أحمد جبريل… المُقاتل العنيد

مقالة ماهر الطاهر

الجمعة 9 تموز 2021

أحمد جبريل... المُقاتل العنيد
آمن جبريل بعمق بمحمور المقاومة وبقدرته على تعديل موازين القوى في المنطقة (أ ف ب )

في يوم حزين، هو السابع من تموز 2021، رحل عن عالمنا القائد الفلسطيني الكبير، أحمد جبريل، «أبو جهاد»، أحد مؤسّسي الثورة الفلسطينية المعاصرة، و«منظمة التحرير الفلسطينية». وبرحيله، فقدت الحركة الوطنية الفلسطينية والشعب الفلسطيني، كما الأمّة العربية والإسلامية وأحرار العالم، مقاتلاً عنيداً لا يعرف اليأس والخنوع.

وجد جبريل نفسه مع عائلته وأهله لاجئاً في سوريا بعد نكبة عام 1948. ومنذ أواسط خمسينيات القرن الماضي، بدأ يفكّر بتأسيس حركة يكون هدفها تحرير فلسطين. فانخرط، لتلك الغاية، في الكلية العسكرية، ودرس في مصر وتخرّج ضابطاً همُّه أن يعود إلى وطنه ويردّ على الجريمة الكبرى، جريمة اقتلاع الشعب العربي الفلسطيني من أرضه وتشريده في كل أصقاع الأرض. وعلى مدى أكثر من 65 عاماً، ناضل «أبو جهاد» وكافح وخاض كل معارك الثورة الفلسطينية المعاصرة مقاتلاً شجاعاً حتى آخر لحظة من حياته.

تميَّزت تجربة القائد أحمد جبريل، على مدى العقود الستة الماضية، بإيمانه بمجموعةٍ من الثوابت والمبادئ التي لم يحِدْ عنها قيْد أنملة، على رغم كل التحوّلات والعواصف التي مرّت على المنطقة العربية والعالم؛ وأهمّ هذه الثوابت والمبادئ:

أولاً: آمن «أبو جهاد» بعمق، بأن الصراع مع المشروع الصهيوني هو صراع وجود بكل ما للكلمة من معنى؛ فرفض بشكل قاطع نهج التسويات والتنازلات والحلول السياسية التي تؤدّي إلى الاعتراف بالكيان الإسرائيلي. ولذلك، كان أحد مؤسّسي «جبهة الرفْض الفلسطينية» التي تمّ تشكيلها بعد «حرب أكتوبر» عام 1973، عندما تمّ طرْح مسألة التسوية السياسية ومؤتمر جنيف. إذ كان يرى أن الانخراط في التسويات السياسية، هدفه تكريس الوجود الصهيوني والكيان الإسرائيلي على أرض فلسطين، فبقي ثابتاً على مواقفه، على رغم كل ما شهدته الساحة الفلسطينية والعربية من تحولات في المفاهيم والمواقف.

تميَّزت تجربة جبريل بإيمانه بمجموعةٍ من الثوابت والمبادئ التي لم يحِدْ عنها


ثانياً: آمن بأن قضيّة فلسطين هي قضيّة عربية، ورفَض كل محاولات عزلها عن عمقها العربي، لإيمانه بأن تحرير فلسطين مهمّة عربية، وليست مهمّة فلسطينية فحسب، لأن الخطر الصهيوني لا يهدِّد الشعب الفلسطيني وحده، بل الأمّة العربية بأسرها.
كذلك، كان يرى أن للقضيّة الفلسطينية بُعدها الإسلامي، وخاصّة بعد انتصار الثورة الإسلامية في إيران، ووقوف طهران الكامل إلى جانب الشعب الفلسطيني، فضلاً عن تقديمها كلّ أشكال الدعم للثورة الفلسطينية والمقاومة الفلسطينية. كما كان يؤمن بالبُعد التحرّري العالمي للقضيّة الفلسطينية.

ثالثاً: آمن المناضل أحمد جبريل بعمق بمحور المقاومة وبقدرته على تعديل موازين القوى في المنطقة. ولذلك، ربطته علاقات وثيقة بهذا المحور: سوريا، الجمهورية الإسلامية الإيرانية، المقاومة اللبنانية بقيادة «حزب الله»، المقاومة العراقية، والمقاومة في اليمن. وكان يحظى باحترام وتقدير جميع أطراف هذا المحور.

رابعاً: كان الراحل الكبير «أبو جهاد» يؤمن بعمْق بالمقاومة المسلَّحة كخيار استراتيجي في مواجهة الكيان الصهيوني، وأنَّ ما أُخذ بالقوّة لا يستردّ بغير القوّة. وقد جاءت الأحداث والوقائع لتؤكد صحّة ما سبق، بعدما ثبُت فشل خيار ما سُمّي بعملية السلام المزيّفة، والتي كان هدفها الوحيد ضرب المشروع التحرّري للشعب الفلسطيني.

في الوقت الذي نتقدم فيه بأحرّ التعازي إلى شعبنا الفلسطيني وأمّتنا العربية والإسلامية وإلى رفاق الدرب في «الجبهة الشعبية لتحرير فلسطين – القيادة العامة»، وإلى الرفيق المناضل الدكتور طلال ناجي وأعضاء المكتب السياسي واللجنة المركزية، فنحن على ثقة بأن رفاق القائد الكبير أحمد جبريل في «القيادة العامة» سيواصلون درب الكفاح والنضال حتى تحرير كل ذرّة من تراب فلسطين. وفي الختام نتوجّه بأحرّ التعازي إلى عائلة وأبناء القائد «أبو جهاد»، الأخ أبو العمرين، والأخ بدر، وجميع أفراد عائلته.

* عضو المكتب السياسي
لـ«الجبهة الشعبية لتحرير فلسطين
»

PFLP-GC Chief, Ahmad Jibril, Dies in Damascus, Who is Palestinian Leader Ahmad “Abou Jihad” Jibril?

07/07/2021

The Secretary General of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine – General Command, Ahmad Jibril, died on Wednesday in Damascus at 83.

Sources close of the late leader mentioned that he died of sickness at one of hospitals in the Syrian capital.

Jibril founded the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine – General Command in 1968. He carried out several attacks on Zionist targets and administered two deals to swap prisoners with the Zionist entity in 1979 and 1985 according to which around 1200 Palestinians were released from the Israeli jails.

Jibril was one of Syria’s and Iran’s allies and fiercely opposed all the settlement agreements between the PLO ( Palestine Liberation Organization) and the Israeli enemy.

‘Israel’ classified Jibril as one of its arch foes and attempted to kidnap him several times.

SourceAl-Manar English Website

Hezbollah Offers Condolences on Demise of Palestinian Resistance Commander Ahmad Jibril: He Devoted His Life Palestine 

 July 7, 2021

manar-00919240016215451213

Hezbollah offered on Wednesday the striving Palestinian people deep condolences and its jihadi factions as well as the command and members of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine – General Command over the demise of the Movement’s Secretary General, Ahmad Jibril, hoping Holy God grants the senior Palestinian leader His Wide Mercy.

In a statement, Hezbollah mentioned that Jibril’s life was full of resistance, jihad, redemption and sacrifice on the road to Palestine, adding the he sacrificed his son ‘Jihad’ for the sake of the pure Palestinian soil.

Hezbollah indicated that Jibril used to believe in the continuous strife as the only path to liberation and unity among the resistance groups on the various fronts, recalling that he used to move from one righteous battle to another.

The statement mentioned that Jibril was characterized by solid determination,deep spirituality, heroic bravery, and distinct qualities that enabled him to occupy this adequate position in the history of Palestine and the region.

Hezbollah considered that the Palestinian people lost a prominent figure of honor and redemption, adding, “What condoles us is that our Umma (nation) and Palestinian people are following his path to liberation, resistance and victory”.

It is worth mentioning that Jibril had died of sickness on Wednesday in Damascus at 83.

Source: Al-Manar English Website

Who is Palestinian Leader Ahmad “Abou Jihad” Jibril?

Source: Al-Mayadeen

Ahmad Jibril is the founder and secretary general of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine – General Command (PFLP-GC). He believed in armed struggle against “Israel” to liberate Occupied Palestine, and died on Wednesday in Damascus.

Visual search query image
Who is Palestinian Leader Ahmad “Abou Jihad” Jibril?

Ahmad Jibril (Abou Jihad) is a Palestinian leader who founded the PFLP-GC. He was the Secretary General from its inception in 1968 until his death on Wednesday in Damascus.

“Abou Jihad” believed in the armed struggle to liberate Palestine, to which end he founded the PFLP-GC, a leftist nationalist Palestinian group that split from the PFLP, and chose to establish its headquarters in Damascus.  The group executed many operations against the Israeli occupation.

Early Life

Ahmad Jibril was born in 1938 in the village of Yazur in the suburbs of occupied Yafa to a Palestinian father and Syrian mother. They were forced to emigrate to Syria during the Nakba in 1948 and settled in the city of Quneitra with his uncles. After receiving his high school diploma in 1956, Jibril moved to Cairo to receive an “academic-military formation,” graduating from the military academy in 1959.

Politics

During his studies in Egypt, Jibril became acquainted with the General Union of Palestinian Students, at which point he grew to become more acquainted with the idea of armed struggle.

In 1959, Jibril founded the “Palestine Liberation Front,” after the “Algeria Liberation Front,” which had influenced him. He would later merge with several leftist and nationalist movements to found the “Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine” in 1967. The movement was led by George Habash, while Jibril led its military wing. He would later decide to break from Habash’s front to found in 1968 the “Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine – General Command,” which today carries out important operations against the Israeli occupation.

Jibril was also firmly against any negotiations with “Israel” in 1974 and remained close to Syria.

Military Operations

The “Al-Khalisa” operation of 1974 was one of the first guerilla operations executed by the “PFLP-GC.” Three guerilla fighters entered the settlement of “Kiryat Shmona,” north of Palestine, killing and wounding tens of Israelis.

The front was also experienced in kidnapping Israeli soldiers and exchanging them with Palestinians in Israeli prisons, like the “Al-Jalil” operation of 1985 in which 3 Israeli soldiers were exchanged with 1150 prisoners.

In November 1987, two of its fighters used a light paraglider, landing near “Kiryat Shmona,” and killed two Israeli soldiers before being martyred themselves.

The PFLP-GC also carried out a large number of operations against the Israeli occupation during the occupation of the South of Lebanon between 1978-2000.

In 2002, “Israel” assassinated Jibril’s son, Jihad Jibril, the head of the front’s military wing in Tallet al-Khayyat, Beirut, by planting explosives on his vehicle. “Israel” considered Ahmad Jibril one of its worst enemies and had attempted to kidnap and assassinate him on numerous occasions.

Al-Mayadeen had broadcast a documentary entitled “Ahmad Jibril” in Arabic last year. This 12-episode documentary showcases the Palestinian freedom fighter’s memoirs, life, and approach to the Palestinian cause in all stages, beginning from when he laid down the principles for the Palestinian revolution. 

The work is biographical and highlights many important stages in the history of the contemporary Palestinian revolution, and many of the nation’s causes, through the lens of a Palestinian Pan-Arab freedom fighter that refused to settle on the Palestinian cause; a man who was one of the most important and greatest military leaders of the Palestinian cause.

Related Videos

Related news

عمرو علان: “نزار بنات” يعري وظيفية السلطة.. فما هي الآفاق؟

عمرو علان

مِن أين يمكننا البدءُ بشكلٍ صحيحٍ؟ فهل نبدأ مِن توصيف جريمة اغتيال الشهيد نزار بنات على أنها جريمةٌ ضد حرية التعبير؟ أم ننطلق مِن كونها جريمة ضد حرية الرأي؟ أم من كونها جريمة فسادٍ أو تجاوزٍ لحدود الصلاحيات داخل جهازٍ أمنيٍّ في ظل دولةٍ ناجزةٍ؟ أم من كونها جريمة ضد “حقوق الإنسان” بمعناها الفضفاض والقابل للتأويل كيفما اتَّفَق؟

يجزم البعض أن هذه المنطلَقات سالفة الذكر تُغيِّب – بقصد أو بدونه – حقيقة توصيف ما جرى وتسلخه عن سياقاته، فما جرى كان في الواقع جريمةٌ ضد خَيارات نزار بنات في الأصل، وذلك بصفته جزء من نهجٍ يقاوم أو يدعو لمقاومة الاحتلال.

لقد جاءت هذه الجريمة المروِّعة لتثبت مجدداً صواب عموم ما طرحه الشهيد وآخرون في توصيف ما انتهت إليه السلطة الفلسطينية، التي يصح فيها ما صح في سائر التجارب السابقة لسلطات الحكم الذاتي تحت ظل الاحتلال في تجارب شعوبٍ أخرى، والتي لا تؤدي في نهاية المطاف إلا إلى خلق مصالحٍ اقتصاديةٍ لطبقةٍ برجوازيةٍ متسلطة، تملك زمام الأمر في مجتمع شعبها الواقع تحت الاحتلال، وعلى ضوء التجارب التاريخية فإن هذه الطبقة البرجوازية تستمدّ “شرعية” وجودها من الاحتلال ذاته، ويصير بقاؤها مرتبطاً ببقاء الاحتلال ومرهوناً باستمراريته.

وفي الحالة الفلسطينية، فإن الطبيعة الوظيفية للكيان الصهيوني تدعم حتمية قيام هذه العلاقة الجدلية بين الاحتلال وسلطة الحكم الذاتي، فأي “دولةٍ” تقام على جزءٍ من الأرض الفلسطينية المحتلة، لا تضع في حساباتها حقيقة أن وجود الكيان الصهيوني يشكل حاجزا أمام أي تكامل عربي أو إسلامي، وهذا منسجم مع طبيعة هذا الكيان بصفته امتداداً للقوى الاستعمارية الغربية وحامي مصالحها، فلابد من أن ينتهي الحال بتلك “الدولة” كجزءٍ من إستراتيجية إدامة هذا الكيان بغض النظر عمن يتولى زمام الحكم فيها، فكيف بسلطة حكمٍ ذاتيٍ كما هو حال السلطة الفلسطينية أو بالأصح سلطة أوسلو؟

حقيقة الصهيوني رئيس فلسطين محمود عباس

لهذا فلا أمل يرجى من حدوث تحوّلٍ في مسار السلطة الفلسطينية، فالمسألة ليست خطأً في التقدير يمكن معالجته بالحوار، أو مسألة وجود إستراتيجية تحرير لدى السلطة الفلسطينية تختلف عن إستراتيجيات فصائل المقاومة، بل إن مكمن القضية يعود إلى الخيارات التي اتخذتها “م.ت.ف” في مرحلةٍ سابقةٍ وأفضت إلى إنشاء سلطة الحكم الذاتي الفلسطينية، تلك الخيارات التي – بالطبيعة – أوصلت السلطة الفلسطينية إلى ما انتهت إليه كأحد الأدوات التي يستخدمها الاحتلال الصهيوني لإدامة احتلاله، وهذه مسألةٌ بنيويةٌ، ترتبط بالظروف الموضوعية لوجود هذه السلطة واستمرار بقائها.

هذه الرواية لم تَعُد تنظيراً، بل باتت واقعاً ملموساً، وإلا فما هو مسوغ عدّ السلطة الفلسطينية “التنسيق الأمني” مقدساً رغم وصول “عملية السلام” إلى طريقٍ مسدودٍ بإقرار الجميع؟ هذا إذا ما تجاهلنا كون “التنسيق الأمني” هو تعريف العمالة بحد ذاتها، ونتمنى لو يشرح أحدٌ لنا الفرق بين جيش لحد اللبناني ومعتقل الخيام وبين السلطة الفلسطينية ومعتقلاتها.

وعليه فإن البعض يرى وجوب وضع جريمة اغتيال نزار بنات في هذا السياق، حالها في ذلك حال الجرائم التي سبقتها ضد مقاومين آخرين، تلك الجرائم التي لعبت فيها السلطة الفلسطينية دوراً رئيسًا بالتعاون مع قوات الاحتلال، إما ليصفِّيهم جسديًا أو ليتم اعتقالهم، فمثلًا ألم يكن الشهيد باسل الأعرج مطلوباً من قبل أجهزة أمن السلطة الفلسطينية؟

تعيد جريمة اغتيال نزار بنات طرح القضية الجدلية في الشارع الفلسطيني عما إذا كان قد حان الوقت للفصائل الفلسطينية الإسلامية والوطنية – وفي طليعتهم حركة “فتح” وباقي فصائل “م.ت.ف” – أن تسمي الأشياء بمسمياتها، وترفع الغطاء الوطني عن سلطة التنسيق الأمني الذي تمنحه إياه، أم أن حالة التكاذب الوطني ستستمر لفترةٍ أطول؟

لعلنا نستطيع أن نستشف الجواب من أحد فيديوهات نزار بنات التي دفع حياته ثمناً لها، والتي قال فيها إن وصف الخلاف بين حركة “فتح” وحركة “حماس” بصفتها حركة مقاومةٍ بالانقسام يجانب الصواب، ولعل الأصح وصفه بالفرز بين مشروعين لا يمكن الجمع بينهما، هذا في النظرة للمشروع الوطني، أما بالنسبة للخلاف على الحكم فهي مسألةٌ أخرى.

وفي الختام، يظل التعويل في الطليعة على أن يُغلِّب أبناء حركة “فتح” المصلحة الوطنية على الخلافات الأخرى المرتبطة بالحكم، ويجروا عملية مراجعة حقيقية للخيارات السياسية السابقة التي ثبت عقمها، ويقوموا بعملية تَقييم موضوعيٍ ومنصفٍ لتجربة سلطة الحكم الذاتي، وأي وضع انتهت إليه، وهي بهذا لم تشذ عن تجارب شعوبٍ أخرى مع سلطات الحكم الذاتي تحت سياط الاحتلال، ويبقى الرهان والأمل الكبيران معقودين على وطنية أبناء حركة “فتح” لتفادي الأسوأ.

لقد آن الأوان لأصلاء حركة “فتح” طيّ صفحة الماضي، ونزع الشرعية عن عملاء “التنسيق الأمني” وسلطتهم، الذين استنزفوا كل رصيد حركة “فتح” النضالي أو كادوا، وليتذكر الفلسطيني أنه مازال يعيش مرحلة التحرير، وفعلياً لا دولة لديه أو كيان ليحكمه، فلينجز الفلسطينيون التحرير أولاً وبعدها ليخوضوا في خلافات الحكم وطبيعته وشكله كما يحلوا لهم.

كاتب وباحث سياسي

Palestine: Hamas defeats Israel

THE SAKER • MAY 25, 2021

Just like in 2006, when both Ehud Olmert and George Bush declared that the “invincible IDF” had, yet again, achieved a “glorious victory” and the entire Middle-East almost died laughing hearing this ridiculous claim, today both the US and Israeli propaganda machine have declared another “glorious” victory for the “Jewish state of Israel” cum “sole democracy in the Middle-East”. And, just like in 2006, everybody in the region (and in Zone B) knows that the truth is that the Zionist entity suffered a huge, humiliated, defeat. Let’s try to unpack this.

First, a few numbers. The combat operations lasted two weeks. All other missile numbers are in dispute. Rather than trust this or that source, I will simply say that Hamas fired many thousands of missiles into Israel. Some, probably less than 50%, were truly intercepted by the Israeli air defenses, others hit in no man’s land, and some actually landed and caused plenty of destruction and at least 12 deaths. The Israelis executed hundreds of artillery and airstrikes causing massive destruction in the Gaza strip and killing about 250 Palestinians. Again, these numbers are guesstimates and they don’t really tell the full story. To understand the story, we need to forget about these numbers and look at what each side was hoping for and what each side achieved. Let’s begin with the Israelis:

The Israeli scorecard

To understand Israel’s goals in this war, we first need to place this latest war in its context, and that context is that Israel was comprehensively defeated in Syria. To substantiate this thesis, let’s remember the goals of the Zionists when they unleashed a major international war against Syria. These objectives, as listed in my July 2019 article “Debunking the Rumors About Russia Caving in to Israel” were:

The initial AngloZionist plan was to overthrow Assad and replace him with the Takfiri crazies (Daesh, al-Qaeda, al-Nusra, ISIS – call them whatever you want). Doing this would achieve the following goals:

  1. Bring down a strong secular Arab state along with its political structure, armed forces, and security services.
  2. Create total chaos and horror in Syria justifying the creation of a “security zone” by Israel not only in the Golan but further north.
  3. Trigger a civil war in Lebanon by unleashing the Takfiri crazies against Hezbollah.
  4. Let the Takfiris and Hezbollah bleed each other to death, then create a “security zone,” but this time in Lebanon.
  5. Prevent the creation of a Shia axis Iran-Iraq-Syria-Lebanon.
  6. Break up Syria along ethnic and religious lines.
  7. Create a Kurdistan which could then be used against Turkey, Syria, Iraq, and Iran.
  8. Make it possible for Israel to become the uncontested power broker in the Middle-East and force the KSA, Qatar, Oman, Kuwait, and all others to have to go to Israel for any gas or oil pipeline project.
  9. Gradually isolate, threaten, subvert, and eventually attack Iran with a broad regional coalition of forces.
  10. Eliminate all centers of Shia power in the Middle-East.

As we all know, this is what actually happened:

  1. The Syrian state has survived, and its armed and security forces are now far more capable than they were before the war started (remember how they almost lost the war initially? The Syrians bounced back while learning some very hard lessons. By all reports, they improved tremendously, while at critical moments Iran and Hezbollah were literally “plugging holes” in the Syrian frontlines and “extinguishing fires” on local flashpoints. Now the Syrians are doing a very good job of liberating large chunks of their country, including every single city in Syria).
  2. Not only is Syria stronger, but the Iranians and Hezbollah are all over the country now, which is driving the Israelis into a state of panic and rage.
  3. Lebanon is rock solid; even the latest Saudi attempt to kidnap Hariri is backfiring. (2021 update: in spite of the explosion in Beirut, Hezbollah is still in charge)
  4. Syria will remain unitary, and Kurdistan is not happening. Millions of displaced refugees are returning home.
  5. Israel and the US look like total idiots and, even worse, as losers with no credibility left.

Seeing their defeat in Syria, the Zionists did what they always do: they used their propaganda machine to list an apparently neverending victorious strikes on supposed “Iranian targets” in Syria. While a few civilian simpletons with zero military experience did buy into this nonsense, the truth about Israeli operations in Syria is simple: the Syrian air defenses have successfully prevented the Israelis from striking at important, sensitive, targets, and they Israelis have been forced to declare as major victories the destruction of empty barns as “destruction of important IRGC headquarters” thereby “proving” to a few naive folks in Zone A and to themselves (!) that the IDF is still as “invincible” as it “always was”. As for the Neocons, they doubled-up on that and declared that 1) Russian air defenses are useless 2) that Russia and Israel work hand in hand and 3) that the Israelis are still invincible. Yet if any of that was true, why has Israel failed to achieve a single one of its goals? And why are both the Russians and the Iranians still in Syria were the Russians just finished a 2nd runway at Khmeimim and they have just deployed a group of Tu-22M3 at that air base from where they can now threaten any ship sailing in the Mediterranean, the Red Sea, the Persian Gulf, the Arabian Sea and the Indian Ocean. In their otherwise “free time” they can deliver tons of bombs and missiles to the remaining Takfiri forces in Syria.

As I have been saying for many years now, the truth is that the IDF is a poor fighting force. Why? First, they have the exact same problem as the USA (and the KSA, for that matter): they rely on expensive technology, but don’t have good combat-capable “boots on the ground”. That is now how modern wars are won (see here for a list of popular misconceptions about modern wars).

In its recent history, the entire gamut of Israeli “elite” forces (including the air force, the navy, the artillery and even the Golani Brigade) got its collective butt handed to them by about 1000 and only lightly armed regular Hezbollah fighters in 2006: keep in mind that the elite Hezbollah forces were deployed only north of the Litani river to protect Beirut against a possible land invasion by Israel. Instead of taking Beirut or “disarming Hezbollah” (that was an official goal!), the Israelis could not even control the small town of Bint Jbeil located right across the official Israeli border! So much for being “invincible”!

What the IDF is very experienced at is terrorising Palestinian civilians and executing what could be called a slow-motion genocide of the Palestinian people. The problem with Gaza now is the same that the failed invasion of Lebanon in 2006 has revealed: just like the Lebanese in 2006, the Palestinians of 2021 are not afraid of the Zionists anymore. Furthermore, with a great deal of help from Iran and others, Hamas in Gaza is now much, much better armed than in the past. True, some of its missiles are decidedly low tech and not very effective (low accuracy, small warheads, simple trajectory, limited range), but Hamas also has shown some pretty decent UAVs too. Most importantly, from now on for Hamas it is only one way: up the “quality ladder” (just like the Houthis did in Yemen, starting with modest drones but eventually getting very capable ones).

The other major goal of the Israelis in this war was to prove to the world (and, even more importantly for the always narcissistic self-worshipping Israeli cowards, to themselves!) that their “Iron Dome” air defense network was the “super-dooper most bestest” in the world (no doubt, due to the famed “Jewish genius”!). It now appears that at best, the Israelis intercepted somewhere around 30-40% of the Hamas missiles. The way the Israeli hid this is by claiming that their fancy shmancy Iron Drone did not even try to engage missiles which were not deemed dangerous. But in the age of the ubiquitous smartphone, that kind of silly nonsense can easily be debunked (including by showing the total chaos in the Israeli skies or, for that matter, the missile strikes on Israeli military objectives). While the full Iron Dome air defense system probably works marginally better than the quasi-useless US Patriot, the Israeli air defenses are clearly at least a generation behind the Russian ones, including the S-300s the Russians sold to Syria (again, in the age of of the ubiquitous smartphone, this is not hard to prove).

It is crucial to remember that Hamas’ missiles are much inferior to those of the Houthis and the Syrians, and even more inferior when compared to Hezbollah or Iranian drones and missiles! In other words, the “invincible” IDF can’t deal with even its weakest, least sophisticated enemies (Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad) and the grotesquely expensive Iron Done cannot protect the Zionists from any determined missile attacks by the Resistance coalition (Palestine, Yemen, Syria, Hezbollah, Iran and Russia).

In their utter despair, the Zionist entity did what the AngloZionists always do when they fail to defeat a military forces: they will turn their wrath on the civilian infrastructure and murder as many as they can. They will also strike highly symbolic targets such as the International Press Center in Gaza or a Red Crescent hospital (under the pretext that Hamas, which is the democratically elected local government) has offices there (this is clearly a F-you to those who condemn Israel for violating international law). To a normal human being, this sounds both obscene and ridiculous. But remember, the Israelis are first and foremost narcissists and they have no means of imagining how normal human beings think or feel. All these guys can feel is self-worship and hatred for all “others”.

We could say that in this war, the Palestinians defeated both military high tech and truly medieval type of genocidal hatred.

In other words, far from showing how “invincible” the Zionist entity is, this latest war against the Palestinians has shown beyond reasonable doubt that the IDF cannot deal with any of its enemies.

Besides missiles and bombs, the Israelis love to use terror, as their ideology has convinced them of two things: the Arabs only understand force and we, the Israelis, are invincible. But this begs the question of why the Israelis did not dare to move into Gaza, not even symbolically. Yeah, I know, the official doxa of Zone A is that “Biden called Netanyahu and told him to stop”. As if “Biden” could give orders to the Israelis!

The truth is that even with a casualty rate of 10:1 in the IDF’s advantage and no armor or artillery, the Palestinians are much more willing to engage in street battles than the IDF. Would the IDF eventually win a ground battle against Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad? Maybe, probably, the objective advantages in everything (except courage!) for the Israelis is so huge that no amount of skills and courage can forever negate the immense superiority in means of the Israelis.

However, as most people in the West tend to forget, wars are but means towards a political goal. If the IDF decided to basically flatten Gaza and kill many thousands of Palestinians at the cost of casualties probably in the hundereds, then this would be politically suicidal for the Zionist regime. This is why I offer this very basic conclusion:

During the latest Gaza war, deterrence did work. But only in the sense that the Palestinians successfully deterred the Israelis from launching a ground attack against Gaza.

There is another crucial political development which should also be noted: while both Iran and Hezbollah did give their full political support to Hamas+Palestinian Islamic Jihad, the latter did not request any assistance. In other words, not only did the Palestinians defeat the Israelis, but they did so absolutely alone, with no help from the other Resistance members.

Again, those Zone A civilians who believe that Israel is scoring huge victories in Syria on a quasi daily basis won’t get it, which is par for the course. But you can be darn sure that at least most of the IDF top commanders know the true score and for them it is yet another huge disaster.

There is also a political factor to consider. While there have been coordination resistance actions by the Palestinians in Israel (proper, as defined by the UN), this is the first time when the Palestinians from Gaza, those from the Occupied Territories and those in “Israel” truly fought, if not side by side (yet!), then at least at the same time and in a common cause. This is a major political victory for Hamas+Palestinian Islamic Jihad and a major problem for Fatah and the Zionists. Now let’s look at the rest of the Palestinian scorecard:

The Palestinian scorecard:

Let’s start by the obvious one: the Palestinians were not defeated. This victory can be further subdivided in the following:

  • The Palestinian leadership has mostly physically survived, it still exists as a local authority. Plenty of Palestinians were murdered, but that did not affect the operational capabilities of the Palestinian forces (any more than the IDF succeeded in affecting Iranian operational capabilities in Syria).
  • The Palestinian leadership has also survived politically. It was not blamed by the “Palestinian street” for starting the war, nor was it blamed for how it executed it. As for Fatah, it is now, by all accounts, lost somewhere in a political no man’s land which, admittedly, it richly deserves for its incompetence, corruption and subservience to Israel and the USA.
  • Militarily speaking, the Palestinian missile strikes were not nearly as effective than, say, Hezbollah (nevermind Iranian!) strikes would have been, but, hey, they made huge progress and we can all rest assured that the Palestinians of Gaza will, sooner or later, catch up with the Houthis and, further down the road, maybe even Hezbollah.
  • By many accounts, Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad have made major political inroads into the Palestinian political scene outside Gaza. Even in spite of a truly immense hasbara effort by the Israelis, the international public opinion was blaming Israel for the orgy of violence.

It is interesting to note here that the famous Israeli journalist Gideon Levy has written an article for Ha’aretz entitled “Israeli Propaganda Isn’t Fooling Anyone – Except Israelis” which was further subtitled “’Hasbara’ is the Israeli euphemism for propaganda, and there are some things, said the late ambassador Yohanan Meroz, that are not ‘hasbarable.’ One of them is Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians.” This is how Levy’s article began:

And propaganda shall cover for everything. We’ll say terrorism, we’ll shout anti-Semitism, we’ll scream delegitimation, we’ll cite the Holocaust; we’ll say Jewish state, gay-friendly, drip irrigation, cherry tomatoes, aid to Nepal, Nobel Prizes for Jews, look what’s happening in Syria, the only democracy, the greatest army. We’ll say the Palestinians are making unilateral moves, we’ll propose negotiations on the “settlement bloc borders,” we’ll demand recognition of a Jewish state and we’ll complain that “there’s no one to talk to.” We’ll wail that the whole world is against us and wants to destroy us, no less.

Now comes the best part: Levy wrote this on Jun. 4, 2015 and updated it on Apr. 10, 2018 – years before the current disaster! Since then, things have only gone south for the IDF and the Israelis in general. Just the blowback from the war in Syria is, for the IDF, a true disaster.

Of course, “Israel” is still worshipped and faithfully served by many ruling classes worldwide (that is one of the functions of the Empire, to enforce this), but that officially lauded Israel is viewed with disgust and revulsion on most of the planet. Hence the inevitable failure of the truly galactic PR effort to brainwash the regular people into believing that Israeli is a polyyanish country, a “place without people for a people without country”, etc. etc. etc. This “Ziolatry”, if you wish, was effective when the PLO was blowing up Jewish grade schools in Western Europe, but today it has lost almost all of its traction, especially amongst thinking people.

The sad and disgusting reality about the Zionist entity is truly coming out, seeping under the propaganda walls of the Empire, and slowly but inevitably resulting in a common reaction of outrage and utter disgust for what is nothing else but the last officially racist country on the planet, the only country with an open air concentration camp it surrounds on all sides, the only country which truly, openly and sincerely does not give a damn about international law or about the lives of non-Jews (while calling their own lives sacred, of course!). This is a state which constantly repeats the mantra about the supposedly “sacred” blood of Jews while, at the same time, committing a slow motion (but very real) genocide of the Palestinian people while using non-stop terrorist attacks against any country daring to defy the order of the latest, and hopefully last, wannabe “superior race” in human history. This is also why the “crime of crimes” for politically correct and successfully brainwashed people is to declare that Israel has no right to exist. This is such a major crimethink that I want to conclude by committing it right now and asking others to join me in this “crimethink”!

Israel has no right to exist whatsoever first and foremost because it is an artificial creation of West European imperialist powers. Second, it is a country which has always engaged in atrocities and massive violations of international laws and norms. Instead, Israel is based on a racist ideology which is, for all practical purpose, indistinguishable from Hitler’s Nazi ideology (both National Socialism and Zionism have the same roots in both time, space and culture, both being products of European secularism and nationalism). For these reasons, Israel, and the Zionist ideology which supports it, are both a clear and present danger for international peace and stability (for details on Zionism as an ideology and its toxicity, please see here). Furthermore, the only possibly way for the Palestinian people to ever recover their land and their rights under international law is for the Zionist “regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time” (to quote the often mistranslated sentence by Ayatollah Komenei). By the way, this awareness also presupposes a clear understanding that the so-called “Two State Solution” (2SS) is an impossibility. Yes, I know, the 2SS is currently the only one under international law, but that is hardly surprising since the state of Israel was created with not only many of the trappings of “being an internationally recognized state” but also with the shameful complicity of the country which won WWII. There is one thing which Israel has in common with the so-called “Republic of Kosovo”: they will be the very first to be liberated as soon as the AngloZionist Empire finally crashes visibly (of course, it has already crashed, hence the many disastrous outcomes for the USA and Israel on the international scene, but that is still denied officially in Zone A and,of course, by the AngloZionist propaganda and those who pay attention to it.

In truth, there is only one true “solution” to this war: the so-called “One State Solution”, meaning that those who live in this land will get to choose their leaders and lifestyles according to the old “one person, one vote” principle. All other “solutions” simply perpetuate the current genocide!

As for those Jews who still want an ethnically pure state of Israel, they can either grow up and get real, or they can choose to colonize some other planet. As long as they don’t persecute local lifeforms, that might work. But if they do this will all happen again, over and over.

Conclusion: “Gaza” and the future of the Zionist entity

I want to end here with what I believe is a glance at the future (or lack thereof!) of Israel. The website Islamic World News Analysis Group (which I highly recommend!) recently posted what it claims to be a video of a new Iranian combat drone named “Gaza” described as so: “The Gaza drone, capable of carrying 13 bombs and 500 kilograms of equipment, as well as 35 hours of flight up to a radius of 2,000 kilometers, is capable of carrying out a variety of combat and intelligence operations. According to the published images, it seems that the Gaza drone uses the Rotary Bomb Launcher mechanism under its fuselage, which can carry up to 5 bombs. This is the first Iranian drone to use this mechanism. 8 bombs are also installed under the wings and in total this drone is capable of carrying 13 bombs”. Here is the footage of this new drone. Take a look for yourself and imagine what the next round of this campaign to liberate Palestine might look like.

Palestinian Activist Nizar Banat Assassinated After Raid on His Home by PA Officers

24/06/2021

Palestinian Activist Nizar Banat Assassinated After Raid on His Home by PA Officers

By Staff, Agencies

Nizar Banat, a leading Palestinian activist and critic of the Palestinian Authority [PA], has died after a raid by PA security forces on his home in Dura in the al-Khalil area early on Thursday.

In a statement, the Governor of al-Khalil Jibreen al-Bakri claimed “during the arrest his health deteriorated,” however Banat’s family said he had been subjected to a beating while being detained.

The arrest took place as the PA stepped up its security crackdown on political opponents and social media users in the occupied West Bank.

Banat was well known for his criticism of the PA leadership and had been arrested several times in the past by Palestinian Authority security forces.

The Middle East Eye cited Muhannad Karajah, from Lawyers for Justice, as saying that Banat had phoned him on Wednesday and told him that he was being subjected to threats by the PA’s intelligence service, who had demanded that he stop his criticism of the authority.

Banat has for months been posting videos on Facebook on which he lambasted PA President Mahmoud Abbas and other senior PA and Fatah officials.

Ammar, a cousin of Banat and a spokesman for the family, told MEE that about 25 officers and a member of the Preventive Security and General Intelligence, stormed the house around 3.30am in the morning after detonating its doors.

He said the officers stormed the room in which Nizar was sleeping and immediately began to attack him by spraying him with gas in his mouth and nose.

The cousin said they beat Banat severely with iron and wooden batons.

He added that Nizar had been in a fainting state, so they dragged him, stripped him of his clothes, and transported him away in military vehicles.

The death has been met with anger on the streets and criticism from human rights organizations and Palestinian factions who have called for an independent investigation.

In a statement, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine [PFLP] held the PA responsible for Banat’s death.

“The arrest and then the assassination of Nizar again raises questions on the nature of the role and function of the PA and its security services, and its violation of the democratic rights of citizens through the policy of silence, prosecution, arrest and murder,” said the PFLP

Additionally, Sami Abu Zuhri, a member of Hamas’ political bureau, said: “We consider that [PA] Prime Minister Mohammad Shtayyeh bears the primary responsibility for the murder of activist and parliamentary candidate Nizar Banat, and we call for the killers to be prosecuted.”

Related Articles

عن الانقسام الفلسطيني في زمن «سيف القدس»

الأخبار

عمرو علان

الخميس 10 حزيران 2021

صنَّفت غالبية قادة المقاومة الفلسطينية معركة سيف القدس على أنها تطور إستراتيجي في مسار الصراع مع العدو الصهيوني، وقد أكّد على هذه القراءة قادة أركان محور المقاومة عندما وصفوها بالتحوّل النوعي، ولعل وصف السيد حسن نصرالله لنتائج المعركة كان الأبلغ، حينما قال إن نتائج معركة سيف القدس تفوق ما تحقّق في حرب تموز 2006، مع العلم أن حرب تموز تُعد نصراً إستراتيجياً موصوفاً، وأحد أهم التحولات في تاريخ الصراع مع الكيان الصهيوني.

إذا ما سلّمنا بهذا التوصيف ـــ وهو بلا شك توصيف دقيق لواقع الأمر ـــ يصير لزاماً على فصائل المقاومة الفلسطينية مواكبة الحدث عبر وضع إستراتيجية جديدة للمرحلة القادمة، تبني على المكتسبات التي تحقّقت وعلى ميزان القوى بين فصائل المقاومة الفلسطينية وبين الكيان الصهيوني الذي رسّخته المواجهة الأخيرة، لأنه دون ذلك يمكن للعدو تفريغ الإنجاز من محتواه، وتقزيمه ليصبح نصراً تكتيكياً عوضاً عن كونه تحولاً نوعياً في مسار المواجهة المستمرة، ولعل إحدى المقاربات في هذا الخصوص كانت الدعوة التي أطلقها السيد حسن نصرالله إلى ترسيخ معادلةٍ جديدةٍ تجعل المساس بالمسجد الأقصى والقدس في مقابل حربٍ إقليميةٍ شاملةٍ، حرب متعددة الجبهات تضع استمرارية بقاء الكيان الصهيوني على المحكّ، هذه المعادلة التي أكد زعيم حركة أنصار الله عبد الملك الحوثي على أن اليمن سيكون جزءاً منها، مدشِّنين بهذا صفحةً جديدةً في مسار الصراع العربي-الإسلامي الصهيوني.

يطرح هذا المنظور لنتائج معركة سيف القدس عدة محاورَ جديرةٍ بالنقاش، لكن سيكتفي هذا المقال بالتعريج فقط على قضية الانقسام الفلسطيني وبناءِ الوحدة الوطنية الفلسطينية.

أبرزت معركة سيف القدس حالةً وحدويةً بين كلّ الفصائل الفلسطينية قاطبةً، تَمثلت في «غرفة العمليات المشتركة» في قطاع غزة، فبدايةً كان قرار الذهاب إلى الصدام العسكري مع المحتل رداً على تجاوزاته في القدس والمسجد الأقصى قراراً مشتركاً بين كلّ فصائل «غرفة العمليات المشتركة»، وكان التنسيق العسكري أثناء المعركة في أعلى درجاته بين كل أجنحة الفصائل العسكرية، سواءً أكان في توقيت الضربات الصاروخية أم في طبيعتها، وظهر التناغم الواضح بين فصائل «غرفة العمليات المشتركة» في التنسيق على المستوى السياسي أيضاً، وهكذا تحقّقت الوحدة بين الفصائل على أساس هدفٍ وطنيٍّ واضحٍ وبناءً على خطةٍ مشتركةٍ، ما عكس وحدةً وطنيةً في سائر قطاعات الشعب الفلسطيني في كامل أراضي الوطن السليب من النهر إلى البحر، وامتد ليشمل كذلك فلسطينيي الشتات حيثما وجدوا.

ومن المهم الإشارة إلى كون «غرفة العمليات المشتركة» قد جمعت بين كلٍّ من حركتي حماس والجهاد الإسلامي وبين فصائل (م. ت. ف.) بمن فيهم كتائب شهداء الأقصى التابعة لحركة «فتح» في إطار موحد، وكذلك الإشارة إلى كون هذه الغرفة لم تأتِ وليدة الصدفة، بل كانت تتويجاً لمسارٍ طويلٍ امتد لسنواتٍ أقلها منذ الحرب على قطاع غزة في عام 2014.
ويرى العديد في صيغة الوحدة هذه «ديناميكية» صالحةً يمكن البناء عليها لإنهاء الانقسام الحاصل في الساحة الفلسطينية منذ قرابة خمس عشرة سنةً، فهي بُنيت على أساس مشروعٍ موحدٍ ومن أجل أهدافٍ واضحةٍ، على عكس المسارات التي كانت مقترحةً سابقاً والتي كانت تتجاهل حقيقة كون الانقسام الفلسطيني منشؤه الاختلاف في الرؤى تجاه المشروع الوطني، والتي كانت تقفز عن هذه القضية الجوهرية لتغوص في قضايا شكليةٍ من أجل تكريس تحاصصٍ في سلطةٍ منتهية الصلاحية أصلاً، وذلك عبر تنظيم انتخاباتٍ أقل ما يقال فيها بأنها تندرج تحت سقف أوسلو، ناهيكم بعبثية فكرة تنظيم انتخابات مجلسٍ تشريعيٍّ في ظل احتلالٍ يتحكّم بكل تفاصيل الحياة في الضفة والقدس، فحقيقة الأمر أن الفلسطيني ما زال يعيش تحت سطوة احتلالٍ فعليٍّ، وكل حديثٍ عن دولةٍ فلسطينيةٍ ما هو إلى «فانتازيا» ومحض وهمٍ.

وأما الحديث المستجد عن إنهاء الانقسام من خلال الذهاب إلى حكومة وحدةٍ وطنيةٍ، يقبلها المجتمع الدولي وتلتزم بشروط «الرباعية الدولية»، فهذه محاولاتٌ بائسةٌ من قبل سلطة محمود عباس والولايات المتحدة الأميركية لتفريغ نتائج معركة سيف القدس من مضمونها، وذلك عبر جرّ الفلسطينيين إلى المربع الذي كانوا فيه قبل 21 أيار مايو 2021، وإدخاله مجدداً في دوامة أوسلو والمفاوضات العبثية التي باتت مجرد غطاءٍ للاحتلال كي يستمر في مشاريع الاستيطان وضم ما تبقّى من أراضي الضفة الغربية.

لقد تمكنت الوحدة التي تشكّلت في الميدان في ما بين الفصائل من تجاوز بعض أخطاء (م. ت. ف.) السابقة، التي كان أفظعها التنازل عن قرابة 80 في المئة من فلسطين للمحتل، لذلك ينبغي على الفصائل الفلسطينية البناء على قواعد وحدة غرفة العمليات المشتركة في أي مسعى مستقبلي لإصلاح (م.ت.ف)، فالهدف المنشود فلسطينياً يتمثل في إصلاح (م. ت. ف.)، لا إفساد حركتي حماس والجهاد الإسلامي وإلزامهما بسقوف (م. ت. ف.) وتنازلاتها التي لم تؤدِّ إلا إلى ترسيخ نكبة عام 1948، وتهديد حقوق اللاجئين في العودة، وجعل مستقبل بقاء الفلسطينيين داخل الخط الأخضر في مهب الريح بعد إقرار الكيان الصهيوني لقوانين يهودية دولته المزعومة.

لقد أثبتت نتائج معركة سيف القدس مجدداً تحول موازين القوى لغير مصلحة الكيان الصهيوني، وكانت حجةً أخرى على من لا يزال يصر على رؤية اليوم بعيون الأمس، ويصرّ على تجاهل التحولات في واقع المقاومة الفلسطينية، وفي واقع حركات المقاومة في عموم الإقليم، بالإضافة إلى حالة السيولة التي يعيشها الوضع العالمي وتراجع السطوة الأميركية على المسرح الدولي، ذلك الذي لا يزال ينظر إلى الكيان الصهيوني على أنه تلك القوة الصاعدة التي تستطيع هزيمة العرب في ستة أيام كما كان حاله في حقبة خلت، لا كما هو في عام 2021؛ كيانٌ هشّ، وفي حالة تراجعٍ، باتت حتى بعض الأصوات الوازنة في الولايات المتحدة الأميركية ترى فيه «عبئاً استراتيجياً» لا قيمةً مضافةً كما كان حاله سابقاً.

يمكن الخلوص بعد هذا العرض، إذاً، إلى أن «غرفة العمليات المشتركة» قد أعطت مثالاً حياً على كيفية الوصول إلى وحدةٍ وطنيةٍ مبنيةٍ على هدفٍ وطنيٍّ واضحٍ، يأخذ في الاعتبار ميزان القوى الحاكم حالياً لا ميزان القوى الذي كان سارياً في الماضي، وهذان المعطيان ـــ «غرفة العمليات المشتركة» وميزان القوى الراهن ـــ صالحان ليكونا نواةً للوصول إلى وحدةٍ وطنيةٍ حقيقيةٍ، ومبنيةٍ على مشروعٍ وطنيٍّ فلسطينيٍّ واضحٍ، وعلى استراتيجيةٍ فلسطينيةٍ جديدةٍ تحاكي تغيرات الواقع يكون عمادها التحرير.
* كاتب وباحث سياسي

مقالات ذات صلة

هكذا تكلَّم السنوار

سعادة مصطفى أرشيد _

ألقى قائد حماس في غزة خطاباً يوم السبت الماضي، جاء اقرب إلى حديث مطول مع مجموعة مختارة من الأكاديميين، ومثل فرصة مهمة لمعرفة الشخص الذي قاد الحرب الأخيرة، وأصبح الاسم الأبرز فلسطينياً، معرفة مباشرة لشخصه وأسلوبه وفكره وسياسات حركة حماس خصوصاً، والمقاومة عموماً. فالحديث هو وثيقة سياسية بامتياز، يمكن اعتمادها لزمن آتٍ.

قدّم السنوار تحليلاً متماسكاً لظروف ما قبل الحرب وشرح كيف تدحرجت الأحداث لتصل إلى المواجهة، إذ اعتبر أنّ تراجع السلطة عن التفاهمات الوطنية التي جرت بين حركتي حماس وفتح ثم مع باقي الفصائل، وقدمت بها حركة حماس التنازل تلو التنازل، في سبيل الوصول إلى هذه التفاهمات والشروع ببناء نظام فلسطيني جديد وإنهاء الانقسام، فتراجعت عن إصرارها على تزامن الانتخابات التشريعية مع الرئاسية وانتخابات المجلس الوطني، لتقبل بكامل وجهه نظر السلطة بأن تجري انتخابات المجلس التشريعي أولاً وقبلت بتغيير قانون الانتخابات ليصبح قانون النسبية الكاملة والقوائم، إلا أنّ السلطة في رام الله، ما لبثت أن تراجعت، والسلطة لم تغادر موقعها الذي لا يرى أية بدائل للتفاوض، ولا يرى أنّ العملية الديمقراطية هي أساس الحكم ومصدر شرعيته، وإنما الحكم يقوم ويستمر بالإيفاء بالالتزامات التي قررها اتفاق أوسلو وما تلاه من ملاحق أمنية، يرى السنوار أنّ الوصول إلى هذه الحالة من الخلاف الفلسطيني – الفلسطيني، قد صنع شعوراً زائفاً لدى الاحتلال، بأنه يستطيع والحالة كذلك تمرير مخططاته بالقدس، فكانت أحداث باب العمود وتلتها أحداث حي الشيخ جراح والمسجد الأقصى، تحرك الشعب الفلسطيني بكلّ أطيافه وتشظياته على قلب رجل واحد، وهنا اضطرت المقاومة للتدخل، واضعة القدس تحت جناحها وحمايتها، بعد أن خذل المدينة الجميع بمن فيهم عمان ورام الله.

اتسم حديث السنوار بالشعبويّة والتعبويّة والدعم النفسي، وأدى ولا ريب إلى إكمال دور الصواريخ في إنعاش الحالة المعنوية لعموم أهل فلسطين، بعد مرحلة من الإحباط وانعدام اليقين وانحدار الثقة بالنفس، وأكد في السياق على المكانة التي منحتها الحرب والمقاومة لمن يقاتل ويقاوم، وعلى امتلاك قراري الحرب والسلم، ثم تحدّث في تفاصيل المعركة ومقدار القوة التي استعملتها المقاومة ومقدار القوة التي لا زالت تملكها، فيما الضعف والوهن لم يتسلل إلى النفس المقاومة والى المواطن الغزيّ، في حين انكشفت أكذوبة المشروع المعادي الذي لا تستطيع التكنولوجيا والقوة المجردة التمويه على مقدار ضعفه وهشاشته، فهو ليس إلا بيت عنكبوت. الحصار سوف يُرفَع – أو أنّ ظروف الحصار ستكون أقلّ صرامة – وأنّ ازدهاراً سيلمسه أهل غزة بالقريب، فيما إعادة إعمار ما دمّرته الحرب سيكون سريعاً، بإشراف المقاومة التي لا تحتاج لمدّ اليد لأموال الإعمار، فلديها كثير وسيأتيها كثير من أصدقائها وشركائها في محور المقاومة والممانعة الذي أكد الانتماء له، وإعادة الإعمار لن يكون لرام الله دور فيها، وهو الأمر الذي يؤيده بقوة عموم أهل غزة، بمن فيهم اتحاد المقاولين، ومعهم من اكتوى بنار الخلاف بين غزة ورام الله التي دفّعتهم ثمن خلاف ليسوا مسؤولين عنه.

عبر الطريقة الشعبوية، تحدث السنوار في عمق السياسة، أكد على استقلالية القرار – الحرب والسلم – وعلى ولاية المقاومة على القدس وعلى شرعية تمثيلها للشعب الفلسطيني في كافة أماكن انتشاره، الأمر الذي كان جلياً في الالتفاف حول المقاومة، – وكأنه يقول – بما يمثل تصويتاً وانتخاباً وتفويضاً للمقاومة، وأبلغ مستمعيه من أكاديميين ومشاهدين بما ستعرضه حماس في لقاءات القاهرة يومي السبت والأحد المقبلين، مؤكداً أنّ تفاهمات ما قبل الحرب التي تراجعت رام الله عنها، لم تعد قائمة، فما بعد الانتصار ليس كما قبله، وقدّم نصيحة شبه مباشرة لرام الله، بأن تكفّ عن طرح مبادرات وأفكار من مثل حكومة وفاق، أو قيادة مشتركة، فهذا ليس إلا كلاماً فارغاً ومضيعه للوقت، ولم يعد وارداً في أجندة المقاومة التي أصبحت صاحبة اليد الطولى، وأشار إلى أنّ منظمة التحرير بتركيبتها الحالية عاجزة وغير جامعة وهي تحتاج إلى إعادة بناء تبدأ بانتخابات مجلس وطني أولاً ومن ثم تستكمل هيئاتها بموجب الانتخابات، وأن لذلك أهمية وأولوية تفوق انتخابات المجلس التشريعي، وكانت رسالته الأخيرة للمجتمع الدولي – والتي يُقال إنه أرسلها سابقاً عبر مصر وقطر – عن قبول حركة حماس باتفاق وطني، كما ورد في وثيقة الأسرى، ثم في التفاهمات الوطنية، يقضي بقبول دولة فلسطينية على حدود الرابع من حزيران وعاصمتها القدس، وهو شرط المقاومة البديل لشروط الرباعية الدولية.

إطلالة السنوار ولا شك موفقة، ضرورية وبالغة الأهمية لمعرفة الرجل وما يقول أولاً، والأهمّ لمعرفة برنامجه وسياسته ثانياً، ولكن، ولكي يستمرّ هذا التوفيق وتبقى للرجل صورته التي شاهدها الناس السبت الماضي، لا بد من تسجيل بعض الملاحظات :

أثبت السنوار منذ اليوم الأول للمعركة أنه صادق الوعد والفعل، وذلك منذ الساعة السادسة من مساء العاشر من أيار الماضي حين انطلقت الصواريخ في موعدها الدقيق من غزة للقدس، ونتمنى على الرجل أن يبقى دائماً كذلك، مصداقاً قولاً وفعلاً – وهو تمنّ مصدره الاحترام لا سوء الظنّ – فالأيام المقبلة سوف تكون أطول وأكثر أهمية من الأيام التي انقضت، والمعارك الآتية ولا بدّ، سوف تكون عديدة وأكثر ضراوة في نارها، وأشدّ أثراً في مفاعيلها ونتائجها السياسية، الأمر الذي يتطلّب دقة في القول وعدم الانسياق في مسارب الحماسة.

أطلقت المقاومة على المعركة اسم «سيف القدس»، وهي بلا ريب نقطة مركزية في الوجدان القومي والديني والسياسي، وكان حافز الحرب الدفاع عنها، وإعلان المسؤولية عنها والرعاية عليها، وحمايتها تتطلّب أدوات وجهوداً سياسية واجتماعية واقتصادية وحقوقية صادقة ومخلصة، تسير في موازاة العمل العسكري وتمثل رديفاً كفاحياً يتكامل معه. من هنا، فإنّ المقدسي أولاً والفلسطيني ثانياً ينتظر من المقاومة تطوير برامجها وتفعيل هذه الأدوات، وإيلاء المسائل المذكورة الأهمية التي تستحقها.

إنّ كثيراً من جمهور المقاومة ومناصريها، يتمنون على السنوار، أن يذكر دائماً أنّ الفضل في المعركة المجيدة، للمقاومة بكل عناصرها، وأنّ المقاومة هي من أنزله مكانته الرفيعة في السياسة وفي القلوب، الأمر الذي يدعوه أن يتحدث ويتعاطى مع موقعه بصفته الأكبر وبأنه قائد للمقاومة، ورمز من رموزها، لا قائداً لفصيل، فالعمل وإن تحقق بجزء مهم منه على يد حركة حماس، إلا أنّ جميع تشكيلات المقاومة كانت شريكة في هذا الإنجاز المجيد، ومعهم توحّد الشعب الفلسطيني من أعالي الجليل إلى أقاصي النقب ومن ساحل المتوسط إلى أعماق الأغوار ومن ورائهم الأمة بأسرها والعالم بأجمعه في لحظة تاريخية فارقة، تمثل فرصة فريدة لقائد وطن لا قائد فصيل.

* الكفير ـ جنين ـ فلسطين المحتلة

Hamas Chief in Gaza: Palestinian Resistance Used Only 50% of its Military Power During Al-Quds Sword Battle السنوار عن الرشقة الأخيرة في معركة سيف القدس: “وما خفيّ أعظم”

Source

manar-06674190016224720967

June 5, 2021

Hamas Chief in Gaza, Yahya Sinwar, indicated on Saturday that the Palestinian resistance used only 50% of its military power during Al-Quds Sword battle, highlighting the military readiness to face any Zionist aggression.

Addressing the academicians in Gaza, Sinwar stressed that if the confrontation erupts again, the entire Middle East will change, underlining that there are great surprises in this regard.

Sinwar pointed out that 130 missiles were fired by the Palestinian resistance at Tel Aviv, adding that the Zionist enemy could not destroy more than 3% of Gaza tunnels.

On the other hand, Sinwar said that the Palestinian resistance will reject any attempt to keep Gaza affected by the destruction caused by the Israeli war, adding that all who plan to support the Gazans or invest in the Strip are welcomed.

Sinwar, also, noted that the PLO must be reorganized in order to be joined by Hamas and the resistance factions, emphasizing that all the political concepts that were adopted by the PLO figures before Al-Quds Sword have become useless.

 Al-Manar English Website

السنوار عن الرشقة الأخيرة في معركة سيف القدس: “وما خفيّ أعظم”

 الميادين نت

05/06/2021

رئيس المكتب السياسي لحركة حماس في قطاع غزة يحيى السنوار يؤكد أنه “إذا تفجرّت المواجهة مع “إسرائيل” مجدداً، فإن شكل الشرق الأوسط سيكون مختلفاً عما هو عليه الآن”.

رئيس المكتب السياسي لحركة حماس في قطاع غزة يحيى السنوار (أرشيف)

رئيس المكتب السياسي لحركة حماس في قطاع غزة يحيى السنوار (أرشيف)

أعلن رئيس المكتب السياسي لحركة حماس في قطاع غزة يحيى السنوار، أنه “إذا تفجرّت المواجهة مع “إسرائيل” مجدداً، فإن شكّل الشرق الأوسط سيكون مختلفاً عما هو عليه الآن، فالمقاومة قادرة على تحقيق الردع واستطاعت أن تصنع من المستحيل القوة المتراكمة”.

ولفت خلال لقاء مع الكتّاب والأكاديميين والأساتذة في جامعات بغزة، إلى أن”انتفاضة أهل الضفة الغربية والداخل شكلّت عامل ضغط أكبر من صواريخ المقاومة في العدوان على غزة، فيما الهرولة العربية للتطبيع والانقسام الفلسطيني والوضع الدولي شجعّت إسرائيل على عدوانها”. 

وكشف السنوار أن “ما خفيّ كان أعظم، ففي في الرشقة الصاروخية الأخيرة التي أعددناها، كان القرار بإطلاق كافة الصواريخ القديمة”، موضحاً أن “العدو لن يستطيع فرض واقعه المزعوم في القدس والشيخ جرّاح مستغلاً حالة الانقسام والتطبيع”.

وتابع السنوار قائلاً: “مقاومتنا المحاصرة من العدو والأقربون، تستطيع أن تدك تل أبيب بـ130 صاروخاً برشقة واحدة، والرشقة الأخيرة بمعركة “سيف القــدس” كان القرار أن تدك بكل صواريخها القديمة، وما خفيّ أعظم”، مؤكدا أن “تل أبيب التي أصبحت قبلة الحكام العرب، حولناها إلى ممسحة وأوقفتها المقـاومة على رجل واحدة”.

وأشار السنوار إلى أن “الاحتلال لم يدمّر إلا كسوراً من أنفاق المقـاومة في قطاع غزة، وفشل في تحطيم “مترو حمـاس” لأننا نعشق هذه الأرض كما هي تعشقنا، كما فشل بتحطيم قدرات المقـاومة وفي تنفيذ خطته التي تقضي بقتل 10 آلاف مقاتل من المقاومة، ولم يدمروا أكثر من 3% من الأنفاق، مضيفا أنه “إستعملنا فقط نصف قوتنا”.

وشدد على أنه “لا يمكن أن نقبل دون انفراجة كبيرة يلمسها أهلنا في قطاع غزة، ونحن بعد أيار/مايو 2021 لسنا كما كنا قبله”، مؤكداً بسياق المناسبة أن “المعركة الأخيرة أثبتت أن المقاومة الفلسطينية تضم بين صفوفها عدداً كبيراً من حملة الشهادات العليا”.

انتخابياً، كشف السنوار عن ” تقديم كل تنازل ممكن وأبدينا مرونة عالية جداً من أجل الوصول لحالة تنهي شتاتنا وتنهي الانقسام، لكن الانتخابات ألغيت، وأي شخص يريد الإستثمار بقطاع غزة أو يقدم الدعم لغزة سنفتح له الباب ولن نأخذ أي شيء للمقاومة، والأيام القادمة ستكون  اختباراً حقيقياً للاحتلال وللعالم وللسلطة لترجمة ما تم الاتفاق عليه”.

وأكمل: “أمامنا فرصة لإنهاء حالة الانقسام وترتيب البيت الفلسطيني ونقول كل ما كان يطرح قبل 21 أيار لم يعد صالحاً”، معتبراً أن “منظمة التحرير بدون حركة حمـاس وفصائل المقـاومة هي مجرد صالون سياسي، وأمامنا استحقاق فوري لترتيب المنظمة لتمثّل الجميع ولنضع استراتيجيتنا الوطنية لإدارة الصراع لتحقيق جزء من أهداف شعبنا”.

«معركة» عزل السلطة تنطلق: «الممثل الشرعي الوحيد»… مقاومة

رجب المدهون

 السبت 29 أيار 2021

«معركة» عزل السلطة تنطلق: «الممثل الشرعي الوحيد»... مقاومة
أكدت «حماس» جاهزيتها للذهاب إلى أبعد مدى في ترتيب البيت الفلسطيني (أ ف ب )

غزة في إطار سعيها إلى الاستثمار في نتائج معركة «سيف القدس»، والتي يبرز من بين أهمّها تراجع مكانة السلطة الفلسطينية وتهشّم صورتها لدى الجمهور، تعمل فصائل المقاومة على الإفادة من ذلك، في إعادة ترتيب البيت الداخلي على أساس إنهاء برنامج المفاوضات وتصدير برنامج الكفاح المسلّح. وفي هذا الإطار، تُكثّف الفصائل لقاءاتها الهادفة إلى إنهاء تفرّد محمود عباس بالقرار الرسمي الفلسطيني، متجاهلةً دعوة الأخير إلى تشكيل حكومة وحدة وطنية، على اعتبار أنها لا تُلبّي تطلّعات مَن خَرج منتصراً من معركة طاحنة مع العدو. في هذا الوقت، تتواصل الجهود المصرية لبدء مفاوضات غير مباشرة بين المقاومة والاحتلال، تستهدف تثبيت وقف إطلاق النار، توازياً مع تجدّد تحذيرات الفصائل للعدو من التلاعب بملفّ إعادة الإعمار

بعد أسابيع من الإحباط الذي ساد أوساط الفلسطينيين وفصائلهم، إثر تأجيل رئيس السلطة، محمود عباس، الانتخابات، بذريعة رفض الاحتلال إقامتها في مدينة القدس، تسعى العديد من الفصائل إلى إرساء آليات جديدة لإعادة ترتيب البيت الداخلي، وذلك استثماراً لنتائج معركة «سيف القدس»، التي كان التنسيق الفصائلي فيها في أعلى مستوياته وأفضلها. منذ ما قبل المعركة، بدا واضحاً أن التنسيق بين الفصائل في قطاع غزة كان عالياً جدّاً، في ظلّ عدّة جلسات ولقاءات عقدتها لتباحث قضية القدس، مؤكدة وقوفها خلف التهديد الذي أطلقه رئيس أركان «كتائب القسام»، الجناح العسكري لحركة «حماس»، محمد الضيف، واستعدادها لخوص المعركة موحّدة بكلّ قوة. إلّا أن تجليات التنسيق في ما بين الفصائل خلال المعركة على المستوى السياسي، بجوار توحّدها في خطواتها العسكرية عبر «غرفة عمليات المقاومة المشتركة»، وتحقيقها سويّة انتصاراً في المواجهة، وخفوت موقف السلطة الذي بدا ضعيفاً ودون المستوى، كل ذلك دفع الفصائل جميعها إلى تعزيز خطابها بصوابية برنامج المقاومة الفلسطينية، وانتهاء برنامج المفاوضات، والمطالبة بإعادة ترتيب البيت الفلسطيني في أسرع وقت، ومواجهة تفرّد عباس وجزء من حركة «فتح» بالقرار الفلسطيني.

[اشترك في قناة ‫«الأخبار» على يوتيوب]

وحسبما علمت «الأخبار»، فقد عقدت الفصائل في غزة، قبيل المعركة الأخيرة، اجتماعات مع قيادة «حماس»، لتباحث الأحداث في القدس والخيارات المتاحة أمامها، مؤيّدة الذهاب نحو مواجهة مع الاحتلال في حال استمرّت ممارساته في المدينة المحتلة. وبعد انتهاء المعركة، عقدت لقاءً آخر اتفقت خلاله على ضرورة الضغط على عباس لترتيب البيت الفلسطيني، وإنهاء حالة التفرّد، لتحقيق أكبر مكتسب لمصلحة القضية الفلسطينية بعد الانتصار، ووقف عبث المفاوضات، فيما اقترحت بعض الفصائل، في حال رفض عباس الاتفاق، إعلان فقدانه للشرعية، وأنه مغتصب لقيادة الشعب الفلسطيني، والعمل على تشكيل إطار يجمع جميع فصائل المقاومة، باعتبار المقاومة المُمثّل الوحيد للشعب الفلسطيني في كلّ مكان. وفي الوقت الذي دعا فيه عباس إلى تشكيل حكومة وحدة فلسطينية بعد الحرب، تلتزم بالاتفاقيات مع الاحتلال وبشروط «الرباعية الدولية»، تجاهلت الفصائل هذه الدعوة على اعتبار أنها لا تُلبّي تطلّعات الشعب الفلسطيني الذي يعيش حالة انتصار على العدو.

تجاهلت الفصائل دعوة محمود عباس إلى تشكيل حكومة وحدة وطنية


في المقابل، أكد رئيس المكتب السياسي لحركة «حماس»، إسماعيل هنية، أن حركته جاهزة للذهاب إلى أبعد مدى في ترتيب البيت الفلسطيني، داعياً إلى البدء في إعادة هيكلة «منظّمة التحرير الفلسطينية»، وإدخال الشعب الفلسطيني في الشتات في معادلة المؤسّسة والقرار عبر الانتخابات، وبناء رؤية فلسطينية على قاعدة الشراكة. وشدّد هنية على أن معركة «سيف القدس» أنهت مرحلة وفتحت مرحلة حديدة، لافتاً إلى أن الجماهير وقفت في كلّ مكان خلف المقاومة. واعتبر عضو المكتب السياسي لحركة «الجهاد الإسلامي»، خالد البطش، بدوره، أن «معركة سيف القدس كانت نقطة تحوّل استراتيجي أسّست لانتصار كبير على أساس أن الفلسطيني يمكن أن ينتصر على المحتل، وعليه يجب استعادة الوحدة الوطنية، وتحقيق الشراكة ضرورة مُلحّة لاستثمار نصر معركة سيف القدس». ورأت «الجبهة الشعبية لتحرير فلسطين»، من جهتها، أن «معركة سيف القدس أعادت التأكيد على وحدة الشعب الفلسطيني، وهو أوّل معطى يجب أن نبني عليه قاعدة وحدتنا الوطنية والاجتماعية المتينة، من بوّابة استعادة مشروعنا الوطني التحرّري، وأداته الوطنية الجامعة؛ منظّمة التحرير الفلسطينية التي يجب تحريرها من قيود نهج التسوية والمفاوضات والاتفاقيات الكارثية مع العدو، والتي طوتها مقاومة شعبنا وانتصاره المؤزّر». ودعت الجبهة، القيادة الفلسطينية الرسمية «المهيمنة»، إلى «عدم تبديد إنجازات ومكتسبات شعبنا، من خلال العودة إلى المفاوضات التي يتزايد الحديث بشأنها، وعدم المساهمة في نقل التناقض إلى الداخل الفلسطيني».

من ملف : فلسطين: معركة عزل السلطة تنطلق

فيديوات متعلقة

متعلقة متعلقة

Gaza – US and the West Supports Israel’s Crimes Against Humanity – Understanding the Never-Ending Conflict

May 18, 2021

Gaza – US and the West Supports Israel’s Crimes Against Humanity – Understanding the Never-Ending Conflict

By Peter Koenig for the Saker Blog

“I said we would exact a very heavy price from Hamas and other terror groups, and we are doing so and will continue to do so with great force,” Netanyahu said in a fiery video address.

Israel’s PM Netanyahu is a war criminal and should be held accountable for war crimes throughout his PM-ship of Israel, according to the 1945 / 1946 Nuremberg trials criteria. His crimes against humanity, against a defenseless Palestine are comparable to the Holocaust.

In 2016 Mr. Benjamin Netanyahu had been indicted on charges of bribery, fraud and breach of trust. The trial is ongoing but has temporarily been “suspended”. Netanyahu has dismissed the charges as hypocritical and acts as if they didn’t exist. Even though he lacks the majority to form a government, he acts with impunity, because he can – he can because he has the backing of the United States.

More importantly, Israel has been accused before the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague for crimes against humanity and war crimes against Palestine. The prosecutor of the ICC, Ms. Fatou Bensouda, said on 3 March 2021 that she has launched an investigation into alleged crimes in the Palestinian territories. She added the probe will look into “crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court that are alleged to have been committed” since June 13, 2014, and that the investigation will be conducted “independently, impartially and objectively, without fear or favor.”

In a quick response, PM Netanyahu accused the Court of hypocrisy and anti-Semitism. Of course, the quickest and often most effective defense and counter-attack is calling any accusation, no matter how rightful it is, as anti-Semitism. Calling someone an anti-Semite shuts most people up, no matter whether the accusation is true or false. That explains in part why nobody dares to even come forward with the truth about crimes committed by Israel.

Imagine, Jews were the chief victims of the German Third Reich – a Nazi Regime, and today the descendants of these very Jews, persecuted and slaughtered in Nazi-concentration camps, allowed the transformation of Israel into a Zionist Fourth Reich, executing Palestinians Holocaust-style. They have done this with impunity for the last 73 years, with the current massacres reaching unheard-of proportions.

Pro-Palestine protests take place around the world – and especially now, finally, throughout Europe. Workers and young people joined protests across Europe on Saturday, 15 May, including in London, Paris, Berlin and Madrid, to oppose Israel’s bombardment of the Palestinian population in Gaza. The demonstrations coincided with the Palestinian Nakba (Catastrophe Day, 14 May 1948)—marking the founding of the state of Israel, through the forced expulsion of 760,000 Palestinians from their villages.

Here is what one protester, Khalid, in Manchester, UK, had to say. Khalid held a placard reading “Lift the siege of Palestine-Stop bombing Palestine”. He said, “Israel should know better. They know how it feels to be exterminated. They had no homeland and came to Palestine as guests and now they have taken the Palestinians’ homes and are trying to throw them out. The Palestinians have no water, they have no food. You have got people like [UK Prime Minister] Boris Johnson and presidents colluding with Israel and giving them money to destroy human life” – http://www.defenddemocracy.press/protests-across-europe-against-israeli-war-on-gaza/

Israeli war crimes, crimes against humanity, always take place with the unwavering support of the United States. No US presidential candidate has a chance of being “elected” to the empire’s highest chair, the Presidency, without having proven his or her unquestioned support for Zionist-Israel. Without that western support, Israel’s war against and oppression of Palestine would soon be over.

Palestine could start breathing again and become a free country, an autonomous, sovereign, self-sustained country, what they were before the forced UN Partition Plan for Palestine, and as was foreseen by UN Resolution 181 II of 1947. This genocidal conflict situation has lasted almost three quarters of a century – and has little chance to abate under the current geopolitical constellation of the Middle East and the world, where obedient submission to US-Israeli command and atrocities is the name of the game.

Background
The conflict started basically with the creation of Israel. The UK, since the end of WWI and the Dissolution of the Ottoman Empire, occupier of the Palestine Peninsula (Palestine and Transjordan, see map), proposed to the UN as a condition for UK withdrawal, the creation of Israel in the western part of what was then known as Palestine and Transjordan. The so-called UN Partitian Plan for Palestine, was voted on 29 November 1947 by the UN General Assembly, as Resolution 181 (II). The then 57 UN members voted 33 (72%) for, 13 against the resolution, with 10 abstentions, and one absent. The Palestinian Authority was never consulted on this proposal. Therefore, for many scholars the UN Partition Plan’s legality remains questionable.

The Plan sought to resolve the conflicting objectives and claims of two competing movements, Palestinian nationalism and Jewish nationalism, or Zionism. The Plan also called for an Economic Union between the proposed two states, and for the protection of religious and minority rights.

However, immediately after adoption of the Resolution by the General Assembly, a civil war broke out and the plan was not implemented. The remnants of this civil war, the non-acceptance by Palestine of this UN Resolution 181, for which the historic owners of the land were not consulted, are lingering on as of this day.

British Mandate Palestine map

After the fall of the Ottoman Empire, the British administration was formalized by the League of Nations under the Palestine Mandate in 1923, as part of the Partitioning of the Ottoman Empire following World War I. The Mandate reaffirmed the 1917 British commitment to the Balfour Declaration, for the establishment in Palestine of a “National Home” for the Jewish people, with the prerogative to carry it out.

The Balfour Declaration was a public statement issued by the British government in 1917 during the First World War, announcing support for the establishment of a “national home for the Jewish people” in Palestine, then an Ottoman region with a small minority Jewish population. The declaration was contained in a letter dated 2 November 1917 from the United Kingdom’s Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour to Lord Rothschild, a leader of the British Jewish community, for transmission to the Zionist Federation of Great Britain and Ireland. The question is still asked today: How legitimate was that declaration in terms of international law? Many academics see this declaration still today as a unilateral move and a breach of international law, as no consultation of the Palestine Authority ever took place.
——

In the November 1947 UN General Assembly vote, the US was among the 33 countries voting FOR the Partition Plan. Interestingly, though, President Truman later noted, “The facts were that not only were there pressure movements around the United Nations unlike anything that had been seen there before, but that the White House, too, was subjected to a constant barrage. I do not think I ever had as much pressure and propaganda aimed at the White House as I had in this instance. The persistence of a few of the extreme Zionist leaders—actuated by political motives and engaging in political threats—disturbed and annoyed me.” – This Zionist pressure was to set the bar for what was to follow – up to this day.

David Ben-Gurion, Zionist statesman and political leader, was the first Prime Minister (1948–53, 1955–63) and defense minister (1948–53; 1955–63) of Israel. In a letter to his son in October 1937, Ben-Gurion explained that partition would be a first step to “possession of the land as a whole” (emphasis added by author).

As of today, seventy-three years later and counting, the conflict is not resolved. To the contrary. It has become the longest lasting war, or aggression rather, in recent human history. A war it isn’t really, because a sheer oppression and literal slaughter against a perceived enemy, like Palestine that has no weapons to speak of, being bombarded and shot with the most sophisticated US-sponsored weapons systems, cannot be called a war. It is sheer genocide. The Palestinian weapons of choice are mostly rocks; rocks thrown by Palestinians at the Israeli IDF invaders, who then mow them down with machine guns, mostly civilians, women and children.

The Israel armed-to-the-teeth Defense Forces (IDF), invade Gaza and Palestinian West Bank areas with the most sophisticated machine guns, bombs, white phosphorus, practicing indiscriminate killing. The IDF destroys Palestinian living quarters, administration buildings, schools, shops, the little manufacturing industries that makes up their economy – destroying a people already teetering at the edge of extreme poverty and despair. No mercy. What does one call people who are committing such unspeakable crimes?

What does one call this style of aggression? – Literally killing hundreds, thousands of people without defense, in the world’s largest open prison – Gaza – home to more than 2 million people, living in misery, housing and infrastructure constantly destroyed, painfully partially rebuilt – just to be destroyed and bombed to pieces again. Those who don’t die from Israeli direct aggressions, may die from the indirect effects – famine, misery, disease and suicide – of this constant, abject hostility perpetuated upon what was supposed to be, according to the UN Partition Plan, an autonomous Palestine home of the Palestine people.

It is an ongoing – seemingly never-ending conflict, ever since the first Intifada beginning in December 1987 (Intifada in the context of the Israeli-Palestine conflict is a concerted Palestinian attempt to shake off Israeli power and gain independence).

The Oslo Accords I and II are a pair of agreements between the Government of Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), of 1993 and 1995, respectively, sponsored by Norway in an attempt to achieve peace between the two parties. The Oslo Accords failed bitterly, over the issue of Jerusalem that was to become the religious capital for both countries, but Israel refused, claiming Jerusalem as her own, making the holy city to Israel’s capital. The first foreign leader recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, was US President Donald Trump on 6 December 2017.
—-

There was, however, another, less talked-about but equally important issue – an issue of survival – within the Oslo Accords: The fair sharing of the water resources. Israel never agreed, as about 85% of all water resources of what used to be the Palestinian Land, falls currently within the borders of what was defined by the Partitian Plan as Palestine. This is based on a World Bank study, in which I participated. On the insistence of Israel, the US vetoed publication of the study. Hence, the report was never officially published and publicly available.

Subsequent, so-called Peace processes, mostly US-sponsored, failed as of this day, because both Israel and the US have no interest in finding a peaceful solution. Neither one of the two nations have an interest in a Peace Accord, as the US needs the conflict to keep control over the Middle East, while Israel has no intentions to give up (slave)-control over Palestine, as her wellbeing depends on the overall control of what used to be Arab-Palestinian territory, and especially Palestine’s water resourcesWithout them, Israel would be a dry and unproductive desert.

There is a purpose behind these illegal, but ever-growing number of Israeli settlements on Palestine territories: Control over water. The settlements are usually over or near underground water resources. This is one way of controlling Palestine’s water. This happens not only in the so-called West Bank, but also in Gaza, where water resources are really scarce. Gaza is the world’s per capita water-scarcest area. The few Gaza water tables are super-posed by Israeli settlements.

This totally illegal and often UN-condemned Israeli Settlements strategy – also totally ignored by Israel – gradually reduces Palestine land and increases Israel’s control over crucial Palestinian water resources. See map

The impediment of being able to manage their own water resources, therefore increasing their food self-sufficiency through their own agriculture, makes out of Palestine an Israeli slave-state.

In addition, Israel has a handle on opening or closing the Gaza border, letting at will minimal food, medication and other life-essentials into Gaza, as well as allowing exactly the number needed of low-paid Palestinians (literally slave-labor) cross the border in the morning to work in Israel, and having to return at night to their Palestine homes. It is sheer Apartheid exploitation. Furthermore, Israel does not recognize Gaza’s territorial Mediterranean waters which would be a means towards Palestinians self-sustention and economic industrial activity.

According to an OECD report of 2016, Israel ranks as the nation with the highest poverty rate among OECD countries, i.e. 21% of Israelis are living under the poverty line. This is more than Mexico, Turkey and Chile. The OECD average is about 11%. This figure (21%) may be slightly exaggerated, given the relatively large informal sector and transfer payments to Israel from Jews abroad, as well as from international Jewish organizations.

Nevertheless, it is clear that Israel is economically not autonomous and needs Palestine to survive, both in terms of confiscated Palestinian water resources, as well as Palestinian slave labor. Therefore, there is hardly any hope for the UN-planned two-state solution to eventually materialize. There is little hope that this situation will change under the current geopolitical conditions. The US wants to dominate the Middle East and needs Israel as a garrison state that will be armed to the teeth for the US – to eventually grow and become Washington’s proxy ruler of the Middle East.

A question that is rarely asked, if ever: What is Hamas’ role in this never-ending Israeli-Palestine conflict? Since 2007 Hamas is officially governing the 2-million-plus population of the 363 square kilometer Gaza Strip. Hamas is also the Palestine paramilitary or defense organization. Hamas is said to be funded largely by Iran. Is it true? And if so, is Iran the only funder of Hamas?

It is odd, however, that ever so often, Hamas attacks Israel by launching unsophisticated rockets at Israeli cities, rockets that most often are intercepted by the IDF defense system, or cause minimal damage. But they cause, predictably minimal damage against an IDF which is US-equipped with the latest technology weapons- and defense systems.

Yet, a Hamas attack on Israel prompts regularly a ferocious retaliation; bombardments, not so much aiming at Hamas, as Netanyahu intimidates, “We would exact a very heavy price from Hamas and other terror groups…” , but at the civilian populations. The heaviest casualties are civilian Gaza citizens, many women and children among them, after an Israeli “self-defense” retaliation. This is of course no self-defense. The Hamas attacks usually follows an Israeli provocation.

Why would Hamas hit back, knowing that they won’t wreak any damage on Israel, yet they will trigger each time a deadly massacre on the Gaza population? – At the outset, Israeli provocations look like “false flags”. Could they be false flags with the willing participation of Hamas? If so, with whom does Hamas collaborate?

These are questions which certainly do not have an immediate answer. But the 14-year pattern of repeatedly similar events begs the question – is there another (Hamas) agenda behind what meets the eye?
——-

What is nearly as criminal as the IDF’s aggressions, is the almost complete silence of the west, and the world at large, vis-à-vis Israel’s atrocities committed on the Palestinian population. It is an unspoken tolerance for the carnages Israel inflicts on Palestine, especially in the Gaza Strip, the world’s largest open-air prison.

For example, the political UN body, despite hundreds of Resolutions, condemning and flagging Israel’s illegal actions against Palestine, including the ever-increasing number of illegal Israeli settlements on Palestine territories, seems to be hapless against Israel. Weak condemnations of Israel, calling both parties to reason – leaves Israel totally cold and undisturbed. There is no punishment whatsoever, not from the UN system, not from the western allies, most of whom are Washington and NATO vassals.

The Biden Administration has taken the usual imperialist position of cynical neutrality, like it was an uninvolved disinterested player, while painting up Israel as being some kind of victim instead of the brutal Zionist apartheid state that it is. It is important to remember that the creation of Israel was so that the US had a garrison state to protect her interests in the Middle East.

Take the UN Secretary General. Instead of condemning Israeli ruthlessness and demanding accountability, the spokesman for UN Secretary General, Antonio Guterres, merely called on the Netanyahu regime to “exercise maximum restraint and respect the right to freedom of peaceful assembly.”

The Secretary General himself reiterates his commitment, including through the Middle East Quartet, “to supporting Palestinians and Israelis to resolve the conflict on the basis of relevant United Nations resolutions, international law and bilateral agreements.” The Quartet, set up in 2002, consists of the United Nations, the European Union, the United States and Russia. Its mandate is to help mediate Middle East peace. As of this day they have not achieved any tangible results.

Because they do NOT WANT to achieve any peace. For the reasons mentioned before, Peace is not in the interest of Israel, nor in the interest of the West, led by the United States. To keep the conflict burning, sacrificing hundreds, thousands, tens of thousands of Palestinian lives is not important. It’s just a collateral damage of a larger agenda – control over the Middle East and her riches, a step towards controlling the entire world.

Time and again, Guterres disgraced himself and the office he holds by failing to denounce US/NATO/Israeli aggression and demand accountability for high crimes too serious to ignore.

If the UN is incapable or unwilling of assuming the responsibility of reigning in Israel, perhaps the Group of 77 (by now more than 120 UN member countries) should take a joint stand, exerting pressure on Israel, asking as an intermediary for outright negotiating with Israel and Palestine to reach a sustainable peace settlement, including the original two-state solution, back to the pre-1967 Israeli-Palestine borders. Let us, the UN, become pro-active in seeking and finding a permanent solution for the stressed-to-death, starving and tortured Palestinians, especially those from the Gaza Strip.


Peter Koenig is a geopolitical analyst and a former Senior Economist at the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO), where he has worked for over 30 years on water and environment around the world. He lectures at universities in the US, Europe and South America. He writes regularly for online journals and is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed; and co-author of Cynthia McKinney’s book “When China Sneezes: From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Politico-Economic Crisis” (Clarity Press – November 1, 2020)

Peter Koenig is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.

A Brief History of Israeli Interventionism in Lebanon

Source

in World — by Yanis Iqbal — April 30, 2021

Israel has a long-standing interest in Lebanon. These interests have periodically manifested themselves in bloody attacks against the small Arab state. Two important sources on the Zionist plans for Lebanon are the diary of Moshe Sharett, who was the Prime Minster of Israel in 1954-1955 and who was considered a “soft Zionist”, and Livia Rokach’s “Israel’s Sacred Terrorism: A study based on Moshe Sharett’s Personal Diary, and other documents”. In the latter we find some very important information, and it is worth quoting at length:

“Then he [Ben Gurion] passed on to another issue. This is the time, he said, to push Lebanon, that is, the Maronites in that country, to proclaim a Christian State. I said that this was nonsense. The Maronites are divided. The partisans of Christian separatism are weak and will dare do nothing. A Christian Lebanon would mean their giving up Tyre, Tripoli, and the Beka’a. There is no force that could bring Lebanon back to its pre-World War I dimensions, and all the more so because in that case it would lose its economic raison-d’etre. Ben Gurion reacted furiously. He began to enumerate the historical justification for a restricted Christian Lebanon. If such a development were to take place, the Christian Powers would not dare oppose it. I claimed that there was no factor ready to create such a situation, and that if we were to push and encourage it on our own we would get ourselves into an adventure that will place shame on us. Here came a wave of insults regarding my lack of daring and my narrow-mindedness. We ought to send envoys and spend money. I said there was no money. The answer was that there is no such thing. The money must be found, if not in the Treasury then at the Jewish Agency! For such a project it is worthwhile throwing away one hundred thousand, half a million, a million dollars. When this happens a decisive change will take place in the Middle East, a new era will start. I got tired of struggling against a whirlwind.”

The next day Gurion sent Sharett a letter which contained the following argument:

“It is clear that Lebanon is the weakest link in the Arab League. The other minorities in the Arab States are all Muslim, except for the Copts. But Egypt is the most compact and solid of the Arab States and the majority there consists of one solid block, of one race, religion and language, and the Christian minority does not seriously affect their political and national unity. Not so the Christians in Lebanon. They are a majority in the historical Lebanon and this majority has a tradition and a culture different from those of the other components of the League. Also within the wider borders (this was the worst mistake made by France when it extended the borders of Lebanon), the Muslims are not free to do as they wish, even if they are a majority there (and I don’t know if they are, indeed, a majority) for fear of the Christians. The creation of a Christian State is therefore a natural act; it has historical roots and it will find support in wide circles in the Christian world, both Catholic and Protestant”.

Sharett responded a few weeks later:

“As far as I know, in Lebanon today exists no movement aiming at transforming the country into a Christian State governed by the Maronite community…This is not surprising. The transformation of Lebanon into a Christian State as a result of an outside initiative is unfeasible today… I don’t exclude the possibility of accomplishing this goal in the wake of a wave of shocks that will sweep the Middle East… will destroy the present constellations and will form others. But in the present Lebanon, with its present territorial and demographic dimensions and its international relations, no serious initiative of the kind is imaginable.

 [I should add that] I would not have objected, and on the contrary I would have certainly been favorable to the idea, of actively aiding any manifestation of agitation in the Maronite community tending to strengthen its isolationist tendencies, even if there were no real chances of achieving the goals; I would have considered positive the very existence of such an agitation and the destabilization it could bring about, the trouble it would have caused the League, the diversion of attention from the Arab-Israeli complications that it would have caused, and the very kindling of a fire made up of impulses toward Christian independence. But what can I do when such an agitation is nonexistent?…In the present condition, I am afraid that any attempt on our part would be considered as lightheartedness and superficiality or worse-as an adventurous speculation upon the well being and existence of others and a readiness to sacrifice their basic good for the benefit of a temporary tactical advantage for Israel…Moreover, if this plan is not kept a secret but becomes known a danger which cannot be underestimated in the Middle Eastern circumstances-the damage which we shall suffer… would not be compensated even by an eventual success of the operation itself”.

Civil War

The opportune moment for Israeli machinations arrived when a civil war broke out in Lebanon, involving a sectarian battle between Christians, who had monopolized politico-economic power, and Muslims, who lived in poverty and deprivation. These internal imbalances were exacerbated by the large presence of Palestinian refugees who – fearing a repeat of the September 1970 massacre in Jordan at the hands of Christians – were compelled to ally with the Muslims and their allies, namely Baathists, Communists, Nasserites and others. On April 9, 1976, the Syrian military intervened to fight against the National Movement (NM) and Palestinians. Kamal Jumblatt – the leader of the NM – was too radical for the liking of Damascus. With his anti-Zionist leanings, he could easily provoke Israel into invading Lebanon – increasing the strategic vulnerability of Syria. Thus, Hafez al-Assad proceeded to thwart any possibility of a leftist regime coming to power in Beirut.

Israel interposed itself in this cauldron of conflicts in early 1976 to begin a policy of open borders with some of the small Maronite villages in the far south that wished to have contact with the few Maronites still living along the border in northern Israel. Israel also armed and trained Christian militias who were driving their Muslim (mostly Palestinian) opponents from the towns along a strip between Tyre and Marjayoun. The Syrians, while issuing a statement refusing to bow to Israeli pressure, withdrew their troops from the posts they held furthest south, including those they held near the Greek Orthodox center of Marjayoun. These Israeli initiatives were just one step in a strategy of supporting those dissidents in south Lebanon who would eventually cooperate with the Israelis in the creation of a buffer jurisdiction. Major Sa’ad Haddad (followed by Colonel Antoine Lahoud) established the South Lebanese Army (SLA), allying himself with Israel.

Even before Menachem Begin became Prime Minister in May 1977, the Israelis had begun transporting Maronite militiamen from Junieh harbor to Haifa for training so that they could fight with Haddad’s forces in the southern enclave. After Begin-headed Likud government came to power in 1977, Israel’s troops provided sustained and overt assistance to the SLA, often crossing over into Lebanese territory to conduct their own operations. A massacre of 37 Israelis by a Fatah armed group that crossed into Israel for the purpose set the stage for the first large-scale Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) entry into Lebanon. The Litani Operation of 1978 was launched on March 14 and saw IDF forces advancing across southern Lebanon to the Litani River, occupying this area for a week-long period.

The operation involved 25,000 troops. It was intended to dislodge the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) from the border area, destroy the PLO bases in southern Lebanon from where the attacks on northern Israel were emanating, and to extend the area of territory under the control of Haddad’s militia. In the course of the operation, the PLO was pushed back north of the Litani River, and a number of refugees headed for the north. 22,000 shells killed 2000, destroyed hundreds of homes and forced 250,000 to flee their homes. Israeli forces withdrew after the passing of United Nations Security Council Resolution (UNSC) 425. The resolution called for immediate withdrawal of Israeli forces from southern Lebanon and established a UN military presence in southern Lebanon. IDF forces departed southern Lebanon in the following weeks, handing over positions to the SLA of Major Haddad. The entry of United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) did not usher in a period of quiet.

Operation Peace for Galilee

Barely ten months later, on June 6, 1982, Israel launched a massive land, sea and air invasion of Lebanon code-named “Operation Peace for Galilee”. It was given covert consent by the US. In a speech given before the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations on May 28, 1982, then Secretary of State Alexander M. Haig Jr. said: “Lebanon today is a focal point of danger…and the stability of the region hangs in the balance…The Arab deterrent force [instituted in 1976 to end Syrian killings of Palestinians and Muslim forces], now consisting entirely of Syrian troops, with its mission to protect the integrity of Lebanon, has not stabilized the situation…The time has come to take concerted action in support of both Lebanon’s territorial integrity within its internationally recognized borders and a strong central government capable of promoting a free, open, democratic and traditionally pluralistic society.” With the ostensible goal of destroying Palestinian infrastructure, Israel invaded Lebanon with 60,000 troops, 800 tanks, attack helicopters, bombers and fighter planes, supported by missile boats, and spread pure terror in Muslim-inhabited areas. Over 15,000 Lebanese perished in the invasion, mostly civilians. Israel claimed portions of Lebanese territory and placed militias within Lebanon.

Upon reaching Beirut, the IDF began a nine-week siege, including saturation bombing and intermittent blockades of food, fuel, and water. On June 26, the US vetoed a UNSC resolution for an end to hostilities (saying it was “a transparent attempt to preserve the PLO as a viable political force.”) But sensing the siege’s impact on public opinion, former US President Ronald Reagan had Philip Habib begin talks for a cease-fire. Habib demanded that the PLO leave Lebanon. Even after this was agreed to, the IDF continued bombing, killing 300 on August 12, 1982. Reagan then told Begin to halt the “unfathomable and senseless” raids. Even the Israeli Cabinet was taken aback and stripped Sharon of the right to activate forces without higher approval.

Importantly, Israel used the invasion to place its own stooge Bashir Jumayil – a major leader of pro-Zionist Christian forces – at the presidential palace. Jumayil’s elevation was accomplished in the Fiyadiya barracks, just outside Beirut, where Phalangist militiamen formed an inner cordon, with Israeli soldiers just behind them. It had not been an entirely foregone conclusion; Ariel Sharon and his company had been obliged to exert themselves on his behalf with pressure, threats, cash – and even the helicoptering of one elderly parliamentarian from an isolated village in the Beqa’a before the Syrians could get at him. With its foremost ally elected to the highest office in Lebanon, Israel was basking in the glory of its military muscles. However, this period of grandeur proved to be fleeting. On September 14, 1982, he and 26 others died when a remote-controlled bomb went off in the Phalange party headquarters. This event precipitated an extremely murderous bloodbath of innocent Lebanese civilians.

On September 16, 1982, the day after Israeli forces had taken up positions overlooking the Palestinian camps, Phalangists entered the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps and carried out a revenge massacre. This pogrom was carried out by members of Bashir’s own militia, reportedly led by Elie Hobeika and joined by members of Haddad’s SLA militia. Although the IDF officials seemed to have taken responsibility for security in the area, they did nothing to stop the slaughter. Entire families were indiscriminately slaughtered. People were killed with grenades hung around their necks, others raped and disemboweled. Infants were trampled with spiked shoes. Throughout, high-ranking Israeli officers listened on radios to Phalangists discussing the carnage. After 3 days of butchery, the news began to leak out. Nearly 2,000-3,000 people were killed, mostly women, children, and the elderly.  The massacre created fractures in the intra-Israeli consensus over the war, leading to a rally of 400,000. Sharon’s only punishment, however, was to be shuffled to another cabinet post.

Increasing Resistance

With its main Maronite ally dead, Israel attempted to work with Bashar’s brother Amin Jumayil and to move forward toward a peace agreement under US mediation. Amin proved not strong enough to play the role envisioned for him according to this idea. Instead, Israel became increasingly concerned with protecting the lives of its own soldiers amid angry calls for the withdrawal of IDF forces. In August 1983, the slow process of withdrawal began, with Israel removing its forces unilaterally from the area of the Shuf mountains where it had been seeking to mediate between the Phalange and Druze forces loyal to Walid Jumblatt. Jumblatt at the time was allied to Syria and his forces were the clearest threat to Amin’s attempt to consolidate control over the country. When Souk al-Grarb – a town commanding the road from the mountains to the Presidential Palace, Defense Ministry and East Beirut – was nearly captured by Jumblatt’s militia, Amin appealed to the US for help, which had to withdraw in late 1983 due to growing resistance from Lebanese Muslims.

Meanwhile, an anti-Jumayil, anti-Israel and anti-American alignment was now emerging as the key political force in Lebanon. Among the various elements involved in this alignment, little noticed at first, were pro-Iranian Shia militants who had organized under the auspices of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards (IRG) in the Biqa. Israel’s withdrawal to the Awali river line removed the IDF from Beirut. But it left Israel entrenched as an occupying force in the Shia-dominated south of Lebanon. The result was that in the next period, Israel found itself the unexpected target of Shia attacks. A number of incidents deriving from Israel’s mistreatment of Shia Muslims contributed to the deterioration of the situation. The Shia violence against the Israeli forces was carried out by two organizations – the Amal militia, which had constituted the main political force among the Lebanese Shia since its establishment in the 1970s, and the smaller, pro-Iranian Hezbollah that would eventually eclipse Amal.

The IDF remained deployed along these lines for the next two years, in the course of which Hezbollah grew in popularity as a force combining opposition to Israeli occupation with a wider Shia Islamist ideology totally opposed to Israel’s existence and to the West. Israel’s peace treaty with Lebanon – signed in May 1983 – was abrogated in 1984. Israeli forces remained deployed along the Awali river line, under increasing attack from Hezbollah and Amal. In June 1985, the IDF again redeployed further south – leaving all of Lebanon save a 12-milewide “security zone” close to the Israeli border, which was maintained in cooperation with the SLA. In 1993, and again in 1996, the IDF undertook major operations beyond the security zone and deeper into southern Lebanon. Both operations – Accountability in 1993 and Grapes of Wrath in 1996 – were undertaken in order to weaken Hezbollah.

The maintenance of the security zone exacted a cost from IDF personnel. Israeli public discontent with the seemingly endless conflict in southern Lebanon began to increase after a helicopter accident claimed the lives of 73 soldiers in the security zone in 1997. An incident on September 5, 1997, in which 12 members of the IDF’s naval commando unit were killed, further helped to erode the Israeli public’s willingness to see the IDF stay in southern Lebanon. Ehud Barak was elected prime minister in 1999 with a clear promise to withdraw Israeli forces to the international border. Israel’s unilateral withdrawal from the security zone began on May 22, 2000. In its final phase, it turned into a humiliating rush for the border as the SLA collapsed. A considerable amount of military equipment, including armored vehicles, was left behind and fell into Hezbollah hands. Some of this equipment may still be seen in southern Lebanon, where Hezbollah has converted it into monuments for its victory. At the entrance to Bint Jbayl, for example, an ancient SLA tank may be seen, with a cardboard statue of Ayatollah Khomeini standing on it. By 2000, Hezbollah had claimed its first victory as Israel withdrew from Lebanon, although it insisted on occupying two areas, the Seven Villages and the Shebaa Farms.

Hezbollah’s victory solidified its legitimacy among a sizeable section of the Lebanese populace who had suffered greatly under the Israeli occupation. Prior to the Israeli withdrawal, Lebanese prisoners continued to be detained outside any legal framework in the Khiam detention centre where conditions were cruel, inhuman and degrading, and torture was systematic. After the Israeli withdrawal, the residents of Khiam village stormed the detention centre and released all the remaining 144 detainees. The horrendous treatment of these detainees is evident, for example in the case of Suleiman Ramadan who was arrested in September 1985. One of his legs was amputated as a result of lack of medical care after his arrest. During his interrogation he was beaten and given electric shocks. He was detained without charge or trial until his release in May 2000.

2006 Attack

In 2006, Israel launched another attack on Lebanon; the central goal of the onslaught was to destroy Hezbollah. The campaign aimed at cutting Hezbollah’s road of supplies, destroying much of its military infrastructure (stocks of rockets, rocket launchers, etc.), eliminating a large number of its fighters, and decapitating it by assassinating Hassan Nasrallah and other key party leaders. The Israeli generals opted for an offensive that was intended to be both rapid and powerful. Their idea was to sweep away all that they found in their path, clean up any remaining pockets of resistance and then pull back. To facilitate the ground offensive they subjected Lebanon to an air and sea blockade, while aircraft bombarded bridges and roads to isolate the enemy, sowing death and destruction in the towns and villages of South Lebanon, and devastating the southern suburbs of the Capital.

The aerial campaign massacred hundreds of Lebanese civilians. But it did not seriously reduce the operational capacity of the Hezbollah fighters. Not only did they continue to fire rockets into Israel, but the rocket campaign increased in intensity up to the final day. At the same time, the land incursions of Israeli units met with a resistance of ferocity and efficiency not expected by the Israeli commanders, incurring unusually heavy losses among the Israeli troops. Israel was not able to secure a significant part of Lebanese territory, even within the narrow strip of territory separating the Litani River from the Israeli-Lebanese border. Shaken by their lack of success, the military chiefs and the Israeli government hesitated between prolonging the phase of the aerial campaign and limited incursions, with the risk of further losses for little gain, and the option of staging a large scale ground offensive. A large scale offensive would mean moving into the Beka’a Valley – where the resistance of Hezbollah would be even more stronger than in the frontier zone – and then on to Beirut. The “grand” offensive was finally ordered. It turned out to be a face-saving operation. Its scope and duration were very limited. The attack did not reach any further than various points along the Litani River and its launch coincided with the declaration of a cease-fire within 48 hours. In the final analysis, while the Israeli attack caused heavy destruction – the death of more than 1,100 people, the displacement of over a quarter of the population, and an estimated $2.8 billion in direct costs with more than 60% of the damage affecting the housing sector – it failed to make a political impact upon Lebanon. Hezbollah shattered the invincibility of Israel and put an end to its interventionism in Lebanon.

Yanis Iqbal is an independent researcher and freelance writer based in Aligarh, India and can be contacted at yanisiqbal@gmail.com.

Fatah, PLO: No Elections without Jerusalem

April 19, 2021

East Jerusalem. (Photo: Wikimedia Commons)

Member of Fatah’s Central Committee and the PLO’s Executive Committee Azzam Al-Ahmad yesterday reiterated that the PLO and Fatah will not accept carrying out elections without Jerusalem.

Speaking to Voice of Palestine radio, Al-Ahmad said:

“Israel continues its aggressive policies against Jerusalem – the capital of the state of Palestine,” pointing to the increasing raids on Al-Aqsa Mosque, settlement expansion, house demolitions, and the prevention of Palestinian activities. Regarding the elections, he said: “Israel started to put obstacles ahead of carrying out the elections such as preventing Fatah candidates from holding consultation meetings.”

“We, the Palestinian leadership, and the people of Jerusalem have insisted from the beginning that this is our land and the capital of our state and it is our right to have its people participate in the democratic process in order to renew the legitimacy of their leadership,” he stressed.

Al-Ahmad said that the Palestinian Authority had sent a letter to Israel regarding carrying out elections in Jerusalem, adding that the EU and other world countries had taken similar steps but Israel “ignores these letters.”

The senior Fatah and PLO leader stressed that this election will be a form of resistance against the Israeli occupation, noting that this issue of election in Jerusalem would be discussed during the Fatah Central Committee and PLO Executive Committee meetings.

(MEMO, PC, Social Media)

بعد تدخل أردوغان في إنتخاباتها حركة حماس إلى أين فهَل تصبح نصفين؟

مجلة تحليلات العصر الدولية – إسماعيل النجار

2021-04-16

حركَة المقاومة الإسلامية حماس، واحدة من أكبر الحركات التحررية الإسلامية في فلسطين وخارجها، بَرَز إسمها على الساحة الفلسطينية في شهر ديسمبر ١٩٨٧ مع إنطلاق الإنتفاضة الفلسطينية الأولى، وكانت قدَ عَرٍَفَت عن نفسها كجناح من أجنحة الإخوان المسلمين في فلسطين ولكنها في الحقيقة أحد أشكال المقاومة التي قرر الفلسطينيون تبنيها ضمن مشوار العمل المقاوم التاريخي الطويل لهم.
**عَرَّفَت حماس عن هويتها الأيديولوجية وطرحها السياسي والفكري أنها حركة جهادية تستند إلى تعاليم الإسلام وتراثه الفقهي، وتؤمن بتوسيع دائرَة الصراع ضد المشروع الصهيوني ليشمل الإطارين العربي والإسلامي إيماناً منها بأن فلسطين هيَ قضية كل الشرفاء في العالم مسلمين ومسيحيين وأن القدس هي مهد الأديان الثلاث التي يحاول الصهاينة تحويلها إلى مدينة يهودية صهيونية فاقدة لحلاوة العيش المشترك بين أطراف الأديان السماوية الثلاث.

**تؤمن الحركة بأن الصراع مع العدو الصهيوني هو صراع حضاري مصيري ذات أبعاد عقائدية وجودية،

وحدَّدَت أهدافها الرئيسية والإستراتيجية أهمها تحرير كافة الأراضي الفلسطينية من البحر إلى النهر وإقامة دولة إسلامية على تراب فلسطين،
**لَم تؤمن حركة حماس بالعمل السياسي من داخل منظمة التحرير الفلسطينية رغم إحترامها الكبير لها، ورفضت الإنضمام إليها إلَّا بشَرط إذا وقعَت منظمة التحرير معها إتفاقاً تتعهد فيه بعدم التفريط بأي شبر من أرض فلسطين التاريخية ورفض الإعتراف بالكيان الصهيوني الأمر الذي رفضته قيادة منظمة التحرير التي تعهدت بالتفاوض مع الكيان الغاصب وتبني حَل الدولتين.

**إهتَمَّت الحركة بقوَة بعمقها الإسلامي والعربي وجاهدت للحفاظ على هويتها الإسلامية والعربية وأجرَت إتصالات مع دُوَل مجلس التعاون الخليجي الذي فَرَضَ عليها شروطاً قاسية مقابل تبنيها كحركة إسلامية تحررية وكان لا بُد للحركة من التنازل قليلاً لكي لا تتعرَّىَ من محيطها التي طالما أعتبرته ثوبها الدافئ ومظلتها الدولية الشرعية،

**تَبَنَّت الجمهورية الإسلامية الحركة ودعمتها بكُل ما أؤتيَت من قوَّة وقدمت لها كل أشكال الدعم المادي والسياسي والعسكري والإعلامي، من دون أي قَيد أو شرط،
[أيضاً تَلَقَّت حماس دعماً واسعاً من دمشق التي إحتَضَنت كبار قياداتها وفتحت لها أبواب سوريا على مصراعيها من دون أي قيد أو شرط، وبقيَت الأمور على حالها حتى عام ٢٠١١ وإنطلاق شرارة الخريف الصهيوني العربي وكانت دمشق واحدة من بين أهدافه الرئيسية حيث تساقطت الأنظمة العربية وهَوَت خلال ثلاثة شهور وأصبحَ قادتها الدكتاتوريين بين قتيلٍ وسجينٍ ولاجئ خارج البلاد.

إلَّا سوريا الأسد التي قررَ رئيسها الحفاظ على الدولة وأمن المواطنين وسلامة المؤسسات التي أستهدفها الإرهابيون وإندلعت المعارك في شوارع دمشق ومحيطها، فكان لحركة حماس موقفاً سلبياً من اللذين إحتضنوهم وأعطوهم الأمان فقرروا الوقوف مع المشروع القطري السعودي الأميركي وساهموا بقتال الجيش العربي السوري على الأرض السورية من خلال وجود المخيمات الفلسطينية داخل العاصمة وخارجها وكان مخيم اليرموك أحد ساحة القتال سيطرت حركة حماس على قسم كبير منه.
*تراجعَت درجة حرارة العلاقات بين طهران وحماس وبيروت وحماس من دون أن تنقطع الإتصالات كلياً بسبب تواصل الكثير من القيادات الحمساوية مع الطرفين الإيراني واللبناني رافضين إنخراط الحركة في الصراع السوري الداخلي ومواقف رئيس الحركة {خالد مشعل} المقيم في قطر، *بينما إنقطعت العلاقات كلياً مع دمشق وأصبَحَت الأمور معقدة جداً بين الطرفين.

**لَم تَكُن تتوقَّع حماس بعد مغادرتها دمشق وإحتضار العلاقة مع طهران وحزب الله أنها ستكون في موقفٍ صعب من خلال الضغوطات الخليجية التي مورِسَت على الحرَكَة بهدف تقديم تنازلات والقبول بحَل الدولتين الذي يعني بقاموسها إعتراف بإسرائيل، ثمَ تأكدَت بإن مشروع التطبيع قائم فحاولت أن تخرج من أزمتها من خلال التوازن بين المحورين العدوين تُبقي من خلاله حماس قدماً في طهران وأُخرَى في الرياض لكن الأخيرة كانت قاسية بما يكفي لإخراج الحركة من بلادها واعتقال مسؤوليها الأمر الذي تلقفته أنقرة بإستقبال قادتها وتبني دعمها سياسياً،
بدأت الأمور تتحسن تدريجياً مع طهران بعد عزل خالد مشعل وتعيين إسماعيل هنية، فتقبلت طهران وحزب الله الأمر لكن سورية بقيت على موقفها الرافض لعودة الحركة الى دمشق رغم وساطة السيد حسن نصرالله، فتُرِك الأمر للأيام ولتغيير الظروف السياسية والعسكرية في المنطقة.

 بعد الدخول التركي إلى قطر إثر الخلاف السعودي مع الدوحَة وإخراج الرياض من معادلة الحل في سوريا، ودخول اردوغان الساحة الليبية كلاعب رئيسي بقوة،
وبعد المصالحة السعودية القطرية (المسيارة) والتقارب السعودي المصري التركي، وإحتدام الصراع بين إسرائيل والجمهورية الإسلامية الإيرانية وإحتمال حصول مواجهة مباشرة شاملة بينهما، فوجئ الجميع بإنتخاب خالد مشعل مسؤولاً لحركة حماس خارج فلسطين بالكامل،
وتسربَت معلومات عن ضغوط تركية كبيرة لأجل ذلك الأمر الذي يشير إلى أن صراعاً سياسياً متحكماً بقيادة الحركة في الداخل والخارج بين طرفين بارزين يشكل محمود الزهار ويحي السنوار وصالح العاروري وغيرهما أحد صقور طهران الأقوياء داخل الحركة، الأمر الذي يشير إلى توجُه حماس نحو قرارين متناقضين خارجي وداخلي بعد إنتخاب مشعل مسؤولاً عن الحركة في الخارج،
فهل تذهب أنقرة من خلال مشروعها لشق صفوف حركة حماس وإضعافها؟

 الأمر يعود إلى شرفاء الحركة اللذين نضع بين أيديهم أمانة وحدة الحركة والفصائل كمواطنين مؤيدين للقضية الفلسطينية.

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

April 7, 2021

By Ramzy Baroud

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Israeli occupation continues to implement its Judaization plan in occupied Al-Quds

The Judaization of Al-Quds, Jerusalem - How it Works - Palestine Chronicle

SOURCE

Created on Saturday, 20 March 2021 19:11

The Israeli occupation authorities continue to implement their plan to Judaize the occupied city of Al-Quds through expanding settlement building operations that threaten thousands of Palestinians with forcible displacement in a new ethnic cleansing crime committed amid the complete silence of the international community.

The Palestinian Liberation Organization’s (PLO) National Bureau for Defending the Lands and Resisting settlements said in its weekly report issued on Saturday that thousands of Palestinians in Al-Quds are facing the risk of displacement due to the settlement occupation plans in the city, especially in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood, where the occupation authorities have notified 2200 Palestinians to evacuate their houses with the aim of handing them over to settlers, and in Al-Bustan neighborhood in the town of Silwan, south of Al-Aqsa Mosque, where the occupation delivered notifications about demolishing 100 houses inhabited by about 1500 Palestinians with the aim of evacuating Al-Quds from the Palestinian presence and Judaizing it.

The report indicated that the occupation authorities announced a plan to change the features of the historic markets in the old city of Al-Quds as part of implementing their plans to change the city’s demographic character and its Arab Palestinian identity. The report pointed out that the occupation is also escalating demolition operations against Palestinian houses and facilities in Shuafat Camp and the towns of Al-Issawiya and Kafr Aqab in occupied Al-Quds to seize the locals’ lands and expand settlement activities.

 According to the report, the occupation continued throughout the past week to displace the Palestinians from the northern Jordan Valley in the West Bank. It announced a plan to demolish houses in the water and antiquities-rich village of Khirbet al-Mateh, threatening 700 Palestinians with displacement, indicating that this plan is paving the way for the seizure of 45 thousand dunums of the Jordan Valley lands.

The report went on to say that the occupation authorities seized more than 75 dunums of Palestinian lands in several villages and towns in the cities of Bethlehem, Al-Khalil and Salfit and bulldozed 100 dunums in a village east of Qalqilya, and in wide areas of land in Ramallah, Nablus and Bethlehem with the aim of expanding a number of settlements.

The report added that the occupation demolished a house and three agricultural facilities in Silwan city, four houses in Issawiya in occupied Al-Quds, five agricultural facilities in Beit Ta’amer area in Bethlehem and several houses and facilities in the villages of Kharabsheh in Ariha city and Beit Furik in Nablus.

The report indicated that the Israeli settlers continue to attack the cities and towns of the West Bank under the protection of the occupation forces. They stormed the village of Beit Iksa northwest of occupied Al-Quds where they attacked Palestinian houses and properties. They also stormed the archaeological area of Burj Al-Bardawil, west of Silwad town in Ramallah and razed Palestinian lands in the vicinity of the Al-Ibrahimi Mosque in Al-Khalil.

The settlers seized wide areas of Palestinian lands in the village of Wadi Al-Nis in Bethlehem to establish a settlement outpost and uprooted dozens of olive and fruit trees from the Palestinians lands in the towns of Qaryut, Burin, and Jalud in Nablus and attacked Palestinian farmers in the town of Masafer Yatta in Al-Khalil.

Hamda Mustafa

Palestine elections: A leap into the unknown for Fatah and Hamas

HearstDavid Hearst is co-founder and editor-in-chief of Middle East Eye. He is a commentator and speaker on the region and analyst on Saudi Arabia. He was The Guardian’s foreign leader writer, and was correspondent in Russia, Europe, and Belfast. He joined the Guardian from The Scotsman, where he was education correspondent.

David Hearst

18 February 2021 14:31 UTC

Both parties are going into the elections without an agreed vision for Palestine and a detailed plan for obtaining it

You can tell when elections are being planned in the occupied West Bank. 

This is the fifth time elections across Palestine have been attempted in the past 15 years since they were held in 2006, when Hamas, to everyone’s surprise, not least their own, swept the board. This time President Mahmoud Abbas appears to be serious about holding them.

How can one tell? Because between them his Preventive Security and Israeli forces are arresting anyone who opposes their candidates. The Palestinian Prisoners Club says that 456 civilians were arrested in January in the West Bank and on one night alone in February, 31 Palestinians were rounded up. 

A Palestinian member of Central Elections Commission displays an ID to a colleague as they check the work of the first Voter Information and Registration Centre in Gaza City on 10 February, 2021 (AFP)

A serious escalation

The arrests are politically colour blind. Every faction has been targeted – even those that have not yet been established. For over a year, Israeli forces have been targeting hundreds of young men and women from a left-wing social and political network.

Politically motivated arrests are nothing new in the West Bank. What may surprise some is that the Hamas leadership in Gaza is still pushing ahead with the election plan regardless

They face charges of  “terrorist activity,” “visiting an enemy state” or even vaguer “communicating with foreign agents”. Their interrogators put them in little doubt about why they are being detained . They want fear to spread in the community.  Detention and torture are tools to stop the network before it can grow. Hamas members in the West Bank are threatened they will be next if they dare to stand. 

Khaled al-Hajj, a Hamas leader in Jenin who supported President Abbas’s elections decrees, was arrested last week. Another Hamas member, who had just had surgery for cancer, was severely beaten.

Wasfi Kabha, a former Hamas minister, told MEE: “We are facing a dangerous and serious escalation, not only by the occupation, but also by the security services that belong to the PA. That arrest campaign aims to scare, intimidate and terrorise members of the movement and also those who have sympathy for Hamas. The arrests are meant to influence the election. There are many others that the Israeli forces threaten to arrest if they nominate themselves or take part in the elections.”

Kabha added: “The Palestinian security services severely beat Abdel Nasser Rabbi despite the fact he had suffered from cancer and had surgery a short time ago. Unfortunately, Palestinian security services finish the job of whoever Israel can not manage to arrest.”

Politically motivated arrests are nothing new in the West Bank. What may surprise some is that the Hamas leadership in Gaza is still pushing ahead with the election plan regardless.

A divided Hamas

The interesting question is why? During three rounds of negotiations with Fatah in Beirut and Ankara, the Hamas leadership insisted on holding all three elections for the Legislative Council , the presidency, and the National Council of the PLO simultaneously. This is because they did not trust Abbas to keep his word once he himself had been reelected as president.After 15-year wait, Palestinian elections face new obstacles following law amendments

Hamas also insisted that the PA end its security cooperation with Israel and the arrest campaign in the West Bank. For a while Abbas complied, only to abandon that strategy when it became clear to him last November that Donald Trump was out of office. In subsequent talks in Cairo, Hamas failed to get either demand. 

The other two factions, the Islamic Jihad and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), both tabled reservations. Islamic Jihad announced it was not running for the elections, but the delegation from Hamas stayed in.

Proponents of the deal with Fatah claim that Hamas were given guarantees that some 38,000 civil servants in Gaza would not only be paid by the PA, but receive permanent tenure. They claim a new election court would be formed to avoid the heavily weighted constitutional court that Abbas created. They also claim Hamas would secure the collaboration of the international community, including renewing relations with the European Union. They also claim that no one could criminalise the resistance.

Opponents of the deal within Hamas say all of these promises are wishful thinking. They point out that the issue of civil servants, which is at least a decade old, has been put off until after the elections. A new election court has not been announced by Abbas and, even if it were to be formed, it could not supplant the existing constitutional court, which remains the highest legal authority in the West Bank. 

Lastly, they say that it is not in Fatah’s power to guarantee international recognition of Hamas, which is still designated as a terrorist organisation by both the US and the EU

This combination of pictures created on 11 January, 2019 shows (L) Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas and Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh (AFP)
This combination of pictures created on 11 January, 2019 shows (L) Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh (AFP)

Hamas’s senior leadership is clearly divided. Hamas in Gaza is hemmed in, unable to break out of the prison camp that has become Gaza following the 2006 elections, the attempted coup by Fatah leader Mohammed Dahlan, and the split with Fatah. They are fed up with being held responsible for the continuing siege and are desperate to find a way out. Money is also running out. Iran is no longer funding them as before, and there are signs that other foreign backers are pushing them into Fatah’s arms.  Israel’s arrest campaign aims to destroy a new Palestinian movement

But the anger at the crackdown on Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the PFLP members in the West Bank is mounting. While there is sympathy over the conditions they face in Gaza, the Hamas leadership, which is now based entirely in the enclave, will face mounting pressure to pull out of elections in which Hamas can only lose. 

No one expects a rerun of the 2006 result.

One measure of the backlash which the leadership in Gaza will face is spelled out in a leaked letter from one of the most prominent Hamas leaders in Israeli prisons. Ibrahim Hamid was a leader of the military wing in the West Bank during the Second Intifada and received one of the harshest terms: 54 concurrent life imprisonment sentences. Hamid called the decision by Hamas’ political bureau to run in the elections “hasty”.

He said the decision had been made independently of the Shura Council, a consultative body that elects Hamas’s politburo, and without the full knowledge of the prisoners’ movement. Ibrahim added that running for the elections would only serve Abbas’s purpose of reviving his legitimacy while curtailing that of Hamas.

In Hamid’s analysis, Hamas is facing a lose/lose scenario: should it win the elections, what is to prevent a repeat of the 2006 scenario, which launched the siege of Gaza and the split with Fatah? Should it lose the elections, would Hamas hand over both the administration and its rockets to Fatah in Gaza?

Even if Abbas kept his word and created a genuinely representative national Palestinian government, and Hamas was allowed to return to parliament and enter the PLO, what would stop Israel from arresting MPs as they do now? 

Fatah’s problems

Fatah is faring no better. Abbas’s drive to refresh his mandate and seek the legitimacy he has lost as one of the architects of Oslo is being threatened by two other Fatah leaders. Abbas has long been aware of the plan which I first revealed in 2016 to replace him with his arch-rival Dahlan.

The plan for a post-Abbas era was hatched by the United Arab Emirates, Jordan and Egypt. Since 2016, Egypt and Jordan have not stopped pressuring Abbas to reconcile with Dahlan. The latest message was passed to Abbas when Egypt and Jordan’s heads of intelligence visited Ramallah recently.

The new card in this operation is the man who ran against Abbas and then withdrew his candidacy in the 2005 presidential election, the Fatah leader Marwan Barghouti, a leader of the First and Second Intifadas who is in prison on five concurrent life sentences. 

Barghouti remains a consistently popular figure of the resistance. At one point he polled higher than both Abbas and Ismail Haniyeh, the Hamas leader, for the post of president. In April 2017 Barghouti organised a hunger strike of Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails.

This time round, Barghouti announced his intention to run for the presidency and the PNC through one of his supporters, Raafat Ilayyan. Ilayyan quoted Barghouti as saying that a united Fatah list “should be open to all including those accused of taking sides and those sacked from the movement”.

A man holds a photo of prominent Palestinian prisoner Marwan Barghouti calling for his release during a rally supporting those detained in Israeli jails after hundreds of them launched a hunger strike, in the West Bank town of Hebron on April 17, 2017
A man holds a photo of prominent Palestinian prisoner Marwan Barghouti calling for his release during a rally on 17 April 2017 (AFP)

This was a clear reference to Dahlan, who lives in exile and has been sentenced in absentia to three years in prison on corruption charges and expelled from the party. Dahlan’s lawyer at the time called the conviction a “cleansing exercise” for Abbas.

Does Fatah want to liberate Palestine from the occupation, or does it want to govern as a surrogate for Israel, whatever conditions it is put under?

After nearly two decades behind bars, Barghouti wants to get out of jail. Is Dahlan, who is Israel’s preferred Palestinian leader, the Fatah leader’s get out of jail card? Barghouti’s announcement ruffled feathers in Fatah. Jibril Rajoub, secretary general of Fatah’s central committee, who led negotiations with Hamas, accused foreign countries of meddling in the Palestinian elections. 

Rajoub told Palestinian TV: “Some messages have been received from some countries trying to interfere in the path of dialogue, including Arab states which rushed [to normalise relations with Israel]. However, Fatah’s position is clear and does not take directions from any foreign capital.” 

In their campaign to position Dahlan as the next Palestinian leader, Egypt, Jordan and UAE are keen to exploit the distrust between Fatah and Hamas. The latest sign of this is the arrival of the first of what will be a large group of Dahlan men in Gaza after many years in exile. This could only have been achieved with the consent of Hamas leaders in Gaza. 

The true winner of the election may, therefore, be a man who does not even stand on the ballot. One way or another, Dahlan is determined to return to Palestine at the expense of both Abbas and Hamas. 

The jockeying for position within Fatah is about power. But aside from this, Fatah has a real problem with its identity and its purpose. Does Fatah want to liberate Palestine from the occupation, or does it want to govern as a surrogate for Israel, whatever conditions it is put under?

Rajoub and Dahlan are sworn enemies only because they are rivals. Neither has a vision for a free Palestine. Abbas momentarily found his voice as a Palestinian leader in pushing back against the normalisation of ties with Israel, which he called a betrayal. But as soon it became clear Trump was on his way out, Abbas tossed his principles out of the window and returned to business as usual both with Washington and Israel.

The real leaders

Who then are the real leaders of this struggle? For this, we should not look to elections but to what is happening on the streets because it is only here that liberation movements are reborn. That was the case when the late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat started Fatah and when Hamas became a dominant force in the First Intifada. No one, either in Ramallah or Gaza, is leading or directing events that are now taking place in Palestine.

Israel is playing a delaying game, and unhappily, both Fatah and Hamas leaders are playing into its hands

It has been a long time since there were major demonstrations by Palestinian citizens of Israel. Earlier this month, protests erupted in several towns and villages. The spark this time is the crime rate and the lack of policing. But the Palestinian flags and the slogans tell a different story, one that has not been seen or heard since the First Intifada. 

There are more and more youth initiatives taking root in the West Bank, including the one Israeli forces are so keen to dismantle. There is clearly a new generation of protest underway that is independent of Fatah, Hamas or the now divided Joint List in the Israeli Knesset.

In the diaspora, the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement (BDS) is becoming an international movement. This, too, is independent of any Palestinian leadership. Rudderless, there is every chance that a new Palestinian movement in and outside Palestine will seize control. 

Israel is playing a delaying game, and, unhappily, leaders of both Fatah and Hamas  – one crippled by its decision to recognise Israel, the other imprisoned by it – are playing into its hands. If this continues, the impetus to break the deadlock will come from the streets, as it always has done in the past.

No vision

What a contrast Palestinian leaders make to other liberation movements. When Nelson Mandela walked out of prison on 11 February 1990, he made a speech that resonates to this day. He said the armed struggle would continue until apartheid collapsed. He called on the international community to continue the boycott of the apartheid regime.

Mandela and the ANC showed determination and vision to the end. Both are sadly lacking in Palestine

“The factors which necessitated the armed struggle still exist today. We have no option but to continue. We express the hope that a climate conducive to a negotiated settlement would be created soon so that there may no longer be the need for the armed struggle… To lift sanctions now would be to run the risk of aborting the process towards the complete eradication of apartheid. Our march to freedom is irreversible. We must not allow fear to stand in our way,” Mandela said.

Compare this to what Fatah has done. It signed the Oslo agreement that criminalised the armed struggle and opened the way for Israel to normalise its relations with China, the Soviet Union in its last days, India and many African countries. Oslo gave nothing to the Palestinians. It ended up giving a lot to Israel, culminating in the opening of embassies in Abu Dhabi and Manama. 

The Palestinian Authority created by Oslo became a surrogate of Israeli forces, even when Israel was starving Ramallah of tax revenue collected on its behalf. In Abbas’s own words, the PA provided Israel with “the cheapest occupation in history”.

What did Abbas get in return? Another 600,000 Israeli settlers in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. 

Mandela and the African National Congress showed determination and vision to the end. Both are sadly lacking in Palestine. The mice of this struggle are in Ramallah. The lions are on the street – where they have always been.

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

Related

⁨إصلاح “حماس”، عمرو علان يساجل أحمد يوسف

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

إصلاح “حماس”، عمرو علان يساجل أحمد يوسف

عمرو علان

 عربي 21، الخميس 31 كانون الأول\ديسمبر 2020

نشر د. أحمد يوسف مؤخرا مقالا بعنوان “لأخي خالد مشعل، حماس وجدلية الإصلاح والتغيير”، وجاء المقال على صيغة نصيحة لحركة “حماس” ولرئيس مكتبها السياسي السابق السيد خالد مشعل بهدف تقويم المسار وسد الثغرات وتقوية الحركة حسب تصور د. أحمد. 

لكن جل ما عدَّه د. أحمد نصائح إصلاحية كانت في الحقيقة تساعد على زيادة اعوجاج المسار – إن كان مسار الحركة شابه اعوجاج – وتفتح الباب على مصراعيه للتنازلات في الثوابت عوضا عن سد الثغرات، وفيها مما يهدم قوة الحركة الحقيقية إذا ما استصاغتها قيادة الحركة.

ويبدو أن ما ورد في المقال المذكور يتجاوز كونه حالة فردية إلى كونه يمثل وجهة نظر شريحة معينة من أبناء حركة المقاومة الإسلامية “حماس”. 

ولا يدّعي كاتب هذه السطور أنه أحد أبناء هذه الحركة، لكن منطلقا من الحرص على كل فصائل المقاومة الفلسطينية، التي تعد حماس عمودها الفقري، والتي باتت تشكل يد الشعب الفلسطيني الطولى وسنده الصلب، هو ما اقتضى هذا الرد.

حماس” والمعترك السياسي

يقول د. أحمد إنه كان من أوائل من دعوا إلى دخول معترك السياسة والحُكْم، ويتحسر على تأخر حركة حماس في اتخاذ هذه الخطوة، لكنه في الوقت نفسه يختلف مع السيد خالد مشعل على كون خوض حماس لانتخابات 2006 ودخولها معترك السلطة والحُكْم قد حمى ظهر المقاومة كما كان مرجوا، وهو محق في هذا التقييم، فكيف إذن لا تؤخذ هذه التجربة ونتائجها بالحسبان عند الدعوة إلى الغوص أكثر في دهاليز السياسة والحُكْم؟ 

وهنا يجدر التذكير بكون أول من عد انتخابات 2006 غير شرعية كانت أمريكا ومن لف لفها من دعاة الديمقراطية، رغم شهادة الجميع بنزاهة تلك الانتخابات بما في ذلك حركة فتح ذاتها. أليس في هذا عبرة لمن يَعدّ أن تلك الدول التي يرجى مخاطبتها في السياسة كخصم سياسي لن تعترف بحركات المقاومة كندّ سياسي حتى تتخلى عن الثوابت؟ ناهيك عن تخليها عن المقاومة المسلحة كمنهج وطريق للتحرير؟

وفي الواقع – ومع تقديرنا لكلام السيد خالد مشعل – فإن دخول حركة حماس انتخابات 2006 كان خطأ في التقدير، فهو أولا: لم يؤمّن للمقاومة وحركة حماس عموما أي حصانة، وثانيا: كان بمعنى أو بآخر اعترافا ضمنيا بأوسلو رغم تصريحات حماس بعكس ذلك، ورغم عدم رغبة حماس بالاعتراف بمسار أوسلو، فالسياسة ممارسة، لا مجرد مواقف تفقد قيمتها إذا ما اقترنت بالفعل، وعلى المرء أن يعترف بأن رفض مخرجات أوسلو ومن ثم دخول انتخابات للمشاركة في سلطة هي أحد مخرجات أوسلو فيه من التناقض ما لا يمكن تجاهله.

ومن ثم يذكر د. أحمد فيما ذَكَر لدعم وجهة نظره خذلان بعض الحركات الإسلامية والعروبية التي كانت حماس تعول عليها بما نراه من انبطاح واتفاقيات تطبيع مخزية. 

حسنا، أليس أحد أهداف هذه الاتفاقيات بث الوهن في عَضُد حركات المقاومة والضغط عليها نفسيا؟ وإيهامها بأنه لم يعد لها سند ولا نصيرعلها ترضخ للمسارات السياسية طريقا عوضا عن طريق المقاومة والكفاح المسلح؟ 

نعم يألم الجميع لما نراه من هرولة للارتماء في أحضان العدو، لكن هذا لا يغير شيئا على الأرض وفي الميدان، فلقد طورت حماس في ظل السنوات العجاف التي مرت من قدراتها التسليحية أضعافا، وحفرت عشرات الكيلومترات من الأنفاق، وتحولت المقاومة إلى جيش يحسب له ألف حساب، ولكم في المناورات المشتركة الأخيرة “الركن الشديد” مثالا، وإن هذا الطريق هو الذي يحبط أهداف العدو من إسقاط بعض الأنظمة والحركات في براثن التطبيع، وأما الغرق أكثر في بحور السلطة فلن يكون مصيره أفضل مما وصلت إليه السلطة الوطنية الفلسطينية، التي لم تصمد على قرار وقف التنسيق الأمني الشكلي سوى أسابيع، حتى خرج علينا حسين الشيخ ليعلن انتصار الشعب الفلسطيني وعودة الحال لما كان عليه بعد استلامه ورقة من مجرد ضابط مخابرات صهيوني، وبالمناسبة كان شح الأموال وضيق الحال الاقتصادي من أهم دوافع السلطة لإعلان عودة التنسيق الأمني والخروج علينا بتصريح حسين الشيخ المخزي بكل المعايير، وهذه نفس الظروف التي أشار إليها د. أحمد في مطلع مقاله، ولعله بهذا يقرأ في كتاب الرئيس محمود عباس.

النظام الداخلي لحماس وحديث الهدنة

ويمضي د. أحمد في مقاله بعد ذلك لتعداد بعض النقاط التي يرى فيها خللا، ومن بينها على سبيل المثال: دعوته إلى تطوير النظام الداخلي لحركة حماس، ولعملية اختيار القيادات فيها، وهذا أمر مشروع ومحمود بالتأكيد، لكن مع مراعات منهج التطوير السليم، وإدراك كون حركة حماس حركة مقاومة وتحرير لا دولة، فصحيح أنه يجب بث الدماء الجديدة في صفوف القيادات والاستفادة من طاقات أبناء حركة حماس المخضرمين، لكن من الصحيح أيضا أن معيار اختيار القيادات الأساسي في حركات التحرير يبقى سِجِل تلك القيادات الجهادي والنضالي، وهذا نهج كل حركات المقاومة والتحرير عبر التاريخ، فلا تقاد حركات المقاومة (بالتكنوقراط) والاختصاصيين، ويُذكِّر هذا بما كانت تتداوله بعض قيادات فتح عن أبو عمار – رحمة الله عليه – بعد إنشاء السلطة، وبعد تصديقهم لأكذوبة أنه بات لنا دولة، فكانوا يتهامسون بأن أبا عمار ليس رجل المرحلة، حيث مقتضيات إدارة الدولة تختلف عن متطلبات إدارة حركة نضال وطني، والكل يعرف بقية القصة، وما آلت إليه حركة فتح بعد إقصاء كل من كان له تاريخ نضالي من صفوفها لصالح (التكنوقراط) على شاكلة سلام فياض وغيره.

ثم يقول د. أحمد إنه قد آن الأوان لعقد هدنة أو استراحة محارب، وليته وضح لنا مفهوم الهدنة التي يقترحها، ألم تعقد حماس عدة اتفاقيات تهدئة؟ لكن دائما كان العدو من يخرقها ولا ينفّذ ما التزم به، فالهدنة المقبولة من وجهة نظر العدو هي تلك التي تسلم المقاومة بمقتضاها سلاحها أو تتوقف عن الإعداد من زيادة السلاح كما ونوعا وحفر الأنفاق وغير ذلك، فهل هذا هو الثمن الذي يُقترَح على حركات المقاومة وحماس دفعه؟

المقاومة السلمية

 وفي نقطة أخرى متصلة يدعو د. أحمد إلى تبنّي منهج مقاوم يردع العدو ويكشف جرائمه، ملمحا إلى المقاومة السلمية، ويتعجب المرء من هكذا كلام وكأن المقاومة السلمية تردع عدوا أو تكبح مغتصبا، نعم المقاومة السلمية تعد أحد أشكال المقاومة لكن لا يجوز بحال تبنيها كمنهج وأساس للمقاومة، فالكفاح المسلح وحده من يردع العدو، ولو كانت مقاومة الشموع تردع محتلا لفلحت مقاومة من اتخذها نهجا من قبْل، فأي نصيحة هذه التي تؤدي إلى تسليم رقاب المقاومين للصهيوني كي يذبحهم على مذبح تجربة المجرب؟ وأما فضح جرائم الاحتلال، فليكن د. أحمد متأكدا بأن أولئك الذين يرغب بفضح العدو أمامهم هم ذاتهم شركاء حتى أخمص قدميهم في جرائم هذا العدو، ولا يلزمهم شرح ولا توضيح.

حزب سياسي للإسلاميين!


أما الطامة فكانت في قول د. أحمد “لقد آن الأوان لإنشاء حزب سياسي يتحدث باسم الإسلاميين في فلسطين، ويمثل رأس جسر لهم، بعيداً عن اتهامات التطرف والإرهاب”، عذرا لكن أيما تشويش في الأفكار هذا؟ هل يرضى د. أحمد وصول الحال بحماس بأن تشجب وتدين العمل المقاوم ليرضى عنها هؤلاء الذين يريد شرح جرائم الاحتلال لهم؟ ونربأ بالدكتور أحمد عن ذلك، وأيضا هل وصف حركة حماس وسائر حركات المقاومة بالإرهاب والتشدد لأنهم فعلا كذلك أم لكونهم متمسكين بحقهم وحق كل الشعب الفلسطيني في المقاومة والتحرير؟ 

وعليه ليس مفهوما ما المقصود من هذه النصيحة، وما هي طبيعة تلك الحركات الإسلامية “غير المتشددة”، ولعل مرد التشويش في الأفكار عند د. أحمد هو الإيمان بطريق السلطة والحُكْم، وإعلاء السياسة كأولوية على القوة والمقاومة اللتين تعدان مصدري صناعة السياسة ومرتكزاتها الأساسية، وبدونهما يصير العمل السياسي مجرد استجداء وحبر على ورق.

ويدعو د. أحمد إلى ضرورة إعطاء أولوية الإنفاق للمحتاجين، ولتوجيه دعم الدول العربية والإسلامية لوكالة الأونروا، مجددا القصد غير واضح تماما من هذه النصيحة ومن استخدام كلمة “أولوية” في هذا المقام،بالطبع يقع على عاتق حركة حماس مسؤولية اتجاه المحتاجين من شعبنا، كونها أحد الفصيلين الأكبرين في الساحة الفلسطينية، وكونها ارتضت تسلم السلطة في قطاع غزة، فإن كان القصد هو إيلاء هذه المسؤولية المزيد من الاهتمام عبر سد أبواب الهدر التي باتت وبصراحة كثيرة في نشاطات فروع حركة حماس في خارج فلسطين، عبر كثرة المؤتمرات الخطابية التي لا تقدم ولا تؤخر كثيرا، والتي تتسم في الكثير من الأحيان بالبذخ غير المقبول نهائيا، وصارت مصدر استرزاق للبعض وللزبائنية، وحيث صار جزء لا يستهان به من كوادر حركة حماس في الخارج عبء على كاهل الحركة بدلا من أن يكونوا رافدا لها.

فإذا كان المقصود هو سد هذا الباب وتحويل جزء من هذا الهدر لدعم المحتاجين من شعبنا فلا غبار على ذلك، وأما إن كان المقصود تحويل حركة حماس لجمعية خيرية، وتقزيم القضية الفلسطينية لتصبح قضية محتاجين ففي هذا انحراف كبير، فمسؤولية حركة حماس الأساسية مع باقي حركات المقاومة العمل على تحرير الأرض، والتحرير له أولوياته المعروفة، وهذا ما يحل مشكلة المحتاجين من أصلها التي ما هي إلا أحد أعراض الاحتلال وضياع الأرض، وإلا سيظل شعبنا محتاجا ومحروما إلى ما شاء الله، ومع الفوارق في الفداحة وقدر المعاناة، يظل حال الشعب الفلسطيني كحال غيره من شعوب المنطقة التي اتخذت من المقاومة والصمود طريقا، فها هي الجمهورية الإسلامية في إيران ترزح تحت حصار خانق منذ قرابة الأربعين عاما، ولبنان يتحمل من الحصار والضغوط الأمريكيين بسبب تمسك حزب الله بالثوابت الدينية والوطنية وحقوق لبنان في أرضه وثرواته من غاز وغيره، وتتعرض سوريا لحرب كونية ضروس منذ عشر سنوات بسبب مواقفها الوطنية والقومية الداعمة للمقاومات في لبنان وفلسطين على حد سواء، واليوم جاؤوها بقانون قيصر الظالم ليستكمل الحصار الاقتصادي على شعبها الصامد، فهذا هو حال شعبنا وهذه هي ضريبة التحرير، وإلا فلنرتضي أن تصير حركة حماس تنتظر الفتات من تحويلات مالية “إسرائيلية” كما السلطة الوطنية الفلسطينية العتيدة.

خاتمة


الحديث يطول فيما ورد في المقال من نقاط “ونصائح”، لكن ملخص القول إن د. أحمد دعا في غير موضع من مقاله إلى استخلاص العبر والدروس من تجارب الماضي، لكن الظاهر أن د. أحمد لم يستخلص العبر من المثال الشاخص أمامنا ممثلا في مسار منظمة التحرير وما وصلت إليه، ناهيكم عن مسارات المتخاذلين الآخرين من حركات ونظام عربي متهالك، فإذا كان هذا هو المنهج فلا لوم على الذين سقطوا سقوطا مدويا في عامنا هذا الذي يصح وصفه بعام الخيانات.

*كاتب فلسطيني وباحث سياسي

The ‘Western’ Racist Roots of Israeli Apartheid

by Jeremy Salt

Source

Palestinian phoenix 4510c

Joe Biden supports a two-state solution to the ‘Palestine problem’. Well, first of all, it never was a Palestine problem. It was a  zionist problem, leading to the colonization and takeover of Palestine by a settler minority. 

Second, the two-state solution is a chimera. Israel is not interested and by supporting a two-state solution that is a delusion,  Biden is actually supporting the continuation of a policy of no solution. In fact, his bogus two-state solution is no more than a mask drawn over the face of his real policy, of continuing lavish support for Israel whatever it does. The one issue Biden does have to face is the Israeli threat to attack Iran if he dares to take the US back into the nuclear agreement breached by Trump. We have to wait to see how he works this out.   

By themselves, the Palestinians have never counted for less in the strategic and political calculations of the zionists. They are treated as a defeated people who should have surrendered long ago and true, the zionists have never been stronger at the material level,  the Palestinians never weaker. 

Only the Palestinians have the right to decide what to do next in the current calamitous situation, but friends can make suggestions and an obvious one would be the need to reconstitute themselves as a national community, building tactical and strategic consensus, before going any further.

In the absence of a two-state solution, the pendulum swings back to one state, either one  Jewish national state or one state for all.  This second aspiration takes the issue back to the 1960s and the one secular state advanced at that time by the PLO.

This soon foundered on the reef of zionist ideology, which from the beginning was based on a Jewish state established over all of Palestine.  That was the whole point of taking the land in the first place: it was a delusion to think the zionists would ever accept anything less than a Jewish state.  Israel’s extended dissembling over the past two decades has merely enabled what was intended,  its colonization of east Jerusalem and the West Bank to reach the point of what many believe to be irreversibility.   

Irreversibility has no meaning in history, of course. The examples are too numerous even to bother proving the point but apparent irreversibility manifested in the 600,000 settlers occupying East Jerusalem and the West Bank has led many Palestinians back to the idea of  one state for all across all of Palestine. 

The pooling of resources in one state with equal rights for Jews, Muslims and Christians (and anyone else) is an attractive and sensible option, of course,  even with all the immense practical difficulties that such an idea entails, beginning with acceptance of the right to return of Palestinians (and their heirs) to the places they came from,  taken over by Jewish settlers in 1948/9 as illegally as the settlers living in east Jerusalem or the West Bank since 1967.

However, even if all this could be sorted out theoretically (and a new name devised for this shared land),  the Jews of today’s Israel do not want it any more than their forebears did.   

For secular Jews living in pre-1967 Israel/occupied Palestine,  the ‘right’ of Israel to exist as a Jewish state is the rock of their collective existence:   for religious Jews living in the territories taken in 1967,  God’s mandate and not Israel’s ‘right’ to exist explains their position but the two positions dovetail in the belief of the necessity of a Jewish state, across all if not most of Palestine.

Just as there were a handful of brave Afrikaners who fought white settler apartheid, so there have always been Jews who challenge zionist racism:  Judah Magnes and the small circle around him in the 1920s-40s who believed in a binational state,  Uri Avnery and the peaceniks in the 1960s and 1970s and currently,  the scholar Ilan Pappe and the journalists Amira Hass and Gideon Levy.  They expose the lies of the state and the endorsement of its crimes by the people but they represent a tiny minority, allowing the state and the people to shrug them off. 

The similarities between apartheid South Africa and apartheid Israel should not blind people into thinking that the outcome will be the same, that one day,  like the white settlers in South Africa,  the zionists will voluntarily see the error of their ways and change course. 

As far as we can see ahead, this would be another delusion. By 1990 the small white minority of South Africa had declined to about 13 percent of the total population.  Apart from the numbers, the apartheid regime was isolated internationally, with sanctions being imposed that spelled economic ruin: ultimately it had no choice but to give in to what was manifestly inevitable.    

By comparison, while the demographics continue to change against them all the time,  Jews still constitute about 50 percent of the population of Palestine between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River. They still have sufficient numbers as well as the armed might for Israel to be able to put down any Palestinian challenge from inside.   

Furthermore,  there is little effective pressure on Israel from the ‘western’ world to change its ways.   BDS has damaged Israel,  but at the cost of a counter-reaction which has resulted in  Israel being given additional protection by the passage of anti-BDS measures by state legislatures across the US and by parliaments in Canada,  Britain, France and Germany.  The gains have been heavily offset by the cost.

The cash flow from the US continues undiminished,  and neither the UN as a collective body or any of its member governments seeks to restrain Israel in any serious way. Not only that,  but they give their fervent support to the charge of anti-semitism which Israel continues to use unscrupulously to destroy those who stand against its racism, the most recent high profile scalp being Jeremy Corbyn’s.

In such an environment of international indulgence,  with only notional marginal interest at home in a genuine one-state settlement, the Israeli government sees no need to change course.  It knows it can do virtually whatever it wants  without the ‘international community’ stepping forward to stand in its way.  Not even the killing of children on the West Bank or in Gaza have been sufficient to push it into making Israel pay for the consequences of its actions.   

Holocaust guilt helps to explain indulgence of Israel but so does the racism of the ‘west,’  past and present,  as manifested yet again by the recent slaughter of hundreds of thousands of innocent people in Middle Eastern lands.

Far from generating absolute horror at such crimes,  these deaths count for little in the ‘western’ homeland.  Black lives in the US, Canada, or Australia might matter but black or brown lives destroyed in Iraq,  Syria,  Libya, Yemen,  Palestine and numerous other places count for very little in these same countries.

The deaths of 3000 people on 9/11 were widely described as a turning point.  By comparison, no episode of the mass killing of people of color has ever been described as a turning point in history. 

These deaths have little impact in the countries where they are decided:  the faces are faceless, the names nameless,  the features featureless,  the deaths not counted,  no more than an estimate if someone asks.    

There is no turning point for these victims of racist wars:  their world will continue to turn the same way it always has done.  Their deaths do not register because they are not exceptional  – as the deaths on 9/11 were –  but only the normal continuation of what has been going on for centuries in Latin America,  Africa, the Middle East and South-east Asia, with no end in sight even now, and one does not sit up and take notice of the normal.

The ending of these lives of unequal value at the hands of ‘western’ armies is ignored or quickly forgotten:  no-one in the ‘western’ homeland is ever held responsible, not the politicians launching the wars,  not the pilots firing the missiles, and not the media giving encouragement on the home front.

These two complementary forms of racism, zionist apartheid  on one hand and deeply imprinted  ‘western’ racism on the other,  have been fundamental to the success of Zionism from the beginning. 

With support continuing from the US at all levels,  and with the ‘international community’ reluctant to intervene,  it would be a delusion to think that Israel will one day voluntarily accept a genuine one-state settlement.  The great bulk of Jewish Israelis do not want it and the state will fight it tooth and claw if it ever becomes a serious threat (an extremely remote prospect at the moment).   

There are no signs that sufficient momentum can be developed to compel Israel to accept such a solution.  BDS is effective but only up to a certain point.  The ‘international community’ is not interested in challenging Israel in any meaningful way.  Arab governments never genuinely committed to the Palestine cause in the first place are now coming out of hiding and signing agreements with the enemy who never was. 

To see where any prospect of breaking this deadlock might lie, one has to look at the regional strategic situation as seen through Israeli eyes. The dominant feature in military circles is alarm, born not just of Israel’s failure to intimidate its enemies but the fact that they are stronger now than they were a decade ago. 

The exception is Syria, which has withstood the most determined attempt ever made to destroy an Arab government, has had to pay a terrible price in the loss of life and destruction of its towns and cities and is still battling armed takfiri groups in different parts of the country. It has to concentrate on its own recovery: there is not much else it can do at the moment but its strategic allies, Iran and Hizbullah, remain a standing cause of active preparation for war in Israel.

Inside their homeland, the Palestinians can be killed, bullied and beaten, and otherwise oppressed by a suffocating network of pseudo-legal ‘laws’ but Israel has no such control beyond Palestine’s borders. This external dimension of the Palestinian question –  as an Arab question, historically, politically, culturally, and geographically; as a Muslim question, with the enormous weight that this signifies; and as a human rights question that resonates around the world – has always represented the greatest threat to the zionist state,  as by themselves the Palestinians would never have been capable of overcoming the vast power wielded against them after 1918. 

Resistance to Israel by Iran and Hizbullah arises from the centrality of Palestine in Arab and Muslim consciousness.  They have paid heavily for their commitment but they have not backed off because,  to put it as it is understood in Iran and by Hizbullah, the cause is sacred. Their resistance is deeply principled,  something the ‘western’ homeland cannot allow itself to understand if Israel is to be defended,  but as much as they are demeaned and abused in the ‘western’ homeland as ‘terrorists’  it is they who have human rights and international law on their side,  not Israel.  

In this external form, from beyond Palestine’s borders, the Palestinian phoenix rises again from the ashes of its suffering to haunt its enemy.  An idea can be much harder to crush than a people, because it has to be countermanded by ideas and Israel has none in its armoury, at least not any good ones. 

In the event of another regional war, unfortunately, a probability more than a possibility, on the basis of all past experience, Iran and Hizbullah have the missile capacity to damage Israel well beyond anything it has ever experienced.

Only the trauma of such an experience is likely to push Israel in the direction of one state for everyone living in the land of Palestine,  with the doors of return opened to the refugees. This is clearly the common-sense solution, the humane solution, but it is not one that Israel is likely to embrace voluntarily.

Palestinian elections: one path for many goals ‫الانتخابات الفلسطينية: مسارٌ واحد لأهداف كثيرة

**English Machine translation Please scroll down for the Arabic original version **

Cartoon – Mother #Palestine gives #Israel agent Mahmoud Abbas a lesson on  the Right of Return | Latuff Cartoons

All Palestinian factions have been plunged into a detailed debate about the elections, without even placing them in the balance of need and benefit. Everyone was silent on the way and timing chosen by the authority’s president, Mahmoud Abbas, to hold the elections, Hamas, accepted the decrees. Abbas wants to elect the “Legislative Council”, then the presidency, as the “National Council of the Liberation Organisation”, However, Abbas” wants to ensure that he remains in his chair, and to prepare plans to contain “Hamas” or reduce its representation, Fatah faces serious divisions that could fragment the movement in his life before he leaves, a scenario that he has not been accounted for and is now firmly working to prevent. The only constant is that as long as he is alive, he will not budge from his position, and that what forced him to hold elections is only the American-European, Arab, requests for the considerations of each party. Hamas, which advocates that it is “compelled” to run in elections and pressured it — in a repetition of the 2006 scenario — has decided to work to harvest the majority if possible, while Islamic Jihad remains on its previous position, with the possibility of participating in the “national” elections in whether it will lead to a change in the PLO’s doctrine. Between this and that, the organisation’s factions and “independent” figures assess the proportions they can get to cross the entry threshold, and better alliances if they are forced.

Three-way split threatens Fatah: The Solution in Barghouti’s Hand

Mai Reda

Monday, February 1, 2021

Ramallah | Since PA President Mahmoud Abbas issued a presidential decree setting a date for the elections, as a result of a U.S.-European-Arab request to renew “legitimacy” and arrange the region, internal “Fateh” differences have begun to surface, foreshadowing divisions within the movement that may contest the elections with three lists: one affiliated with the Central Committee and supporting Abbas, the second supported by the prisoner Marwan Barghouti and the youth group, and the third for the current dismissed leader Mohammed Dahlan (reformist) will continue to count on Fatah even if the latter rejects it.

PFLP has not resolved its position on participation because it doubts Abbas’s intentions (APA)

The “Fateh” projections indicate Barghouti’s intention to run for president, and to form a list in the legislative elections that precede it, a “nightmare” that haunts Fatah’s first-grade leaders. But Marwan’s son, Kassam Barghouti, said his father “does not yet have an official position on the matter… On Tuesday, the date of the lawyer’s visit to Barghouti will be conveyed from him, pointing out that “everything that is rumoured in the press is not official.” However, according to well-informed sources in the movement, who preferred not to be named, the subject is “very sensitive”, so within days he will meet the secretary of Fateh’s central committee, Jibril Rajoub, Barghouti in prison to dissuade him from running against Abbas, and to try to satisfy him by putting him at the top of Fateh’s list in the legislative council. The sources add: «Barghouti is very angry with the behaviour of the authority about his case, and feels that he was left alone, especially in the strike of dignity announced years ago,» but «it is unlikely to depart from the framework of the movement because it is one of its founders».

A few days ago, Fateh leaders Azzam al-Ahmad and Jamal Nazzal vowed that the movement would hold accountable any of its members who might fight it by running independently “difficult”, but Al-Ahmad added that “Barghouti is cut off from politics and spent his life in prison, and cannot meet the wishes of our people”! However, Fateh’s legislative member Hatem Abdel Kader told Al-Akhbar that, according to Barghouti’ lawyer, the man would run for president, but we do not know how the “Fateh” pressure will affect him. Barghouti entered his 19th year in Israeli prisons on charges of leading formations of the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, the military wing of Fateh, while circles close to him are rumoured to have many concerns about his fate, and what he is currently interested in getting out of prison, especially if there is a prisoner exchange at the hands of the resistance.

Away from the man’s position on running for the presidency, there is a “Fateh” approach calling, if the official movement’s list does not meet the conditions that would ensure its success (e.g., including competent, honest, experienced, professional and militant personalities), to create another list that meets the previous conditions, says Abdel Kader, noting that Abbas has threatened to use “force” against any other list called Fateh, a rival to that official. Other sources confirm Abdel Kader’s speech, saying that there is a list led by al-Shabaab ( young people), which will be supported by Barghouti, and that there may be figures from the Central Committee and other authority at the Level of the West Bank and Gaza. This list is “a haven for disgruntled people to power, and by the way they will not ally with Dahlan, but may be coordinated after the elections if they win, with the aim of restoring consideration to Fatah,” the sources added.

There is an official list of “central” and another for Dahlan and a third supported by Barghouti


ياسر عرفات – اليرموكYarmouk63

As for the “reformist”, he intends to participate in a parallel list and promote it with leaders Dahlan is working to buy the loyalty of some of them inf the West Bank and Gaza, and he appointed a few days ago two spokespersons of the current, the owners of the “shocking names of Fatah and the Authority”, according to sources close to his current. “Dahlan has monitored this list and its success in tens of millions of dollars with UAE funding.” The current spokesman, Imad Mohsen, has already said that if Fateh does not include them in its list, “we will go to the elections with an independent list of legal and academic Fateh figures, because the free Fateh will not be driven like a herd based on the whims of one person,” referring to Abbas.

Commenting on these divisions, Fatah leader Abdullah Abdullah told Al-Akhbar that Dahlan is no longer Fatah, and therefore his descent into the elections does not affect the unity of the movement. Barghouti will be contacted by the Central Committee, stressing that it is the frameworks of the movement (the central, the revolutionary council and the advisory council) that decide the presidential candidate, “and if you decide a name, everyone should abide by it… I don’t think Barghouti sings outside Fatah.” With regard to the electoral map and the official list, Abdullah said: “After the Cairo meeting, we will determine who will be at the top of the list based on the ideas that will be presented at the meeting, and we will decide whether the movement will be at the top of the list alone or with other factions of the PLO, and we will not anticipate the events.”

Dahlan’s current realises that Fatah’s polarisation will be a factor in his favour in the elections, as there has already been a split in the movement’s leaders’ statements about its presidential candidate. However, The Kaban’s egg remains in Barghouti’s hand, which public opinion polls show is the most popular Palestinian in the West Bank at least, the most recent of which was conducted by the Palestinian Center for Political and Research Research (PSR) a few days ago, with Barghouti winning 61% of the vote if he was placed not in front of Abbas, but in front of Hamas’ political bureau chief, Ismail Haniyeh. According to the same poll, if Haniyeh is placed in front of Abbas, the former will get 50% against 43% for the second. The Center also estimated that if Barghouti forms an independent list, he will get 25% of the public vote, while 19% of the public said that in this case they will vote for the official Fatah list, which is confirmed by a source in the Ramallah government who said that «50% of the official Fatah prefers Barghouti for the presidency over Abbas». As for Dahlan, the poll predicted that his current list would get 7% of the public, while in this case 27% would vote for Fateh’s official list against him.

Hamas seeks majority… And “Jihad” is studying its options

Rajab Al-Madhoun

«حماس» تسعى للغالبية... و«الجهاد» تدرس خياراتها
Recommendations have been issued to the government in Gaza to improve dealing with people and avoid any problems (AFP)

Hamas continues to prepare and prepare its initial list for legislative elections, while Islamic Jihad continues to consider the possibility of contesting elections of its origin and any parts it may participate in, and the two issues remain awaiting the outcome of the Cairo Dialogues

Gaza | As part of Palestinian preparations for the first part of the elections next May, a Hamas source told Al-Akhbar that the movement has prepared its initial list of legislative elections, including Gaza and the West Bank, but is “considering options other than entering a single list in its name,” including “the possibility of a list of alliances with resistance factions, and with independents, to achieve an appropriate number of seats,” stressing that the directives of the Political Bureau and the Shura Council approved the entry of the elections strongly and work to win more than 2006 elections.

Although Hamas has not begun to “mobilise the organisational cadre” for the elections and implement the popular mobilisation plan to vote for it in Gaza, it has completed the formation of its central and sub-committees to implement its campaign based on the Program of Resistance and Resilience in the Face of Occupation, the source says, which reveals instructions to the Government branch in Gaza to “complete the efforts that have been strengthened over the past two years to improve the reality of government work with the population, prevent any current crises, and provide all necessary services to citizens.” The initial list includes symbolic figures in the movement, as well as the young faces whose number swelled, noting that the largest share will be professional and community figures with a large presence within Gaza and the West Bank, as the movement seeks to avoid the problems of 2006, when the main criticism was that its list consisted mostly of sheikhs and graduates of sharia colleges.

Regardless of the nature of the list, Hamas has resolved its intention to participate strongly


At the same time, the source says, the movement has developed a number of scenarios for the elections, including a single list or a list with Fatah, a list with resistance factions or even a list with “independents,” but will wait for the outcome of the Cairo dialogues next week to determine the nature of their participation, and which scenarios will result in the biggest victory. These dialogues, it seems, will be a watershed in evaluating the elections and their seriousness, the source explains, adding that “we have formed committees to process the files for dialogue in the issues of justice, security, personnel and the reality of the situation in Gaza, the West Bank and freedom of expression… We have also formed a central high committee in the political bureau to follow up on the legislative elections.”

Although it seeks to win the most seats, Hamas does not want to form a government alone if it wins a majority, but rather favours a government of national unity or a competent government to avoid a new blockade. The “Hamas” position on the mobilisation for the National Assembly elections remains the same, but the decision to enter the presidential elections has not yet been decided, to be discussed after the results of the “legislative”

In contrast, The Islamic Jihad has not resolved its position on participating in the legislative council elections, preferring to discuss the move after the Cairo dialogues, according to statements by its leaders. However, sources said that there are opinions within the movement pushing towards partial participation, as opposed to a majority rejecting the origin of participation that the movement has avoided many times before while announcing that it continues to adopt the option of resistance, away from the secretions of the Oslo Agreement all. While Jihad has a strong desire to enter the National elections under certain conditions, it has postponed discussions on these conditions until it is sure that these elections, scheduled for the end of the eighth month, can take place, and the movement has not resolved its position on the presidential elections and any figures that could support them through its cadres.

«PFLP» hesitating… The rest are afraid to fall.

Rajab Al-Madhoun

Monday, February 1, 2021

«الشعبية» متردّدة... والبقية يخشون السقوط
PFLP has not resolved its position on participation because it doubts Abbas’s intentions (APA)

Palestine (PFLP), has not resolved its position on participating in the elections. This is because he continues to question the intentions of the authority’s president, Mahmoud Abbas, and the possibility of using the Constitutional Court against his opponents if Fatah does not win. Al-Shaabia (PFLP) shares its participation with consensus in Cairo on the points of contention, most notably “the formation of the electoral court by national consensus away from the uniqueness and manipulation that took place in the Supreme Council for the Elimination of Abbas”, as confirmed by the Deputy Secretary-General of the Front, Abu Ahmed Fouad.

A leading source in al-Shaabia (PFLP), told Al-Akhbar, that the Central Committee and the Political Bureau have not yet decided on the decision to participate, but confirms that “all options are available, including participation in a national list of all factions, alliance with Hamas, or a single list similar to the 2006 elections” in which the FRONT won 4.2% by three seats. The source points out that there is internal opposition to entering into a unified list with the organization’s factions, including Fatah, for fear of exploiting the list, strengthening its uniqueness with the Palestinian decision, strengthening its political program based on negotiations with the occupation, as well as differences with Fatah that have not been resolved at all.

The front refused to be under the umbrella of Fateh and shared one list


In parallel, Fatah is seeking to bring together PLO factions to enter into a single list with them in the legislative elections. Since the decision to hold the elections, the organisation’s factions have held meetings, most recently in the middle of last month, to discuss how they will enter the elections and achieve good results that will cover their weak popularity. Fearing the exposure of its low popularity, a number of them are seeking to form a unified list to bypass the threshold and entry of the Legislative Council, which was called for by The Democratic Front’s Central Committee member, Mahmoud Khalaf.

DPFLP meetings include the People’s Party, the Popular Struggle Front, the Palestine Liberation Front, the Palestine Arab Front, and the Palestinian Arab Front, factions that did not get the decisive percentage in the 2006 elections, and fear that their presence would end because some of them adhered to the positions of the authority, the latter’s use of them in many positions, as well as their ineffectiveness in the popular arena. Therefore, it wants to boost its chances now to achieve more than 10% for all of them, but the fear of disagreements over the formation of a unified list among them has led some to demand a reduction of the discount rate to 1% unlike the previous rate, 2%. Democracy wants to expand the alliance of the organisation’s factions this time to achieve better results than it did in 2006, when it allied itself with the People and Fida and garnered 2.7% of the vote, and is now struggling to include the Liberation Front, which won the last election 0.3%, in addition to the Palestinian Arab, which received 0.4%, and the Palestinian Initiative (Mustafa Barghouti and others.) which got 2.72%.

“Independents” find their chance

Rajab Al-Madhoun

The presidential decree on legislative elections does not allow “independents” to run individually, prompting a number of them to form their own lists, leaving themselves as a rival and alternative to factions, taking advantage of the decline in popular confidence of the majority of the organisations. “Independent” figures in the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip are preparing to form several lists, while a number of factions are considering an alliance with those including Hamas and Fatah to consolidate the seats they will win in the elections.

With the “Gathering of Independent Personalities” welcomed the election decree, sources in the group revealed that a number of figures under his banner are seriously considering running in the elections on a special list, amid expectations that this list will get “satisfactory results with the high popularity of a number of them and the desire of the street to change and end the division.”

Al-Akhbar learned that the former prime minister, Salam Fayyad, is preparing to enter the elections at the top of a list of independents that includes personalities from Gaza and the West Bank, as happened in the 2006 elections in which he won two seats, but his partner in the last elections, Hanan Ashrawi, announced that she would not run This election, as well as her disagreement with him.

‫الانتخابات الفلسطينية: مسارٌ واحد لأهداف كثيرة

Cartoon – Mother #Palestine gives #Israel agent Mahmoud Abbas a lesson on  the Right of Return | Latuff Cartoons

غرقت الفصائل الفلسطينية كافة في النقاش التفصيلي حول الانتخابات، من دون وضعها أصلاً في ميزان الحاجة والفائدة. سكت الكلّ على الطريقة والتوقيت اللذين اختارهما رئيس السلطة، محمود عباس، لإجراء الانتخابات، وتحديداً «حماس» التي قبلت «المراسيم» كما هي من دون اعتراض. يريد عباس انتخاب «المجلس التشريعي»، ثمّ الرئاسة، فـ«المجلس الوطني لمنظمة التحرير»، والأخيران تحصيل حاصل لخريطة القوى التي ستظهر في الأول. لكن مع احتياطات «أبو مازن» لضمان بقائه على كرسيّه، وإعداده خططاً لاحتواء «حماس» أو تقليل نسبة تمثيلها، تواجه «فتح» انقسامات خطيرة قد تُشظّي الحركة في حياته قبل رحيله، وهو السيناريو الذي لم يكن يحسب له حساباً ويعمل الآن بقوة على منعه. الثابت الوحيد أنه ما دام حيّاً، فلن يتزحزح عن منصبه، وأن ما اضطره إلى إجراء الانتخابات ليس سوى الطلبَين الأميركي – الأوروبي، والعربي، لاعتبارات كلّ طرف. أمّا «حماس»، التي تدافع بأنها «مضطرة» لخوض الانتخابات وأن ضغوطاً تمارَس عليها – في تكرار لسيناريو 2006 -، فقرّرت العمل على حصاد الغالبية لو أمكن، فيما لا تزال «الجهاد الإسلامي» على موقفها السابق، مع إمكانية للمشاركة في انتخابات «الوطني» في ما إذا كانت ستؤدي إلى تغيير في عقيدة «منظّمة التحرير». بين هذا وذاك، تُقيّم فصائل المنظّمة والشخصيات «المستقلّة» النسب التي يمكن أن تحصل عليها لتتخطّى عتبة الدخول، والتحالفات الأفضل في حال اضطّرت لها.

انقسام ثلاثي يهدّد «فتح»: الحسم بيد البرغوثي

 مي رضا الإثنين 1 شباط 2021

رام الله | منذ أن أصدر رئيس السلطة الفلسطينية، محمود عباس، مرسوماً رئاسياً بتحديد موعد للانتخابات، جرّاء طلب أميركي ــــ أوروبي ــــ عربي تحت عنوان تجديد «الشرعيات» وترتيب الإقليم، بدأت الخلافات «الفتحاوية» الداخلية تطفو على السطح، ما ينذر بانقسامات داخل الحركة التي قد تخوض الانتخابات بثلاث قوائم: الأولى تابعة لـ«اللجنة المركزية» وتدعم عباس، والثانية يدعمها الأسير مروان البرغوثي وفئة الشباب، والثالثة لتيار القيادي المفصول محمد دحلان (الإصلاحي) ستبقى تُحسب على «فتح» حتى لو رفضتها الأخيرة.

لم تحسم «الشعبيّة» موقفها من المشاركة لأنها تشكّك في نيّات عبّاس (أي بي أيه )

تشير التوقّعات «الفتحاوية» إلى نية البرغوثي ترشيح نفسه للرئاسة، وتشكيل قائمة في انتخابات المجلس التشريعي التي تسبقها، وهو «كابوس» يؤرّق قيادات الصف الأول في «فتح». لكن نجل مروان، قسام البرغوثي، قال إن أباه «ليس لديه حتى الآن موقف رسمي حيال الأمر… غداً الثلاثاء موعد زيارة المحامي للبرغوثي وسينقل عنه موقفه»، مشيراً إلى أن «كلّ ما يشاع في الصحافة ليس رسمياً». مع ذلك، تقول مصادر مطّلعة في الحركة، فضّلت عدم ذكر اسمها، إن الموضوع «حسّاس جداً»، ولذلك سيلتقي خلال أيام أمين سرّ «اللجنة المركزية لفتح»، جبريل الرجوب، البرغوثي في السجن ليثنيه عن الترشّح ضدّ عباس، ولمحاولة إرضائه بوضعه على رأس قائمة «فتح» في المجلس التشريعي. تضيف المصادر: «البرغوثي غاضب جداً من سلوك السلطة حيال قضيته، ويشعر بأنه تُرك وحيداً وخاصةً في إضراب الكرامة الذي أعلنه قبل سنوات»، لكن «يُستبعد أن يخرج عن إطار الحركة لأنه من مؤسِّسيها».

وقبل أيام، توعّد القياديان في «فتح»، عزام الأحمد وجمال نزال، بأن الحركة ستحاسب أيّاً من أعضائها الذين قد يحاربونها بترشّحهم مستقلّين «حساباً عسيراً»، لكن الأحمد زاد على ذلك بالقول إن «البرغوثي منقطع عن السياسة وأمضى عمره في السجون، ولا يستطيع تلبية أمنيات شعبنا»! مع ذلك، يقول عضو «التشريعي» عن «فتح»، حاتم عبد القادر، لـ«الأخبار»، إنه وفقاً لما نُقل عن البرغوثي عبر محاميه، سيُرشّح الرجل نفسه للرئاسة، لكن لا ندري كيف ستؤثّر الضغوط «الفتحاويه» عليه. يُذكر أن البرغوثي دخل عامه الـ 19 في سجون الاحتلال بتهمة قيادة تشكيلات لـ«كتائب شهداء الأقصى»، الجناح العسكري المحلول لـ«فتح»، فيما تشيع أوساط مقرّبة منه أن لديه هواجس كثيرة حيال مصيره، وما يهمّه حالياً الخروج من السجن، وخاصة إن كان هناك تبادل أسرى على يد المقاومة.

بعيداً من موقف الرجل من الترشّح للرئاسة، ثمّة توجّه «فتحاوي» يدعو، في حال كانت قائمة الحركة الرسمية لا تلبّي الشروط الكفيلة بإنجاحها (كأن تضمّ شخصيات ذات كفاءة ونزاهة وخبرة وسيرة مشرّفة مهنياً ونضالياً)، إلى إنشاء قائمة أخرى تُلبّي الشروط السابقة، كما يقول عبد القادر، علماً بأن عباس هدّد باستخدام «القوة» ضدّ أيّ قائمة أخرى باسم «فتح» منافِسة لتلك الرسمية. وتؤكّد مصادر أخرى حديث عبد القادر، قائلة إن هناك قائمة يقودها الشباب، وسيدعمها البرغوثي، ويُحتمل أن تكون فيها شخصيات من «اللجنة المركزية» وأخرى من السلطة على مستوى الضفة وغزة. وهذه القائمة «ملاذ الساخطين على السلطة، وهم بالمناسبة لن يتحالفوا مع دحلان، لكن ربّما يجري التنسيق معه بعد الانتخابات في حال فوزهم، بهدف إعادة الاعتبار إلى فتح»، تضيف المصادر.

ثمّة قائمة رسميّة من «المركزية» وأخرى لدحلان وثالثة يدعمها البرغوثي


أمّا «الإصلاحي»، فينوي المشاركة بقائمة موازية وتعزيزها بقيادات يعمل دحلان على شراء ولاء بعضهم على مستويَي الضفة وغزة، وهو قد عيّن قبل أيّام متحدّثَين رسميَّين للتيار، هما من أصحاب «الأسماء الصادمة لفتح والسلطة»، كما تقول مصادر مقرّبة من تيّاره. وتضيف: «دحلان رصد لهذه القائمة وإنجاحها مبالغ ضخمة بعشرات الملايين من الدولارات بتمويل إماراتي». وسبق أن قال المتحدّث باسم التيار، عماد محسن، إنه في حال لم تُدخلهم «فتح» في قائمتها، «فسنذهب إلى الانتخابات بقائمة مستقلّة تحتوي على شخصيات فتحاوية اعتبارية وأكاديميين، لأن الفتحاوي الحر لن يساق مثل القطيع بناءً على أهواء شخص واحد»، في إشارة إلى عباس.
تعقيباً على هذه الانقسامات، يقول القيادي في «فتح»، عبد الله عبد الله، لـ«الأخبار»، إن «دحلان لم يعد من فتح، ولذلك نزوله في الانتخابات لا يؤثّر في وحدة الحركة. أمّا البرغوثي، فستتواصل معه اللجنة المركزية»، مؤكّداً أن أطر الحركة (المركزية والمجلس الثوري والمجلس الاستشاري) هي التي تُقرّر مرشح الرئاسة، «وإذا قرّرت اسماً، على الجميع أن يلتزم بذلك… لا أعتقد أن يغرّد البرغوثي خارج فتح». وفي ما يتعلّق بالخريطة الانتخابية والقائمة الرسمية، يقول عبد الله: «بعد لقاء القاهرة، سنُحدّد مَن يكون على رأس القائمة بناءً على الأفكار التي ستُطرح في اللقاء، وسنقرّر هل ستكون الحركة على رأس قائمة وحدها أم مع غيرها من فصائل منظّمة التحرير، ولن نستبق الأحداث».

يدرك تيار دحلان أن حالة الاستقطاب التي تعيشها «مركزية فتح» ستكون عاملاً لمصلحته في الانتخابات، إذ سبق أن ظهر انقسام في تصريحات قادة الحركة حول مرشّحها للرئاسة. مع ذلك، تبقى بيضة القبّان بيد البرغوثي، الذي تُظهر استطلاعات الرأي العام أنه الأكثر شعبية «فتحاوياً» وفلسطينياً ــــ في الضفة على الأقل ــــ، وآخرها استطلاع أجراه «المركز الفلسطيني للبحوث السياسية والبحثية» قبل أيام، وكانت نتيجته تفوّق البرغوثي بحصوله على 61% من الأصوات في حال وُضع ليس أمام عباس، بل أمام رئيس المكتب السياسي لـ«حماس»، إسماعيل هنية. وبحسب الاستطلاع نفسه، فإنه في حال وُضع هنية أمام عباس، يحصل الأول على 50% مقابل 43% للثاني. كما قَدّر المركز أنه إذا شَكّل البرغوثي قائمة مستقلّة، فسيحصل على 25% من أصوات الجمهور، فيما قال 19% من الجمهور إنهم سيصوّتون في هذه الحالة لقائمة «فتح» الرسمية، وهو ما يؤكّده مصدر في حكومة رام الله قال إن «50% من فتح الرسمية تُفضّل البرغوثي للرئاسة على عباس». أمّا بشأن دحلان، فتَوقّع الاستطلاع أن تحصل قائمة تيّاره على 7% من الجمهور، في حين أن 27٪ سيُصوّتون في هذه الحالة لقائمة «فتح» الرسمية ضدّه.

«حماس» تسعى للغالبية… و«الجهاد» تدرس خياراتها

رجب المدهون الإثنين 1 شباط 2021

«حماس» تسعى للغالبية... و«الجهاد» تدرس خياراتها
صدرت توصيات للحكومة في غزة بتحسين التعامل مع الناس وتجنّب أيّ إشكالات (أ ف ب )

تُواصل «حماس» استعداداتها وتجهيز قائمتها الأوّلية للانتخابات التشريعية، فيما لا تزال «الجهاد الإسلامي» تتدارس إمكانية خوض الانتخابات من أصلها وأيّ أجزاء يمكن أن تشارك فيها، والمسألتان تبقيان في انتظار ما ستفرزه «حوارات القاهرة»غزة | في إطار الاستعدادات الفلسطينية للانتخابات المنوي عقد الجزء الأول منها (البرلمان) في أيار/ مايو المقبل، يقول مصدر في «حماس»، لـ«الأخبار»، إن الحركة أعدّت قائمتها الأوّلية للانتخابات التشريعية بما يشمل غزة والضفة، لكنها «تدرس خيارات أخرى غير الدخول بقائمة منفردة باسمها»، ومنها «إمكانية عقد قائمة تحالفات مع فصائل المقاومة، وأخرى مع مستقلّين، بما يحقق لها عدداً مناسباً من المقاعد»، مؤكداً أن «توجيهات المكتب السياسي ومجلس الشورى أقرّت بضرورة دخول الانتخابات بقوة والعمل على الفوز بنسبة أكبر من انتخابات 2006».

ومع أن «حماس» لم تبدأ «استنهاض الكادر التنظيمي» للانتخابات، وتنفيذ خطّة التحشيد الشعبي للتصويت لها في غزة، فإنها أكملت تشكيل لجانها المركزية والفرعية لتنفيذ حملتها القائمة على «برنامج المقاومة والصمود في وجه الاحتلال»، كما ينقل المصدر، الذي يكشف عن صدور تعليمات للجهاز الحكومي في غزة بـ«استكمال الجهود التي تَعزّزت خلال العامين الماضيين في تحسين واقع العمل الحكومي مع السكّان، ومنع ظهور أيّ أزمات حالياً، وتقديم كلّ ما يَلزم من خدمات إلى المواطنين». وتشمل القائمة الأوّلية شخصيات رمزية في الحركة، إلى جانب الوجوه الشابّة التي ازداد عددها، علماً بأن الحصّة الكبرى ستكون لشخصيات مهنية ومجتمعية ذات حضور كبير داخل غزة والضفة، إذ تسعى الحركة بوجودهم إلى تلافي إشكالات 2006، حين تمحور الانتقاد الرئيسي حول أن قائمتها تتشكّل غالبيتها من الشيوخ وخرّيجي الكلّيات الشرعية.

بغضّ النظر عن طبيعة القائمة، حسمت «حماس» نيّتها المشاركة بقوّة


بموازاة ذلك، يقول المصدر إن الحركة وضعت عدداً من السيناريوات للانتخابات، منها الدخول بقائمة منفردة أو بقائمة مع «فتح» أو بقائمة مع فصائل المقاومة أو حتى قائمة مع “المستقلّين”، لكنها ستنتظر ما ستفضي إليه حوارات القاهرة الأسبوع المقبل لتحديد طبيعة مشاركتها، وأيّ السيناريوات ستُحقّق لها أكبر فوز. هذه الحوارات، كما يبدو، ستكون محطّة فاصلة في تقييم الانتخابات وجدّيتها، كما يشرح المصدر، مضيفاً «(أننا) شَكّلنا لجاناً لتجهيز الملفّات الخاصة بالحوار في قضايا القضاء والأمن والموظفين وواقع الحال في غزة والضفة وحرية التعبير… أيضاً شَكّلنا لجنة عليا مركزية في المكتب السياسي لمتابعة الانتخابات التشريعية».
وعلى رغم سعيها إلى الفوز بأكبر قدر من المقاعد، إلا أن «حماس» لا ترغب في تشكيل الحكومة وحدها مجدّداً في حال نيلها الغالبية، بل هي تُفضّل تأليف حكومة وحدة وطنية أو حكومة كفاءات لتلافي حصار جديد. أمّا الموقف “الحمساوي” في شأن الحشد لانتخابات «المجلس الوطني» فلا يزال هو نفسه، لكن لم يُحسم بعد القرار بالدخول في الانتخابات الرئاسية، على أن يناقَش ذلك بعد نتائج “التشريعية”.

في المقابل، لم تحسم حركة «الجهاد الإسلامي» موقفها بخصوص المشاركة في انتخابات «المجلس التشريعي»، مُفضِّلة أيضاً مناقشة هذه الخطوة بعد حوارات القاهرة، طبقاً لتصريحات قياديين فيها. لكن مصادر قالت إن هناك آراء داخل الحركة تدفع نحو المشاركة الجزئية، مقابل غالبية ترفض أصل المشاركة التي تَجنّبتها الحركة مرّات سابقاً مع إعلان استمرارها في تبنّي خيار المقاومة، بعيداً من إفرازات “اتفاقية أوسلو” كافة. وبينما لدى «الجهاد» رغبة كبيرة في دخول انتخابات «الوطني» ضمن شروط معينة، أرجأت التباحث في هذه الشروط حتى التأكّد من إمكانية حدوث هذه الانتخابات المُقرَّرة نهاية الشهر الثامن، كما لم تحسم الحركة موقفها من الانتخابات الرئاسية وأيّ شخصيات يمكن أن تدعمها عبر كوادرها.


«الشعبية» متردّدة… والبقية يخشون السقوط

رجب المدهون الإثنين 1 شباط 2021

«الشعبية» متردّدة... والبقية يخشون السقوط
لم تحسم «الشعبيّة» موقفها من المشاركة لأنها تشكّك في نيّات عبّاس (أي بي أيه )

لم يحسم الفصيل الأكبر في «منظّمة التحرير الفلسطينية» بعد حركة «فتح»، «الجبهة الشعبية لتحرير فلسطين»، موقفه من المشاركة في الانتخابات. مردّ ذلك أنه لا يزال يُشكّك في نيّات رئيس السلطة، محمود عباس، وإمكانية استخدامه المحكمة الدستورية ضدّ خصومه في حال لم يحالف الفوزُ «فتح». وتربط «الشعبية» مشاركتها بالتوافق في القاهرة على النقاط الخلافية، وأبرزها «تشكيل محكمة الانتخابات بتوافق وطني بعيداً من التفرّد والتلاعب الذي جرى في المجلس الأعلى للقضاء على يد عباس»، كما أكد نائب الأمين العام للجبهة، أبو أحمد فؤاد.

يقول مصدر قيادي في «الشعبية»، لـ«الأخبار»، إن اللجنة المركزية والمكتب السياسي لم يحسما بعد قرار المشاركة، لكنه يؤكد أن «الخيارات كافة متاحة بما في ذلك المشاركة في قائمة وطنية تضمّ جميع الفصائل، أو التحالف مع حماس، أو قائمة منفردة على غرار انتخابات 2006» التي حصلت فيها الجبهة على 4.2% بواقع ثلاثة مقاعد. ويشير المصدر إلى وجود معارضة داخلية للدخول في قائمة موحّدة مع فصائل المنظّمة تضمّ «فتح»، خشية من استغلال الأخيرة تلك القائمة، وتعزيز تفرّدها بالقرار الفلسطيني، وتقوية برنامجها السياسي القائم على التفاوض مع الاحتلال، فضلاً عن وجود خلافات مع «فتح» لم يتمّ حلّها أصلاً.

رفضت الجبهة أن تكون تحت مظلّة «فتح» وتشاركها قائمة واحدة


على خطّ موازٍ، تسعى «فتح» إلى تجميع فصائل «منظّمة التحرير» للدخول في قائمة واحدة معها في الانتخابات التشريعية. ومنذ قرار إجراء الانتخابات، عقدت فصائل المنظّمة لقاءات، آخرها منتصف الشهر الماضي، للتباحث في كيفية دخولها الانتخابات وتحقيق نتائج جيدة تغطّي ضعف شعبيتها. وأمام خوف عدد منها من انكشاف شعبيّتها المتدنّية، فهي تسعى إلى تشكيل قائمة موحّدة لتجاوز نسبة الحسم ودخول «المجلس التشريعي»، الأمر الذي دعا إليه عضو اللجنة المركزية لـ«الجبهة الديموقراطية»، محمود خلف.

تضمّ تلك اللقاءات حزب «الشعب» و«جبهة النضال الشعبي» و«جبهة التحرير الفلسطينية» وحزب «فدا» و«الجبهة العربية الفلسطينية»، وهي فصائل لم تحصل على نسبة الحسم في انتخابات 2006، وتخشى من انتهاء حضورها بسبب التصاق بعضها بمواقف السلطة، واستخدام الأخيرة لها في مواقف كثيرة، فضلاً عن انعدام فعاليتها في الساحة الشعبية. ولذلك، تريد تعزيز فرصها الآن لتحقيق أكثر من 10% لها جميعاً، لكن الخشية من الخلافات حول تشكيل قائمة موحّدة بينها دفع بعضها إلى المطالبة بخفض نسبة الحسم إلى 1% بخلاف النسبة السابقة، 2%. أمّا «الديموقراطية»، فتريد توسيع تحالف فصائل المنظّمة هذه المرّة لتحقيق نتائج أفضل من التي حصلت عليها في 2006، عندما تحالفت مع «الشعب» و«فدا» وحصدت 2.7% من الأصوات، وهي الآن تجهد لضمّ «جبهة التحرير» التي حصلت في الانتخابات الماضية على 0.3%، إضافة إلى «العربية الفلسطينية» التي حصلت على 0.4%، و«المبادرة الفلسطينية» (مصطفى البرغوثي وآخرين) التي حصلت على 2.72% .

«المستقلّون» يجدون فرصتهم

رجب المدهون الإثنين 1 شباط 2021

لا يتيح المرسوم الرئاسي الخاصّ بالانتخابات التشريعية، لـ«المستقلّين»، الترشّح بصورة منفردة، ما يدفع عدداً من هؤلاء إلى تشكيل قوائم خاصة بهم، طارحين أنفسهم منافساً وبديلاً من الفصائل، مستغلّين في ذلك تراجع الثقة الشعبية لغالبية التنظيمات. وتستعدّ شخصيات «مستقلّة» في الضفة المحتلة وقطاع غزة لتشكيل قوائم عدّة، فيما يدرس عدد من الفصائل التحالف مع هؤلاء بِمَن فيها «حماس» و«فتح»، لتعزيز المقاعد التي ستحصل عليها في الانتخابات.

ومع ترحيب «تجمّع الشخصيات المستقلّة» بمرسوم الانتخابات، كشفت مصادر في التجمّع أن هناك عدداً من الشخصيات المنضوية تحت لوائه تبحث بجدّية خوض الانتخابات ضمن قائمة خاصة، وسط توقعات بأن تحصل هذه القائمة على «نتائج مرضية مع ارتفاع شعبية عدد منهم ورغبة الشارع في التغيير وإنهاء الانقسام».
وعلمت «الأخبار» أن رئيس الوزراء الأسبق، سلام فياض، يستعدّ لدخول الانتخابات على رأس قائمة من المستقلّين تضمّ شخصيات من غزة والضفة، كما جرى في انتخابات 2006 والتي حصل فيها على مقعدين، لكن شريكته في الانتخابات الماضية، حنان عشراوي، أعلنت أنها لن تخوض هذه الانتخابات، فضلاً عن خلافها معه.

Realities of politics and Palestinian aspirations حقائق السياسة وأماني الفلسطيني

**Please scroll down for the Arabic version **

Palestinian politician residing in Jenin, Occupied Palestine

Saada Mustafa  Arshid_

Many Arab and Palestinian policies are built on the fact that Joe Biden’s presidency will  be a natural extension of the policies of the Obama administration, in which Biden was vice president, and president Biden is the same person. I think that’s an inaccurate estimate. The man has a strong personality, he is experienced and experienced in both domestic and foreign politics, and his long experience in Congress has given him the experience and statesmanship he needs, and then there is a lot of water that has taken place  in the valleys of politics  both in Washington and  in the Middle East during the four years  of Trump’s administration, which  has been full of events, which makes the new president obliged to deal  with  those  variables, albeit with a different mentality and policies. If he ever talked about a two-state solution, he ever talked about a two-state solution, it goes back  to a long time ago, and that  does not  mean that he will remain steadfast when he speaks. The new U.S. State Department, which supports the two-state solution, a state (Israel) as a Jewish state and besides it a Palestinian state without sovereignty and dignity, without borders without crossings, without sovereignty over its airspace or the hollow of its territory, without its Jerusalem and some of the West Bank. Last Tuesday, exaggerated statements were made in Ramallah following a speech by the Acting United States Representative to the United Nations Ambassador Richard Wells, in which he said: We will restore relations with the Palestinian leadership and the Palestinian people, and that many mistakes were made by the administration of former President Trump in this context and must be corrected, but it does not specify what are those mistakes, and it seems certain that the subject of Jerusalem and the transfer of the embassy to it are not one of those mistakes, as well as the annexation of the West Bank from the Jordan, settlements and  goods that have become sold in the United States and written on them.  By Israel, these mistakes may not go beyond cutting off financial aid, closing the PLO office in Washington, and closing the U.S. consulate in East Jerusalem.

There is no doubt that the election of Biden was in some respects a coup in the Arab balances  that  have  repercussions on the Palestinian affairs, and he acknowledged in the certainty of many Arab leaders that Trump will remain in the White House for a second term, which led them to invest in supporting his re-election financially and politically, and indeed At the  expense of national security through the processes of normalisation and alliance in its political, security and then economic forms, and this has put them in trouble with the new administration, which has enough files and tools to their necks, making it their plans and dreams and illusions autumn papers, blowing the wind. Biden’s victory, at the same time, was a victory for other regional  powers, which entered into a bitter and strained conflict with the Trump administration, Iran  breathed a sigh of relief, even if there were adjustments to the  nuclear deal with the Obama administration, but with Biden’s arrival, she had passed the difficult stage and had come out  of the bottle, as well as Qatar, a permanent ally of democratic administrations in Washington, and a victory for Qatar’s Muslim Brotherhood allies and Qatar’s Palestinian guests, i.e. Hamas, while at the same time defeating Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the UAE and its Palestinian guest, while dealing with an adversary with the Trump administration can be optimistic (and perhaps He is overly optimistic, as we see the Palestinian Authority, which see President Mahmoud Abbas’ call for Trump’s house to be  ruined, has been met with caution, and those who have treated the Trump administration cautiously in its last year find an opportunity to build better relations with the new administration, as Jordan has. Some Arabs are optimistic under Biden, including the Palestinians, as they carry expectations and aspirations above what they can afford, and what comes out of the new U.S. administration is nothing more than delusions and signs that may be misleading — such as talking about a two-state solution — because there are no clear policies or strategies that can be read or built upon yet, This is while the Arab, Islamic and international violations are expanding, with new countries candidates for normalisation, and others in the process of transferring their embassies to Jerusalem, while (Israel) exchanges with Sudan, Morocco and the United Arab Emirates embassies, missions, economic and cultural  missions and iron domes, an Arab who was the back of Palestine Its issue and the rights of  its people  will  be at its best only a neutral  intermediary, in the Palestinian (Israeli) relationship, while the Palestinian is totally  absent  from any comment, condemnation or criticism of this nefarious behaviour.

حقائق السياسة وأماني الفلسطيني

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is Untitled-726-780x470.png
سياسي فلسطيني مقيم في جنين – فلسطين المحتلة

سعادة مصطفى أرشيد

يتمّ بناء كثير من السياسات العربية والفلسطينية منها على أنّ رئاسة جو بايدن ستكون امتداداً طبيعياً لسياسات إدارة الرئيس الأسبق أوباما، التي كان فيها بايدن نائباً للرئيس، وانّ الرئيس بايدن هو الشخص ذاته. وفي ظني أنّ ذلك تقدير غير دقيق. فالرجل يملك شخصية قوية، وهو مجرّب ومتمرّس في السياسة الداخلية والخارجية على حدّ سواء، وقد منحته تجربته الطويلة في الكونغرس ما يحتاجه من خبرة وحنكة، ثم أنّ مياهاً غزيرة قد جرت في وديان السياسة سواء في واشنطن أو في الشرق الأوسط خلال السنوات الأربع من حكم ترامب والتي كانت مليئة بالأحداث، ذلك ما يجعل الرئيس الجديد ملزماً بالتعامل مع تلك المتغيّرات وإنْ بعقلية وسياسات مختلفة. وإذا كان قد تحدث ذات يوم عن حلّ الدولتين، فإنّ ذلك يعود الى زمن مضى، ولا يعني ذلك أنه سيبقى متمترّساً عند كلمته، فالسياسة أمر دائم التغيّر ولا ثوابت فيها، وكذلك مفهوم حلّ الدولتين الذي يحتمل أكثر من تفسير، مما يدعم هذه النظرة ما قاله منذ أيام، وزير الخارجية الأميركي الجديد بلينكن أمام الكونغرس، من أنه يدعم حلّ الدولتين، دولة (إسرائيل) كدولة يهودية وإلى جانبها دولة فلسطينية منزوعة السيادة والكرامة، بلا حدود بلا معابر، بلا سيادة على أجوائها أو جوف أرضها، بلا قدسها وبعض من الضفة الغربية. الثلاثاء الماضي، صدرت تصريحات مبالغة في تفاؤلها من رام الله اثر حديث أدلى بها القائم بأعمال مندوب الولايات المتحدة في هيئة الأمم السفير ريتشارد ويلز، قال فيه: سنعيد العلاقات مع القيادة الفلسطينية والشعب الفلسطيني، وإنّ أخطاء عديدة كانت قد اقترفتها إدارة الرئيس السابق ترامب في هذا السياق ويجب تصحيحها، ولكنه لم يحدّد ما هي تلك الأخطاء، ويبدو أنّ من الأكيد أنّ موضوع القدس ونقل السفارة إليها ليسا من تلك الأخطاء، وكذلك ضمّ أراضي الضفة الغربية من أغوار ومستوطنات وبضائعها التي أصبحت تباع في الولايات المتحدة ومكتوب عليها أنها من إنتاج (إسرائيل)، ولعلّ تلك الأخطاء لن تتجاوز قطع المساعدات المالية وإغلاق مكتب منظمة التحرير في واشنطن، وإغلاق القنصلية الأميركية في القدس الشرقية.

مما لا شك فيه أنّ انتخاب بايدن كان في بعض جوانبه انقلاباً في التوازنات العربية التي لها انعكاساتها على الشأن الفلسطيني، فقد وقر في يقين عديد من القادة العرب أن ترامب باق في البيت الأبيض لفترة رئاسية ثانية، الأمر الذي دعاهم لأن يستثمروا في دعم إعادة انتخابه مالياً وسياسياً، لا بل وعلى حساب الأمن القومي من خلال عمليات التطبيع والتحالف بأشكاله السياسية والأمنية ثم الاقتصادية، وهذا الذي أوقعهم في مأزق مع الإدارة الجديدة التي تملك من الملفات والأدوات ما يكفى لليّ رقابهم، فجعل ذلك من خططهم وأحلامهم وأوهامهم أوراق خريف، تذروها الرياح. فانتصار بايدن، كان في الوقت ذاته انتصاراً لقوى إقليمية أخرى، دخلت في صراع مرير ومجهد مع إدارة ترامب، إيران تنفست الصعداء، حتى لو جرت تعديلات على الاتفاق النووي الذي أبرمته مع إدارة أوباما، لكنها مع مجيء بايدن، قد تجاوزت المرحلة الصعبة وقد خرجت من عنق الزجاجة، وكذلك قطر، الحليف الدائم للإدارات الديمقراطية في واشنطن، وانتصار لحلفاء قطر من الإخوان المسلمين وضيوف قطر من الفلسطينيين وأقصد هنا حركة حماس، وفي الوقت ذاته هزيمة للسعودية ومصر والإمارات وضيفها الفلسطيني، فيما يستطيع من تعامل بخصومة مع إدارة ترامب بأن يتفاءل (وربما يبالغ في تفاؤله) كما نرى السلطة الفلسطينية التي ترى أنّ دعاء الرئيس أبو مازن على بيت ترامب بالخراب قد تمّت الاستجابة له، ومن تعامل بحذر مع إدارة ترامب في عامها الأخير، أن يجد فرصة لبناء علاقات أفضل مع الإدارة الجديدة، كما حال الأردن. يبدي بعض العرب تفاؤلاً برئاسة بايدن، ومنهم الفلسطينيون، إذ يحملون الأمور توقعات وأماني فوق ما تحتمل، فما يصدر عن الإدارة الأميركية الجديدة ليس أكثر من تهويمات وإشارات قد تكون مضللة – كالحديث عن حلّ الدولتين – إذ لا سياسات أو استراتيجيات واضحة يمكن قراءتها أو البناء عليها حتى الآن، هذا فيما يتسع الخرق العربي والإسلامي والعالمي، بدول جديدة مرشحة للتطبيع، وأخرى بصدد نقل سفاراتها للقدس، فيما تتبادل (إسرائيل) مع السودان والمغرب والإمارات السفارات والبعثات والملحقيات الاقتصادية والثقافية والقباب الحديدية، وهو العربي الذي كان ظهيراً لفلسطين ومسألتها وحقوق شعبها، لن يكون بأحسن أحواله إلا وسيطاً محايداً، في العلاقة الفلسطينية (الإسرائيلية) فيما يغيب الفلسطيني تماماً عن أيّ تعليق أو إدانة أو انتقاد لهذا السلوك الشائن.

%d bloggers like this: