، كعادتها، ممزقة بسبب معضلة كيفية التمركز. قد ينزلق الشرق الأوسط إلى مزيد من الفوضى، حيث يمثل فيروس كورونا والضغوط البيئية والهجرة عدداً قليلاً من التحديات التي تنتظر الأوروبيين.

وأضاف: لقد أخفقت مجموعة الدول السبع، التي نصبت نفسها بنفسها في تمكين “النظام العالمي القائم على القواعد” المحددة بشكل غامض، في إظهار القيادة اللازمة، والتي لا تتطلب القوة فحسب، بل تتطلب كذلك الصدق الفكري والنقد الذاتي. لا يحدد بيانها الأخير أي رؤية ملهمة للشرق الأوسط، وقد فشلت في معالجة القنابل التي انفجرت بالفعل (بين “إسرائيل” وفلسطين) أو التي قد تنفجر (الانهيار الوشيك للبنان).

وختم بالقول: كان الشرق الأوسط خلال العقدين الماضيين من هيمنة الأحادية الأميركية في حالة من الفوضى. فهل يمكن أن يكون أسوأ من دونها؟ هذا مشكوك فيه، ولكن سيكون من الأفضل ربط أحزمة الأمان على أي حال.

*ماركو كارنيلوس دبلوماسي إيطالي سابق. تم تكليفه بالعمل في الصومال وأستراليا والأمم المتحدة. وقد عمل في فريق السياسة الخارجية لثلاثة رؤساء وزراء إيطاليين بين عامي 1995 و2011. وشغل أخيراً منصب مبعوث الحكومة الإيطالية الخاص لعملية السلام في الشرق الأوسط إلى سوريا، وحتى تشرين الثاني / نوفمبر 2017، سفيراً لإيطاليا في العراق.

نقله إلى العربية بتصرف: هيثم مزاحم

If Bibi Was the Frying Pan, Is Bennett the Fire? What To Expect from Israel’s New PM

By Jessica Buxbaum

Source

“It’s not like [Israel is] replacing Netanyahu with a person who believes in equality for all, who believes in freedom for all, who believes in human rights for all. They’re replacing Netanyahu with an ultra-nationalist who is going to put forward his ultra-nationalist agenda.” – Diana Buttu, former PLO spokesperson

JERUSALEM — After more than a decade, four elections, three corruption charges, and a tumultuous parliamentary vote, someone other than Benjamin Netanyahu was sworn in as Israel’s prime minister this week.

Naftali Bennett, the far-right nationalist who has replaced Netanyahu, heads the most politically diverse coalition in the nation’s history, but his politics are far from progressive.

Who is Naftali Bennett?

Unlike his predecessors, Bennett is more of a novice than a veteran politician. While he has served in several ministerial roles, his government experience is relatively brief.

Bennett began his political career as Netanyahu’s chief of staff in 2005, when the latter served as opposition leader. Prior to his first role in government, he served in the Israeli army as a commando unit officer during Israel’s 1996 offensive against Hezbollah in Lebanon and was indirectly involved in the Kfar Qana Massacre, in which Israeli artillery fire killed 102 Lebanese civilians at a United Nations facility.

The 49-year-old Bennett was born in Haifa to parents who immigrated to Israel from San Francisco in 1967. Donning a kippah (a cap often worn by Jewish men during rituals), Bennett is Israel’s first religiously observant prime minister.

While not a settler himself, Bennet is seen as an icon of Israel’s settler right. He was appointed director general of the Yesha Council, the political body representing Israeli settlers, in 2009. The following year, he founded the My Israel Movement along with fellow Israeli politician Ayelet Shaked. The Zionist group works to eradicate what it identifies as “anti-Israel activity” online, specifically in relation to the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement.

Bennett became chairman of the religious and right-wing Jewish Home Party in 2012, but left in 2018 to create the New Right Party, which is currently the sole member of his far-right electoral alliance, Yamina (or “to the right” in Hebrew). He was often perceived as standing on the sidelines of politics — an outsider desperately wanting in. Except for his time as education minister, almost every stint as an Israeli minister was short-lived. His contribution to politics has been less action-oriented and more centered on his inflammatory statements.

A history of racist rhetoric

Bennett is notorious for the myriad of controversial remarks he’s made over the years:

  • During a parliamentary debate on releasing Palestinian prisoners, Bennett bragged about “killing Arabs.” “If we capture terrorists, we need to just kill them,” Bennett said in 2013. “I’ve already killed a lot of Arabs in my life, and there is no problem with that.”
  • In 2018, he advocated for a shoot-to-kill policy for Palestinians crossing the Gaza border. When questioned about whether children would be part of this policy, he said, “They are not children — they are terrorists. We are fooling ourselves. I see the photos.”
  • During a televised debate in 2010, Bennett said to Palestinian lawmaker Ahmad Tibi, “When you were still climbing trees, we had a Jewish state here.”
  • In an interview with The New Yorker in 2013, Bennett reiterated his strong opposition to a Palestinian state. “I will do everything in my power, forever, to fight against a Palestinian state being founded in the Land of Israel,” Bennett said.

Bennett has long advocated for full annexation of Israeli-controlled Area C of the Occupied West Bank, which comprises 60% of the West Bank. He said, in 2013:

The most important thing in the Land of Israel is to build, build, build [settlements]… It’s important that there will be an Israeli presence everywhere. Our principal problem is still Israel’s leaders’ unwillingness to say in a simple manner that the Land of Israel belongs to the People of Israel.  “

In 2014, Bennett referred to Israeli annexation of the West Bank, telling reporters Israel “will be gradually attempting to apply Israeli law on Israeli controlled areas of Judea and Samaria [the occupied West Bank].”

And more recently, in February of this year, he said in an interview, “As long as I have any power and control, I won’t hand over one centimeter of the Land of Israel. Period.”

Benjamin Netanyahu,Naftali Bennett
Netanyahu, right, and Bennett pose for a photos with children in the Arab town of Tamra, Sept. 1, 2016. Sebastian Scheiner | AP

While Diana Buttu, a Palestinian analyst and former spokesperson for the Palestine Liberation Organization, is happy Netanyahu is out of office, she doesn’t see the new leader as the right kind of change. “It’s not like [Israel is] replacing Netanyahu with a person who believes in equality for all, who believes in freedom for all, who believes in human rights for all,” Buttu said. “They’re replacing Netanyahu with an ultra-nationalist who is going to put forward his ultra-nationalist agenda.”

Bennett’s possible policies

Bennett’s lack of a governing record makes it difficult to predict what kind of leader he’ll be and what kind of policies he may enact.

Paul Scham, executive director of the Gildenhorn Institute for Israel Studies at the University of Maryland, surmises the new prime minister will tackle mundane but necessary agenda items like passing a budget and solving Israel’s infrastructure crisis.

“He recognizes that this isn’t a time for a bold action on the ideological front,” Scham told MintPress News.

Two hours after Bennett was sworn in as prime minister, President Joe Biden phoned the new leader to congratulate him. By contrast, Biden waited a month after his own swearing-in ceremony to call Netanyahu. Scham suggested such actions hint Bennett may prioritize relations with the United States and remain diplomatic in an effort to undo his predecessor’s damage.

“Since Bibi seemed to have this adverse relationship with [former President Barack] Obama and was very pro-Republican, Bennett will take care not to push the buttons, like denying that a Palestinian state will ever come into existence,” Scham said. On several occasions, Netanyahu has rejected the formation of a Palestinian state under his leadership.

Naftali Bennett protest
Israelis hold signs during a protest against Benneft’s allaince with Arab politicians in Tel Aviv, Israel, May 30, 2021. Sebastian Scheiner| AP

On the other hand, Buttu believes Bennett will want to bolster his right-wing credentials in the face of criticism for joining forces with Palestinian and leftist parties. Israel’s new government was formed through a coalition of several conflicting political parties, including Muslim party United Arab List, the far-left Meretz Party, centrist Yesh Atid Party, the Labor Party and Bennett’s Yamina.

Earlier this month, hundreds of right-wing activists demonstrated in front of Shaked’s and other fellow Yamina members’ homes against the far-right coalition teaming up with left-wing parties.

“He’s been saying in statements ‘Now is the time for a national unity government,” Buttu said. “But then to his crowd, he’s saying, ‘Don’t worry, this is a right-wing government.’”

New leader, same agenda

While other Israeli politicians often tone down their rhetoric to fit a global standard, Bennett thrives on unquestionably racist language.

“If anything, Bennett is just that much worse because his ideology is an ideology of extreme racism,” Buttu said. “Whereas when it comes to Netanyahu, he’s learned how to polish up that same ideology.”

Despite a new government coming to power, the politics of settler-colonialism remain the same. In that regard, peace and any chance for Palestinian liberation feel out of reach.

“People are happy Netanyahu is out, and my worry is that because Netanyahu is out and because [Israeli Foreign Affairs Minister Yair] Lapid is backing Bennett, there’s going to be a red carpet rolled out for a person who is openly racist,” Buttu said, cautioning that placing Bennett on a pedestal will make the mistake of validating the politician’s perspectives. “Legitimating him inside Israel once again means it’s okay to have a prime minister who is so openly ultra-nationalist and who believes in land theft.”

And with this extremist ideology heading the Israeli government, the recent wave of settler terrorism may become even more emboldened.

Bibi and the One State Solution

 BY GILAD ATZMON

bibi one state.jpg

By Gilad Atzmon

I am slightly amused by the many voices who celebrate what is perceived as the end of the Netanyahu era. Of course, I am not a Netanyahu supporter, far from it, but I will give Netanyahu credit where he deserves it.  ‘King Bibi,’ as his Jewish supporters often refer to him, was actually a crucial factor in the rise of Palestinian resistance and Palestinian unity.  Bibi was a pragmatist who managed to pull his nation, the region and even the entire world into a chain of disasters in a desperate but relentless attempt to save himself. Bibi is not a conspirator. He did it all in the open, and despite this, he is still the most popular politician in Israel.

As I have pointed out many times before, Israel is not politically divided. The vast majority of Israeli Knesset Members (MKs) are to the right of Netanyahu. Israel’s political establishment is divided over Netanyahu, but primarily due to personal rifts.

Israel is now governed by a very weak coalition unlikely to hold together for very long. One minor border clash in Gaza or a Jewish right-wing march in Jerusalem could topple the government and bring to an end to the ‘spirit of change’ in Israel. Since the current government enjoys a majority of just one Knesset member, every member in the coalition possesses the power to topple the government, or alternatively to mount significant pressure on the leader. The Government is practically paralyzed.  

But the issue is far deeper. Netanyahu’s potential disappearance (be it through retirement from politics or shelter from his legal issues in a friendly country) will see the immediate collapse of the current coalition in favour of an ultra-right government. Such a government would enjoy the support of at least 80 Knesset members. It would include whatever is left out of the Likud party, the rabbinical Orthodox parties and of course around 20-25 of Netanyahu’s right-wing rivals who happened to end up (momentarily) in the so called ‘change coalition’.

In the complicated political stalemate that emerged due to the unresolved tension between Netanyahu and his rivals within the Right (such as Naftali Bennett, Gideon Sa’ar and Avigdor Lieberman), the Islamist party and its leader Mansur Abbas became kingmakers. On the face of it, the success of Abbas could bring many more Israeli Arabs to the polls. If Arabs in Israel see a benefit in their political participation and decide to go to the polls at a similar rate to their Jewish counterparts, they could almost double their representation in the Knesset. Israeli Arabs could easily become the most significant political bloc in the Jewish State.  Yet Netanyahu’s disappearance would lead a shift in the complete opposite direction. With a right-wing Jewish coalition comprised of 80 MKs, no one would be dependent on the support of Ra’am or any Arab party.

What are the chances of Netanyahu disappearing? It depends how his trial evolves. But despite some calls to replace him within the Likud party, every grassroots Likud activist knows that Likud’s future and its electoral survival are totally dependent on Netanyahu and his charisma. Not only did he fail to prepare a successor, he worked tirelessly to undermine every gifted politician around him. He turned every rising right-wing alternative into his bitter enemy, and to a certain extent owes himself his own demise.

 

Unlike the naïve voices who speak for Palestine in the West but hardly understand the region and are too scared to ask what is it that drives the Jewish State, Hamas’ strategists see it all. They helped Bibi stay in power: he let them win, they let him paralyze Israel and let it spiral down. I also believe that Mansour Abbas can read the map. He knows that the Israeli Left is a comical compromised act. He knows that Meretz and the Labour party have removed themselves from the conflict and are solely concerned with climate issues and  Identitarian matters  (LGBTQ in particular). Mansour Abbas made a strategic effort to bond with the Jewish right wing, to form a coalition with the Orthodox parties. Bibi was happy to take Abbas into his coalition but Abbas failed to achieve his goal because the ultra-right Jewish parties identified his strategy and worked hard to undermine it.

I would have thought that in light of the above, those who wish for one state between the River and the Sea should consider accepting that Bibi may be the safest and fastest route towards such a goal. 

Donate

رحيل نتنياهو وقدوم رئيسي Netanyahu’s departure and Raisi’s arrival

رحيل نتنياهو وقدوم رئيسي

17/06/2021

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is %D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AA%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%8A%D9%82-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B3%D9%8A%D8%A7%D8%B3%D9%8A.jpg

يرمز بنيامين نتنياهو الى آخر ملوك «بني إسرائيل» بالنسبة لكل معسكر اليمين في كيان الاحتلال، رغم انتماء خليفته الضعيف نفتالي بينيت إلى المعسكر ذاته. فالظروف التي أملت رحيل نتنياهو ترافقت مع ضعف الكيان وفشله العسكري، سواء بقبته الحديدية التي عجزت عن صد صواريخ المقاومة عن كبريات مدن الكيان التي تقصف للمرة الأولى منذ قيامه، أو بعجزه الناري عن تدمير الصواريخ ومنصات إطلاقها وأنفاق تخزينها، أو بهروبه من عملية برية كانت تنتظره فيها صواريخ الكورنيت، وقبوله بوقف النار بقرار من نتنياهو، رغم ذلك، كما ترافق الرحيل مع إنهاء زمن استقلال الكيان وبدء خضوعه للوصاية الأميركية بالتزامن مع العودة الأميركية المحسومة للاتفاق النووي مع إيران، كما قال نتنياهو، وهو محقّ بذلك، ما يجعل من رحيل نتنياهو نهاية مرحلة وبداية مرحلة، والمرحلة الجديدة عنوانها الأفول لحضور الكيان كقوة كبرى في الإقليم.

يرمز المرشح الرئاسي الإيراني الأوفر حظاً السيد إبراهيم رئيسي الى الشرائح السياسية والنخبوية الداعمة للحرس الثوريّ في إيران، والتي تضع مشروع الاستقلال عن الغرب واتباع خطط تنمية تعتمد على توطين التكنولوجيا وتحقيق الاكتفاء الذاتي، وبناء مقدرات عسكرية تمنح إيران القدرة على مواجهة أية تحديات عسكرية، وفي طليعتها المضي ببرنامج صاروخي متصاعد، وتلتزم بدعم حركات المقاومة في المنطقة، وتعتبر فلسطين قضيتها المركزية، ما يجعل من وصوله علامة على صعود إيران وتثبيتاً لمكتسبات تحققت للمحور الذي تقوده طهران، وإعلاناً عن تبلور مشروع محور المقاومة بصورة رسميّة، كقوة تعاظم قدراتها ويتنامى حضورها، وتشكل الشريك الندي الذي لا يمكن تجاهله للقوى الكبرى، الصديقة وغير الصديقة على مستوى كل ما يتصل بالمنطقة.

ليس تزامن الأفول والصعود صدفة إلا لجهة تقارب أيام الاستحقاقات، أما جوهر التزامن فحتمي، لأنه ما كان ممكناً أن يبدأ زمن أفول الكيان كقوة عظمى في المنطقة إلا لأن هناك من نجح باستنزاف هذا الكيان، ووضعه أمام تحديات مثلها نمو مقدرات حركات المقاومة المدعومة من إيران، وصولاً إلى تحول هذه التحديات للطبيعة الاستراتيجية، وعجز الكيان عن حلها، وبدء تحوّلها الى تحديات وجودية، فكما يبشر رحيل نتنياهو بتعمق مأزق الكيان، يبشر صعود رئيسي ومعه إيران ببدء حقبة جديدة في المنطقة هي حقبة محور المقاومة.

مقالات متعلقة


Netanyahu’s departure and Raisi’s arrival

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is %D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AA%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%8A%D9%82-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B3%D9%8A%D8%A7%D8%B3%D9%8A.jpg

Benjamin Netanyahu symbolise the last “Israelites” king of all the right-wing camp in the occupying entity. His weak successor, Naftali Bennett, belongs to the same camp. The circumstances that dictated Netanyahu’s departure were accompanied by the weakness of the entity and its military failure, whether with an Iron Dome, which failed to repel the resistance’s missiles from the major cities of the entity that were bombed for the first time since the entity’s inception, and his inability to destroy missiles and storage tunnels, and to escape from a ground operation that the Kornet missiles were waiting for, The acceptance of the ceasefire by Netanyahu’s decision also coincided with the beginning of the entity’s submission to the American guardianship in conjunction with the return of the United States to resolve the nuclear agreement with Iran, as Netanyahu said, and rightly so, which made Netanyahu’s departure the end of a stage and the beginning of a stage. The new phase ends the presence of the entity as a major force in the region.

The most fortunate Iranian presidential candidate, Mr. ُEbrahim Raisi, symbolises the political and elite segments that support the Revolutionary Guards in Iran, which lay the project of independence from the West and follow development plans based on the localisation of technology, achieving self-sufficiency, and building military capabilities that give Iran the ability to face any military challenges, and at the forefront Proceeding with an escalating missile program, and is committed to supporting the resistance movements in the region, and considers Palestine its central issue, which makes his success a sign of Iran’s rise and confirmation of the gains achieved by the axis led by Tehran, and announcing the crystallisation of the project of the resistance axis, as a force that is growing its capabilities and growing presence, and constitutes a dewy partner that cannot be ignored by the major powers, friendly and unfriendly in all related to the region.

The synchronicity of decline and rise is not a coincidence except in terms of the convergence of the days of maturity. As for the essence of the synchronisation, it is inevitable, because it was not possible to start the time of the demise of the entity as a superpower in the region only because there were those who succeeded in draining this entity, and placed it in front of the challenges of the growth of the capabilities of the resistance axis, which turned into existential strategy challenges that the entity was unable to solve, with Netanyahu’s departure, the entity’s predicament deepened, which heralds the beginning of a new era in the region, the era of the axis of resistance.

Related Videos

Related News

ISRAEL DEPLOYS IRON DOME TO HOLD NATIONALIST MARCH IN JERUSALEM, HAMAS WARNS OF CONSEQUENCES

South Front

Israel Deploys Iron Dome To Hold Nationalist March In Jerusalem, Hamas Warns Of Consequences

On June 15th, Israel Defense Forces (IDF) has deployed Iron Dome air defense batteries and raised its level of alert ahead of the Jerusalem Flag March.

Hamas warned it would respond to the right-wing march if it goes through as planned, potentially with rocket fire from the Gaza Strip.

Omer Bar-Lev, the newly sworn-in public security minister after a meeting with Police Commissioner Kobi Shabtai and representatives of several Israeli defense agencies allowed the march to go on as planned.

“I was under the impression that the police is well prepared and that a great effort has been made to safeguard the delicate fabric of life and public safety,” Bar-Lev said in a statement.

Hamas warned Israel that the march will renew unrest, less than a month after the two sides reached a cease-fire following 11 days of fighting in Gaza.

“We are calling on Palestinians in Jerusalem and within the Green Line to halt the march tomorrow,” said Hamas spokesman Abdulatif al-Qanua on Monday. He dubbed the march, in which right-wing groups parade through the Old City carrying Israeli flags, a “fuse for a new explosion for the protection of the al-Aqsa Mosque and Jerusalem.”

Assailing the march as a “provocation”, Palestinian factions have called for a “Day of Rage” in Gaza and the Israeli-occupied West Bank.

“We warn of the dangerous repercussions that may result from the occupying power’s intention to allow extremist Israeli settlers to carry out the Flag March in occupied Jerusalem tomorrow,” Palestinian Prime Minister Mohammad Shtayyeh said on Twitter.

The original march was re-routed to avoid the walled Old City’s Muslim Quarter on May 10th in Jerusalem.

Israeli rightists accused their government of caving into Hamas by changing its route. They rescheduled the procession after an Egyptian-mediated Gaza truce took hold.

A route change or cancellation of the procession could expose Bennett’s patchwork coalition to accusations from Netanyahu, now in the opposition, and his right-wing allies of giving Hamas veto power over events in Jerusalem.

Palestinian protests were planned across the Gaza Strip, and Hamas and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas’s Fatah faction have called on Palestinians to flock to the Old City to counter the march.

“Tensions (are) rising again in Jerusalem at a very fragile & sensitive security & political time, when UN & Egypt are actively engaged in solidifying the ceasefire,” U.N. Middle East envoy Tor Wennesland said on Twitter.

“Urge all relevant parties to act responsibly & avoid any provocations that could lead to another round of confrontation,” he said.

The formation of Bennett’s alliance of right-wing, centrist, left-wing and Arab parties, with little in common other than a desire to unseat Netanyahu, capped coalition-building efforts after March 23 elections, Israel’s fourth in two years.

Minutes after meeting Bennett, 49, on his first full day in office, Netanyahu repeated a pledge to topple his government.

“It will happen sooner than you think,” Netanyahu, 71, who spent a record 12 straight years in office, said in public remarks to legislators of his right-wing Likud party.

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

Palestine: Old Policy of Divide and Rule Continues

By VT Editors -June 14, 2021

By Sajjad Shaukat Pak VT

After martyring more than 300 Palestinians, including 100 children and 80 women, injuring more than 3000 innocent civilians in Gaza Strip through airstrikes and ground shelling, Israel agreed on a ceasefire with Hamas, which ended the 11 days war.

Unmatched with Israeli arms, freedom fighters of Hamas and the Islamic Jihad group Abu Ubaida had no option except firing rockets inside Israel.

Very tensions had started when Israeli police stormed the Al-Aqsa Mosque in occupied East Jerusalem and attacked the Palestinians. Thousands of Palestinians staged protests in the Al-Aqsa Mosque complex.

In an emergency meeting of the foreign ministers, the OIC had called for an immediate halt to Israel’s barbaric attacks on Gaza.

Earlier, called by China, the UNO Security Council held an urgent meeting on the unrest in Jerusalem. The three sessions of the UN body failed after the US’s moves to block a joint statement that would condemn Israel for the violence and call for a cease-fire.

Like the past administrations, the US President Joe Biden reiterated that Israel has the right to defend itself.

Biden also sent Linda Thomas-Greenfield—the US’s UN envoy to de-escalate tensions. However, it was part of the double game of Washington. When American President Biden seriously pressured Netanyahu to prevent a full-scale war, Tel Aviv agreed for ceasefire.

But, Israeli Premier Netanyahu has not accepted the two-state solution of the Israeli-Palestinian dispute which was stressed by the US and some major Western countries.

In fact, international bodies such as the UNO Security Council, OIC and the US-led West failed to present a solution to end the Israeli state terrorism on the Palestinians, which have continued from time to time.

Notably, like the United States, Ottoman Empire of Turkey was a large multi-ethnic state. In order to maintain their control, one of the British strategies was divide and rule which was being practiced through various tactics like arrangement of rebellions, manipulation of ethnic and sectarian differences. The Britain provided soldiers, weapons and money to the Arab subjects against that Empire. According to the Sykes-Picot Agreement, the British and French agreed to divide the Arab world between them. The Britain took control of what are now Iraq, Kuwait, and Jordan. The French were given modern Syria, Lebanon and southern Turkey. Thus, they brought about the end of the Ottomans and the rise of the new states, with borders, running across the Middle East, dividing Muslims from each other.

Balfour Declaration of November 2, 1917 which was a conspiracy of the American and the British rulers against the Palestinians was implemented. On May 14, 1948, the UNO acted upon the 1947 UN Partition Plan and established the state of Israel.

Israel occupied East Jerusalem and Syrian Golan Heights during the 1967 Arab-Israeli war and annexed the entire city in 1980 in a move that has never been recognized by the UNO and international community.

Once Henry Kissinger stated “legitimacy is not natural or automatic, but created.”

Under the cover of the 9/11 attacks, the US President George W. Bush started global war on terror. Occupation of Afghanistan by the US-led NATO, Anglo-American invasion of Iraq, like the creation of Al-Qaeda by the CIA, the Islamic State group (ISIS), proxy wars in Libya, Syria and Yemen, and elsewhere in the world were part of the same anti-Muslim campaign to continue old divide and rule policy.

Henry Kissinger had suggested the split of Iraq into three independent regions, ruled by Kurds, Shias and Sunnis. In this regard, the Asia Times Online reported in 2005: “The plan of balkanizing Iraq into several smaller states is an exact replica of an extreme right-wing Israeli plan…an essential part of the balkanization of the whole Middle East. Curiously, Henry Kissinger was selling the same idea even before the 2003 invasion of Iraq…this is classic divide and rule: the objective is the perpetuation of Arab disunity.”

Similarly, during the partition of the Sub-continent, the people of the state of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) which comprised Muslim majority decided to join Pakistan according to the British formula. But, Dogra Raja, Sir Hari Singh, a Hindu who was ruling over the J&K in collusion with the Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and Governor General Lord Mountbatten joined India.

The Security Council adopted resolution of April 21, 1948, which promised a plebiscite under UN auspices to enable the people of Jammu and Kashmir to determine whether they wish to join Pakistan or India. On February 5, 1964, India backed out of its commitment of holding plebiscite. Instead, Indian Parliament declared Kashmir-an integral part of the Indian union.

Indian cruel actions against the Kashmiris reached climax on August 5, 2019 when Indian extremist government led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the leader of the fanatic ruling party BJP revoked articles 35A and 370 of the Constitution, which gave a special status to the disputed territory of the Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJK). New Delhi unilaterally annexed the IIOJK with the Indian Federation to turn Muslim majority into minority.

Implementing the ideology of Hindutva ((Hindu Nationalism), Indian prejudiced rulers have Issued over 1.8 million domicile certificates to non-Kashmiris to change the demographic structure of the IIOJK.

And deployment of more than 900,000 military troops in the IIOJK, who have martyred thousands of the Kashmiris through brutal tactics-extrajudicial killings—non-provision of basic necessities of life and medicines for the coronavirus patients prove worst form of India’s state terrorism. Now, almost 21 months have been passed. But, Indian strict military lockdown in the IIOJK continues.

Besides, the Indian Citizenship Amendment Act 2019 (CAA) and the National Register of Citizens (NRC) further exposed the discriminatory policies of the Modi-led government against the Muslims.

It is mentionable that Article 42 of the 1907—Hague Regulations states that a territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army.

Moreover, in its resolution 3314, the United Nations General Assembly prohibits states from any military occupation. Article 2(4) of the UN charter explicitly prohibits the use of force.

In addition, General Assembly’s resolution 1541 adopted in 1960 accepts the legitimacy of the right of self-determination and opposes repressive measures of all kinds against the freedom fighters by the colonial powers.

Nevertheless, the US-led major Western countries continue old policy of divide and rule to create division among the Islamic countries.

In this respect, on the directions of the US ex-President Donald Trump, some Muslim countries’ various moves such as recognition of the state of Israel, opening of Israeli embassies in their countries, Shia-Sunni sectarian split, manipulation of Iran-Saudi Arabia differences, encouragement to Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories, lack of practical action against the Modi-regime etc. might be cited as some instances. Undoubtedly, it is due to lack of unity in the Islamic Ummah that the Muslim countries have become easy target of this old policy.

Sajjad Shaukat writes on international affairs and is author of the book: US vs Islamic Militants, Invisible Balance of Power: Dangerous Shift in International Relations

Email: Sajjad_logic@yahoo.com

ABOUT VT EDITORS

VT EditorsVeterans Today

VT Editors is a General Posting account managed by Jim W. Dean and Gordon Duff.

All content herein is owned and copyrighted by Jim W. Dean and Gordon Duff

editors@veteranstoday.com

Israel must choose between civil war or regional war : Senior Lebanese Analyst

JUNE 14, 2021

Editorial Comment from The Saker Blog for updated information only:  Since this interview took place, and just this past weekend, there are changes in the Israeli government.  Despite these changes, the comments from senior Lebanese political analyst Nasser Qandil hold true to the situation in the main, and the change in the Israeli government does not negate Mr. Qandil’s commentary.  In short, these changes are:  Right-wing nationalist Naftali Bennett has been sworn in as prime minister, leading a coalition “government of change” that was approved with a razor-thin one-vote majority and in a power-sharing deal with the centrist Yesh Atid under the leadership of Yair Lapid.  Mr. Netanyahu will remain head of the right-wing Likud party and will become the leader of the opposition.
Israel must choose between civil war or regional war : Senior Lebanese Analyst

Description: 

In a recent appearance on a political talk show, senior Lebanese political analyst Nasser Qandil said that Israel is currently going through a sensitive and dangerous period of its history, in which it must choose between “civil war or regional war”.

Source:  Al Mayadeen TV

Date:  June 8, 2021

(Note: Please help us keep producing independent translations by contributing a small monthly amount here )

Transcript:

Nasser Qandil, Editor-in-chief of the Lebanese newspaper Al-Binaa:

I personally do not believe that Netanyahu is capable of taking any major action at this stage. The main test (of Israel’s power) was the (recent) Sword of al-Quds (battle). I mean, we would not have never seen a ceasefire if the steadfastness of the (Israeli) occupation entity – in terms of its army, institutions, and society – was strong enough during the battle to bear the burden and the weight of Netanyahu’s decisions.

We have to look back at the image of what happened before the ceasefire: the missiles raining down on the cities of the (Israeli) occupation entity. This has never happened before in the history (of the Israeli entity). They were heavy missiles with explosive heads capable of bringing down buildings. Now you have this new scene. The missile fire (on Israel) continued, and (Israel) could not stop it. Before the ceasefire, (Palestinian resistance forces) had no land access (to outside world), no air force, nor an Iron Dome. Therefore, (Israel) accepting a cease-fire is its acceptance of helplessness, it is a request for US protection.

I believe, according to my personal assessment and readings, that with the ceasefire and its aftermath, since that day, the era of the independence of the (Israeli) occupation entity has ended. The (Israeli) occupation entity has fallen under an American mandate. Even in terms of (forming) the new (Israeli) government, how was this government born? Its (forming) was not even on the table. The government was suddenly born. The US today goes into details. Since (the US) holds the future of the (Israeli) entity in its hands, (it follows this policy:) “I protect you and I fund your (government), therefore, I control your politics.”

Host:

Forgive me for interrupting, but what I meant by the ‘developments on the ground’ is that today Benjamin Netanyahu and the extreme right are talking with insistence about holding, for example, the Flag March on its original date. This may call for action at the grass-roots level. Therefore, the (Palestinian) resistance may take action. We are not confirming anything; we are (just) studying scenarios. However, due to these developments on the ground, the situation might deteriorate.


Qandil:

Let us first rule out the military scenarios, meaning sabotage, security operations, military action, targeting (individuals and locations) and igniting a war. This is beyond (the Israeli entity’s) power because it lacks internal harmony; an entity in which the US is a partner, whether at the intelligence level, or in terms of the Chief of Staff, or the Ministry of Defense. I mean, (the Israeli entity) cannot make its decision on its own.

Regarding the situation on the ground, well, the (original) date of the march was on Thursday, but now (the march) has been postponed to Tuesday by a decision from Netanyahu and his team to avoid taking any risks. (Next) Tuesday, they are talking about 500 (participants) and 500 flags. We know that this march is usually attended by at least 50,000 people every year. Therefore, Netanyahu and his team are now discussing ways to both deprive the (Palestinian) resistance from the opportunity to talk about its success in canceling the march altogether, and not crossing the red line drawn by the US.

Netanyahu explains the (current political) equation by saying: “you (Israelis) are going to either clash with Gaza, Hamas, and the (Palestinian) resistance forces, or experience Israeli bloodshed”, meaning that (Israeli) settlers and demonstrators will come out and clash with the police. I believe that Netanyahu’s assessment is correct. The future of the (Israeli) entity will look like one of two options: either a comprehensive war that begins with any action that would trigger conflict, or the other option, which is a Jewish-Jewish civil war because it is impossible to restrain the (Israeli) settlers.

It is possible that the march goes by with minimal provocations by avoiding sensitive areas and deploying the police and the army. However, since the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin (former Prime Minister of Israel), the only vital force that has a meaningful political activity in the occupation entity is the (Israeli) settlers and extremists. The rest are empty structures. Thus, if they (settlers and extremists) took the initiative out of their certainty that the political establishment has become impotent, we will hear about confrontations and clashes every day.

On the one hand, protecting the (Israeli) entity will require that a part of the army, the police and security forces face the (Israeli extremists). On the other hand, if (Israel) lets (the extremists) loose, this will trigger regional wars. The (Israeli) entity today is going through a delicate, dangerous and sensitive period of its life as it faces a stark choice: either civil war, or regional war.


Subscribe to our mailing list!

Related Posts:

The Washington Post Details US, ‘Israel’, Saudi Role in Coup Plot Against Jordan King

14/06/2021

The Washington Post Details US, ‘Israel’, Saudi Role in Coup Plot Against Jordan King

By Staff, Agencies

The Zionist entity, Saudi Arabia and the US joined forces to pressure Jordan’s King Abdullah II to partake in the US-sponsored “normalization deals” with Tel Aviv, according to the Washington Post.

The Jordanian monarch resisted the attempts, leading to a plot to “destabilize” the country, that ensnared the king’s half-brother Prince Hamza and former senior officials Bassem Awadallah and Sharif Hassan bin Zaid.

According to the report, Saudi crown prince Mohammad bin Salman [MBS], former Zionist PM Benjamin Netanyahu and former US President Donald Trump were at the center of the intrigue.

“It became a belief of Trump that the king was a hindrance” to his plan, a former senior CIA official was quoted as saying.

The report noted the close relations that Trump and his son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner had forged with MBS, Saudi Arabia’s de-facto ruler.

Abdullah was said to be concerned those expanded ties came at Jordan’s expense, because of his reservations over the US proposal for the Middle East.

Abdullah is recognized as the custodian of the Haram esh-Sharif and the al-Aqsa Compound, and other Muslim sites in the Old City, which the Zionist regime occupied in the 1967 Six Day War.

The newspaper wrote that Abdullah felt the US, ‘Israel’ and Saudi Arabia were trying to push him out as custodian.

As Kushner’s campaign to advance Trump’s plan picked up last year, he also hoped to help facilitate a normalization pact between the Zionist entity and Saudi Arabia, according to the report. However, Abdullah was seen as an obstacle to such a rapprochement.

A key figure in the report was Awadallah, one of the former senior officials implicated in the alleged recent plot. Awadallah, a cabinet minister and onetime head of the royal court, moved to Saudi Arabia in 2018 and became close with the Saudi crown prince.

“A sticking point for us is al-Aqsa. The king [Abdullah] uses that to browbeat us and keep his role in the Middle East,” Awadallah was reported to say regarding the US plan.

An unnamed former US official, according to the report, said he was told by Awadallah that “MBS is upset because he can’t get a deal because he can’t handle the reactions of Palestinians if the king holds his position” on occupied al-Quds.

The Post also quoted from a Jordanian investigative report on the coup plot.

“Awadallah was working to promote the ‘deal of the century’ and weaken Jordan’s position and the King’s position on Palestine and the Hashemite Custodianship of Islamic and Christian holy sites in al-Quds,” the Jordanian report said.

According to the same report, bin Zaid, the other senior Jordanian official implicated alongside Awadallah, met in 2019 with two officials from a foreign embassy in Amman “to inquire about their country’s position on supporting Prince Hamzah as an alternative to the King.”

The Post said an unnamed Western official who gave him the report believes the embassy was likely the US mission in the Jordanian capital.

%d bloggers like this: