British police have behaved in a repressive manner toward Palestine solidarity activists but have never prosecuted anyone for taking part in Israel’s war crimes. Andy SolomanUCG/Universal Images Group
In 2015, Shamima Begum, a British national of Bengali descent, was groomed online to join ISIS at the age of 15. She was then trafficked over the border from Turkey into Syria by a Canadian spy.
Just days after arriving, she became the child bride of an ISIS soldier from the Netherlands. She bore him three children.
All died from malnutrition and disease before they reached 5.
ISIS is a proscribed terrorist group in the UK. Supporting it is a criminal offense and joining it is an automatic crime.
As such, the UK government stripped Shamima Begum of her British citizenship, making her stateless.
She sits in a refugee camp in Syria, a victim of the brutal West which created her and a brutal regime which tricked her.
The case of Shamima Begum is just one of the great hypocrisies of the British government when dealing with Muslims and the routine denial of their rights.
Despite the Special Immigration Appeals Commission confirming in February 2023 that there was credible suspicion that Begum “was recruited, transferred and then harbored for the purpose of sexual exploitation,” it stated that it was for the home secretary to make the decision on the revocation of her citizenship.
Shamima Begum is not accused of committing any violence in ISIS. Her crime alone was, while still a minor, to join.
While Shamima Begum lost her citizenship without firing a shot, British-Israeli dual nationals have been allowed to join the Israeli military and commit war crimes in Gaza with impunity.
Not a single one of these British nationals has been arrested by UK police forces. Not a single one has been charged and not a single one has lost their British citizenship.
In contrast to Shamima Begum, who has not harmed any person, Israeli forces are actively bombing residential apartment blocks in Gaza. Credible accounts have shown them executing civilians sheltering in a school.
They have forced medical workers and parents to evacuate hospitals, leaving babies in incubators to die. They are targeting and murdering journalists at an unprecedented rate.
International consensus
The UN has stated as fact that since 7 October, Israeli forces have indisputably been committing war crimes in Gaza. Alarmingly, UN experts have also recognized the overt intent of genocide of the Israeli state towards the Palestinians and is desperately urging the international community to take action to prevent it.
What is also indisputable is that despite its claims, Israel, as an occupying power, does not have a right in international law to defend itself against the Palestinians it is occupying.
Under Int'l Law,Israel has the right to PROTECT itself,not to WAGE WAR (i.e. self-defense under art 51 UNCharter) agst the people it has kept under belligerent occupation since'67. Gaza IS "occupied" given Israel's effective control,regardless of Hamas' existence.
— Francesca Albanese, UN Special Rapporteur oPt (@FranceskAlbs) November 16, 2023
However, under international law, as an occupied people, the Palestinians have a full right to defend themselves with armed struggle and to resist that occupation.
As such, any individual who is taking part in the current military campaign on behalf of the Israeli state is participating in war crimes and genocide. This includes any British national currently serving with the Israeli army.
The British police make clear that war crimes are indeed crimes, and that the police will investigate and prosecute any British national or resident who has committed these crimes.
The London Metropolitan Police website states: “War crimes are crimes that come under the collective name of ‘core international crimes.’ Core international crimes are some of the gravest crimes in international law; examples of them can include the crime of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and torture.”
The police point out that “through international treaties the UK has a responsibility to investigate and prosecute those who have committed core international crimes. If a UK resident has been responsible for core international crimes anywhere in the world, they may be investigated and prosecuted in the UK.”
This means British nationals who are Israeli soldiers and who have committed war crimes can be investigated and prosecuted in the UK. More importantly, however, the UK has a responsibility in international law to investigate and prosecute those who have committed these crimes.
Though the UK has not actively sought out Britons currently serving in the Israeli military and who have since returned, South Africa has made clear to its own citizens serving in the Israeli army that it is able to prosecute them for violations of international law including war crimes. This includes the threat of any naturalized citizen having their citizenship revoked should they engage “under the flag of another country in a war that the Republic does not support or agree with.”
Compare and contrast
Since then, however, South Africa has not only maintained its position on the so-called war, but has intensified its stance. On 29 December, it made an application to the UN’s International Court of Justice against Israel for genocidal acts and what it considers as Israel’s violations of its obligations under the Convention of the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, the only state thus far to have done so.
In contrast to South Africa’s commitment to international law, UK politicians have instead raised concerns about the actions of the UK police in assisting the International Criminal Court in gathering evidence for that court’s investigation into Israeli war crimes, initiated in 2019.
In an extraordinary instance of projection, Boris Johnson, the former prime minister, criticized the police’s actions as a “worrying politicization of the Met police” despite his own political attempts to oppose investigations into Israeli war crimes during his tenure as prime minister.
While the proactive involvement of the police in aiding the ICC is commendable, no prosecutory action has yet been taken by the police under UK law.
Like much of the support for a free Palestine and for a ceasefire, it is the power of the people which is making waves. While the British government tries to ban public bodies from boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) campaigns against Israel, individuals around the world are choosing not to buy pro-Israeli goods, causing profits of major companies to plummet. Starbucks alone has reported a loss of $11 billion.
In the same vein, if the British government will not take action, it is up to us, the public, to do so. We can bypass the government and take matters into our own hands and go directly to the police ourselves.
So, should you encounter any British citizen or resident currently serving in the Israeli military, then you can report them to the police.
It is remarkably easy to find these individuals. If you are on social media, you have probably seen them on your timelines where they are surprisingly active and often show off their military actions.
"They're gonna start teaching Hebrew at this school soon…."
The British government cannot have one rule for a child bride and another for adults who intentionally and willfully serve in an army that has declared its explicit intention to commit genocide. They all need to be brought to justice in British courts.
International core crimes are the worst crimes that can be committed on earth. People should not be able to commit them with impunity just because the victims are Palestinians.
Israeli politician Benny Gantz. (Photo: via Gantz TW Page)
The immunity prevents Gantz and Eshel from being prosecuted in the Supreme Court of Justice on charges of war crimes during Israeli operations.
The Supreme Court in the Netherlands has ruled to grant legal immunity to the former Chief of Staff, Benny Gantz, and the former Commander of the Air Force and Director General of the Ministry of the Army, Amir Eshel, Israel’s Channel 7 reported on Friday.
The highest Dutch court confirmed rulings by judges in two lower courts that Gantz and Eshel are protected from prosecution because of their “functional immunity”.
The future liberated and de-Zionised Palestine may look now as a fantasy, but unlike Fantasy Israel, it has the best chance to galvanize locally, regionally and globally every person with a modicum of decency. Israel’s … Continue readingJ
The immunity prevents them from being prosecuted in the Supreme Court of Justice on charges of war crimes during Israeli operations.
The civil lawsuit was filed against Gantz and Eshel in September 2019 by Ismail Ziada, a Dutch-Palestinian citizen, who lost six family members in an airstrike during Operation Protective Edge in 2014.
Ziada, who is a Dutch citizen, said in a statement that he was “disappointed and angered” by the decision.
Ideological shifts do not appear and disappear overnight. Regardless of the outcome of Israel’s protests, the ideological shifts in Israel are seismic and long-lasting. The late Israeli commentator, Uri Avnery, wrote, “I am increasingly worried … Continue reading
“The court has once again chosen to put politics over people and blocked access to justice”, Ziada said, adding that he is considering appealing to the European Court of Human Rights.
For his part, Gantz welcomed the ruling, crediting Israel’s “stong and independent judicial system”, which protects Israeli officials “even in front of international courts”.
Women raise copies of the Qur’an as they participate in a demonstration called for by the Lebanese Hezbollah movement to denounce the desecration of the Qur’an in Sweden, in the southern suburbs of Beirut on July 21, 2023. (Photo by AFP)
Women, men and children took part in protests on Friday across Lebanon against the desecration of the Holy Qur’an in Sweden, answering the call of Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah.
On Thursday, during a televised speech during the Ashoura ceremonies, Sayyed Nasrallah called on all worshippers to hold protests after the Friday prayers in all the mosques across Lebanon and demand that the Lebanese authorities expel the Swedish ambassador and withdraw the Lebanese ambassadors from Sweden.
He also urged Ashoura ceremony attendees to hold a copy of the Holy Book on Friday in order to show commitment to the Qur’an and collectively read a number of verses.
A Sweden-based Iraqi refugee desecrated the Qur’an during a demonstration outside the Iraqi embassy in Stockholm on Thursday amid strict protection provided by the Swedish police. This came less than a month after the man burnt a copy of the Muslim holy book outside Stockholm Central Mosque, sparking outrage in the Muslim world.
Earlier in January, Swedish authorities gave permission for an event outside the Turkish Embassy in Stockholm where an extremist politician burned the Qur’an, Islam’s holy book. Days later, Edwin Wagensveld, Dutch leader of the far-right Pegida movement in the Netherlands, tore pages out of a copy of the Qur’an near the Dutch Parliament.
Unacceptable anti-human acts
In Lebanon, one of the many countries that have a Muslim majority, people poured onto the streets and gathered in front of mosques and Islamic centers to protest the act following the Friday prayers, which many see as “an organized crime”. There was consensus among people who spoke to the Press TV website at the demonstrations that not only are such anti-Islamic acts unacceptable under the pretext of freedom of speech and democracy, but also turning a blind eye and remaining silent on such atrocious acts is unethical. Some also went further and called the desecration “anti-human acts.”
Noha, a 42-year-old journalist and activist was present at one of the gatherings in Beirut’s southern suburbs in front of the Sayeda Zeinab mosque. She told Press TV that showing disrespect to religious beliefs should not receive any support from any government or international body.
“Some Western governments, like the case of Sweden, issue permits for these crimes under the pretext of so-called freedom of expression. The burning and tearing of religious texts is disrespectful, hurtful, and illegal. Many of my Christian and Sunni friends in Lebanon also share this viewpoint, and if someone disrespected the sanctity of some other faith I would react the same way and express my rejection of such ugly behavior,” she said.
“These are not small rallies, nor limited demonstrations. This is a real uprising against the desecration of Muslim sanctities. In Islam, we are taught to respect others, their freedoms, sanctities and privacy. We will protect our religion, we will take action as people and push for our governments to take action. The Western “civilization” based on hegemony and otherness must come to an end.”
Women, men and children participated in rallies in different areas across Lebanon, holding the Holy Qur’an in their hands and placards that read “The Holy Qur’an lives in our conscience and moral sense of right and wrong not only in our homes!”
Your freedom ends where mine begins
Speaking to the Press TV website, a Member of the Political Council of Hezbollah since 2004, Dr. Rima Fakhry said that the desecration of the holy book of Islam is a crime in the eyes of all Muslims, non-Muslims of other faiths and all the free people of the world who respect true freedom and value it.
“This is an act of aggression against the faith of a tremendous number of people across the globe, and the response should be in the size of the crime itself,” she said.
The desecration act, which is seen as provocative and ill-considered by many countries, while claimed as a right to “freedom of expression” by Sweden and other countries, cannot be tolerated by millions of Muslims and non-Muslims across the world.
Fakhry said in this regard that the act is not related whatsoever to the so-called “freedom of speech and expression” because freedom should be based on respect in the first place.
“One of the principle tenets of freedom is respect. It is the Western school of thought which claims that ‘your freedom ends where mine begins’,” she said adding “Will for instance Sweden agree to see its flag being set on fire? Or does its constitution get desecrated? I doubt.”
On women taking part in the protests on Friday in Lebanon, the Hezbollah politburo member said there is no difference between men and women, all are human beings and should sound their rejection of such violation.
“There is no difference between men and women here, both are human beings who have the right to express their refusal to see the Holy book of the Qur’an get desecrated in such an ugly manner. Believe it or not, young and old, male and female, everyone is annoyed by this act.”
Women raise copies of the Qur’an as they participate in a demonstration called for by the Lebanese Hezbollah movement to denounce the desecration of the Qur’an in Sweden, in the southern suburbs of Beirut on July 21, 2023. (Photo by AFP)
This act of desecration, according to Fakhry, comes in the context of an organized crime perpetrated by the West and guided by Zionism to weaken other peoples and faiths.
“What the West does not realize is, that by such acts, they only make us stronger, more determined, and more attached to our religion and Holy Qur’an,” she explained.
Mass protests to protect our Qur’an
Also on Friday, Khadija Salloum, head of the women’s mobilization organization in Hezbollah told Press TV that all human beings who have dignity and believe in true freedom should express their rejection of the crime against Islam and Muslims.
“These provocative acts from time to time and the desecration of sanctities, be it the Holy Qur’an, Jesus Christ, Virgin Mary or other, are unacceptable and should be condemned by all people.”
It is acceptable that some people do not believe in a certain faith, she explained, and that is something that should be respected. However, desecration is not something that can be tolerated and should be confronted by mass protests around the world.
“Freedom of speech does not mean we can disrespect others and their beliefs, be that Islam, Christianity or Judaism. These acts are driven by a desire for political power, a struggle for resources, ethnic rivalries, and economic competition because religions and faiths preserve human dignity and serve as a just constitution that keeps justice and order in societies, and this is what the West wants to sabotage,” she pointed out.
Salloum said that the act coincides with Ashoura, which is part of the Shia school of thought that teaches people how to fight injustice and face all types of tyranny and that is why the response this time should be even stronger.
Press TV’s website can also be accessed at the following alternate addresses:
CNBC reports that US is pressuring Dutch ASML not to send chip manufacturing equipment to China while the Netherlands does not seem keen on stopping exports to one of the largest chip markets.
An ASML cleanroom (ASML)
Amid the global struggle between powers, mainly China and the US, to gain tech superiority and establish world dominance in the industry, CNBC news outlet reported on Monday that the US “has its eyes” on the Netherlands.
The European country seems to be at the center of Washington’s attention as it is the home of one of the most vital technologies to manufacture semiconductors in the world.
Advanced Semiconductor Materials Lithography or ASML is a dutch company that specializes in producing not the semiconductors, but the extreme ultraviolet (EUV) lithography machines that manufacture the chips.
ASML has a global monopoly on EUV production, being the only company in the world to make them, and supplies its products to the world’s largest chip maker, Taiwanese TSMC.
The report adds that China, the second largest economy, is eager to gain access to the product.
However, according to the news outlet, the US dissuaded the Netherlands from trading the machine with China for now, however, the latter does not seem excited to be cut off from one of the world’s most demanding chip markets.
EUV machines have not been shipped to China since 2019 following a number of export restrictions adopted by the Dutch government, said a spokesperson of ASML, noting however that it is anticipated that, “the direct impact of the new export control measures on ASML’s overall 2023 shipment plan to be limited.”
According to the news report, China currently possesses no EUV systems, and the United States is concerned that if ASML exports the high-tech machines to China, it would start producing “the most advanced semiconductors in the world” which has “extensive military and advanced artificial intelligence applications.”
CNBC mentions in the report that Washington’s pressure on the European country started in 2018 during the term of former US president Donald Trump.
Reuters published a report in 2020 stating that the authorities in the Netherlands revoked ASML’s license to send EUV machines to China following heavy US pressure.
Trump launched a trade war with China that evolved into a tech fight for supremacy between the two superpowers, as the US aimed to prevent Chinese companies from accessing high-tech machines and equipment.
The former president also issued an export blacklist on American tech companies against China’s largest chip producer SMIC.
However, his successor current US president, Joe Biden, increased the tech hostility against Beijing.
Earlier in October, the Bureau of Industry and Security of the US Department of Commerce passed a rule that forces American companies to get attain a special license in case they intended to sell certain semiconductors or chip manufacturing machines to China.
Dutch ASML ordered its staff in the US to deny services to Chinese clients following this decision.
The report added that US pressure on the Netherlands is ongoing.
According to the news outlet, the undersecretary of commerce for industry and security at the US Department of Commerce Alan Estevez, in addition to the senior director for technology and national security at the US National Security Council Tarun Chhabra held talks with Dutch officials earlier this month.
“Now that the U.S. government has put unilateral end-use controls on U.S. companies, these controls would be futile from their perspective if China could get these machines from ASML or Tokyo Electron (Japan),” Pranay Kotasthane, head of the high-tech geopolitics program at the Takshashila Institution, told CNBC.
“Hence the U.S. government would want to convert these unilateral controls into multilateral ones by getting countries such as the Netherlands, South Korea, and Japan on board.”
Earlier last week, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken praised the “growing convergence in the approach to the challenges that China poses,”, especially with the EU.
However, the report added, the Netherlands does not seem to be exactly in line with Blinken’s statement.
“Obviously we are weighing our own interests, our national security interest is of utmost importance, obviously we have economic interests as you may understand and the geopolitical factor always plays a role as well,” said the Minister for Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation of the Netherlands Liesje Schreinemacher last week.
Beijing is “an important trade partner,” she added.
Filed under: China, EU, Europe, Taiwan, USA | Tagged: ASML, Netherlands | Comments Off on US pushes Dutch chip firm to halt China exports, Netherlands not happy
Palestinians organized a rally in support of Palestinian Resistance in West Bank (Photo: Mahmoud Ajjour, The Palestine Chronicle)
– Benay Blend earned her doctorate in American Studies from the University of New Mexico. Her scholarly works include Douglas Vakoch and Sam Mickey, Eds. (2017), “’Neither Homeland Nor Exile are Words’: ‘Situated Knowledge’ in the Works of Palestinian and Native American Writers”. She contributed this article to The Palestine Chronicle.
On October 24, 2022, Samidoun Palestinian Prisoner Solidarity Network international coordinator, Charlotte Kates, and one of the founders of the Palestinian Alternative Revolutionary Path Movement (Masar Badil), Khaled Barakat, arrived in Amsterdam to participate in the Week of Action for Return and Liberation of Palestine. No sooner had they arrived at Amsterdam Schiphol airport than immigration service, operated by Dutch military police, detained them for questioning.
After being interrogated about their political views–about Samidoun, about Masar Badil, and the week of action for liberation and return–they were denied entry and deported back to Canada where they will continue organizing and speaking out against Zionist repression of Palestinians. While saddened by this action, activists immediately spoke out, vowing to channel their anger into making the March even stronger despite efforts to quash the movement.
Calling on Palestinians to be “purveyors of consciousness not victimhood,” journalist Ramzy Baroud suggests that, while understanding that the reach of Zionist repression is important, communicating a sense of “collective victimhood” denies human agency to those who are oppressed.
When Samidoun issued a statement declaring that “our response to this attack on our organizing must be to make an even bigger, stronger, louder and more powerful stand with the Palestinian people, their resistance, and the liberation of Palestine,” they are answering Baroud’s request that Palestinians convey strength and fortitude in the face of Zionist oppression.
“The Palestinian struggle cannot be reduced to a conversation about poverty or the horrors of war,” Baroud continues, “but must be expanded to include the wider political contexts that led to the current tragedies in the first place.” Activists are doing this as well, calling attention to the history of repression against Barakat and Kates by the European state.
In their statement, Samidoun recalls the past history of repression against Barakat and Kates. In 2019, Barakat received a political ban due to his organizing among Palestinians living in Berlin, Germany at the time. After leaving Germany, Barakat and Kates, who are also a married couple, were banned from re-entry for many years. This was the cause cited as the reason for their denial of entry into the Schengen zone, though their ban did not extend to this region.
Indeed, there has been an established policy in Germany, the Netherlands and the European Union of attacking the Palestine solidarity movement. From banning Nakba commemorations to condemning organizations that are in solidarity with Palestinian liberation, these officials have a long history of repression not only in the diaspora but also of supporting the Zionist colonization of Palestine since Israel’s founding.
Significantly, Kates’ and Barakat’s most recent ban occurs as Dutch prime minister Mark Rutte was travelling to the settler colonial Zionist state for talks during a time of escalating colonial violence and repression. Rutte’s trip serves to link repression of Palestinian activism in the diaspora to increasing Israeli violence towards Palestinians in their own country.
From Charlotte Kates came a statement that voiced this link quite clearly: “The European Union always talks about human rights, but ignores them when it comes to Palestine. Palestine activists in all EU countries face repression. This deportation is therefore not just an attack on Khaled and me, but on the Palestinian movement as a whole.”
As in the diaspora, escalating Zionist violence in Palestine has fueled the rise of resistance groups, including the “Lions’ Den” and Jenin Brigades, which includes groups of people regardless of political affiliation across the West Bank. According to Hani Al-Masri, what distinguishes this movement is that it unites armed struggle with other forms of popular resistance, such as a general strike held recently in the West Bank.
In Gaza, the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine organized a rally to support Palestinian resistance in the West Bank and Occupied Jerusalem. Saleh Nasser, a member of the Political Bureau of the Democratic Front in the Gaza Strip, stressed that Palestinians much chose between a variety of resistance strategies to confront the Israeli Occupation.
“What [Israel] fail[s] to understand,” writes Ramzy Baroud, “is that the growing rebellion in the West Bank is not generated by a few fighters in Nablus and a few more in Jenin, but is the outcome of a truly popular sentiment.” This unity can also be seen in solidarity around the world, most recently in the quick response to European efforts to weaken the March in Brussels.
In response to the banning of Kates and Barakat, activists at Schiphol Airport held the Palestinian flag along with signs that read “long live the Palestinian Struggle.” Others presented a statement of solidarity with Kates and Barakat to the military police who detained and interrogated the movement’s leaders.
From a wide array of Palestine solidarity groups around the world came a quick response to the injustice, showing again a commitment to unity across many different lines. For example, the US Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (USACBI) urged activists to stand in solidarity with Kates and Barakat by supporting and/or organizing their own protests in conjunction with the March.
Al-Awda—The Palestine Right to Return Coalitioncalled on supporters to defend the right to organize for the right of return for Palestinian people, and accentuated that “our response to this attack on our organizing must be to make an even bigger, stronger, louder and more powerful stand with the Palestinian people, their resistance, and the liberation of Palestine.”
“For the Palestinian narrative to be truly relevant,” Baroud writes, “Palestinians must assume the role of the Gramscian intellectual, as purveyors of consciousness, and abandon the role of the victim intellectual altogether.” Given rising resistance in Palestine and growing solidarity around the world, his words are bearing fruit.
Reports back from the March also paint a clear picture of carrying on with strength and dignity despite the ban. Despite efforts to the contrary—the Israeli ambassador in Brussels demanded the cancellation of the March—all attempts to quash the spirit of participants have failed.
The week began with standing room only for the first events which focused on the struggle of Palestinian prisoners. These workshops followed a 1,000-strong demonstration and march to the prison in Lannemezan, France, where Georges Ibrahim Abdallah, the Lebanese struggler for Palestine, has been jailed for the past 39 years.
As the movement becomes stronger, there will be more efforts to silence Palestinian voices. “Let us be clear,” stated the organizers of the March,
“all of these show just why it is so urgent that our demonstration on Saturday 29 October be very loud, clear and massive, demanding accountability from European colonialism and imperialist powers for their ongoing crimes against the Palestinian people. Join us on Saturday, 29 October at Lumumba Square in Brussels at 2 pm, to march to the European Parliament in the March for Return and Liberation.”
Explaining why “Israel is Afraid of the Lions’ Den,” Baroud concludes that that Palestinians are “simply fed up with the Israeli occupation and with their collaborating leadership.” They are ready to put “it all on the line,” because, he predicts, the coming months are going to be critical for all Palestinians.
All the more reason for organizers of the March to call for “a clear demonstration that the Palestinian people will accept nothing less than return and liberation, from the river to the sea, and will hold Europe accountable for the colonial crimes and ongoing imperialist exploitation.”
Joining the March or organizing local activities for return and liberation, they conclude, is a step towards making this possible.
Mainstream media reporting on Islam, and especially on “security threats” linked to Muslim actors, are often criticized for their bias and the way they promote Islamophobia.
All studies on media reports on Muslims and Islam show, to a greater or lesser extent, that the mainstream media across Europe are often biased against Muslims and involved in spreading Islamophobic ideas, especially the alleged relationship between Muslims and extremism and radicalization.
Why are the media racist?
But what causes this? The new report of which I am a co-author analyzes in detail the factors that cause the widespread dissemination of anti-Muslim reports in the media. In general, academic studies agree that reports are influenced by the pressures of advertising and marketing, the political orientation of publishers, and especially, from the owners of the media. Another key influence on reporting is journalists’ dependence on a narrow range of apparently authoritative sources.
Mastery of “official” sources
Research shows that these “official” definitions of the “problem” of “radicalization” and “extremism” dominate the media. Actors who enact these views can be called “primary definitions” of problems. The phrase was coined by Stuart Hall and his colleagues in the 1970s. He sees the media as “secondary” definers, who are in “structured subordination” to “primary definitions.
But who are these “primary” definers in the case of Muslims? First, the state anti-terrorist apparatus; police, intelligence services, and a wide range of other “counterterrorism” officials. They are supported by neoconservative and anti-extremism pressure groups and expert groups.
The report examines how Islam is treated in the press in five European countries: the United Kingdom, France, the Netherlands, Spain and Italy. A long sample period of twenty years was able to detect changes in the reports and if they were related to policy changes, to verify/falsify the thesis that official sources were the most important influence.
The evolution of anti-terrorism policy
The United Kingdom adopted a “Prevention” policy on the fight against terrorism in 2003. This was quickly followed by the EU and the Netherlands in 2005. France ( 2014 ) and Spain ( 2015 ) took another decade to introduce similar policies. Only Italy did not adopt a “prevent” style policy at the time of the study. One was almost approved in 2016 / 7, but the government collapsed before it was enacted.
Coverage of “extremism” and “radicalization” in Europe
The first significant spike in coverage of “extremism” in the UK occurred in 2005 – 2006. 2005 was the year of the London bombings on 7 July, after which Prime Minister Tony Blair said “the rules of the game are changing” and at that time the “Prevention” policy was already in force . A second peak from 2011 corresponded to a later iteration of “Prevenir”, which was a significant movement in a neoconservative direction.
French reports show an increase in attention to “radicalization” from 2012 when a political debate on radicalization began to emerge, followed by an exponential increase in 2016. This process preceded the attack in France against Charlie Hebdo ( January 2015 ) and the Bataclan ( November 2015 ). ) and is more obviously related to the launch of the new anti-terrorism strategy in April 2014.
Spanish data shows that coverage started later and peaked in 2017, one year after France. The beginnings of the increase go back to the discussion and subsequent launch of the new anti-terrorism strategy in January 2015.
Italian data shows the inverted relationship, with reports of “extremism” always higher than those of “radicalization. Given that the term “radicalization” is particularly associated with official anti-terrorism policy, this trend possibly reflects the relative lack of such a policy in Italy. The start of the “radicalization” increase in 2014 coincides with the publication of reports by neo-conservative expert groups, with an exponential increase during the attempt to approve the “Prevent” bill.
What official sources are cited in the media
But what sources were cited in the twenty-year sample? In the UK, the data showed the prominence of intelligence agencies. MI5, the national intelligence agency, and MI6, the foreign agency, stood out. Together they totaled almost six percent of the total appointments of the top one hundred.
The think tanks they were prominent in the UK, with the Quilliam Foundation, often criticized for its proximity to the British state, and the Henry Jackson Society, often described as “Islamophobic, that was presented regularly.
Civil rights organizations such as the Islamic Commission on Human Rights, ranked 96, or Cage, which is not among the top 100, were cited very little. This reflects his critical position on anti-terrorism policy and the UK government’s “radicalization” approach.
France – Intelligence-led coverage with Muslim groups captured by the state
In France, the Direction Générale de la Sécurité Intérieure ( DGSI ), the national intelligence agency, was the most cited. Its external equivalent, the Direction Générale de la Sécurité Extérieure ( DGSE ), was presented at 28. Government ministries obtained a relatively high ranking and generally, ( were cited more widely with 26 percent of citations ) than the EU ( 17 percent ) or the UN ( eight percent ).
Muslim civil society groups were relatively prominent with six percent of the appointments in total. On closer inspection, each of them was effectively a government spokesperson. By contrast, genuine Muslim civil rights organizations such as “Le Collectif Contre l’islamophobie” in France were not among the hundred most cited groups.
Spain – Official sources and think tanks neoconservatives
In Spain, the Ministry of the Interior is the second most cited body. It should be noted that the neoconservative think tank Fundación Real Instituto Elcano was one of the most cited organizations, standing above the think tanks of the rest of the countries. The Neo-Conservative Foundation for Social Analysis and Studies ( FAES ) also featured prominently, receiving more appointments than any Muslim civil rights organization in Spain. The president of FAES is José María Aznar, former president of the Government of Spain. Aznar is also NewsCorp director for Rupert Murdoch, responsible for a number of Islamophobic news media around the world, as well as being involved with various Zionist groups.
Italy: lack of official Italian sources
In Italy, unlike the other countries, the highest Italian ministry cited was the Ministry of Economy and Finance ( 11o ). He was cited less frequently than six international government organizations: the European Union, the United Nations, NATO, Europol and the European Commission. This shows that if the Italian state did not promote the perspective of “radicalization”, the Italian media would resort to other official international sources. US intelligence agencies – the CIA and the FBI – were more cited than the Italian national intelligence agency, Dipartimento delle Informazioni per la Sicurezza ( DIS ), not listed at all in the sample. Italian data also included some quotes from neoconservative organizations.
Official sources as holders of power
In general, the role of the security state is absolutely central to the way the media operates on issues related to Muslims and security. In each case, we examine what this was, unlike media factors such as ownership, editorial control, or “reality” ( world events ), which provided the main impetus for the direction and tone of the coverage.
Changes in anti-Muslim reporting date back to the adoption of “Prevent” style policies. This reflects the crucial role of official sources, specifically government institutions associated with the anti-terrorist apparatus and intelligence agencies, in determining what is being reported and how. This was particularly key in the dominance of intelligence sources in the French and British reports. The role of neoconservative think tanks and against extremism was also significant as defenders of the security state, for example in Spain and the United Kingdom.
The “primary definitions” of Islamophobic news media coverage are, therefore, the central institutions of the security state in relation to which the media are in structured subordination as “secondary” defining.
In terms of politics, the bottom line is that problems of racism or media bias cannot be solved only at the level of media reform. Reform of the State and anti-terrorism policy is also necessary.
The US military reportedly carried out sorties over the future site of the Nord Stream pipeline “incident” in the Baltic Sea.
The US military’s Sikorsky MH-60R Seahawk helicopter
US military helicopters habitually and on numerous occasions circled for hours over the site of the Nord Stream pipelines incident near Bornholm Island earlier in September, Flightradar24 data showed.
Denmark’s maritime traffic agency and Sweden’s Maritime Authority on Monday reported a “dangerous” gas leak in the Baltic Sea close to the route of the inactive Nord Stream 2 pipeline, which experienced an unexplained drop in pressure.
The leak, southeast of the Danish island of Bornholm, “is dangerous for maritime traffic” and “navigation is prohibited within a five nautical mile radius of the reported position,” the agency warned in a notice to ships.
Following the incident, German newspaper Tagesspiegel claimed Monday that Berlin is convinced that the loss of pressure in the three natural gas pipelines between Russia and Germany was not a coincidence and suspects a “targeted attack“.
The cause of the incidents remains unknown and an investigation is underway. Swedish Foreign Minister Ann Linde said on Tuesday that the disruption was caused by detonations, which indicates that it was sabotage.
The Nord Stream 2 pipeline, which runs parallel to Nord Stream 1 and was intended to double the capacity for undersea gas imports from Russia, was blocked by Berlin in the days before the start of the war in Ukraine.
Flightradar24 showed an unidentified aircraft that did not even have a helicopter icon hovering over the site. However, the aircraft’s 24-bit ICAO code included in the description makes it possible to establish the model, which is the US military’s Sikorsky MH-60R Seahawk. The code is verified through open resources that collect data on military aircraft.
The US helicopter is also shown by the aircraft tracking service to have flown into the area of loitering over the Nord Stream pipelines from Gdansk, Poland.
On the second day of the loitering, almost in parallel with their US counterpart, a Dutch navy NH9 helicopter was flying in the vicinity of Bornholm Island, and it is expected to have been observing the Americans’ activity.
US helicopters also took flights over other Nord Stream pipelines on September 10 and 19 and others stayed over the incident site for hours on the night of September 22 and September 25.
Reportedly, helicopters that made sorties on the night of September 22-23 and 25-26 have especially confusing tracks.
These revelations come after German newspaper Der Siegel reported Tuesday that the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) warned the German government there would be attacks on Nord Stream gas pipelines weeks ahead of any incident being reported around the pipelines.
An informed source told the German magazine that Berlin had been told by the CIA a few weeks ago that there would be attacks on the key pipelines supplying a huge portion of Europe’s energy from Russia.
Turkish businessman Kavala has been in prison for four years for his suspected role in the Gezi Park protests and his involvement in a failed coup attempt in 2016.
Osman Kavala
This research note discusses that the Turkish businessman Kavala has been in prison for four years for his suspected role in the Gezi Park protests and his involvement in a failed coup attempt in 2016. Kavala is one of Turkey’s most well-known civil society figures. Since the early 1980s, the billionaire has helped to establish multiple publishing enterprises in Turkey, and a decade later, he has supported numerous civil society organizations.
Osman Kavala was one of Turkey’s most prominent activists. He has been held in pre-trial imprisonment in Silivri Prison since October 2017. Authorities in Turkey accuse him of initiating the Gezi Park demonstrations in 2013.
Significantly, President Erdogan has accused him of being the Turkish leg of billionaire US philanthropist George Soros, whom he claims is behind insurgencies in several nations. He has been held in detention pending the outcome of his latest trial, and he has rejected the charges.
Whereas, the indictment of September 2020, according to Kavala’s lawyers, was nothing more than a presumed fantasy based on no real evidence. Human rights organizations around the world have slammed Kavala’s arrest, claiming the charges are politically motivated. Additionally, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) found that Kavala’s arrest was politically motivated and it was carried out with the goal of “bringing other human rights defenders, to the political prisoners.” (DW, 2021).
Following a similar line, the Council of Europe has given a warning to Turkey to comply with a European Court of Human Rights ruling to free Kavala pending trial, which was issued in 2019. Otherwise, it will file an infringement complaint against Turkey.
The ambassadors of the ten nations issued a unified statement urging Turkey to abide by the Council of Europe’s judgments. Germany, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, and the United States all requested a “fair and swift” settlement to Kavala’s case (DW, 2021).
They further stressed, “The ongoing delays in Kaval’s trial, which include the merging of many cases and the establishment of new ones following a prior acquittal, throw a pall over Turkish court respect for democracy, the rule of law, and transparency. In light of the European Court of Human Rights’ judgment, they requested Turkey to release it as soon as possible. These ambassadors demanded a fair and expeditious settlement to his case under Turkey’s international responsibilities and domestic legislation.”
Most importantly, Kavala who has been imprisoned since 2017, has been frequently demanded their release by international observers and human rights organizations. They claim that the detention is due to political concerns. While the officials deny the allegations and maintain that Turkish courts are independent.
While the Turkish government views the ambassadors’ declaration as direct involvement in domestic politics. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan condemned the diplomats’ behavior and threatened to expel them from the country. In an intensifying disagreement with the countries, who intervened in the case of a detained businessman by demanding his release.
After their statement demanding the release of Osman Kavala, President Erdogan authorized the Turkish foreign minister to proclaim the ambassadors of ten nations to Turkey “persona non grata”. Notably, when a diplomat is declared persona non grata, they are banned in their host country and they are now just one step away from expulsion.
In a speech, Erdogan remarked, “I have directed our foreign minister to expedite the declaration of these ten ambassadors,” These ten ambassadors must be declared persona non grata. They will be familiar with and understand Turkey”. He went on to say that these ambassadors would not release “terrorists” in their nations if they did not know and understand them (Arab News, 2021).
For this reason, tensions between Ankara and the United States, Canada, Germany, France, the Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Norway, and New Zealand soared over Turkey’s president proclaimed the envoys “persona non grata.”
Moreover, the ambassadors had been instructed to “keep within the responsibilities of their duties after an insincere and double-standard approach and It was highlighted in our constitution that Turkey is a democratic state of law that protects human rights, and it was reminded that such reckless utterances would not affect the Turkish court”.
The government further noted that the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) judgments are frequently disregarded and not followed, claiming that focusing solely on Turkish cases to keep the Kavala case on the table at all times is ineffective (DW, 2021).
Whereas, former Turkish ambassador to Azerbaijan and senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment in Washington, Alper Coskun, tweeted, “Expelling ambassadors is not a good strategy to protect national interests. Turkey’s isolation has been exacerbated by its rash foreign policy aimed at domestic politics” (Arab News, 2021).The opinions mentioned in this article do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Al mayadeen, but rather express the opinion of its writer exclusively.
Simply denouncing them but declining to take any tangible action would have made President Erdogan look weak in everyone’s eyes unless they recanted their joint statement and apologized. He couldn’t afford to do that even though he must also have expected that Western pressure against him personally and his country more broadly will soon intensify as a result.
Turkish President Erdogan announced over the weekend that he instructed his Foreign Minister to declare 10 Western ambassadors persona non grata after they meddled in his country’s foreign affairs by releasing a joint statement demanding the release of a jailed businessman who they consider to be a “political prisoner”. This is a huge diplomatic move that will reverberate for some time to come. It shows that Turkey has zero tolerance for such high-profile foreign meddling and is ready to accept the potential political consequences for expelling the Canadian, Danish, Dutch, Finish, French, German, New Zealander, Norwegian, Swedish, and US Ambassadors.
Those diplomats must have predicted that the Turkish President would react in a similar way to how he ultimately did. This implies that they planned their joint statement as a political provocation intended to catalyze a self-sustaining cycle of escalations between their countries and Turkey. The purpose of doing so is to prompt the pretext for intensifying their information warfare against him and potentially threatening sanctions, whether on that basis or a different one.
Those diplomats’ countries probably also wanted to manipulate their people’s perceptions about Turkey by making it seem like it’s “anti-Western” and “despotic”. The planned expulsion of so many ambassadors of such influential countries will certainly provoke a diplomatic crisis. It’ll likely generate incredibly hostile coverage by the Western Mainstream Media too. In other words, all of this is part of the US-led HybridWar on Turkey which aims to punish the country for its increasingly independent foreign policy in recent years.
From the Turkish perspective, it’s unacceptable to let those diplomats meddle in such a blatant way, especially regarding a jailed figure who they consider to be a “political prisoner”. Simply denouncing them but declining to take any tangible action would have made President Erdogan look weak in everyone’s eyes unless they recanted their joint statement and apologized. He couldn’t afford to do that even though he must also have expected that Western pressure against him personally and his country more broadly will soon intensify as a result.
From a larger viewpoint, Turkey is setting an example for other non-Western nations to follow. Not all of them are as confident as that country is nor might they have the “Democratic Security” capabilities to adequately defend themselves from the predicted intensification of US-led Hybrid Wars against them under such pretexts, but they might still be inspired by this huge diplomatic move. After all, a pivotal pillar of Turkish foreign policy is to present itself as a model for others to emulate, especially in the Global South and most recently in Africa.
Looking forward, Turkish-Western relations will likely continue to deteriorate. There’s a chance that the ambassadors who Turkey plans to expel might eventually return or be replaced after some time, but that probably won’t happen in the near future if the country does indeed go through with what its leader just threatened. The overall impact of this trend will be to accelerate Turkey’s proactive engagement with its new non-Western partners, with a priority given to Russia and China.
That development could be manipulated through information warfare means to reinforce the false narrative that Turkey is “anti-Western” even though it would just be pragmatically reacting to Western political provocations. Nevertheless, closer Turkish ties with Russia and China could fuel the intensification of the US-led Hybrid War against it through geopolitical fearmongering about that country’s grand strategic intentions. For this reason, Ankara must brace itself for myriad destabilization attempts ahead of the summer 2023 elections.
It’s impossible to predict the exact forms that they could take at this moment, but they’ll likely be comprehensive and thus involve economic, information, political, and perhaps even security plots. President Erdogan is increasingly portrayed by the Western Mainstream Media as a so-called “rogue” leader, the misleading perception of which will be exploited to intensify the US-led Hybrid War. He’s unlikely to capitulate to their political demands related to his foreign policy but he’s likely still interested in bargaining with them.
(Machine translation): Review the Ministry of defence to the statement of the military Department of the Netherlands about the alleged threat of action last Thursday, June 24, the Russian aircraft near the Dutch frigate “Evertsen” in the Black sea:
“24 Jun 2021 by means of objective control of the black sea fleet is monitoring the actions of NATO ships in the Black sea was established, which was in international waters frigate “Evertsen” Netherlands Navy, changed course and began to move in the direction of the Kerch Strait.
To prevent violations of the border of the territorial waters of the Russian Federation, Su-30 fighters and Su-24 bombers were lifted into the air from the duty forces, which flew at a safe distance near the Dutch Navy ship.
After the flights of Russian aircraft, the Evertsen frigate immediately changed course from the border of the Russian Federation and continued following the same route.
Filed under: Russia | Tagged: Black Sea, Kerch Strait, Netherlands | Comments Off on Video of Russian Aerospace Forces intercepting the Dutch frigate Eversten
To begin, let’s recap what just happened in the Crimean waters. First, the HMS Defender deliberately entered the Russian waters under the pretext that the Brits don’t recognize what they call the “annexation” of Crimea. The Brits deny it, but after seeing 4 bombs explode ahead of the HMS Defender, they altered their course as the Russians demanded.
Next, before looking into this deeper, let’s also keep in mind the following fact: the entire Black Sea is a de facto “Russian lake” meaning that Russia has the full military control of the Black Sea. For those alternatively gifted, let me explain what this means:
The Bal and Bastion coastal defense missiles can sink any ship in the Black Sea in minutes.
The Black Sea Fleet has seven advanced diesel-electric attack submarines, arguably the most advanced on the planet.
The HMS Defender was operating without any air cover but detected over 20 Russian military aircraft overflying it.
For a more detailed discussion of this reality, please see these four (here, here, here and here) articles by Andrei Martyanov. For a more detailed discussion of the laws of the sea, please see this discussion by Nat South.
In other words, the HMS Defender was a sitting duck with no chance of survival had the Russians decided to fire in anger. General Konashenkov, who is in charge of contacts with the media, had this to say about the outcome of the British provocation: (emphasis added)
“The epic fiasco of the provocation of the British destroyer Defender in the Black Sea, which abruptly changed course from Russian territorial waters after the warning shots of the patrol ship, will remain a fragrant stain on the reputation of the Royal Navy for a long time”
(-: Thereby suggesting that the Brits soiled their pants and ran for their lives
Speaking of anger: I have been parsing the Russian media over the past couple of days and I will only say that there are A LOT of commentators who are mad at the Kremlin for NOT opening fire in earnest and sinking the Defender.
Furthermore, several Russian officials have now indicated that the next time around, the intruders would be destroyed.
Did I mention that the British Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, George Eustice declared in an interview that the Brits plan to repeat such operations in the future?
This now begs the question: would the Kremlin really risk WWIII by sinking a British Navy Ship trying to, to use a British expression, “poke the Russian bear”?
Interestingly, the Brits deny that the Russians fired any munitions ahead of the Defender. Why would they do that? My personal explanation is that the British government does not want to freak out the British and European public opinion. But if they are hiding the truth, it means that this is a truth which makes them uncomfortable. What do you think they might be hiding?
Still, the two UK reporters who were on the Defender (by total coincidence, I am sure), both reported hearing explosions and seeing Russian combat aircraft. The Russian FSB also released video footage taken from the Russian border patrol ships which were shadowing the HMS Defender. You can clearly see the Russian firing their guns ahead of the HMS Defender:
The Russians also have radar footage from many sources and it has been really easy for them to prove that the Defender changed course and left after four bombs exploded ahead on its course.
The reason for all this? “We don’t recognize the annexation of Crimea”. Which makes no sense because EVEN if the UK does not recognize the Russian “annexation” of Crimea (and, along with that, the democratic will of the people of Crimea), they should still recognize the indisputable fact that Russia is the “occupying power” which, therefore, has the legal right to deny any ship “innocent passage” if it believes that this ship is a threat, collecting intelligence or used for propaganda purposes (again, read Nat South’s superb discussion on the applicability of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea to this situation). As usual, the Brits are lying about everything, including what the UNCLOS really says…
Now let’s look at this from the Russian point of view.
First, the Russians remember how the Brits declared a 200 miles zone around the Malvinas Islands (“Falklands” in UK parlance) and immediately sunk the cruiser General Belgrano as soon as it entered this zone. The Russians also remember how the Turks shot down a Russian SU-24 over Syria because it had penetrated in Turkish air space for exactly 6 seconds. The HMS Defender spent about 30 minutes in Russian waters.
Can you really blame them for feeling that “some are more equal than others”?
The Brits, being the superior race which only they think they are, declared that they only changed course because a slower Russian vessel was ahead of them and they decided to pass it from the open waters side. In fact, the Brits are so superior to the mongoloid Russian hordes and their dictator that they refused to even reply to the Russian coast guard vessel when it threatened to open fire if the Brits did not change course.
(I wonder, does anybody still believe this crap? Does anybody still believe that Great Britain is, well, great? In Russia the expression “мелкобритания” is increasingly used. Translated into English this would be something like “Tiny Britain”)
Anyways, all of the above clearly shows one of two things:
The Brits do not believe that Russia could sink a UK warship
The Brits are willing to risk a major military incident possibly leading to war in order to maintain tensions between Russia and the collective West (aka the AngloZionist Empire).
This begs the question: are the Brits correct, or are they delusional?
First, we need to understand the purpose of this provocation: to disrupt the planned summit between the EU and Russia which France and Germany seemed to support, and which the 3B+PU and the Netherlands and the Czech Republic (iirc) categorically opposed (the Ukraine is not member of the EU, but they sure acted as if they had some kind of moral veto power over EU decisions). Sure, the UK has Brexited and should therefore not have any say in EU decisions, but the Anglosphere has enough power over the EU to make this completely irrelevant. We also know that Boris Johnson personally gave the order to the HMS Defender to enter Russian waters. Obviously, that kind of high level decision could not have been taken without Uncle Shmuel’s approval, thus we are dealing with a very deliberately calculated action. If this was the goal, it has been a total success and the Brits just screwed over Macron and Merkel.
Second, this is really largely irrelevant for Russia. If the EU cannot muster enough political courage to talk to Russia, then Russia will directly talk with those countries which want to talk to Russia. To put it bluntly, Russia does not give a damn about the 3B+PU. As for the Netherlands, they are a big investor in the Russian economy and Russians don’t care about what the Dutch might or might not say, as long as they keep investing (in Euros, by the way!), which, so far, they still are. Besides, considering the economic size of Holland, even if they stopped investing this would only be a minor nuisance for Russia. In fact, Merkel has even declared that if the EU cannot agree to have a dialog with Russia, Germany would seek other venues for this purpose.
Third, what just happened is yet another clear sign that the EU is profoundly dysfunctional. After the end of the USSR in 1991, russophobic Neocons in the West decided to make the Russians “pay” by incorporating ex WTO and ex Soviet Republics into NATO. At first, it looked great, but now it has become clear that the blowback from this truly idiotic policy has many unexpected benefits for Russia and major problems for the Empire. They include:
Russia got rid of all the Soviet periphery which was bleeding the Soviet Union dry.
None of the newly created states has become a viable, successful state.
The Empire spent many billions trying to prop up these newly independent states (ex USSR and eastern Europe) and tried to turn them into some anti-Russia showcase. They totally and comprehensively failed.
Now the UK and, even more so, the 3B+PU have taken the EU hostage and are preventing the countries which matter from, well, mattering anymore.
Countries bordering Russia are now all demanding NATO troops, which puts the latter in the worst possible position, right across the Russian border and, therefore, within range of too many Russian weapons to list here.
Last, but not least, the stupid and, frankly, totally irresponsible actions of countries like the UK and the Ukraine risk involving all of Europe in a most dangerous and devastating war.
Bottom line is this: the leaders of the AngloZionist thought they had scored big with the expansion of the EU and NATO. Now they are screwed in a major way and with no solution in sight.
This all is hardly big news, but yet another confirmation of the advanced state of collapse of both NATO and the EU. Conversely, the more EU countries decide to hold bilateral talks with Russia, the better for the future of the European continent.
As for the Brits, they are clearly suffering from phantom pains for their lost empire. Think of it, in less than one century the British Empire went from being the empire upon which the sun never sets, (Britannia rules the waves, etc.) to being the USA’s poodle which nobody respects or takes seriously. Bojo is desperate to prove that he is a “new Churchill” which will teach the damn Russians (and Chinese!) to kowtow to the UK or, failing that, at least kowtow to the Anglosphere. And, as a typical western politician, Bojo is both too ignorant and too narcissistic to understand the risks he is taking.
The Brits seemed to be combining imperialist arrogance (and delusion!) with a truly shocking lack of PR skills. Not only did they deny that the Russians opened warning fire ahead of them, only to have the FSB prove this denial false by publishing the video of the Russian coast guard vessel firing ahead of the Defender, but now they came up with a truly clumsy piece of nonsense about how a “super dooper secret” dossier on the British plans was somehow apparently found by a passer-by in a heap of trash behind a bus stop in Kent (you think I am joking, then see here). Needless to say, the Russians openly made fun of the Brits saying that “007 agents agents aren’t what they used to be”. Furthermore, it now appears that some top UK officials were very much opposed to this move which was demanded by Johnson personally (see here and here).
What about the British military?
We know that their actual capabilities are laughable. But what about their understanding of the situation?
I am not a mind reader and I don’t know what the British sailors (and their bosses) were thinking, but there is one thing which I am sure of: the next time around (and, there will be a next time according to UK ministers), the Russians will use force. If possible, they will try to ram the intruding vessel; if not, they might strike at the intruding vessel’s engines/props to disable it and, possibly, tow it. Should the intruding vessel try to fire back, the Russians would probably fire a torpedo and disable it. That is my best guess. I also decided to ask Andrei Martyanov (a former Soviet Navy officer) what he thinks will happen the next time around. Here is his reply:
“Most likely, they will open fire, but first only with small-caliber naval artillery (30-mm from the Russian border patrol ship or even 76-mm), and that fire will be aimed at the propeller-steering group (i.e. at the stern) to begin with. At the same time, the coastal defense batteries will actively track the intruder with their targeting radar, plus the Russian will “hang” 15-20 Su-24 and SU-30SM in immediate readiness to use more serious means – for example, the supersonic (M = 3.5) anti-radiation X-31 and take out the mast with its radar. That is just for starters. Next, the Russians will gage the reaction of the intruder: if they try to shoot at any Russian target, they will be sunk. But this would only happen inside Russian territorial waters. Outside Russian waters the Russians will only monitor their moves. Lastly, do not forget – there are anywhere between 4 and 7 Project 636 submarines at any one time patrolling the Black Sea, each capable of firing 6 3M54 anti-ship missiles in one salvo.”
Here is a short video of the Russian MoD Zvezda channel to give you an idea of how this all looks (in Russian, but no translation needed) and which quite openly shows whom the Russians consider their likely target.
Does anybody still remember what happened when the “invincible” British Navy tried to participate in Trump’s (totally failed) cruise missile attack on Syria? The British subs in the Mediterranean were shadowed by not one, but apparently two Russian submarines. That convinced the British sub commander that firing its missiles would be suicidal. The Brits gave up and left the area.
There is a pattern here: western politicians make a lot of very loud statements; the Russians simply take whatever actions they deem necessary, which frees them from the need to make threats of roaring statements in the first place.
This approach has a problem: only highly specialized people in the West are fully aware of what the Russians are doing and even less people fully understand the implications of the Russian actions. Add to this a western media which lies for a living, and this results in a population in Europe which is almost totally unaware of the very real risks the reckless actions of their (supposed) representative governments engage in. How many Brits will realize that a grinning and apparently happy Boris Johnson has almost stumbled into a war with Russia? Very few I bet. If anything, the common folk in the West are told that (a) their military is the best and (b) that the Russian military is much weaker and the Russians understand that. Ergo: there is no risk.
Then there is the fact that while the general population is kept in total ignorance, western political elites are mostly composed of folks with very strong narcissistic tendencies combined with a total inability to learn from mistakes (both theirs and those of others). Needless to say, history does not inform these people either. Finally, since these folks can never admit a mistake, however minor or serious, they cannot change course; doubling down over and over is pretty much all they are capable of.
Conclusion:
There is no doubt that the Biden Administration has taken a very different course towards Russia (and Iran, by the way!) than the one favored by the Trump administration. I attribute this change of policy to the likely realization by top Pentagon officials that the US desperately needs to “catch its breath” and that the US military is in no condition to take on any other halfway competent military. Even if this is a ploy to win time for reorganizing, I welcome this as, by definition, anything is preferable to war, especially a full-scale war. However, there are clearly interests in both the US and Europe which are desperately opposed to any form of detente with Russia and who want to maintain an atmosphere of crisis and tensions just short of war. Of course, I don’t believe in any meaningful differences between the various factions competing for power on a strategic level: they all want to destroy, submit, break up and otherwise devastate Russia. This 1000 year old dream of the western ruling elites (pretty much all of them) still remains the strategic target of the West. But on a tactical level there appear to be two factions, one which understands that the Empire desperately needs a break to regroup and refine its strategy and another one which still seems to believe that the Empire is invincible and appears to be hell-bent on triggering as many conflicts/wars as it deems necessary to restore Uncle Shmuel’s worldwide hegemony.
That second group, clearly strong, has ties with the UK and the 3B+PU gang who are desperate to remain relevant and who understands that should there ever be any type detente (or even a tense modus vivendi) agreed upon between Russia and the West, that group would become comprehensively irrelevant to the future of our planet. While we can disagree with this logic, we have to remain aware that for countries like the UK or the 3B+PU this is truly an existential issue and that they see a continuation of tensions as the only path to political survival. On this specific point, I happen to agree with them.
I mentioned that ever since Dubya, all the US Presidents who came to the White House were extremely weak, which resulted in the breakup of any single US foreign policy into many different, and often contradictory, “mini foreign policies” by various branches of the government (Congress vs White House, plus a Pentagon foreign policy, a CIA foreign policy, a Foggy Bottom policy, a DoE policy, etc. etc. etc.). Hence, for example, the recent seizure by Uncle Shmuel of the PressTV domain name. (BTW – the domain name https://www.presstv.ir/ still works!).
This all makes for a very dangerous brew. Especially since the Russians clearly and sincerely believe that they cannot back down any further.
I therefore conclude that a future military incident, with the use of fire in anger, and possibly resulting in a real war, remains not only possible, but even likely, unless the factions in the West which want a time-out to regroup manage to get the russophobic nutcases under control.
Will that happen? I doubt it very much. Biden is not only weak and senile, his Administration has been organized with wokeness and (pseudo) “diversity” as opposed to competence or expertise. Thus, the collective Biden (which I designate as “Biden” as opposed to the real Biden) is probably too weak to get the crazies under control, even for a short time.
And here is the really scary thing: from the Russian point of view (and Russians all understand all of the above), sinking a British ship might well be the best solution. Why? Because once this happens, it will be impossible to conceal from the western public opinion that its so-called “leaders” are reckless, incompetant, delusional and simply dangerous narcissists who are now willing to risk a continental war (possibly nuclear!) just in order to keep denying the reality of their irrelevance. If Russia wanted to invade the UK, I believe that most Brits would be willing to risk it all to defend their motherland. But I very much doubt that a majority/plurality of Brits would support the notion of dying for Crimea even if they believe that Russia “annexed” the peninsula and is now “oppressing the Ukrainian people of Crimea”. Nor would they want to die over MH17, Skripal, Syria, Navalnyi or the oppressed homos in Chechnia.
There is one more thing I think Putin could do: make a solemn speech and directly address the people of the West telling them the truth about what the western political leaders are doing. He could honestly tell the people in the West that Russia has retreated as far as she could. He can tell the people of the West that Russia did what she so often did in history, she traded space for time and that the four years break of the Trump Administration has allowed Russia to fully rearm, retrain and reorganize her armed forces which are now quite capable of taking on both the US and NATO and prevail.
Yes, I know, Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi tried to appeal to the people of the West and, in both cases, the democratic and free western media completely obfuscated these admittedly naive and clumsy attempts. But if Putin speaks directly to the people of the West, and explains to them what a war (even a conventional one) would mean for Europe, they would have to listen. Putin could clearly indicate to the people of the West which actions of the Empire Russia could never and would never tolerate. Finally, he could clearly spell out why the Russian people would prefer war to any surrender to the Empire. And, just to make sure that the message gets through, the Russian Navy might want to have one of its Yasen-M class SSGN surface somewhere in the Channel or the Tu-160 practice a cruise missile release on London (only electronically, of course). Hussein and Gaddafi did not have such capabilities. Russia does, and she should make use of them.
Fear, especially existential fear, might well be the only thing which could break through the wall of silence and disinformation which the western media has been feeding the people for decades.
How much hope do I place in the Biden Administration taking control of the nutcases or for Putin to directly address the people of the West? Not much at all. And the next best outcome is for Russia to sink a US/UK warship (or shoot down an aircraft) without triggering a continental war. Is that even possible? Yes, I think so. Very dangerous, but possible.
Does Russia have any other choice? If so, I don’t see it. Do you?
Post scriptum: this just in – the USS Ross (DDG-71), an Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer in the United States Navy, has just entered to Black Sea on her way to Odessa where the Ukies are preparing monoevers if their “mosquito fleet” in the latest “Sea Breeze” NATO maneuvers (the biggest ones to date – 30 countries participate!). The Ukies have also declared that the Ross plans to follow the exact same course as the Defender did. The Russians? They announced that the USS Ross is now a “fat target” on their coastal defense missiles Bal and Bastion. As for Foreign Minister Lavrov, he just authored a seminal article entitled “The Law, the Rights and the Rules” which, still using diplomatic language, shows the utter disgust even Russian diplomats feel for the incompetence and hypocrisy of the West.
“More of the same” seems to be the trend of the day…
Syrian Refugees in Jordan – The Netherlands wants to prolong and increase the Syrian people’s suffering
The Netherlands, like other NATO member states, is involved in the role-play model passing different tasks among themselves that all result in punishing the Syrian people for resisting to fall prey for the US hegemony through terrorist groups, Syria.
One of the roles assigned to the Netherlands is being activated now, however, it’s either the short memory of NATO officials or simple-brained techniques they expose their moves for its sheer criminality without needing to sugarcoat it anymore, they might be very much depending on the Sheeple nature they turned their people into.
The Netherlands, being the house country for the International Criminal Court was assigned by its higher command in the USA to call for an investigation in crimes against humanity carried out in Syria, and no, not to punish terrorist groups that were assembled from all sides of the planet by the world’s superpowers and super-rich countries and dumped as the human garbage they are onto Syria, nor calling for the investigation and prosecuting of those involved in facilitating the terror acts by these human garbage; the Netherlands wants the ICC to prosecute the Syrian people for defending their homes from the NATO-sponsored terrorists. Goebbels would be so proud of the Netherlands and its officials.
The Netherlands mission at the United Nations informed, as it seems, their colleagues in the Syrian mission at the international body, about their intentions to file a case against Syrian officials involved in the crime of defending their country, they claim that the rights of terrorists killing and maiming Syrian women and children were violated by Syrian officials. Europe cut its ties with the Syrian state and recognized cannibal terrorists as representatives of the Syrian people, hence they have to go through different measures to contact the Syrian state.
The minister of foreign affairs in the Netherlands Stef Blok wrote in a letter to his country’s parliament his government’s intention to hold Syrians accountable for what he alleged are ‘crimes against humanity committed by Syrian officials’, he included ‘torture’ as one of them.
The Netherlands is obviously taking advantage of being the host country of the International Criminal Court, the ICC, Syrian official source slammed the latest step by the European monarchy.
In an almost instant response, a Syrian state official condemned the notion by the Netherlands and reminded the Netherlands officials of Syria’s right to prosecute in all legal methods every individual and party, state and non-state actors who facilitated terror in Syria on the Syrian people. The Syrian state official reminded the Netherlands of its destructive and criminal role by directly funding an assorted number of armed groups with up to 28 million Euros of the Netherland taxpayers money paid to groups designated as terrorist groups by the Netherlands own public prosecution.
Syria is not a signatory to the ICC’s ‘Rome Statute’, hence the Netherlands needs the approval of the United Nations Security Council to refer Syrian officials to the ICC, we can say it’s an impossible task, a futile effort with the certain objection of at least Russia and China at the UNSC, each of which has the Veto power, but this stunt could be used as an additional media campaign against the Syrian people, in addition to everything else they’re facing.
The irony is that the United States of America itself has not only rejected to sign the Rome Statue, it went to the extent of imposing sanctions against the ICC’s prosecutor and still wants to use the ICC through its minions to gain politically in Syria what it couldn’t achieve by creating and sponsoring literally hundreds of terrorist groups in the country throughout the past 9.5 years.
Maybe, the Netherlands, like its other EU accomplices, didn’t have enough Syrian refugees migrating to their country and forcing those who couldn’t make it to Europe into becoming refugees, it’s the western European mentality never changed since the Crusades.
To help us continue please visit the Donate page to donate or learn how you can help us with no cost on you. Follow us on Telegram: http://t.me/syupdates link will open Telegram app.
The headquarters of Turkey’s national intelligence organization
Several documents marked “secret” which were obtained by Nordic Monitor have revealed details of illegal surveillance activities of critics based in Germany, Denmark, the Netherlands and Sweden carried out by Turkey’s intelligence services.
The documents, dated 19 March 2019, show that Turks resident in the countries have been closely monitored due to their critical views of the government of President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. The intelligence was used by Turkish authorities to initiate criminal prosecutions against critics, prepare extradition requests and file Interpol notices.
Turkey has been accused of abusing Interpol’s law enforcement mechanisms to silence Erdoğan critics from all segments of Turkish society. According to related reports, Turkey had sought Red Notices for around 60,000 individuals in 2016. Turkish police have also been accused of manipulating Interpol’s Stolen and Lost Travel Documents (STLD) database for political purposes, filing fraudulent missing, lost or revoked passports and travel documents to invalidate the papers of critics and opponents of the Turkish government.
Consequently, Interpol prohibited the use of its communications channels to interact on any issue that concerned the 2016 coup attempt in Turkey because it contravened the provisions of Article 3 of Interpol’s constitution. Article 3 “strictly forbids the Organization to undertake any intervention or activities of a political, military, religious or racial character.”
Critics of the Erdoğan government, especially members of the Gülen movement, have been facing surveillance, harassment, threats of death and abduction since at least 2014, when then-Prime Minister and now President Erdoğan began to suspect the group of being involved in plots to overthrow the government. In turn, Erdoğan’s critics accuse him and State officials of inventing false plots and filing fraudulent charges against opponents to cover up or distract media attention from their own errors and troubles, ranging from claims of widespread corruption (including among the president’s family and closest political and business associates) to Turkey’s dangerous and disastrous decision to support of at least some of the terrorist groups that have been ravaging the northern parts of Syria.
سير الأحداث الحالية تنسج خيطاً نتابعه جميعاً بأبصارنا. ليس «كورونا» إلا جزءاً من اشتباك عالمي كبير يهدف في مكان ما للوصول ببعض الدول إلى النتيجة المقرّرة. يعكس هذا الأمر مفاد الفكرة القائلة: بأنّ «النتيجة التي تحققها القوة بوسائلها المتنوّعة، ستكون هي النتيجة الملائمة إذا ما تحققت في الواقع». هكذا إذاً. فماذا عن صفقة القرن؟ هل تدّل على منتهى الدهاء والتخطيط والذكاء البشري أم على تعاويذ سحرة «الويكا»؟
في الشكل تبدو الصفقة تبادلاً للهدايا الانتخابية. نتنياهو وترامب بحاجة إلى بعضهما البعض للفوز بفترات رئاسية جديدة. كلاهما يختنق بمشاكله الخاصة ويسعى للهروب منها إلى الأمام ولو كان هذا (الأمام) مغامرة محفوفة بالمخاطر، لكن «الجيوبولتيكا التاريخية» التي تجعل الأساطير مركز تصوراتها، تدفع بأحدهما ليغزو المدى الفلسطيني مبشراً بيهودية الدولة، ومن الثاني ليغزو المدى العالمي مبشراً بنهاية التاريخ!
ينطلق الاثنان من أفقين لتعزيز رؤيتها وروايتهما للمستقبل. الأول مكاني (جغرافي)، والثاني زماني (تاريخي). ينعكس العامل الجغرافي في القدرة على التوسع والتموضع والاستحواذ على المزيد من الأعماق المكانية، أما العامل التاريخي فينعكس في قوة الإنسان وحضوره ودوره في صياغة القيم المستحدثة وخلق الوقائع الجديدة.
وعلى الرغم من كلّ العثرات والإخفاقات في سياسات الرئيس الأميركي ورئيس الوزراء الإسرائيلي لكن الاثنين يسعيان لامتلاك الوضعية التي تتيح لأحدهما تصدّر المشهد العالمي والآخر لتصدّر المشهد الإقليمي.
قد يبدو ما تمّ الإعلان عنه في 29 كانون الثاني/ يناير 2020 لحظة تفوّق أميركي إسرائيلي غير مسبوق. أو أنّ التطورات في المنطقة والعالم تقترب بنا أكثر من معادلة جيبولتيكية حتمية صارمة تتمكّن من خلالها الولايات المتحدة الأميركية ومعها الكيان الصهيوني من تحقيق السيطرة العالمية على التاريخ والجغرافيا معاً. ولا شك أنّ الدعاية ساعدت كثيراً في إبراز التآكلات العربية، وموقعية العرب التي إن لم تكن في الهاوية فهي على حافة الهاوية، وكنتيجة منطقية لهذا المسار العربي الرسمي يجب أن يتقلص بصورة نهائية وحاسمة ما دار عليه الصراع منذ مطلع القرن الماضي وتبلّور تحت مسمّى «القضية الفلسطينية». لكن الحقيقة تحجب عمداً التراجعات البنيوية لكلّ من الحليفين على مساحة العالم والمنطقة. «أميركا هذه ليست التي كنّا نعرفها» كما يقول الكاتب الأميركي ديفيد أغناتيوس. ولا «إسرائيل» هي «إسرائيل» التي تعيش هواجس التطويق، والبيئة المحيطة «الغنية بالأسلحة»، والصواريخ الدقيقة و«المتوحشة» لمحور المقاومة، وأزمات الكيان التي تقول عنها الكاتبة ياعيل دايان: «من يقرأ ويتقصّى الحقائق ويتعمّق في الداخل الإسرائيلي ويطّلع على التناقضات والمشاكل الداخلية يدرك ضعف هذا المجتمع… ما بين التصدّع القومي والتصدّع الديني والطائفي والطبقي، تتشكل عوامل انهيار دولة «إسرائيل» في المستقبل».
من الواضح أنّ فكرة الهروب إلى الأمام لدى كلّ من نتنياهو وترامب، تقاطعت مع بيئة الصراع الحالية في المنطقة التي تتميّز بالحركة والتغيّر الشديدين، وأيضاً مع التأسيسات الدينية والاستعمارية التاريخية، وكذلك مع الحسابات الاستراتيجية المتعلقة بالمنافسة العالمية على موارد وثروات الوطن العربي. من هذا المنطلق تعكس الصفقة في جوهرها التصور الأميركي الإسرائيلي لحلّ القضية الفلسطينية. فلا تشير إلى شريك فلسطيني وإنما إلى شريك عربي، ولا هي معروضة للتفاوض وإنما للتطبيق. وهذا التطوّر يشير أولاً، إلى أنّ الحاجة إلى الفلسطينيين في بلورة هذا التصوّر لم تعد ضرورية. وثانياً، إنّ كلّ مسارات التسوية والتفاوض حول قضاياها كاللاجئين والدولة والقدس والحدود والأمن أصبحت من زمن سابق، وحتى مرجعية الأمم المتحدة وقراراتها لم تعد ذا بال. قبل هذه الصفقة يمكن الإشارة إلى أنّ مركب التآمر لحذف فلسطين من الجغرافيا والتاريخ، وإنهاء القضية الفلسطينية كقضية إنسانية عربية إسلامية مرت بصياغات أربع:
الأولى: سياسة الاستعمار البريطاني المتمثلة بتصريح بلفور عام 1917.
الثانية: إجراءات الأمم المتحدة التي أوصت بترسيخ شرعية الاحتلال عبر قرار التقسيم 181.
الثالثة: استخدام القوة الخشنة في محاولات فرض الوقائع الجغرافية الإحلالية عبر النار أعوام 1973 -1967 – 1956 – 1948.
الرابعة: مسارات التسوية التي هدفت إلى تحويل الصراع العربي الإسرائيلي من صراع وجود إلى نزاع حدود.
لقد كان واضحاً من خلال المسارات التفاوضية مع الفلسطينيين أنّ الولايات المتحدة الأميركية لم تكن من الأساس تدعم مبدأ الحلول التوافقية، فقد مرّت على اتفاقية «أوسلو» ما يقارب 27 عاماً من دون نتيجة على الرغم من إجحافها الكبير بحقوق الفلسطينيين، وإنما هدفت إلى أن تحصل (ربيبتها إسرائيل) على ثمار «التسوية» من دون تقديم استحقاقاته، ورسمت إطاراً سياسياً وجغرافياً جديداً تحت مسمّى «الشرق الأوسط الموسع» في سياق عملية يُستعمل فيها عامل الزمن لتغيير معادلة القوة، وإنتاج بنية نفسية وسياسية يقبل فيها العرب بـ (إسرائيل) كياناً طبيعياً في هذه المنطقة، هذا من جانب، ومن جانب آخر، يصل معها الفلسطينيون إلى حالة اليأس من إمكانية استرداد الأرض التاريخية وحتى أجزاء أساسية منها لبناء دولتهم، بل إنّ الزمن عندما يُستفاد منه، بحسب الرؤية الإسرائيلية، بدرجة قصوى سيدفع الفلسطينيين إلى الإعراض عن كثير من مطالبهم السابقة ومبادئهم التي من أجلها قدّموا الدماء، وحينها سينتزع الصهاينة من الفلسطينيين الاعتراف بشرعية وجودهم. وقد كان ملاحظاً منذ «أوسلو» كيف أنّ إسرائيل كانت تتعمّد شراء الوقت وتصطنع الاتفاق تلو الاتفاق وتخترع البروتوكولات والمذكرات حول أيّ قضية جزئية لتواصل عملية توسعة المستوطنات وشقّ الطرق وتغيير معالم القرى والمدن الفلسطينية وصولاً إلى هذا اليوم الذي لم يعد يحق فيه للفلسطينيين إلا ما هو معروض عليهم من فتات!
إنّ محدّدات هذه الصفقة تاريخياً تنطلق من التالي:
أولاً: الحاجة الملحة لتطهير الأرض من السكان الأصليين عبر عمليات الإبادة والطرد أو العزل الجغرافي. فليس لدى «إسرائيل» سوى معادلة واحدة تقوم على أساس محو الوجود الفلسطيني مادياً ومعنوياً وهوية وانتماء.
ثانياً: العدوان يعتبر خاصية سلوكية أيّ سمة تميّز الشخصية الإسرائيلية العميقة التي تتوثب للعدوان وتتحفز له وتهيّئ مقدّماته ولا تأسف لنتائجه، وعلى امتداد السنين الماضية كانت هذه الشخصية محمية ومدعومة بإطار قانوني إداري يسمح لها بالتعبير عن نفسها حتى لو تخطت كلّ الحدود الأخلاقية والإنسانية والقوانين الدولية.
ثالثاً: السلوك الإسرائيلي في التوّسع وسرقة الأرض وبناء المستوطنات يشير إلى هدف أكثر فساداً من مجرد إرضاء حاجة للأمن، على الرغم من خطورة هذا العامل في السنوات الأخيرة، وهو منع إقامة كيان فلسطيني. فقد كانت المدرسة المتطرفة داخل الكيان تعتبر أنّ مثل هذه «الحلول الانهزاميّة» سوف تعطي شرعية للفلسطينيين ولو كانت نسبيّة ومحدودة، كذلك من شأنها أن تثبّت الوجود الفلسطيني البشري. فما من تفاهم، بحسب تلك المزاعم، إلا وسينتهي بقنبلة ديمغرافية لا يمكن منع انفجارها في المستقبل!
رابعاً: الصفقة انعكاس لفكرة «البقاء للأقوى». فالمعادلة بين دولة متقدمة (إسرائيل) ومجموعة من البشر المتخلفين (الفلسطينيون) تُثبت انتصاراً للمتمدّنين على المتخلفين بفعل الهوة الحضارية التي تفصل بينهما. فقد آن الأوان لإعلان هذا الانتصار الساحق لدولة إسرائيل المتقدّمة على الصعد التكنولوجية والعسكرية والاقتصادية والصناعية. وهذا الأمر يؤكد صلاحية نظرية داروين البيولوجية التي أكدت على أنّ البقاء للأصلح والأقوى وانطباقها، بحسب المزاعم الإسرائيلية، على الظواهر التاريخية والاجتماعية أيضاً!
خامساً: تشكل الإمكانات التي يمتلكها الكيان الإسرائيلي أمراً هاماً في إطار عملية إدارة الصراع. هو الأقدر والأكفأ على توظيفها واستثمارها بالطريقة التي تحقق له أهدافه.
أي الضغط بها على العدو( العربي أو الفلسطيني) وابتزازه حتى يرضخ بتسليمه لهزيمة لا مفرَّ منها. فالهدف الأقصى هو جعل الأنظمة والجماهير في حالة اقتناع جذرية من أنّ تحدي القوة التي تمثلها إسرائيل مستحيلة!
سادساً: تدني سقف المطالب العربية. فلم يعد النظام الرسمي العربي يريد للفلسطينيين أن يحصلوا حتى على أبسط حقوقهم. عند هذا النظام انتهت القضية. المرحلة هي للتطبيع والتعامل مع الوقائع والموازين بطريقة «واقعية». وهذا ما يريده الصهاينة، أيّ أن يُقرّ العرب أنّ الصراع قد حُسم لصالح «إسرائيل» وأن ليس أمامهم إلا تبني نظرية المنتصرين والاستسلام لترتيبات وإجراءات المرحلة!
لا شك أنّ «صفقة القرن» هي رمز جديد من رموز هزيمة النظام الرسمي العربي، الذي حكم على نفسه بالهزيمة عندما امتنع عن استخدام جزء من وسائله في الوقت الذي صمّم فيه «العدو» على استخدام وسائله كلها.
لكن قوى المقاومة تملك مقاربة مختلفة للمرحلة وإن كانت ضاغطة بتحدياتها. فعلى الرغم من حالة الإحباط التي سرت في نفوس الجماهير من استمرار مسلسل الهزائم والنكبات، فإنّ الضغط يستدعي المزيد من الأمل لا العكس.
ويمكن أن نسجل الملاحظات السريعة التالية:
أولاً: قوى المقاومة تخوض اليوم معركة دفاعية حقيقية على مستوى المنطقة بأسرها، ومع ذلك قد تشتمل أفعالها على حركة هجومية خصوصاً أنّ موقع العدو الدفاعي ليس قوياً جداً بشهادة الخبراء العسكريين الإسرائيليين أنفسهم.
ثانياً: تعمل قوى المقاومة إلى نقل المعركة إلى قلب الضفة الغربية. المكان الذي طلب فيه جمال عبد الناصر من الفلسطينيين «رصاصة واحدة تدوي كلّ يوم» لجعل العدو في حالة استنزاف وهلع وتراجع وجودي.
ثالثاً: الطاقة المعنوية الهائلة التي تمتلكها قوى المقاومة المرتكزة على الإيمان الديني والوطني والقومي. وهي أداة أساسية من أدوات الحرب لا يمكن إغفال أهميتها في حسم الصراع. ولا شك أنّ قوى المقاومة متفوقة في هذا المضمار وهي تحقق من خلال هذه الأداة تناسباً ضرورياً تحتاجه وهي تخوض صراعاً تسعى للفوز به.
رابعاً: جميع خيوط النشاط التاريخي الحضاري مؤدّية إلى الاشتباك. والنشاط هذا لا يهدف إلى تدمير القدرات القتالية للعدو وإنما إلى إزالة العدو من الوجود. إنّ ضخامة هذا التحدي لا يرتبط بسيرورة التطورات والتحولات في المنطقة وإنما تقديراً لنتيجة الاشتباكات المحمومة حالياً على مستوى العالم بأسره.
صفقة القرن تعكس في وجه من وجوهها العملانية مَن استخدم موارده بمهارة وقوة، ومَن تخلّى عن موارده بخفة وسذاجة، فوصل العرب إلى ما وصلوا إليه! لكن في قصتنا، فالأمر لا يُحسب على قاعدة جيش يجابه جيشاً آخر بمجرد اختبار صارم للقوة، وإنما قيمة أيّ فعل تُقاس بالنتائج. أيّ بنتائج الصفقة وتأثيرها الحاسم على مجمل القضية. ويكفي اليوم أن نفحص التأثير الناجم عن تشكل محور المقاومة لنلحظ مخاوف العدو الذي تقترب الهزيمة منه أكثر ما تزايد النشاط العسكري عند هذا المحور ورجحان وقوع الحرب.
هذه المرة نحن لا نعتمد على حاسة سادسة أو مجرد شعور عاطفي زائف بأنّ الصفقة ستموت كما قال الإمام الخامنئي، وإنما على مقدّمات عقلية، وملاحظات منطقية مُشَاهَدة من داخل فلسطين وخارجها، ودلائل متناثرة في فوضى هذا العالم وتناقضاته الواسعة، تدّل على شيء ما. شيء لم نره بعد ولكن متأكدون أنّه آت!
تُقدّر إسرائيل أن سقوط قتلى وجرحى من الجانب الفلسطيني سيشكّل وقوداً لانتفاضة جديدة (أ ف ب )
تحمل التطورات الميدانية الأخيرة في الأراضي الفلسطينية المحتلة، كلّاً من واشنطن وتل أبيب، على إعادة حساباتهما في ما يتّصل بتنفيذ بنود «صفقة القرن». وفيما يبدو أن قرار ضمّ المستوطنات قد أرجئ إلى أجل غير مسمّى ربما يكون طويلاً، يظهر أن «القمة» الإسرائيلية – السعودية التي أميط اللثام عن تحضيرات كانت جارية لها قد أرجئت هي الأخرى، بالنظر إلى ضعف المكاسب المرجوّة منها في هذا التوقيت بالذات.
تكاثرت في الفترة الأخيرة، تحديداً ما بعد الإعلان عن «صفقة القرن» الأميركية، التقارير عن لقاءات جرت وأخرى يُعدّ لإجرائها بين رئيس الحكومة الإسرائيلية بنيامين نتنياهو وكبار المسؤولين الإسرائيليين، ونظرائهم من ملوك وأمراء وقادة خليجيين وعرب. تكاثرٌ يبدو لافتاً جدّاً، في مرحلة يتداخل فيها الخاص والعام في الكيان الإسرائيلي، المصدر الأول وشبه الحصري للتسريبات عن تلك اللقاءات. «القناة 13» العبرية مثلاً كشفت، عبر سلسلة تقارير، عن زيارات سرية بين إسرائيل ودول خليجية وأفريقية خلال العامين الماضيين، بما في ذلك في الأشهر الأخيرة، مسلّطةً الضوء على المستوى الذي بلغته جهود التطبيع من قِبَل السعودية والإمارات والبحرين وسلطنة عُمان تجاه إسرائيل، وانضمام المملكة المغربية والسودان إلى هذا الركب.
وإلى أبعد مما تقدّم ذهبت بعض التسريبات في الأيام القليلة الماضية، حيث تَحدّثت عن جهود أميركية وإسرائيلية لعقد لقاء علني بين نتنياهو وولي العهد السعودي محمد بن سلمان في الرياض، بعد أن يحلّ رئيس وزراء العدو ضيفاً على المملكة. وهو ما أكّدته مصادر سياسية إسرائيلية شدّدت على المصلحة المشتركة للأطراف كافة في هذا اللقاء، وتحديداً الجانبين الأميركي والإسرائيلي بعد الإعلان عن «صفقة القرن»، متحدثةً عن مشاركة وزير الخارجية الأميركي، مايك بومبيو، في الترتيب لـ«القمة» الإسرائيلية – السعودية. لكن، ما الذي يدفع إسرائيل إلى الحديث علناً عن تحضيرات تجري في الغرف المغلقة لجمع نتنياهو وبن سلمان، وهي تدرك أن الكشف المسبق من شأنه إفشال اللقاء وتأجيله، الأمر الذي يدفعها دائماً في حالات مشابهة إلى انتهاج استراتيجية الصمت إلى حين تحقّق المطلب؟ وفقاً للتسريبات، فإن التحضيرات لـ«القمة» بدأت قبل فترة، لكن تداعيات الإعلان عن «صفقة القرن» دفعت على ما يبدو إلى تأجيلها. كان نتنياهو يأمل الاجتماع بابن سلمان قبل انتخابات «الكنيست» الثالثة في الثاني من آذار/ مارس المقبل، لكن تأزّم الوضع في الأراضي المحتلّة شوّش على أجندته، وعطّل محاولته تحقيق فائدة شخصية من اللقاء، الأمر الذي دفعه – على ما يظهر – إلى تسريب معلومات في شأنه أملاً في حصد نتيجة ما. مع ذلك، فإن تجميد التحضيرات لـ«القمة» لا يلغي إمكانية حصولها، الذي لا يفترض أن يكون مفاجئاً لأيّ متابع لتطور العلاقة وتناميها بين الجانبين.
تضغط ردّة الفعل الفلسطينية، على القيادتين الأميركية والإسرائيلية في اتجاه تأجيل الضمّ
كذلك، تدفع التطورات التي أعقبت الإعلان عن «صفقة القرن»، واشنطن وتل أبيب، إلى إرجاء ضمّ المستوطنات وغور الأردن وأجزاء أخرى من الضفة الغربية إلى أجلٍ غير مسمّى، يبدو أنه سيطول أكثر مما كان متوقعاً. في الخلفية الأولى للقرار الأميركي منع نتنياهو إجراء الضمّ قبل الانتخابات الإسرائيلية، يكمن حرص الولايات المتحدة على عدم التسبّب بإحراج إضافي للحكام العرب ربما يضطرهم إلى اتخاذ مواقف حادّة، ومن هنا كان طلبها «فترة تبريد» تمتدّ لأسابيع. لكن أيضاً، والأهمّ، تضغط ردّة الفعل الفلسطينية، وتحديداً الشعبية والمتمثلة في تنفيذ عمليات فردية ضدّ الاحتلال، على القيادتين الأميركية والإسرائيلية في اتجاه تأجيل الضمّ، لما سيحمله تنفيذه من تأثيرات ميدانية سلبية على إسرائيل. وعلى هذه الخلفية، دعا السفير الأميركي في إسرائيل، ديفيد فريدمان، وهو أحد عرّابي «صفقة القرن» وأوّل الداعين إلى الإسراع في ضمّ المستوطنات، إلى التريّث قبل اتخاذ قرارات متسرّعة لا تصبّ في مصلحة إسرائيل والمستوطنين، مشدداً على ضرورة تأجيل الضمّ إلى ما بعد دراسة المنحى الإجرائي بشكل مناسب، حتى «تستطيع الولايات المتحدة الاعتراف بمثل هذه الوضعية» كما قال فريدمان لـ«جيروزاليم بوست»، معتبراً أن تلك العملية «لا تستغرق بالضرورة زمناً طويلاً، لكن يجب أن تكون متأنّية ومدروسة».
تهديدات «أبو مازن»… جوفاء
عزّز الجيش الإسرائيلي وحداته المنتشرة في الضفة الغربية بقوات إضافية، على خلفية تزايد الاحتجاجات الشعبية والعمليات الفردية من قِبَل الفلسطينيين ضدّ جنود الاحتلال في مناطق مختلفة من الضفة. وجاء قرار تعزيز القوات «بالمئات من الجنود» «بعد سلسلة جلسات تقويم للأوضاع»، وفق ما ذكرت مصادر عسكرية إسرائيلية لصحيفة «معاريف». لكن، هل تكفل هذه الإجراءات إنهاء الاحتجاجات، والأهمّ إنهاء العمليات الفردية التي يمكن أن تؤدي، في حال تواصلها وتصاعدها، إلى انتفاضة شاملة؟ يبدو أن الاحتلال، على رغم قلقه من انفلات الأمور، مطمئن إلى أن السلطة الفلسطينية بقيادة محمود عباس لن تسمح بتمادي التصعيد، وإن أبقت على مستويات محمولة منه. وما دام «التنسيق الأمني» متواصلاً مع الأجهزة الأمنية الفلسطينية، فلا خشية حقيقية من انهيار الأوضاع مهما تأزّمت. ووفقاً لمصادر عسكرية إسرائيلية تحدثت إلى «يديعوت أحرونوت»، فإن قيادتَي الجيش و«الشاباك» سارعتا إلى عقد جلسات تقدير للوضع، مباشرةً بعد الإعلان عن «صفقة القرن»، استعداداً لمواجهة التداعيات المتوقّعة ميدانياً، والتي لن تصل كما قدّرت القيادتان إلى حدّ الاحتجاج الشعبي الشامل. لكن كان واضحاً لكلّ من شارك في الجلسات، بحسب المصادر نفسها، أن سقوط قتلى وجرحى من الجانب الفلسطيني سيشكّل وقوداً لانتفاضة جديدة. ومن هنا، تَقرّر، إلى جانب تعزيز القوات، خفض الاحتكاك مع الفلسطينيين، والذي قدّر المشاركون أن السلطة الفلسطينية ستساهم فيه عن طريق إنشاء حواجز بوجه «المشاغبين».
هكذا، لا تتعامل إسرائيل بجدّية مع تهديدات «أبو مازن» بوقف «التنسيق الأمني». وفي هذا الإطار، تنقل «يديعوت أحرونوت» عن مصادر عسكرية قولها إن تهديداته سُمعت في الماضي ولم تؤدِّ إلى شيء، و«سبق لمؤسسات السلطة أن تلقّت قرارات بإنهاء التعاون الأمني والاقتصادي مع إسرائيل، وهو نفسه عمل على منع تطبيق هذه القرارات». وتلفت الصحيفة إلى أن ثمّة «تقديراً داخل الجيش الإسرائيلي بأن عباس غير قادر على إلقاء المفاتيح وقطع العلاقات، لأن لديه مصلحة عليا في إبقاء السلطة حيّة، بما في ذلك مصلحة اقتصادية شخصية له ولرجاله».
شهيد خامس في طولكرم
استشهد شاب فلسطيني وأصيب آخرون في مواجهات اندلعت، أمس، مع قوات الاحتلال الإسرائيلي في مدن الضفة المحتلة، وذلك في خلال الاحتجاجات المتجدّدة رفضاً لـ«صفقة القرن» الأميركية. وأفادت وزارة الصحة باستشهاد بدر نضال نافلة (19 عاماً) برصاص الاحتلال في قفين، شمالي طولكرم، شمال الضفة، بعد وقت قصير من إصابته بجروح حرجة. ولم تنجح الطواقم الطبية في إنقاذ حياة نافلة نتيجة انقطاع الشريان الرئيسي في رقبته بفعل الإصابة، بعدما أطلق جنود العدوّ الرصاص الحيّ باتجاه الشبان والفتية قرب جدار الفصل العنصري في البلدة. وكان الاحتلال قد عزّز قواته في الضفة تحسّباً لاندلاع مواجهات بعد صلاة الجمعة. واستشهد ثلاثة فلسطينيين، أول من أمس، خلال مواجهات وعمليات ضدّ جنود العدو في الضفة والقدس. وحمّل مستشار الرئيس الأميركي وصهره، جاريد كوشنر، رئيس السلطة الفلسطينية محمود عباس، مسؤولية ما سمّاها «أعمال العنف» الأخيرة، فيما خاطبه رئيس الوزراء الإسرائيلي بنيامين نتنياهو بالقول: «أودّ أن أقول شيئاً لأبي مازن: هذا لن يساعدك، لا الطعنات ولا عمليات الدهس، ولا القنص ولا التحريض». (الأخبار)
This undated photo shows Palestinian protesters demonstrating in front of the International Court of Justice in The Hague, the Netherlands. (Photo by Reuters)
Authorities in the Netherlands have allowed Palestinians living in the country to register the besieged Gaza Strip and the West Bank as their official places of birth, instead of registering under such designations as ‘the Israeli-occupied territories’ or ‘unknown’.
Dutch State Secretary Raymond Knops, in a letter addressed to the House of Representatives in The Hague on Sunday, stated that he intends to add Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem al-Quds, to a list of official states used by the Dutch civil registry.
Knops added that the new category is in accordance with “the Dutch viewpoint that Israel has no sovereignty over these areas.”
The Dutch minister further highlighted that the new category was named based on the Oslo Accords and the United Nations Security Council resolutions.
Dutch news outlets reported that the new category will be available to Palestinians born after May 15, 1948, when Israeli forces displaced some 700,000 Palestinians, forcing them to flee to different neighboring countries. Israeli soldiers also wiped nearly 500 Palestinian villages and towns off the map, leaving an estimated total of 4.7 million Palestinian refugees and their descendants dreaming of an eventual return to their ancestral homeland more than six decades later.
The Israeli-occupied land was the only birthplace available to Palestinians registering in the Netherlands up until 2014. The category “unknown,” also known as code “0000,” was made available to Palestinians living in the country after opposition to listing Israel as their birthplace.
While the UN General Assembly and at least 136 countries have recognized Palestine as a sovereign state, the Netherlands has refused to do so.
Palestinians are seeking to create an independent state on the territories of the West Bank including East al-Quds (Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip, and are demanding that Israel withdraw from the occupied Palestinian territories. Israel, however, has refused to return to the 1967 borders and is unwilling to discuss the issue of al-Quds.
Officials concerned with where money goes, how it is spent
The Netherlands’ Foreign Affairs Ministry has announced they are shutting down all support for multiple factions within Syria, including the White Helmets organization. The White Helmets were recipients of 12.5 million Euros from the Netherlands.
Styling themselves as a “civil defense” force with no ties to foreign governments, the White Helmets actually receive substantially funding from several Western nations, including the US, Britain, and until now, the Netherlands.
The report calling for defunding the group added that they operate in areas ruled by armed groups considered “unaccepted” by the Dutch government, and that it is inevitable they will be in growing contact with such groups.
This presumably means al-Qaeda, as the White Helmets relocated in recent months into Idlib Province, and have set up shop in areas under the control of the al-Qaeda affiliate there.
Also defunded in the same announcement were the Free Syrian Police, primarily for being under the influence of al-Qaeda and ISIS, as well as the Levant Front militant group. Though the Levant Front isn’t legally listed as “terrorists,” officials cited concerns about their growing extremism, and the fact that the Netherlands had secretly provided them with weapons under a “non-lethal assistance” program.
Filed under: Al Qaeda, USA, War on Syria | Tagged: ISIL, Netherlands | Comments Off on Netherlands ends support for Syrian militant groups, including one labeled ‘terrorist’ by Dutch govt
Only hours after Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan issued a bloodcurdling warning about terror attacks against European citizens, four people lay dead on the streets of London. That death toll may rise further because several of those injured in the attack this week in the British capital are in critical condition, fighting for their lives.
Erdogan was speaking Wednesday in what was yet another diatribe in his ongoing war of words with the European Union. The Turkish leader has been enraged by European governments refusing ministers from Ankara holding political rallies in Germany, Netherlands and Austria among other countries. As a result of the injunctions, he has accused the EU of displaying Islamophobia and hostility towards Turkey.
In his latest barrage earlier this week, Erdogan warned that there would be dire repercussions for EU citizens owing to the perceived stance of their governments.
«If you continue to behave like this, tomorrow in no part of the world, no European, no Westerner will be able to take steps on the street safely and peacefully», Erdogan said.
Tragically, within hours of announcing these very words, a British-born man plowed his speeding car into pedestrians on London’s Westminster Bridge, killing several of them and seriously wounding dozens more. The assailant then got out of his crashed vehicle and ran into the grounds of the British parliament where he stabbed a police officer to death, before being fatally shot by another officer.
The attacker was named as 52-year-old Khalid Masood, a British citizen. It is not clear yet what his precise motives were, but the deadly attack was subsequently claimed by the Islamic State terror group.
Turkey’s Erdogan was reportedly one of many world leaders who quickly phoned British premier Theresa May to offer his condolences. Later on Wednesday night, Erdogan released a statement on social media, saying: «We stand in solidarity with the UK, our friend and ally, against terrorism, the greatest threat to global peace and security».
There is a sense here that the Turkish leader was reeling from his own earlier warnings of would-be terror consequences for European citizens, and how his tirades against the EU might be implicated in inciting violence.
Certainly, the EU, in short-order, seemed to find Erdogan’s forecasting of acts of terrorism against European citizens and how «they would not be safe on streets around the world» to be lamentable.
Turkey’s envoy in Brussels was promptly summoned to «explain» the president’s doom-laden words. The day after the London killings, the EU foreign affairs spokeswoman Maja Kocijancic reportedly said: «We have asked the Turkish permanent delegate to the EU to come… as we would like to receive an explanation with regard to the comments by President Erdogan concerning the safety of Europeans on the streets of the world».
At best, Erdogan’s chilling warnings against European citizens are grossly insensitive. Apart from the carnage in London, on the very day that he issued his grim forecast of violence, the date was also the first anniversary of the terror attacks in Brussels when more than 30 people were killed by suicide bombers in the Belgian capital on March 22 last year.
Over the past year, there have been several other terror attacks on the streets of European cities, including the carnage in Nice when a would-be jihadist drove an articulated lorry into a pedestrians last July, killing over 80.
There was also an horrific attack in Berlin when an assailant drove a lorry into a crowded Christmas market.
In all these incidents, there appears to be an Islamist connection. The perpetrators may be acting in some sort of «lone wolf» capacity, without the organizational support of the al Qaeda terror network. But that’s beside the point. The attacks appear to be motivated by some level of Islamist grievance. Perhaps acts of revenge against European governments and citizens who are perceived as being complicit in illegal wars on, or persecution of, Muslim majority countries in the Middle East.
This is where Turkish President Erdogan bears more responsibility than merely just «bad timing» or being «insensitive» remarks.
In recent weeks, Erdogan and senior government ministers in Ankara have been engaging in a reckless war of words with the EU, which can be viewed as bordering on incitement.
Erdogan has repeatedly accused Germany and The Netherlands of acting like «Nazis and fascists». He has condemned the whole of the EU as being «racist» and «anti-Islam».
Just last week, Erdogan claimed that Dutch UN peacekeeping troops were responsible for the Srebrenica massacre in 1995, when up to 8,000 Muslim men were killed by Serb forces. Erdogan said the Dutch had the blood of Muslims «on their hands».
Ankara’s fit of rage stems from European governments blocking political rallies being held in their cities by Erdogan’s ruling Justice and Development Party. Those rallies are aimed at mobilizing Turkish expatriates to vote in Turkey’s referendum next month, which is being held to endorse increasing constitutional powers for Erdogan’s presidency.
Erdogan’s grip on power has already become increasingly autocratic since the attempted coup against his rule failed last July.
In order to push Turkish voters to back his sought-after constitutional changes, Erdogan is evidently whipping up patriotic fervor and in particular Islamist fervor by indulging in a war of words with the EU.
Denouncing European states as «anti-Islamic» and «racist» may gain Erdogan votes. But such incitement has consequences. This war of words is not an abstract phenomenon. It risks inflicting real human casualties, as Europe has all-too often witnessed over the past year.
If EU governments had any spine, they would hold Erdogan legally to account over his potentially seditious behavior.
But the supine EU is too busy trying to keep the Turkish sultan sweet so that he doesn’t open the refugee floodgates from the wars that European governments have been stoking across the Middle East and North Africa.
Turkey has been a NATO ally since 1952, and US aircraft have used Incirlik Air Base in the south during the operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. The base is home to a stockpile of US tactical nuclear weapons. A perusal of media reports leads to the conclusion that Turkey and NATO are heading for a major rift or even a breakup – a problem the North Atlantic alliance hasn’t experienced in its nearly seven decades of existence.
Germany and the Netherlands have blocked Turkish ministers from staging rallies to court the vote of expatriate Turks in the April 16 referendum on giving President Erdogan greater powers. Denmark is siding with its north European neighbors. Turkey faces deep differences with the USA, accusing it of being behind the failed plot in 2016. Both countries have opposing views on the role of Kurds in Syria. Former State Secretary John Kerry came close to threatening Turkey with the loss of its NATO membership.
Add to this the perennial tension between Turkey and Greece and the problem of Cyprus to get the whole picture. According to Bloomberg, «All in all, Turkey appears to have more disputes than friendships with its NATO allies. And its engagement with the alliance itself, which it joined in 1952, isn’t particularly strong».
The NATO annual report for 2016 says Turkey only took part in four of the 18 key NATO exercises held last year. Despite having the fourth-strongest military in the bloc (after the US, France and the UK but ahead of Germany) and the second-highest number of military personnel (after the US), its involvement in NATO’s deployments is small, amounting to just 4 percent of the personnel in the mission to train the Afghan security forces, and 7 percent of the Kosovo force.
Ankara has recently blocked some rolling programs with NATO, including political events, civilian projects and military training, in an escalation of a diplomatic dispute with a number of European states.
Turkey is unable to block cooperation with full-fledged NATO members. The move to block the activities is apparently aimed at Austria, which is not a member of NATO but is a partner country. It has banned Turkish referendum rallies on its territory. Austria has called for the EU to end accession talks with Turkey over alleged human rights violations after the aborted coup.
As a result, a very important NATO project to threaten Russia is in jeopardy. This month, Brigadier General Vladimir Chachibaia, new Chief of General Staff of Georgian Armed Forces, proposed to turn the port of Poti into a NATO military base. This, he argued, would help the alliance get around the provisions of Montreux Convention, which limit non-Black Sea powers access to the Black Sea.
Increasing the number of port calls is a way to boost the bloc’s naval presence, but the passage of naval ships not belonging to Black Sea states is restricted by the Convention. Strengthening the naval forces of Georgia and Ukraine and building a bloc’s «coast guard» base in Georgia would boost NATO’s sea power in the region. Poti could become a home port for the ships of Black Sea NATO members. Georgian military expert Irakli Aladashvili told Russian Kommersant daily that the facility would be protected by ground based weapons systems and land forces.
Ukraine’s plans to buy old ships from NATO members could also be suspended.
Turkey’s action encompasses many more areas of NATO’s activities. The programs cover most of Europe, plus many countries in the Middle East and Asia. Kosovo, Georgia, Ukraine and Afghanistan are affected. Austria is one of the biggest providers of troops in Kosovo. «It is a very unfortunate situation and it means some cooperation programs can’t be launched», said NATO’s Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg during a visit to Copenhagen.
Last November, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said Turkey could become part of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). The idea had been discussed with Russian President Vladimir Putin and his Kazakh counterpart Nursultan Nazarbayev.
Established in 1996, the SCO is a political, military and economic organization comprising Russia, China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. Iran, Mongolia, Belarus and Afghanistan are granted observer status. India and Pakistan are set to join this year to make the SCO a powerful group with global influence. Turkey’s accession would be a milestone bringing together the Shanghai Pact and the Cooperation Council of Turkic-Speaking States (CCTS) – an international organization of Turkic countries, comprising Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Turkey. The General Secretariat is in İstanbul, Turkey. Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan are possible future members of the council.
Turkey is developing military cooperation with Russia. This January, Russian and Turkish air forces launched a joint operation against Islamic State (IS) militants holding the town of al-Bab northeast of Aleppo. The parties have agreed to form a joint military and intelligence mechanism to coordinate their activities in the Middle East. If peace efforts to stop hostilities in Syria succeed, Russia and Turley lead the crisis management process. It could be a start on the way to forming a broader alliance against global terrorism.
Russia and Turkey have been getting increasingly close recently, especially after the two countries brokered a Syria truce in late December to join together in the Astana process. Turkey is in talks with Russia on purchasing the advanced long-range S-400 air defense systems to protect its skies. This issue was on the agenda during the President Erdogan’s visit to Moscow on March 9-10, 2017. Ankara also seeks procurement deals in electronic systems, ammunitions and missile technology.
Both nations are parties to the ambitious Turkish Stream natural gas pipeline project. It should be noted that Russia, not the US or any other NATO member, was the first country to be visited by the Turkish president after the failed coup last year.
Ankara is also getting closer to Beijing. The two countries are closely cooperating to implement China’s the One Belt One Road project. Turkey is again taking the position as a key investment and cooperation partner that will help bridge the East and the West.
Turkey is distancing itself from the West while getting closer with the partners outside NATO and the EU. The abovementioned events conform to the trend. NATO stands to lose its second largest military power as well as one of its key airbases, while Russia, China and other countries are developing the relationship of alliance with the country, which enjoys a unique geographic location between Europe, the Middle East and Asia. It gives it easy access to strategically important areas and major energy resources. Turkey is a founding member of the OECD (1961) and the G-20 major economies (1999), it has the world’s 15th largest GDP-PPP and 15th largest Nominal GDP. The development is a major loss for the West and a major win for those who strive for a multipolar world.
UPROOTED PALESTINIANS: SALAM ALQUDS ALAYKUM 