Why Assad Believes That Syria Would Not Survive a Transition to a Federal System

Why Assad Believes That Syria Would Not Survive a Transition to a Federal System

DMITRY MININ | 11.12.2017 | WORLD / MIDDLE EAST

Why Assad Believes That Syria Would Not Survive a Transition to a Federal System

The idea that the protracted civil war in Syria might be resolved by restructuring the country into a federation has been on a lot of minds lately. At first glance, it does seem tempting to try to reconcile the warring sectors of the population and all the various factions by granting broad rights of autonomy based on ethnicity and religion.

The draft of the new constitution that was originally pitched to the Syrians by the international community was in fact premised on the idea of granting such status to the “nationalities living in the country.” That manifested itself, for example, in the proposal to establish a bicameral parliament in Syria. Only relatively recently did the Syrian Congress on National Dialogue (soon to convene) begin going by that name. Previous attempts were seen to call it the Congress of Syrian Peoples. But President Assad was firmly against that version from the very beginning. He feels that because of the nature of the local environment in the Middle East, the states there that fly the flag of federalism are inevitably forced to watch their territorial integrity and sovereignty slipping away. It seems to the president of Syria that, by touting federalization, the West is resorting to political and subversive means to achieve the goals it has been unable to attain militarily. For example, without waiting for a final resolution of the matter, the Americans have already urged the Kurds, whose cause they so champion, to unilaterally proclaim the establishment of the Federation of Northern Syria in the territories they occupy. And that’s only the beginning.

History has shown that no federation has been viable in that area and that eventual collapse is inevitable. The Syrians themselves must see a lesson in the story of their own short-lived federation with Egypt, known as the United Arab Republic.

Nor did Libya’s repeated attempts to create a federation with some of its neighbors meet with any success. The efforts to merge Ethiopia and Sudan into a federation – initially backed by the West – ultimately ended once Eritrea and South Sudan won their independence and pulled out. Baghdad’s willingness to grant Iraqi Kurdistan an even higher status than that of merely a constituent region of a federation resulted in Kurdish attempts to secede from Iraq. It took a massive military intervention to put a stop to that. And should Syria take that path, there is even less hope that it might escape such a fate.

The projects to federalize states in that region are tied to the initiatives to completely redraw the borders of those territories. The campaign to alter national boundaries in the “Greater Middle East” really picked up steam with the arrival of the Arab Spring in 2011. The new map of the Middle East that was proposed in the journal Foreign Affairs in 1992 by Bernard Lewis, a professor of Near Eastern Studies and advisor to George W. Bush, has regained its popularity. In 2006, this map was updated by the retired military-intelligence officer Ralph Peters in Armed Forces Journal.

The Lewis-Peters map

The intention of these exercises in “applied cartography” is to strengthen American positions in the region by weakening those national states. To this end, a “Balkanization” of the Middle East was planned along the fault lines of religious, ethnic, and clan divisions. And stirring up the animosities between the Shiites and Sunnis was to play a key role.

Syria at that time was not seriously viewed as a target for those efforts, as it seemed like a rock of stability amidst its restive neighbors. It took almost two years for the “ripple effect” from the Arab Spring to reach Syria. Once the Syrian conflict began, a map surfaced in the media (which let’s call “the Israeli version”) showing the potential breakup of that country once it became a federation.

It featured a powerful Druze sector that was to be carved out on the Syrian-Israeli border. Once Syria’s boundaries were redrawn this way, its Druze population – due to fears of Sunni fundamentalism – would be favorably positioned for an alliance with Tel Aviv, which would offer a permanent solution to the problem of the Golan Heights and give Israel a buffer zone that would greatly shore up its security in the north. In addition, the residents of that entire territory might want to “reunite with their compatriots” inside of Israel.

However, the war didn’t go that way. The Druze proved completely loyal to Damascus and distinguished themselves with their heroic exploits to defend Syria’s territorial integrity. Nevertheless, the flavor of Israel’s military operations near that border shows that it has not entirely abandoned those notions. Tel Aviv might try again under favorable circumstances. And one circumstance that might fit that bill would be the federalization of Syria under international control.

A “Kurdish version” of Syria’s future national and state configuration was also widely circulated.

It is not difficult to see that at that time the Kurds had not yet even started to dream of the many territories they have now seized with the Americans’ help. The biggest challenge for them was unifying all the Kurdish cantons in the north into a single zone. As a result, despite gaining control over a quarter of Syrian territory – as far west as the Euphrates – the Kurds have by no means resolved the question of their nationhood. The Kurdish-occupied Arab settlements haven’t demonstrated any particular loyalty to Rojava. And the more economically-developed Afrin canton remains cut off from the greater part of the Kurdish stronghold. Outside of Rojava there are still about 250,000 Kurds living in the city of Aleppo (primarily in the Sheikh Maqsood district), a group that includes the most prominent cultural figures and businessmen of Kurdish ethnicity in Syria. Thus the Syrian Kurds’ appetites for new territory have not yet been sated.

If you look at the map of Syria’s ethno-sectarian makeup, it becomes clear that any attempts to demarcate certain federal or administrative zones along ethnic lines can only lead to fierce new clashes in this “war of all against all.”

The main problem is that the various ethnic and sectarian factions are all sprinkled throughout Syria. It is extremely difficult to clearly demarcate their boundaries. The claims of some will collide with the ambitions of others, forming permanent flash points where they converge. Who should own the uninhabited and oil-rich Syrian desert, which makes up half the country’s territory, is a completely open question. This is in fact a much uglier and more complicated version of the civil war in the former Yugoslavia. However, this is not the only problem.

Any hypothetical plan to impose a federal system on the country elicits the question: what are the criteria for identifying “the nationalities of Syria” and their right to independence? Given the plethora of sects and movements that exist in Syria, this would be an overwhelming task. For example, the West and the countries of the Persian Gulf have long dreamed of driving the Alawites, the Assad family’s tribe, into the “ghetto” of the province of Latakia. But are they not Arabs and Muslims, like their Sunni brothers? Using that approach, the country could be splintered into dozens of micro-states. Among the Sunnis in particular, one might point to the strong collective identity of the Bedouins as a reason to hand all of the desert over to them, and so on. And that might please some, but not Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

He has renounced ethno-sectarian discord and proposed a completely modern version of a civil Syrian nation that would respect the distinctive traits that distinguish the cultures and civilizations of all the groups living in the country. Assad believes that the problems of Syria’s national and state configuration can be resolved with the help of the ideology of pan-Arabism.

Speaking recently at a forum in Damascus attended by representatives from Arab countries, the Syrian president proclaimed that pan-Arabism is a conceptual notion of a civilization that includes “all ethnic groups, religions, and communities” and allows them to develop. And the cultural heritages of all of them have made an invaluable contribution to the historical development of pan-Arabism. According to Assad, an attempt was made during the war to impose a false choice on Syria: to either abandon its own identity and kowtow to foreign powers or to become a society of “communities in conflict.”

Paradoxically, the bulk of the opposition groups that take their cues from Riyadh fully agree with the Syrian president’s approach per se. They are also opposed to a federal system being foisted upon the country and make their arguments from a position of pan-Arabism. But Assad views this principle in a more secular light. It should be noted that under pressure from the opposition, the international mediators led by Staffan de Mistura have already altered their version of the future Syrian constitution, no longer referring to the country as the Syrian Republic, but as the Syrian Arab Republic, which still remains the state’s official name. The tensions between the opposition and Damascus have just about been reduced to one thorny issue – the continued hold of Bashar al-Assad and his entourage on the reins of power in that country. But if the pressure to federalize Syria keeps growing, then – who knows? – perhaps it might even motivate the opposition and the government to find a mutually acceptable solution to this issue as well.

بن سلمان والمهمة المستحيلة .. النوم في بيت العنكبوت

 سيستيقظ الحالم قيس ويظن أنه في بيت ليلى العامرية ليكتشف أنه نام في بيت العنكبوت .. وليست هناك ليلى بل أنثى عنكبوت صهيونية ستأكله حتى قبل رقصة الحب والزواج ..

بقلم نارام سرجون

من المعيب أننا في خصومتنا مع الآخرين وصراعنا معهم حتى الموت نمسك كل ماتقع عليه ايدينا لنرجمهم به من أجل الفوز بأي ثمن .. نرجمهم بلحم البشر ونرشقهم بدماء الناس ونرميهم بالكتب المقدسة ونضربهم بالمآذن والأجراس والصلبان والقرآن ..

القتال مع الخصوم أيضا قتال مع جشع الذات وحيوانيتها .. فليس المهم أن ننتصر كما تفكر الثقافة الغربية الرأسمالية بل المهم أيضا كيف ننتصر .. فالثقافة السياسية الغربية تحنث بالعهود والوعود وتطعن في الظهر وتكذب وتقسم أن الله قد أعطى أرضك لشعبه المختار وترشقك بجثث اخوانك وتفبرك الحكايات والشهود لتقول أنك قتلت الناس بالسلاح الكيماوي وهي التي لاتزال يدها مخضبة باليورانيوم المنضب ولاتزال تقطر من أصابعها دماء هيروشيما الساخنة الملوثة بالاشعاع .. وتشكوك وتتهمك بأنك تقتلع أظافر الأطفال في السجون وتجتث الحناجر وتقطّع أجساد الصبايا .. وهي التي قتلت أطفالا أكثر مما قتل في حروب البشر مجتمعين ..

وأجمل مافي نصرنا أنه نصر نظيف جدا .. لم نغلفه بالأكاذيب والادعاءات .. وسنحافظ على أجمل شيء في الحرب والنصر وهو طهارتهما من نجس الدعاية والكذب والترويج .. ولذلك اياكم أن يغريكم النصر فتستسهلوا ظلم الحكايات والروايات وتستسهلوا القاء الذرائع والادعاءات ..

في حربنا مع الأسرة المالكة السعودية تبدو المعركة أسهل جدا من غيرها لأن مالدى المملكة من آثام ورزايا وعار يكفينا الحاجة لان نبحث عن ذرائع ووسائل لهدمها .. فأنى يممت وجهك شممت في الهواء رائحة السعودية قادمة مع دخان الحرائق وملفات الفساد والجريمة والخيانة .. وتنبعث رائحتها من جراح أطفال فلسطين واليمن الذين تقتلهم رصاصات بارودها من رمال جزيرة العرب ..ولذلك فنحن في غنى عن الاختلاق والتلفيق .. ولدينا فائض من الحقيقة عندما نكتب .. ولذلك فاننا عندما نتناول شأنا سعوديا فاننا لانجعله جذابا ومقروءا بتزيينه بالأكاذيب بل نزخرفه بالحقائق ونعلق عليه أجراسا صنعناها من أعماق الضمير ..

من الأسئلة التي يتداولها الناس هذه الأيام هذا الاندفاع المستميت لاعلان الزواج بين اسرائيل والسعودية .. حيث يتشاطر السعوديون في عملية التسريع في التحالف العلني مع الاسرائيليين .. فيما يبدو الاسرائيليون مستعجلين أكثر في هذا السباق .. وتقوم السعودية باطلاق بالونات اختبار وعملية حقن بلقاح التطبيع التدريجي عبر تصريحات ومصافحات ولقاءات بين شخصيات سعودية واسرائيلية وتسريبات مدروسة التوقيت بعناية بحيث تتوالى الاخبار وفق تكرار مدروس وروتين يحافظ على الاستمرار كيلا تغيب أخبار التطبيع أكثر من اسبوع لتحقن في الاعلام أخبار جديدة لتتابع عملية هدم المناعة النفسية للناس المضادة للتطبيع بلقاحات الأخبار عن لقاءات سعودية واسرائيلية علنية وترحيب من قبل اعلاميين وصحفيين من الطرفين بهذا التغيير .. فهناك من يصافح صباحا وهناك من يعانق مساء .. واليوم هناك من يدعو للسياحة في تل ابيب كي يرد عليه الاسرائيليون بسياحة أحسن منها في الحرم المكي والتقاط الصور قرب قبر النبي .. ومصادر المملكة الرسمية لاتنفي اطلاقا عبر القصر ووزارة الخارجية أي اتهامات وتتجاهل عمدا كل الانتقادات الحادة الموجهة لها بهذا الشأن .. وتريد بهذا الوجه المتحجر الذي لاتبدو عليه امارات التعجب او الاستهجان او حتى القبول ان تصبح عملية التطبيع مع الاسرايليين سهلة جدا وناضجة ويكون العقل العربي والاسلامي قد تهيأ لها لأنه يتلقى الأخبار الصادمة دون نفي او استهجان فيتكرر التلقي الى أن يصبح اعتياديا كما يحدث عند حقن اللقاحات التي فيها فيروسات مضعفة لاتسبب المرض لكن الجهاز المناعي يتعرف على خصائصها كيلا يتفاجأ بها عندما تهاجمه وهي قوية ..

ولاندري من شدة الشوق بين الطرفين من الذي يسعى أكثر الى اللقاء .. ولكن الاسرائيليين مستعجلون جدا للتطبيع مع السعودية لأنها بالنسبة لهم الفرصة التي لن تتكرر حيث تحس السعودية أن التذرع بالخطر الايراني الداهم وتخويف المسلمين والعرب من الغول الايراني ذو الفك الشيعي هو فرصة لن تتكرر بعد أن ابتلعت الجماهير الطعم المذهبي وهي تستعمله من أجل تبرير التحالف مع الاسرائيليين بشكل علني بعد أن كان سرّيا (على شكل تفاهم مديد منذ تأسيس الكياني السعودي الوهابي والصهيوني اليهودي) ..

وستكون السعودية في حرج كبير اذا ماتغير نظام الحكم فجأة في ايران وحل محله نظام موال للغرب وصديق للسعودية لأن مبرر التحالف مع اسرائيل او التطبيع معها سيتلاشى .. فقد واجهت السعودية خصوما أخطر من ايران تمثلوا بالرئيس جمال عبد الناصر والرئيس صدام حسين .. وكلاهما قالا في السعودية أكثر بكثير مما قالته ايران ودعيا الى اسقاط نظامها العميل ووصلا بجنودهما الى حدودها في اليمن والكويت بل وتجاوز صدام حسين الحدود السعودية في الخفجي ودخل اليها بقوات عراقية وهو مالم تفعله قوة معادية لاايرانية ولا من حزب الله .. ولكن السعودية لم تجد حاجة ماسة أو جرأة كافية للتحالف العلني مع اسرائيل ضد ناصر او صدام حسين بالرغم مما فعلا واكتفت بالتنسيق المطلق في الظلام مع اسرائيل حتى دحرت تجربة ناصر وهزمت مشروع صدام حسين ..

ولكن مع ايران الوضع مختلف جدا لأن ايران ليست عربية مثل مصر والعراق عندما لم يكن ممكنا تبرير التحالف حتى مع الشيطان – كما تدعي – من أجل الدفاع عن المملكة لأن هذا لن يبدو سهل الهضم في المساجد والمقاهي من المحيط الى الخليج .. رغم أن صدام حسين فعل بالخليج أكثر مما فعلته ايران اذ دفع بدباباته الى الخليج وتحدث عن عصر تنتهي فيه الاسر المالكة الخليجية “المقبورة” .. ومع ذلك لم تجرؤ السعودية على الصراخ والاستغاثة بتل أبيب رغم ان عدو العدو هو صديق وكانت تستطيع الى حد ما تبرير التحالف مع اسرائيل ضد صدام حسين الذي قالت انه غزا الكويت حيث ألقى “جنوده المتوحشون” الأطفال من الحاضنات في المشافي كما روت سعاد الصباح في شهادتها الشهيرة الكاذبة التي تفوق كذبة اسلحة الدمار الشامل .. وحاول صدام حسين بالحاح ان يظهر هذا التحالف بين اسرائيل والسعودية باطلاق صواريخه على اسرائيل وعلى السعودية معا ودفع بقواته الى مدينة الخفجي السعودية كي ترد عليه السعودية واسرائيل ويظهر الجيش العراقي يواجه السعوديين والاسرائيليين معا كحلفاء .. ولكن الحذر السعودي والاسرائيلي كان أكبر بكثير من محاولته .. لان اظهار التحالف السعودي الصهيوني كانت له خطورته في تلك الايام بسبب تأجج المشاعر التي التهبت بخطوة صدام حسين الذي تجرأ على الممالك النفطية وقال لها مايقال في كل بيت عربي من المحيط الى الخليج .. والتي أظهرت ان الجماهير العربية تكره بشدة حكومات دول الخليج النفطية (المحتلة) وتكن لها الاحتقار الشديد وتنظر اليها على أنها مستعمرات يجب تحريرها وهي تشبه اسرائيل في تكوينها اللاشرعي واحتلالها للشعوب .. وأظهر تأييد الشعوب العربية لضدام حسين أن لهذه الشعوب ثأرا مع حكام النفط ..

أما اليوم فان ايران يمكن ببساطة أن تصنف بتصنيفات لانهاية لها .. فارسية .. صفوية .. مجوسية .. شيعية .. الخ .. ولكنها ليست عربية .. ولذلك تسقط حرمة كل من يتعاون معها حتى لو كان عربيا مثل حزب الله وحماس وسورية .. وتستطيع السعودية ان تعزف على هذه الاوتار العديدة كل الالحان النشاز وتنتقل الى تحالف علني بذريعة أنها اليوم تتزعم قومية عربية تواجه قومية فارسية .. أو مذهبا سنيا يواجه مذهبا شيعيا .. وهذا كله يتيحه التحالف مع قومية أخرى وديانة أخرى متوفرة في اسرائيل ..

مايلفت النظر هو هذه العجلة السعودية والاسرائيلية لانهاء هذا التردد والانتظار الذي طال بضعة عقود .. ويبدو الطرفان في سباق مع الزمن حتى أننا صرنا عاجزين عن اللحاق بتصريحات الغزل والحب والصداقة والتعاون والمصير المشترك بين اسرائيل والسعودية .. حتى أن من يستمع الى الغزل بينهما يحس بالحرج والخجل لأنه صار أكثر مايشبه الغزل بين قيس بن الملوح وبنت عمه ليلى العامرية ..

ولكن لم هذه العجلة في اعلان الحب بين قيس وليلى اليهودية؟؟

هذه العجلة تفسر على أنها خوف مشترك بينهما من نتيجة الحرب في سورية التي هزمت فيها طموحات السعودية واسرائيل معا .. وصار من الواضح أن الحرب قد تسببت بخسائر كبيرة معنوية للسعودية التي كشفت الحرب انها حليف أصيل لاسرائيل منذ النكبة وقد انقشعت كل الحجب بعد أن بدا جليا ان السعودية ساعدت اسرائل على تدمير العراق وعزل مصر ومشروع اسقاط سورية .. وهذه الدول الثلاث هي الدول التي يمكن لها وحدها اسقاط المشروع الصهيوني .. وكشفت الحرب أيضا ان السعودية هي النبع التكفيري الذي أنتج داعش والنصرة والحركات الاسلامية العنيفة وكشفت الحرب السورية فشل أهم جيش سري للناتو وهو القاعدة ومشتقاتها وصار من الضروري اخفاء البصمات وأدوات الجريمة .. كما أن الحرب قد تسببت بتغيرات عسكرية دراماتيكية لم تكن تخطر على بال أحد فالجيش السوري وحلفاؤه من حزب الله وايران قد صار بحوزتهم جيش متناسق موحد منسجم ومتناغم وهو يمتلك أثمن ماتمتلكه الجيوش المحاربة وهو الخبرة القتالية في أصعب ظروف قتالية .. فما حدث لم يكن مجرد حرب عادية بل هي مناورات هائلة المساحة والانتشار ومزج بين قوام الجيش وقوام وحدات الكوماندوز .. فولد مخلوق جديد في العلوم العسكرية لم تعهده الجيوش وهو (الجيش المكمدز) اي مزيج الجيش النظامي الذي يدرب تدريب الكوماندوز .. وجرت عملية تحديث شاملة تبنتها روسيا للأسلحة والوسائط النارية وتجهزات الحرب الالكترونية المعقدة .. أي أن نتائج الحرب كانت كارثية على السعودية واسرائيل على عكس التوقعات ..

السعودية تريد ان تقبض على اللحظة الاخيرة التي شرب فيها الجمهور العربي والاسلامي كله من بول البعير .. وتحول الى جمهور لايكترث بفلسطين بل بالمذاهب في فلسطين وحولها ولم يعد يعنيه مشروع صدام حسين لتحرير الخليج من الاسر الحاكمة بل صار مسكونا بهواجس الهلال الشيعي والخلافة والخرافة .. ولكن نهاية الحرب السورية ستعيده الى لحظة فلسطين وتخرجه من رحلة البحث عن المذاهب حول فلسطين ..

ان كل ماأنجزته اسرائيل من عملية التطبيع المستمرة دون كلل عبر كامب ديفيد واوسلو ووادي عربة قد ينهار تماما بنهاية الحرب السورية عندما يجد العرب والمسلمون أنهم أمام قوة عسكرية هائلة للحلفاء من سورية الى ايران تلجم اسرائيل وتحدد حركتها .. وسيعود الجمهور الى لحظة تاريخية قاسية جدا على اسرائيل عندما بهر السيد حسن نصرالله وحزب الله العرب والمسلمين بتحديهم اسرئيل عام 2006 رغم كل مابذلته ورغم كل المؤامرة العربية والتحالف السعودي (السري) مع اسرائيل .. ولذلك فان من الضروري لاسرائيل والسعودية المتابعة بنفس زخم التذخير المذهبي والقومي والطائفي والعنصري والتخويفي من ايران لخلق حالة التحام عاطفي ونفسي ومصيري مع اسرائيل قبل ان يتم الالتحام من جديد مع مشروع مناوئ لاسرائيل ..

ولكن بكل تأكيد فان السيف قد سبق العذل بالنسبة للسعودية واسرائيل .. لأن عملية التطبيع كانت تسير بنجاح منقطع النظير مع انتصارات مشروع داعش والنصرة وجيش الاسلام .. غير أن مشروع التطبيع وتغيير العدو يحتاج الى انتصار كي يكمل مسيرته .. لأن التطبيع يفرضه المنتصر وليس المهزوم .. فالسادات احتاج الى نصر (ولو تلفزيوني) وليس الى هزيمة ليبرر لنفسه ركوب التطبيع .. ولو انه لم يحقق نصرا نسبه لنفسه لكانت عملية السلام مع تل ابيب صعبة جدا عليه وتسبب رد فعل كبيرا .. ومن هنا كانت مراجعات سينار الحرب في اوكتوبر وثغرة الدفرسوار التي مهدت لقبول مشروع السادات بعد اداعئه أنه صانع الانتصار ولديه مشروع مكمل للانتصار .. ولذا فانه كان قادرا أن يتكئ على معركة العبور التي نسبها لنفسه ليبرر قراره التالي بالسلام .. أما الأسرة السعودية فان مأزقها كبير جدا وعملية التطبيع مع اسرائيل خرقاء جدا في توقيتها لأنها تواجه محورا منتصرا في الشمال على اسرائيل التي تريد ان تتحالف معها وهذا المحور يمسك أوراقا قوية وخطيرة للغاية أمام اسرائيل المقيدة والخائفة من الحرب .. فما هو مبرر هذا التحالف مع طرف لم ينتصر ؟؟ .. وسيزداد الأمر تعقيدا اذا لحقت باسرائيل هزيمة أخرى من اي نوع ولو في معركة صغيرة فكيف اذا نفذ حزب الله مشروعه باجتياح الجليل أو محاصرته في اية مواجهة مقبلة ؟؟ .. وهنا سيكون الناس أمام مشروعين: مشروع تطبيع بلا انتصارات تبرره وتمثله السعودية .. ومشروع تحرير ممانع للتطبيع ومتسلح بانتصار كبير تمثله ايران وسورية وحزب الله .. والناس تميل الى الانتصار لأنه جذاب وتصدق نظريات المنتصر وتسكن اليها .. فالنصر مهما كان هو المغناطيس الذي يجذب الناس وخاصة في الشرق الذي أدمن الهزائم والذل والانكسار .. وسيلحق الناس بالمنتصرين كما لو كانوا منومين مغناطيسيا ..

ولذلك لاأمل من مشروع بن سلمان في التطبيع بذريعة ايران العدوة والخطرة على الأمن العربي والسني لأنه ببساطة يحتاج نصرا واضحا ساطعا وكاسحا في جبهة ما كي يؤمن الناس بنظريات المنتصر ..

ولكن

 ماأصعب النصر اليوم .. انه أصعب شيء يمكن ان يناله ملك مأزوم يحارب عدة حروب ويخشى عائلته .. يحاول يوما أن يكون نابوليون بونابرت في الصباح .. وفي المساء يحب ان يلعب دور المجدد ومؤسس الجمهورية السعودية مثل مصطفى كمال أتاتورك .. وفي الليل قيس بن الملوح .. وفي الفجر يستيقظ مذعورا على صوت صاروخ يمني يسقط في حديقة قصره .. انه كابوس أنه لم يستطع حتى ان يهزم الجياع في اليمن .. فكيف سينتصر في الشمال؟؟ .. وكيف يمكن لقيس الحالم أن يطبّع وأن يراقص ليلى ويتزوجها على سنة الله ورسوله .. من غير نصر على حلفاء نصر الله .. ؟؟ سيستيقظ الحالم قيس ويظن أنه في بيت ليلى العامرية ليكتشف أنه نام في بيت العنكبوت .. وليست هناك ليلى بل أنثى عنكبوت صهيونية ستأكله حتى قبل رقصة الحب والزواج ..

 

   ( الخميس 2017/11/30 SyriaNow)
 Related Video

 

Brotherhood, Wahabism: Two Faces of the Same Coin

 

Apr 13, 2012

Saudi Arabia Has Become An «Irrational Actor in ME»

24-11-2017 | 16:10

Saudi Arabia has become much more aggressive in the Middle East as the United States has pulled back from its traditional role in the region, according to Philippe Dauba-Pantanacce, global geopolitical strategist at Standard Chartered bank.

Saudi Crown Prince MBS

“We’re seeing a series of miscalculations … We tend to think that Saudi Arabia has become an irrational actor in the Middle East,” Dauba-Pantanacce told CNBC Thursday.

His comments come as the Sunni Islamic kingdom’s foreign policy actions are increasingly forcing instability upon smaller nations, where analysts believe Saudi Arabia is seeking to amplify sectarian divisions. These moves have unfolded against the backdrop of escalating competition between Saudi Arabia and its Shia arch-rival Iran.

“I say this because every single foreign venture they (Saudi Arabia) try has reached the opposite result that they wanted. In Yemen, in Qatar, and now in Lebanon,” he said.

In the latest twist to come out of Middle East geopolitics, Lebanon’s Prime Minister Saad Hariri on Wednesday suspended his previous resignation, apparently in order to open “a new gateway for responsible dialogue,” he said in a statement. Whether this came with Saudi approval is not yet known.

The prime minister returned to Beirut Tuesday night following an unexpected two-week stay in Saudi Arabia, where he delivered a shock resignation from the capital Riyadh on November 4. This prompted widespread speculation that the prime minister was “held hostage,” as well as consensus among analysts that Saudi Arabia forced Hariri to resign.

“What Saudi Arabia is miscalculating is that in (holding) the PM of Lebanon probably against his will in the country, it has managed the feat of unifying all of Lebanon against Saudi, including the constituency of Lebanon that is traditionally sympathetic to Saudi,” the strategist explained.

An ‘outbreak of unity’

A diverse country of 18 different religious groups, Lebanon’s fragile political system is based on power-sharing between Sunnis, Shiites and Christians. This often results in a fractured and gridlocked government and society, most vividly manifested in a bloody 15-year civil war that only ended in 1990.

Hariri, a Sunni who holds Saudi citizenship and is a traditional Saudi ally, has since 2016 led a consensus government including Shia political party and group Hezbollah — something the Saudis apparently would not tolerate. The group, which Saudi Arabia classifies as a “terrorist” organization, is Lebanon’s most powerful political body.

Saudi Arabia’s efforts are part of its campaign to isolate Hezbollah and freeze its involvement in regional conflicts in which the Sunni kingdom has interests, like Yemen and Syria. But as Dauba-Pantanacce explained, its military campaign in Yemen has actually prompted greater Iranian involvement there, and its actions concerning Lebanon have brought the fractured country together.

Supporters of Lebanon’s resigned Prime Minister Saad Hariri hold up placards demanding his return from Saudi Arabia on the starting line of Beirut’s annual marathon on November 12, 2017. Hariri announced on November 4 in a televised statement from Riyadh that he would be stepping down from the post, sending shock waves through Lebanese politics.

Supporters of Lebanon’s resigned Prime Minister Saad Hariri hold up placards demanding his return from Saudi Arabia on the starting line of Beirut’s annual marathon on November 22, 2017. Hariri announced on November 4 in a televised statement from Riyadh that he would be stepping down from the post, sending shock waves through Lebanese politics.

“We see an outbreak of unity in Lebanon for their PM because they saw the attitude of Saudi Arabia as humiliating for Lebanon. It’s interesting that we’ve seen this unity against Saudi — Saudi probably outplayed its hand in this conflict,” he told CNBC.

Dauba-Pantanacce attributed the kingdom’s intensifying foreign aggression to Saudi Arabia’s new leadership, headed up by the young Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. The prince has moved to consolidate power through both foreign interventions like its offensive in Yemen and a domestic “anti-corruption” purge of government officials. Dauba-Pantanacce also noted the US’s “retrenchment” from its traditional role in the region as partly to blame for growing Saudi influence.

Source: CNBC, Edited by website team

Tikrit and Najaf: the agony and the ecstasy

November 10, 2017

by Pepe EscobarTikrit and Najaf: the agony and the ecstasy

TIKRIT and NAJAF, Iraq – Nothing, absolutely nothing prepares you to revive, on the spot, the memory of what will go down in history as ISIS/Daesh’s most horrid killing field in Iraq or Syria since the death cult stormed across the border in the summer of 2014; the Speicher massacre of June 12, 2014 – when almost 2,000 Iraqi army recruits were assassinated in and nearby a former Saddam Hussein palace on the banks of the Tigris near Tikrit.

As Dylan would sing it, “ain’t it just like the night to play tricks when you’re trying to be so quiet”. In 2003, a few days after Shock and Awe and the fall of Baghdad, I took the road to Tikrit for Asia Times to survey Uday Hussein’s bombed palace as well as his father’s birthplace, only to return 14 years later to one of those palaces turned into a house of horror.

The Speicher killing field was gruesomely staged – and filmed – by Daesh only a few days after the fall of Mosul. Daesh’s Salafi-jihadi goons were feted as “liberators” by many a Sunni tribe around Trikrit just as 10,000 Iraqi Army recruits from different provinces, mostly Shi’ites, were being trained at an Air Force academy nearby.

With Daesh fast advancing and the Iraqi Army at the time dissolving by the minute, the youngsters were ordered to switch into civilian clothes, leave their weapons behind, and go home. As they were literally walking back to their home provinces they ended up falling in a lethal Daesh trap. Bearing echoes of the Nazi era, the youngsters were divided into Sunnis and Shi’ites – with the Shi’ites bundled in trucks described as their “transportation” home. Instead they were taken to what would become a killing field framed by decaying Saddamist architecture.

The horror, the horror

It’s late evening on a windless Monday – and I’m standing at the eerily silent exact spot of one of the killing field’s sites, captured by a Daesh propaganda video in part of this harrowing footage. Hayder Atamiri, the official representative of the Tikrit massacre committee, almost in tears, swears, “all the tribes in the area took part in this”. He’s convinced the massacre took place in “an icon of Saddam” and it was “revenge for Saddam’s death”.

Daesh leaders presided over a gruesome ritual from a balcony as three jihadis summarily killed the recruits with a bullet in the back of the head. Today, discreet shrines with pictures of the dead surround the balcony. So far 1907 victims have been catalogued – many from Iraq’s Shi’ite-majority and/or poorer provinces (for instance, 382 from Babylon, 254 from Diwaniya, 132 from Karbala, 119 from Diyala, 99 from Najaf.)

Atamiri says locals at the time found roughly 90 bodies “and the rest drifted away” along the Tigris. Nearby, Daesh goons “dug trenches, used bulldozers and covered the bodies with rocks.” No less than 14 mass graves have been found, 13 of them “already excavated.” Two more mass graves were identified “but there’s no proper storage for the remains yet.”

Other figures by the Iraqi Ministry of Health list 1,935 dead – with 994 bodies found, 527 fully identified, 467 under examination and still 941 missing. A systematic search for human remains only started in March 2015 – eight months after the massacre – when Tikrit was finally recaptured by Baghdad’s forces.

Compared with Ramadi or Mosul, Tikrit suffered very little damage as it was reconquered largely by Hashd al-Shaabi, a.k.a. the People Mobilization Units (PMUs), called into action by Grand Ayatollah Sistani’s 2014 fatwa. Atamiri is adamant “Hashd was the only force liberating Tikrit.” And crucially these fighters were not Shi’ites; they were Sunnis.

Yezen Meshaan al-Jebouri, the son of the governor of Tikrit, Raed al-Jebouri, head of the Salahuddin PMU brigade – and a member of the very prominent Sunni Jebouri family, which was historically inimical to Saddam Hussein, had previously confirmed to me in Baghdad; “Local tribal leaders encouraged the work of Hashd. They understood we believe in Iraq’s political system.” Almost a third of the PMU force – a total of around 20,000 fighters – is Sunni. As al-Jebouri stressed, “Tikrit returned to its people. And Tikrit University was protected.”

In the complex Iraqi tribal chessboard, the local consensus is that certain Wahhabi-tinged jihadis were part of the Speicher massacre, but that did not translate into a collective Sunni endeavor. Daesh killed Sunnis as well, and Sunnis helped at least a few Shi’ites to flee.

Atamiri is adamant, “only Hashd stood with us. Now they are maintaining peace and won’t allow any extra-judicial revenge”. He frames the whole battle ahead as the need to “eradicate extremist ideology” and notes that some Daesh jihadis, when captured, “tried to show remorse, but that is very difficult for us to believe. And some of them are now living in European countries.”

Families of the murdered youngsters silently exhibit photos of their sons and ask “international bodies to do something”. They all agree; the response from the “international community” has been shameful. Still, the Tikrit massacre committee vows to keep the memory of Speicher alive. Mothers of victims have been to Geneva to ask for help as well as mental health support for quite a few families, and plan to visit again in June 2018.

This has been one of Iraq’s most devastating nightmares of the past three decades. After such sorrow, what forgiveness?

Shrine honoring victims of a Daesh killing field by the Tigris, near Tikrit, Iraq. Photo Pepe Escobar

Keep walking towards redemption

It’s possible. From agony to ecstasy. There could not be a more radical contrast between darkness and light than taking the road to Najaf – the Iraqi Vatican, and fourth holiest city in Islam – and Karbala, alongside millions of black-clad pilgrims during the annual celebration of Arba’een, the “40th Day” of the martyrdom of Imam Hussein.

Countless tents, tea shops and impromptu restaurants, festively decorated, line up the road to Najaf and Karbala. Suddenly we’re thrown into the vortex of the largest gathering of humans in history, way outdoing the annual Hajj pilgrimage to Mecca; nearly 20 million people as opposed to about 1.5 million. Here is the record of my own pilgrimage in 2003 – a few days after the fall of Baghdad.

To be inside the Imam Ali shrine – in all its glimmering, refracted glory – is a religious experience in itself, the apotheosis of Shi’ite rituals of redemptive suffering (readers interested to know about Arba’een may consult scholar Seyyed Hosein Mohammad Jafri’s book The Origins and Early Development of Shi’a Islam.)

The Imam Ali shrine, in all its splendor, is managed, at the highest instance, by the marja’iya – the religious sources of emulation, mostly personified by Grand Ayatollah Sistani, whose office is in a narrow alley nearby; and in practice, by a foundation. According to its secretariat “more than 20 million people are registered in the shrine”.

Najaf welcomed refugees of the fight against Daesh by the tens of thousands; Sunnis from Anbar province, Christians, Shi’ite Turkmen from Tal Afar; “Now many are back to their communities”. The PMUs are incredibly popular – their white flags fluttering everywhere alongside black Imam Hussein and multicolored Imam Ali banners.

The shrine is proud to at least assist in helping victims from the Speicher massacre; “The government may be shorthanded”.

I was in Najaf last week, at the start of the pilgrimage. But the apex of Arba’een is today, November 10. And that happens in the most extraordinary of historical circumstances; the final defeat of Daesh.

Inside the Imam Ali shrine in Najaf, Iraq, a few days before Arba’een. Photo Pepe Escobar

The Syrian Arab Army (SAA) announced on Wednesday it had captured Albu Kamal, the last town held by Daesh in Syria – after Iraqi forces captured its sister town across the border, al-Qaim. In Baghdad, before leaving to Najaf, I was assured by a top PMU commander that al-Qaim would be retaken “in a matter of days”: four, in the end, to be exact.

None of this is getting traction in Western media. The final victory on the ground against Daesh, in Syria, was accomplished by the Syrian army with help from Russian strategy and air power, and in Iraq by the Iraqi army and the PMUs. Syrian and Iraqi forces are symbolically reunited at the border.

Meanwhile, at this very moment, millions of souls – Iraqis, Iranians, Afghans, Pakistanis, northern Africans, Central Asians, Persian Gulf nationals – are being soothed via the massive, cathartic walk from Najaf to Karbala. A pilgrim captured the spell – spiritual redemption merging with political statement – as he told me, with the flicker of a smile, the walk is also “a protest against terrorism”.

The World Civil War: Will ISIS win or will be defeated? حرب أهلية عالمية: داعش ينتصر أم ينهزم؟

 

The World Civil War:  Will ISIS win or will be defeated?

أغسطس 21, 2017

Written by Nasser Kandil,

شرقاً درّ… الغرب منافق ومتآمر

The international scene does not seem promising as long as the political leaderships of the active and the ruling countries live in a state of alienation from reality. The first superpower which has political, economic, and military control in the world is headed by a white racist who talks in a language that bears the responsibility of more cracks in the humanitarian relationships between the ethnics, colors, and religions. In Europe, where there is the Islamic extremism which has the dark skin versus the Christian extremism which has white and blond skin, and where the black and the blue eyes become the criterion for belonging, dignity and later the death, the reluctant political leaderships rule and flatter the relations with the Gulf governments the source of extremism and atonement on one hand, and with the right –wing extremism in their countries with electoral considerations on the other hand. With the knowledge of these political leaderships the scenes of the opposite mobilization for a civil war are organized. They turn along with their security services into statistical system for victims and denouncing crimes. While in the Islamic rich capable countries, the center of rule is distributed between a sponsor of Wahhabism the origin of takfiri schools in Saudi Arabia and the reference of the Muslim Brotherhood between Ankara and Doha where the media, money, fatwas, mosques turn into schools for sending more of terrorists. In the poor and upper middle-class countries the wars are under ashes, the power is controlled by governments that most of them do not have solutions for the problems of the national independence or attitudes towards the major issues at their forefront Palestine, or plans of development that combat the poverty and ignorance and grant the priority to the security. Therefore thousands of them flee to the west coasts in search for better life, later they become under the pressure of the racist attraction and then fuel for the next war.

It is no longer possible to confine the search of the global security with the fate of ISIS, Al Nusra, and Al-Qaeda organization in Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan, Egypt and Libya. The whole world turns into open battlefield where an army does not meet an army or security with terrorism but a white extremist kills the innocent ordinary people from the black or the Muslims, versus Black Muslim extremist kills good simple people of blue eyes. This is the unfair war in its two aspects; its victims are ordinary people. In this war only the racists and the takifiris celebrate their victory by the blood of victims through absorbing new waves of angry people who are similar to them and mobilize them as new soldiers in their unjust war. After every killing of innocents by the Takfiri of ISIS and Al-Qaeda they crowd tens and hundreds of the while Christians of Europe and America to the ranks of the new Nazis and racists, and after every killing that targets the Muslims and the Black in Britain and America they crowd tens and hundreds to the ranks of Al-Qaeda and its supporters and those who celebrate the joy of their criminal operations.

The world turns into dramatic theatre where victims kill other victims by turning around the killers, supporting them, and rejoicing the crime against the innocents and considering it a revenge of victims of similar crime unless a miracle happens. The world will move during few years to more difficult and complicate stage, we will witness during it mutual arming and the spontaneous sort of people by avoiding colors, the share of residence and work in the same areas in search for security and dignity, then it will be easy to see the closure of the districts by night in front of the other color as an enemy, and later closing the districts in front of the police for the sake of the mutual self-security, along with arming that will be followed by raising the opposite barricades. So neither Paris nor London nor Brussels, nor Amsterdam, nor Berlin, nor New York nor Chicago will be away from it. When the spark of this open war breaks out the wise will wake up where the hypocrisy will control the situation, and they will move electorally towards the culture of the white racism and towards the Wahhabism and the Muslim Brotherhood for interest and financial considerations, so maybe today they will be aware that unless there is firmness in confronting these two extremisms, and unless the banners of the civil just protecting country are raised the people in all the world will wake up to discover lately that they turned this beautiful planet into unviable place.

Those who prepare themselves to celebrate the victory on ISIS, they prepare for it and for Al-Qaeda the opportunity of celebrating a joint victory with the White racists against humanity, rationality, civilization, and the victory of death over life.

Translated by Lina Shehadeh,

حرب أهلية عالمية: داعش ينتصر أم ينهزم؟

ناصر قنديل

أغسطس 18, 2017

شرقاً درّ… الغرب منافق ومتآمر

– لا يبدو المشهد الدولي مبشّراً بالخير، طالما أنّ القيادة السياسية لدول فاعلة وحاكمة تعيش بغربة عن الواقع. فالدولة العظمى الممسكة بالدفة السياسية والاقتصادية والعسكرية الأولى في العالم، يتربّع على رأسها عنصري أبيض يتحدّث بلغة تتحمّل مسؤولية إنتاج المزيد من التصدّع في جدار العلاقات الإنسانية بين الأعراق والألوان والأديان، وفي أوروبا حيث ينمو التطرفان الإسلامي الأسمر اللون والبشرة، ومقابله التطرف المسيحي الأبيض والأشقر، وتصير العيون السوداء والعيون الزرقاء معياراً للانتماء والهوية ولاحقاً للموت، تحكم قيادات سياسية متردّدة تجامل العلاقات بالحكومات الخليجية مصدّرة التطرف والتكفير من جهة وبالتطرف اليميني في بلادها بحسابات انتخابية، وتتمّ تحت أعينها مشاهد التعبئة المتقابلة لحرب أهلية لا تبقي ولا تَذَر، وهي تتحوّل مع أجهزتها الأمنية إلى جهاز إحصاء للضحايا وتنديد بالجريمة، وفي الدول الإسلامية الغنية والقادرة يتوزّع مركز الحكم بين راعٍ للوهابية منشأ مدارس التكفير في السعودية، ومرجعية الإخوان المسلمين بين أنقرة والدوحة، حيث الإعلام والمال والفتاوى والمساجد تتحوّل مدارس لتخريج المزيد من الإرهابيين، وفي الدول الفقيرة والمتوسطة الحال، حروب تحت الرماد تمسك بالسلطة حكومات لا تملك في أغلبها حلولاً لمشاكل الاستقلال الوطني ولا وقوفاً على خط القضايا الكبرى وفي مقدّمتها فلسطين، ولا خطط تنمية ومكافحة للفقر والجهل، وتمنح الأولوية للإمساك بالأمن، فتنزح منها ألوف نحو سواحل الغرب بحثاً عن حياة أفضل بداية، لتصير تحت ضغط الاستقطاب العنصري لاحقاً وقوداً للحرب الآتية.

– لم يعُد ممكناً حصر البحث بالأمن العالمي بمصير داعش والنصرة وتنظيم القاعدة في سورية ولبنان والعراق وأفغانستان ومصر وليبيا، فقد تحوّل العالم كله ساحة حرب مفتوحة، لا يتقابل فيها جيش مع جيش، أو أمن مع إرهاب، بل يقوم متطرف أبيض بقتل الناس العاديين الأبرياء الطيبين من السود أو المسلمين، ومقابله يقوم متطرف أسمر مسلم بقتل الناس الطيبين البسطاء من ذوي العيون الزرقاء. وهذه الحرب الظالمة بوجهيها، ضحاياها هم الناس بكلّ ما تتسع له الكلمة من معانٍ وأبعاد. وفي هذه الحرب وحدهم العنصريون والتكفيريون يحتفلون بتبادل أنخاب دماء الضحايا بنصرهم، المتمثل باستيعاب موجات جديدة من الغاضبين من أبناء جلدتهم وتطويعهم جنوداً جدداً في حربهم الظالمة، فكلّ عملية قتل لأبرياء على يد تكفيري من داعش والقاعدة تضخّ العشرات والمئات من المسيحيين البيض في أوروبا وأميركا إلى صفوف النازيين الجدد والعنصريين. وكلّ عملية قتل تستهدف المسلمين والسود في بريطانيا وأميركا تضخ المئات والآلاف إلى صفوف القاعدة ومريديها ومؤيديها والمحتفلين بفرح بعملياتها الإجرامية.

– يتحوّل العالم مسرحاً درامياً مرّ الطعم والمذاق، الضحايا يقتلون الضحايا، بالتفافهم حول القتلة وتأييدهم، واحتفالهم فرحاً بوقوع الجريمة بحق الأبرياء واعتبارها انتقاماً لضحايا جريمة مماثلة وقعت بحق ضحايا آخرين، وما لم تحدث معجزة، يذهب العالم بأعين مفتوحة خلال سنوات قليلة لمرحلة أصعب وأعقد، سنشهد خلالها التسلّح المتقابل والفرز السكاني العفوي، بتفادي اللونين تشارك السكن والعمل في أماكن واحدة بحثاً عن الأمن والكرامة، وبعدها سيكون سهلاً رؤية إغلاق الأحياء ليلاً أمام اللون الآخر كعدو، ولاحقاً إغلاق الأحياء بوجه الشرطة لحساب أمن ذاتي متقابل، وسريان حمّى التسلح يتبعها ارتفاع متاريس متقابلة، لن تكون لا باريس ولا لندن ولا بروكسل ولا أمستردام ولا برلين ولا نيويورك وشيكاغو بمنأى عنها. وعندما تندلع شرارة هذه الحرب المفتوحة على الموت بلا حساب، سيستفيق الحكماء أنهم استقالوا من مهمتهم عندما كان النفاق سيد الموقف، تجاه ثقافة العنصرية البيضاء انتخابياً، وتجاه الوهابية والإخوانية لاعتبارات مصلحية ومالية، عساهم يدركون اليوم أنه ما لم يقع الحزم بمواجهة هذين التطرّفين الإثنين، وما لم ترتفع رايات الدولة المدنية العادلة والراعية والحامية، سيفيق الناس، كلّ الناس، في العالم، كلّ العالم، ليكتشفوا بعد فوات الأوان أنهم حوّلوا هذا الكوكب الجميل مكاناً غير صالح للعيش.

Related

At Least 13 Killed, 50 Injured In Barcelona Van Attack. ISIS Claimed Responsibility

At least 13 people were killed and 50 others injured when a van plowed into a crowd in the turist area in Barcelona, Spain, on Thursday. Catalonia’s interior minister Joaquim Forn officially confirmed these numbers.

According to some media reports, the death toll could be even higher, up to 20 people. However, this still has to be confirmed.

One suspect was arrested after the incident described as a terror attack by Spanish police.

Spanish police have identified one of the suspects as Driss Oukabir. He had allegedly rented the white Fiat van used in the attack. It is not clear if he is the person who has been arrested.

ÚLTIMA HORA | La policía identifica a uno de los implicados en el atentado de Barcelona: Driss Oukabir http://cort.as/yoxE 

A second van linked to the attack (assumed to have been used as getaway car) has been found in the town of Vic in Catalonia.

Rumors are also circulating that somebody has opened fire on police in Barcelona but no confirmation has appeared yet. Spanish media had also reported that two armed men were holed up in a bar in downtown. However, police later dismissed those reports.

Report: Somebody has opened fire on police in second possible attack. 

ISIS claimed responsibility for the attack via its news agency Amaq.

At Least 13 Killed, 50 Injured In Barcelona Van Attack. ISIS Claimed Responsibility

It was the latest terrorist attack using a vehicle in Europe. The incident followed similar attacks in Nice, Berlin and London that have resulted in killing of over 100 people in total.

Meanwhile, US President Donald Trump suggested to use General Pershing’s methods to combat terrorism. During his presidential campaign Trump cited a dubious legend of dipping bullets in pig’s blood, shooting 49 of 50 terrorists, and telling the last one to tell his friends what would happen if they committed further terrorist attacks.

Study what General Pershing of the United States did to terrorists when caught. There was no more Radical Islamic Terror for 35 years!

Photos from the scene:

At Least 13 Killed, 50 Injured In Barcelona Van Attack. ISIS Claimed Responsibility

At Least 13 Killed, 50 Injured In Barcelona Van Attack. ISIS Claimed Responsibility

Related Articles

مقالات مشابهة

Mirzaolang Massacre: Wahhabis Slaughter, the World Watches Silently!!

Local Editor

Militants of Wahhabi ideology massacred dozens of civilians, mostly Shia Hazaras, in a brutal, inhumane way after attacking a village in a remote area of Afghanistan’s northern province of Sar-e Pul earlier this week.

Mirzaolang Massacre


The assailants were a mixed group of Taliban and Daesh terrorists inspired by the Wahhabi ideology, an extremist doctrine of Saudi roots.

 

Mirzaolang Massacre


Following are some of the many heartbreaking photos of the massacred and the survivors as well.

 

Mirzaolang Massacre

Mirzaolang Massacre

Mirzaolang Massacre

Mirzaolang Massacre

Mirzaolang Massacre

Mirzaolang Massacre


Source: Al-Ahed

11-08-2017 | 12:54

The Neoconservatives and the “Coming World”: A response to the questions of a virtual friend

July 31, 2017

by Amir Nour (1)

« In the emerging world of ethnic conflict and civilizational clash, Western belief in the universalityof Western culture suffers three problems: it is false; it is immoral; and it is dangerous »

Samuel Phillips Huntington

« The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order »

Dear friend, I have just read the The Neoconservatives and the “Coming World”: A response to the questions of a virtual friendgreat question you have asked me about the world’s future according to the American Neo-conservative’s vision. This question came quite naturally to your mind when reading the interview (2) given by one of the most impassioned advocates of this school of thought – Thomas Barnett – author of the controversial book “The Pentagon’s New map: War and Peace in the twenty-first century”.

Assuredly, we’re dealing here with a major issue whose understanding is a sine qua non condition for deciphering both the contingencies and the dominant trends characterizing the evolution of international relations, particularly since the end of the Cold War.

Indeed, the turmoil and convulsions the world is experiencing since the turn of the third millennium, more particularly in the region that should be of a paramount interest to you – i.e. the Arab-Muslim world – are one of the most significant manifestations of the process of multidimensional change underway. Most probably, they are harbingers of the “coming world”- in the words of Malek Bennabi- one radically different from that which we have known since the end of the Second World War to the fall of the Berlin Wall and the subsequent collapse of the Soviet empire in 1992.

The ensuing new international reality -the emergence of the United States of America as the sole global superpower- has also been a long shot since it has in turn faded as a result of both the financial and economic crisis that erupted in 2007-2008 and continues to this day, and the rise of new assertive international actors, including the BRICS members (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa).

In all likelihood, this new “coming world” will be multipolar. This is a frightening prospect for the proponents of the perpetuation of the Old Order established by and for the West several centuries ago. And it is quite naturally therefore that the West, under the aegis of its American hegemon leader, is fiercely trying to hinder the realization of this inexorable prospect.

In the first chapter of my aforementioned book (3), I tried to analyze the reasons for this “fear”. At the core of those is undoubtedly the persistence of the imperial ideology that took over American policy after World War II: Neo-conservatism.

As explained in a related Wikipedia article, neoconservatism is a political movement born in the United States during the 1960s of the twentieth century, among conservative-leaning Democrats who became disenchanted with the party’s foreign policy and the “New Left” culture. The first writings of the neo-conservative current appeared in the Jewish monthly New York Monthly Review Magazine Commentary, published by the American Jewish Committee. And the first neo-conservative theorist to have adopted this word and is considered therefore as the founder of this ideology is Irving Kristol (who was militant Trotskyist in his early days!). He is the founder of the famous neo-conservative think tank: Project for the New American Century (PNAC).

Neo-conservatism peaked in influence during the Republican presidential administration of Ronald Reagan whose doctrine was guided by anticommunism and opposition to the global influence of the USSR. It reached its climax at the turn of the last century with the Bush Doctrine of exporting democracy, including by means of military force if necessary. The prominent neo-conservative newspapers are Commentary and the Weekly Standard. There are also neo-conservative think tanks on foreign policy, including American Enterprise Institute (AEI), the Heritage Foundation, JINSA (Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs) and, of course, the PNAC (4).

In foreign policy, the Neocons defend “the military power of Democratic States in international relations in order to establish a new international order”. In a PNAC manifesto published in 1996, they laid out their quintessential thought and principles as follows:

-Moral clarity and benevolent hegemony;
-Preventing the emergence of a rival power;
-End of “complacency” towards dictatorships;
-Refusal of the decline of the American power because it is the first democratic power of the world;
-Upgrading of the military tool to respond to aggression.

The Neo-conservatives say they want a new international order based on freedom, according to the designs that are not those of Kant and Wilson, to which they reproach the impotence, but which take their source in the writings of Moses Maimonides and Saint Augustine. They criticize the United Nations and international law in the name of morality. At major international conferences, they prefer smaller coalitions according to the “mission-defines-the-coalition” principle. They support Israel. Their creed is interventionism. Therefore, the United States “must be recognized as the flagship nation of human rights and export democracy and freedom all over the world if need be by force”.

Among the emblematic ideas of the Neo-conservatives, features prominently the theory of “creative chaos” -developed mainly by Michael Ledeen, a former correspondent in Rome of the New Republic. It is a project aiming to “establish a state of war and permanent instability in the Middle East that would enable the Americans and Israelis to preserve their geostrategic objectives in the region, even by re-redrawing it’s map”. Neo-conservatives do not consider the stability of the world a good to maintain but instead advocate the virtues of destabilisation.

Such was the opinion of Robert Kagan, co-founder with William Kristol of the PNAC. He was the originator of the letter of 26 January 1998 sent to Bill Clinton asking him to conduct another policy in Iraq, one with a view to toppling Saddam Hussein to preserve American interests in the Gulf. The same can be said about Robert Cooper, a British partisan of neoconservatism who advocated a doctrine of “imperialist liberalism” granting the “right” to “civilized countries” to use force against their “foreign ennemies” (5).

It was, however, President G. W. Bush who is notoriously known for having endorsed and put in practice these neo-conservative principles. He did so by invading Afghanistan in 2001 and Iraq in 2003 through an extreme instrumentalization of the unfortunate though “miraculous” events of 11 September 2001. In his 31 December 2005 State of the Union Address, he explained that there is no question of satisfying the “false comfort of isolationism”, which ends in “danger and decline”. America must “lead” the world. It’s a security imperative. “The alternative to American leadership is a much more dangerous and anxious world.” In his view, America must therefore continue to “act boldly in favour of freedom”. And as in 1945 “when she liberated the camps of death, she must accept the call of history to deliver the oppressed”, Half the world lives in a democracy, he said. “We do not forget the other half, in countries like Syria, Burma, Zimbabwe, North Korea and Iran because the demands of justice and the Peace of the world also require their freedom” (6).

To do so, the Security Council of a United Nations, although until then so decried by the neo-conservatives, becomes the privileged instrument for conducting hazardous military expeditions with chaotic consequences for some “recalcitrant” States and their peoples, particularly in the MENA region (7). George W. Bush named as his Ambassador to this important UN body John Bolton, a neo-conservative “hawk” who recounts his UN experience in a book with a very significant title (8).

Almost a decade later, and notwithstanding the debacles of unilateralism and military interventionism he has been preaching ceaselessly, Robert Kagan continues to exert a strong influence on the American establishment. In his book (9) published in 2012, he strived to refute the thesis of the “Decline of America”. This book is said to have become the bedside book of President Barack Obama, who stated in his State of the Union Address in January 2012: “America is back. Anyone who tells you otherwise, anyone who tells you that America is in decline or that our influence has waned doesn’t know what they’re talking about”.

This vision is shared by Steve Bannon, the mastermind of the new administration (before being excluded from it) of President Donald Trump. As explained in the excellent article by Pepe Escobar (10), Steve Bannon “a man who eats history and political theory essays for breakfast (…) a post-truth Machiavelli behind the most powerful of Princes”, sees our current geopolitical juncture as “the ultimate battle between Good and Evil (no, Nietzsche’s verdict, for him, does not apply) ‘Good’ in our case is Christian civilization and its history of two millennia – with a possible place of honor for the Enlightenment and the Industrial Revolution. Its opposite, ‘evil’ is conveyed by a whole series of ‘existential threats’ – from the post-modern, technocratic/secular elites (the inner enemy) to Islam (the enemy in general)”.

For more insight into the roots of this neo-conservative ideology and its impact on the policy that characterizes the United States today, I recommend reading the analysis written by Paul Fitzgerald and Elizabeth Gould (11). Armed with a razor-sharp writing style and remarkably documented references, they dissect the history of the Neocon take over of the United States, through a four-step-process presented as follows:

– American Imperialism Leads the World into Dante’s Vision of Hell
– How Neocons Push for War by Cooking the Books
– How the CIA Created a Fake Western Reality for ‘Unconventional Warfare’
– The Final Stage of the Machiavellian Elites’ Takeover of America

The Neocons, the Arab World and Israel

Dear friend, after outlining this long but indispensable historic and geostrategic overview, I come to the other major question underlying the issue you raised: Why is the Arab-Muslim world the main victim of this American neo-conservative ideology, one that is supposedly the bedrock of the New World Order and the ultimate culmination of a long process of a history coming to an end – according to another neo-conservative theorist: Francis Fukuyama? We now know that History did not end; on the contrary, it is witnessing an unprecedented acceleration, and the American Empire, far from bringing peace and prosperity to the world, has led all mankind on the road to the great disorder in the world and destructive chaos in the Arab-Muslim world, especially through the ill-named “Arab Springs”.

Aided by a formidable “media compressor roller” in its enterprise of global domination on behalf of a so-called messianic “manifest destiny”, the American empire undertook to redesign the world map in order to be able to establish, in the long term, a kind of « World State » or a « World Government ». This presupposes the destruction of nations by dissolving them into regions and continental poles. This is probably what Herbert Marshall McLuhan, the Canadian sociologist and Vatican adviser – notably known for coining the expression « the medium is the message » – had in mind when he wrote in 1968 “War and Peace in the Global village” (12) his revolutionary book in which he depicted a planet made ever smaller by new technologies, and used the concept of “glocal”, a mixture of global and local, foreshadowing the fundamental architecture of the New World Order.

As is well explained in an article (13) published in 2012, after the fall of communism, the epicenter of this policy was set in the Middle East “where not only the great reserves of hydrocarbons are located, but also the State of Israel, the real mother house of Globalism, which has been impeding all attempts of peace in this region of the world since its creation”. The map of this part of the planet has long been redesigned within Judeo-American think tanks as well as by military commands whose ultimate goals are the fragmentation of nations on ethnic and religious bases (leaving Israel as the only regional superpower), but also by pushing Islam to operate its “Vatican II” so as to be integrated tomorrow into the vast global market in gestation. Because Europe « is being in Dormition, whether we like it or not, Islam is the only bulwark against the total stranglehold of the Tel-Aviv and Washington traders on the world”. This desire to subdue Islam also aims to “create a single religion” (which should bring together all religious currents). This will only be achieved through the division of Muslims, Sunnis and Shiites. In view of this, one can easily understand why the sacred Islamic State (14) is also planned, including Mecca and Medina, to better control Islam and integrate it into a new world order, which is not possible today. Indeed this religion does not have an identified hierarchy (15).

In his excellent book “Black Terror White Soldiers: Islam, Fascism & the New Age”, David Livingstone states that because they are far too ignorant of the histories of the rest of the world, and being aware of only the accomplishments of Greece, Rome and Europe, Westerners have been made to believe that their societies represent the most superior examples of civilization. This idea, he continues, derives from the hidden influence of those who believe in and teach that history would attain its fulfillment when man would become God, and make his own laws. Livingstone concludes that this is the basis of the propaganda which has been used to foster a Clash of Civilizations, whereby the Islamic world is presented as stubbornly adhering to the anachronistic idea of “theocracy”. Where once the spread of Christianity and civilizing the world were used as pretexts for colonization, today a new White Man’s Burden makes use of human rights and democracy to justify imperial aggression. And because, after centuries of decline, the Islamic world is incapable of mobilizing a defense, the Western powers, as part of their age-old strategy of Divide and Conquer, have fostered the rise of Islamic fundamentalism, to both serve as agent-provocateurs and to malign the image of Islam.

Few weeks after the Amercian invasion of Iraq, Ari Shavit wrote a thought-provoking piece in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz under the significant title « White Man’s Burden » (16). He stated that the war against Iraq was based on an « ardent faith disseminated by a small group of 25 or 30 neo-conservatives, almost all of them Jewish, almost all of them intellectuals (a partial list: Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, William Kristol, Elliot Abrams, Charles Krauthammer), people who are mutual friends and cultivate one another and are convinced that political ideas are a major driving force of history. They believe that the right political idea entails a fusion of morality and force, human rights and grit. The philosophical underpinnings of the Washington neo-conservatives are the writings of Machiavelli, Hobbes and Edmund Burke. They also admire Winston Churchill and the policy pursued by Ronald Reagan ».

Quoting William Kristol, he added that this war was also based on « the new American understanding that if the United States does not shape the world in its image, the world will shape the United States in its own image ». At a deeper level, according to Kristol, it is « a greater war, for the shaping of a new Middle East. It is a war that is intended to change the political culture of the entire region. Because what happened on September 11, 2001, Kristol says, is that the Americans looked around and saw that the world is not what they thought it was. The world is a dangerous place. Therefore the Americans looked for a doctrine that would enable them to cope with this dangerous world. And the only doctrine they found was the neo-conservative one ».

This opinion is obviously shared by Charles Krauthammer for whom « the war in Iraq is being fought to replace the demonic deal America cut with the Arab world decades ago. That deal said: you will send us oil and we will not intervene in your internal affairs ». That deal effectively expired on September 11, 2001, Krauthammer says. Since that day, the Americans have understood that “if they allow the Arab world to proceed in its evil ways – suppression, economic ruin, sowing despair – it will continue to produce more and more bin Ladens”. America thus reached the conclusion that it has no choice: it has to take on itself the project of rebuilding the Arab world. Therefore, the Iraq war « is really the beginning of a gigantic historical experiment whose purpose is to do in the Arab world what was done in Germany and Japan after World War II ».

The article ends with a slightly divergent opinion expressed by Thomas Friedman, The New York Times columnist, who is not part of the group, although he didn’t oppose the war and was convinced that « the status quo in the Middle East is no longer acceptable. The status quo is terminal. And therefore it is urgent to foment a reform in the Arab world ». Friedman thought « it’s the war the neo-conservatives wanted. It’s the war the neo-conservatives marketed. Those people had an idea to sell when September 11 came, and they sold it. Oh boy, did they sell it. So this is not a war that the masses demanded. This is a war of an elite (…) I could give you the names of 25 people (all of whom are at this moment within a five-block radius of this office) who, if you had exiled them to a desert island a year and a half ago, the Iraq war would not have happened ». Still, he was of the opinion that « it’s not some fantasy the neo-conservatives invented. It’s not that 25 people hijacked America. You don’t take such a great nation into such a great adventure with Bill Kristol and the Weekly Standard and another five or six influential columnists. In the final analysis, what fomented the war is America’s over-reaction to September 11; the genuine sense of anxiety that spread in America after September 11. It is not only the neo-conservatives who led us to the outskirts of Baghdad. What led us to the outskirts of Baghdad is a very American combination of anxiety and hubris ».

Echoeing Ari Shavit, Stephen Green affirms (17) that since 9-11, a small group of neo-conservatives –many of whom are senior officials in the Defense Department, National Security Council and Office of the Vice President– have effectively gutted–they would say reformed–traditional American foreign and security policy. After reviewing the internal security backgrounds of some of the best known among them, he concludes that they had dual agendas, while professing to work for the internal security of the United States against its terrorist enemies.

Bill Christison (18) and Kathleen Christison reach the same conclusion (19). They say that since the long-forgotten days when the State Department’s Middle East policy was run by a group of so-called Arabists, U.S. policy on Israel and the Arab world “has increasingly become the purview of officials well known for tilting toward Israel”. These people, “who can fairly be called Israeli loyalists, are now at all levels of government, from desk officers at the Defense Department to the deputy secretary level at both State and Defense, as well as on the National Security Council staff and in the vice president’s office”.

An examination of the cast of characters in Bush administration policymaking circles, they say, reveals a “startlingly pervasive network of pro-Israel activists, and an examination of the neo-cons’ voluminous written record shows that Israel comes up constantly as a neo-con reference point, always mentioned with the United States as the beneficiary of a recommended policy, always linked with the United States when national interests are at issue”.

The two authors point out to a telling example of the drafting by Feith, Perle, and both David and Meyrav Wurmser of a policy paper issued, in 1996, by an Israeli think tank and written for newly elected Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu. Through this document, they urged Israel “to make a ‘clean break’ from pursuit of the peace process, particularly its land-for-peace aspects, which the authors regarded as a prescription for Israel’s annihilation”.

The document’s authors saw the principal threat to Israel coming, we should not be surprised to discover now, from Iraq and Syria and advised that focusing on the removal of Saddam Hussein would kill two birds with one stone by also thwarting Syria’s regional ambitions.

According to the Christisons, Elliott Abrams is “another unabashed supporter of the Israeli right, now bringing his links with Israel into the service of U.S”, after his appointment as Middle East director on the NSC staff.

Interestingly enough, the Christisons were of the view that the dual loyalists in the Bush administration “have given added impetus to the growth of a messianic strain of Christian fundamentalism that has allied itself with Israel in preparation for the so-called End of Days”. These crazed fundamentalists, they say, see Israel’s domination over all of Palestine as a “necessary step toward fulfillment of the biblical Millennium, consider any Israeli relinquishment of territory in Palestine as a sacrilege, and view warfare between Jews and Arabs as a divinely ordained prelude to Armageddon”, which raises the horrifying but very real prospect of an apocalyptic Christian-Islamic war”.

Writing a commentary in a recent issue of Foreign Policy magazine (20), Elliott Abrams –in his capacity as a senior fellow for Middle Eastern studies at the Council on Foreign Relation-, predicts that “even in the best-case scenario, with the Islamic State defeated and losing its control over a “state,” it may continue to exist as a terrorist group — and in any event al Qaeda and other jihadi groups will not disappear”. This, he concludes, “will not end our involvement in Middle East conflicts and may in fact lead it to increase. There will be no repeat of the Iraq wars, with vast American armies on the ground, but there will need to be a long continuation of the sort of commitment we see today”.

As is explained by Alison Weir in her book (21), « Few Americans today are aware that US support enabled the creation of modern Israel. Even fewer know that US politicians pushed

this policy over the forceful objections of top diplomatic and military experts ». Prodigiously documented, this book brings together « meticulously sourced evidence to illuminate a reality that differs starkly from the prevailing narrative. It provides a clear view of the history that is key to understanding one of the most critically important political issues of our day ».

All of the above fits perfectly with the thesis of the “New Sykes-Picot” that I develop in my book.

In conclusion, I believe I can assert that if Men are the main driving force of the events that make world history, they are certainly not the movers and shakers of its destiny. This -as the great Algerian thinker Malek Bennabi wrote in the past century in his flagship book “l’Afro-asiatisme” (22) – is realized “in spite of the will of men (for) human reason would be futile if it did not coincide with the processes of facts that impose God’s will on History. And it would be sacrilegious if it wanted to deflect the course of history as if it wanted to oppose God’s will and purposes”.

* *
*

Notes:

[1] Algerian researcher in international relations, author of the book « L’Orient et l’Occident à l’heure d’un nouveau Sykes-Picot » (“The Orient and the Occident in time of a new Sykes-Picot”), Editions Alem El Afkar, Algiers, 2014.  He is a fervent advocate of the henceforth vital “dialogue of civilizations”, the alternative option of which in today’s increasingly globalized and polarized world, is a catastrophic “clash of civilizations.
[2] “A future worth creating: Interview with Dr. Thomas Barnett“:
Http://www.checkpoint-online.ch/CheckPoint/Forum/For0078-InterviewBarnett.html
[3] Downloadable free of charge, in French and Arabic languages, by clicking on the following links: Http://www.mezghana.net/amir-nour.pdf  and
Http://www.mezghana.net/Sykes-Picot.jadeed-REAL.LAST.pdf
[4] Read the presentation made by l’Observatoire européen des think tanks:
Http://www.oftt.eu/think-tanks/monographs/article/pnac-project-for-the-new-american-century
[5] Robert Cooper “The Breaking of Nations: Order and chaos in the twenty-first century“, Atlantic Monthly Press, New York, 2003.
[6] Read the article in the French newspaper Le Monde of 01/02/2006 entitled ” L’Amérique doit conduire le monde, selon Bush» (America must lead the world, according to Bush).
[7] This episode is superbly analyzed by Hardeep Singh Puri, Permanent Representative of India in Geneva and New York (between 2002 and 2013) in his book “Perilous Interventions: the Security Council and the Politics of chaos“, Harper Collins, 2016.
[8] John Bolton, “Surrender is not an option: Defending America at the United Nations and abroad“, Threshold Editions, 2008.
[9] Robert Kagan, “The World America made“, Alfred A. Knopf, 2012.
[10] Pepe Ecsobar, “Will Andrew Jackson Trump Embody the Benno doctrine” Entelekheia, March 21, 2017.
[11] A four part analysis titled “The history of the Neocon takeover of America “, the Francophone Saker, 10 May 2017.
[12] “War and Peace in the global Village“, Bantam Books, New York, 1967.
[13] Read “Les coups tordus de l’Empire“, in the French magazine “Réfléchir et agir”, No. 40, Winter 2012.
[14] According to a readjustment of the boundaries of the Islamic geographical area imagined by Ralph Peters, member of the PNAC, in an article in the military journal Armed Forces newspaper of June 2006 entitled “How a better Middle East would look“.
[15] In “L’Iran, un pays en sursis “, French magazine ‘Nexus 66’, January-February 2010.
[16] See article « White Man’s Burden », Haaretz newspaper, April 3, 2003.
[17] See Stephen Green, « Neo-Cons, Israel and the Bush Administration », Counterpunch, February 28, 2004.
[18] Bill Christison was a senior official of the CIA. He served as a National Intelligence Officer and as Director of the CIA’s Office of Regional and Political Analysis.
[19] See « The Bush Neocons and Israel », Counterpunch, September 6, 2004.
[20] See « The United States Can’t Retreat From the Middle East », Foreign Policy magazine, July 10, 2017.
[21] Alison Weir, « Against Our Better Judgment: The hidden history of how the United States was used to create Israel », CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, February 2014.
[22] Malek Bennabi, «L’Afro-Asiatisme, conclusions sur la Conférence de Bandoeng », Cairo, Imprimerie Misr S.A.E, 1956.

Hezbollah Liberates Al-Nusra Stronghold in Eastern Lebanon

[ Ed. note – This is a major victory for Hezbollah. The last Al-Nusra stronghold in Lebanon, in the Arsal Mountains on the border with Syria, has been cleared of terrorists. In addition to the RT report above, I am also posting a Hezbollah statement expressing solidarity with Christians and paying tribute to Father Jaques Hamel, a French priest murdered by ISIS terrorists one year ago.

Christians all over the world should be grateful to Hezbollah for its defense of Christians in the Middle East. To the brave fighters of Hezbollah: we thank you. ]

From the Islamic Resistance in Arsal to Father Jacques Hamel… A Homage of Brotherhood and Loyalty

Alahed News

For all mankind, they fought. To all the oppressed, they dedicated their victories. Victims of terrorism spread everywhere like the plague; terrorism which does not distinguish among religions and races.

From the Lebanese Arsal outskirts, are Resistance fighters who offered their most precious in the battle of victory for just and humanity against Takfiri terrorism.

As Hezbollah Secretary General His Eminence Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah offered the victory in Arsal outskirts to both Christians and Muslims, the unjustly slain Father Jacques Hamel had his share of the victory.

The Islamic Resistance’s Mujahedeen in the outskirts did not forget their Christian brothers, particularly Father Hamel. Hence, they saluted his sacrifice via message to al-Ahed news website written in French.

The message reads: “Your spirit will never die. Generations will live on your memory. Rest in peace knowing that we will protect our Christian brothers. Peace be upon you. Your brothers in Hezbollah.”

Father Jacques Hamel, born on November 30th 1930, was a French priest in the parish of Saint-Étienne-du-Rouvray. He was murdered during the Normandy church attack by the Wahhabi Daesh [Arabic acronym for “ISIS” / “ISIL”] terror group on July 26, 2016.

Neither his age nor religious rank were able to spare the 86-year-old priest from the Wahhabi monsters’ claws who never gave any regard to religion nor humanity.

Today, the sons of the Islamic Resistance in Lebanon had triumphed for the spilled blood of the unjustly slain priest.

Despite the pain, the wounds and the hardships of Jihad, the Resistance – from the heart of Arsal Outskirts – did not forget to pay tribute to Father Hamel as to assert that the battle with Takfiri terrorism is one, and that their resistance is to defend all humanity and religions.

Accordingly, this is not the first time Hezbollah fighters had honored their fellow Christians as the land of Ma’loula which had been liberated from the Takfiris, bears witness to the purity of the battle these men are waging. This battle is the strongest evidence of the unity of religions in the face of the Takfiri terrorism.


A little bit more about Father Jaques Hamel from Wikipedia:

Hamel was ordained as a priest on 30 June 1958.[12][17] He served as a vicar at the St. Antoine church in Le Petit-Quevilly from 1958, a vicar at the Notre-Dame de Lourdes church in Sotteville-lès-Rouen from 1967, a parish priest in Saint-Pierre-lès-Elbeuf from 1975, and a parish priest in Cléon from 1988. He joined the church in Saint-Étienne-du-Rouvray in 2000.[18] He officially retired at the age of 75, but was allowed to keep serving in the parish.[13] As a result, he assumed his role as the parish’s assistant priest from 2005 to his death.[18]

With local imam Mohammed Karabila, the president of Normandy’s regional council of Muslims, Hamel worked since early 2015 on an interfaith committee.[12][19] After Hamel’s death, Karabila described him as his friend with whom he had discussed religion and as also someone who gave his life for others.[20]

Hamel died when his throat was slit by two Muslim men, Adel Kermiche and Abdel Malik Petitjean, who both pledged allegiance to the Islamic State.[21][22][23][24] The attack occurred while Hamel was saying Mass in his parish in Saint-Étienne-du-Rouvray on 26 July 2016.[25][26] During the attack, Hamel said “Satan, go!” when confronted by his killers.[3]


Saint-Étienne-du-Rouvray is in the French region of Normandy…


Report from July 27, 2017–one year and one day after Father Hamel’s death…”Satan  go…”…God works in mysterious ways…

Arsal Battle: Nusra Urged to Surrender or Face Death, Battle Almost Over

Alahed News

The Resistance’s accomplishments in its battle in the outskirts of Arsal had been quick and swift. In a few days’ time, the mighty revolutionaries were able to lift the banners of victory over the outskirts’ hills and mountains amid retreats among the ranks of terrorists.

Five days after the start of the offensive in Arsal, the Takfiri al-Nusra Front terrorists are facing an ultimatum: to leave or face eminent death.

As the offensive in the outskirts of Arsal reached its sixth day Wednesday, attention has turned to the looming deadline set by Hezbollah for negotiations with the al-Nusra, and a scheduled evening speech by Hezbollah Secretary General His Eminence Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah.

With the injury of the Nusra chief of operations Omar Wardi after being hit by resistance gunfire, the terrorist group’s militants retreated, Hezbollah War Media Center said.

The center further added that the area occupied by the Nusra terrorists in the outskirts of Arsal had shrank to 10%.

The coming hours will be crucial in determining the outcome of negotiations with Nusra militants whose positions on Arsal outskirts are besieged.

Source: Hezbollah War Media Center, Translated by website team

Independent Journalists Reveal America’s Sinister War in Syria

By Tony Cartalucci

May 29, 2017 “Information Clearing House” –  Syria is not experiencing a “civil war.” It is being targeted by both proxy and direct military force organized by the United States and its allies for the explicit purpose of dividing and destroying yet another Middle Eastern nation.

Worse than that, the United States is employing tactics to transform Syria’s heterogeneous multi-ethnic and religious communities into segregated ghettos, and using this as a means of dividing and conquering the nation and even the region.

The US is also widely employing the abhorrent tactics of socioeconomic, psychological, and armed terrorism to break the Syrian people completely and absolutely.

Unlike in Libya and Iraq, however, US plans in Syria have been confounded. And because of this, ample time has elapsed for independent journalists to travel to, record, and report what is actually transpiring versus the intentional, malicious, and continuous lies told by the West’s mainstream media.

One of these journalists is Patrick Henningsen of 21st Century Wire, whose recent trip to Syria had him cross paths and interview others frequently visiting and sharing their experiences and findings from the besieged nation.

The picture painted is one that cannot be ignored.

For those who have already decided to believe the Western media based on “activist accounts,” the accounts provided during a recent audio interview published by 21st Century Wire is at least as equally compelling. However, for those who truly desire to discover the truth, critical thought and additional research will reveal the latter to be telling a truth consistently and intentionally obfuscated by the Western media.

Imperialism’s Fingerprints: Weaponized Ethnic-Segregation

In an interview with British journalist Tom Duggan, the process of terrorists from internationally designated terror organizations like Jabhat Al Nusra and the so-called “Islamic State” targeting communities along sectarian lines is described. While the Western media has confirmed the sectarian nature of the ongoing conflict, what Duggan and Henningsen’s accounts reveal is that Syria was multi-ethnic, with communities enjoying integration and diversity based first on being Syrian, then based on their respective religious and ethnic identities, long before the conflict began.

Intermarriage and sociopolitical exchanges were common before the conflict, and only since 2011 has ethnic and religious tensions begun to expose fault lines within communities based solely on fear created and perpetuated by foreign-backed terrorist organizations like Al Nusra and the Islamic State.

Pointed out was the fact that both US foreign policy regarding Syria and Al Nusra and the Islamic State’s goals, both aim to see a Syria divided along sectarian lines.

While Al Nusra and the Islamic State attempt to cut Syria’s sectarian-diverse communities up literally with bullets and blades, the US has repeatedly presented multiple maps over several years of Syria divided into sectarian-based micro-states – effectively eliminating Syria as a functioning and unified nation-state. While the US omits the “secret ingredient” to make its fictional maps a reality, it is demonstrably clear that terrorist organizations are the ones on the ground attempting to draw these new maps.

Libya – besieged, divided, and destroyed by US-led NATO aggression in 2011 – has suffered a similar fate and currently exists as a cautionary example of what may become of Syria should US plans succeed. Libya will no longer contest US special interests geopolitically or otherwise in its current form as a failed, divided, and destroyed state.

The premeditated and systematic nature of this attempted division and destruction of Syria matches verbatim the tactics employed for centuries by the British Empire – and before that – the Roman Empire.

It is a fundamental tactic not of humanitarian-motivated interventionists, but of imperialists. The crass nature of these tactics – simultaneously promoted by the West and designated terrorist organizations – explains why the Western media has attempted to portray Syria as ethnically and religiously divided before the conflict began, rather than as a process of intentional division and destruction unfolding as part of US foreign policy.

Similar tactics have been employed in Iraq as well, with much greater success. And even as far as Thailand in Southeast Asia, the groundwork is being laid for similar tactics to be employed to divide and weaken states targeted by Washington for regime change – highlighting the global nature of America’s neo-imperial proclivities.

Daily Terrorism Carried Out By “Rebels,” Not Against Them 

While the Western media has flooded headlines for years regarding the alleged atrocities carried out by the Syrian government and its allies against so-called “moderate rebels,” it has muted coverage of atrocities committed in turn by militants fighting the Syrian government and its people. These accounts are muted, because while they are technically “reported,” the obvious nature of these atrocities is often glossed over – sometimes even spun or lionized – rather than presented in a the same straightforward manner accusations against Damascus are.

During Henningsen’s interview with Duggan, the destructive and indiscriminate nature of improvised artillery systems used by terrorists in Syria was described. The narrative is one that equals any tale of “barrel bombs” employed by the Syrian government – perhaps even surpassing them – because while the Western media claims the Syrian government is using helicopters to drop ordnance into areas using direct line of sight, improvised artillery used by terrorists called “hell cannons” do not have direct line of sight to their targets.

This means that those using hell cannons have no way of knowing who, or even what they are hitting. They are blindly firing canisters full of deadly shrapnel – according to Western reports – up to a mile away.

The Daily Mail would describe the hell cannon as:

Firing improvised explosives with a range of around a mile, this is the homemade weapon of choice of the Free Syrian Army known as the ‘hell cannon’.

The cannon has been widely used during the conflict in besieged cities such as Aleppo and usually fires out highly modified propane gas cylinders.

The hell cannon could only ever be used as an absolutely indiscriminate weapon. With no way to reliably aim it, and no way to know definitively where rounds are landing, the result is predictable mayhem brought upon government forces and innocent civilians alike. With the vast majority of those living down range from the terrorists’ hell cannons being civilians, not soldiers, the likelihood of innocent people being maimed or killed by them is much higher.

For average readers of reports like the Daily Mail’s, “Syrian rebels strike back with the HELL CANNON: Aleppo fighters build devastating homemade weapon that shoots propane gas cylinders,” five minutes of critical thought will lead them to this conclusion.

Those operating among the West’s media – trained in journalism and in reporting events – when writing articles like those appearing in the Daily Mail, are thus making the conscious decision to intentionally, maliciously, and continuously lie regarding the methods and means used by terrorists they repeatedly refer to as “moderate rebels.” The double standards illustrated by the Daily Mail alone regarding “barrel bombs” versus “hell cannons” indicates concerted and serial attempts to misinform audiences and manipulate public perception.

Similar revelations are revealed during Henningsen’s interview with Duggan regarding the terrorists’ use of hospitals, schools, and mosques as military centers – knowing full well that any attempt by Damascus and its allies to target them would be politically exploited by their Western sponsors both from behind the podiums of public offices and within press rooms across the West.

Perhaps most ironic of all – is that US operations in Syria allegedly targeting terrorists, when hospitals, schools, and mosques are hit – produce admissions from across the Western media that – indeed – terrorists are using such facilities as military bases – admissions the Western media refused to make during the Syrian government’s operations to retake cities like Homs, Hama, and Aleppo.

Keeping an Open Mind

For those attempting to make sense of Syria’s ongoing conflict, or any other conflict being reported on by the Western media – the deep and concerted conspiracy that surrounded the US invasion of Iraq in 2003 alone should provide pause for thought before unquestioningly believing narratives produced from these same collection of Western media sources regarding other conflicts.

There are alternative organizations and media platforms operating in Syria, producing videos, audio interviews, and pages of information on a daily basis giving alternative insight into the conflict that people around the world can watch, listen to, and read. While no one is bound to believe Western or alternative narratives – for those genuinely pursing the truth – both need to be considered, researched, and vetted factually, rationally, and within a historical and logical context.

Narratives of a “humanitarian” motivated West seeking to end conflict and bring a brighter future to Syria simply does not add up in any context.

The special interests promoting regime change in Syria have a decades-long track record of deceiving the public, dividing and destroying nations, and leaving a path of destruction cutting across entire regions of the planet. While Western audiences are tempted to believe Western narratives regarding Syria in pursuit of US-backed regime change, nations like Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Ukraine smolder in the ruination of Western military intervention. By adding up the big picture, it is clear that alternative media sources are providing invaluable insight into global conflict the Western media has systematically and intentionally covered up for years.

Shifting in the minds of the global public the perceived reputation of Western media organizations versus their demonstrated serial deceptions is the first step toward truly ending conflicts like that raging in Syria, and truly bringing peace and a better future to the people trapped within these conflicts.

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

This article was first published by NEO

The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Information Clearing House.

Click for Spanish, German, Dutch, Danish, French, translation- Note- Translation may take a moment to load.

Iraq and the dialogue of after the victory العراق وحوار ما بعد الانتصار

Written by Nasser Kandil,

In a pre-emptive smart initiative, the institute of the Iraqi Dialogue headed by the Sheikh Humam Hamoudi, the member in the body of the Head of Representatives in cooperation with the University of Baghdad, the Iraqi Parliament and, and with a remarkable participation from each of the President of the Republic, the Speaker of the Parliament, the Prime Minister, and the heads and the representatives of the main political components has called for a conference under the title of Iraq and the Dialogue after the victory, and in conjunction with a permanent search in the corridors of the Iraqi politics about the settlement’s  items that affect issues that were a matter of suspicion and fear to debate among the Iraqis for a decade ago. Iraq is a Levantine Arab citadel through its population, area, wealth, minds, and status according to active present history and geography.

Iraq will enter the year 2018, after it has freed from three successive burdens, a regime among it the Iraqis have divided till it fell, knowing that some of them felt of cold after it had fallen, and some of them on the early days of the US occupation felt of some kind of warmth comparing with the frost of the former regime. Despite the fact that the continuation of the division around the occupation did not last, but it led to a division around the new regime that is no less than the former regime, even if the opportunities of expression and the frameworks of change were more and available. But after Iraq and the Iraqis have been liberated relatively from the burden of the occupation, they got a heavier burden that re-imposes some of the occupation and some of the former regime along with some of the divisions around them, in addition to the burden of ISIS. But most importantly is that the majority of the Iraqis have agreed to wage the war of confrontation, salvation, and the search for a dialogue that renews the social coherence among the Iraqis on the basis that the first power of Iraq comes from the degree of the cohesion of its interior not the degree of the cohesion of some of its interior with some of its exterior against some of the other part of its interior with some of the other part of its exterior.

This time, the Iraqi Dialogue is a test of the experience before it is a national test that does not lack any of the Iraqis even if they were different in employing its keys and in determining its taboos, only the experience prevents them from turning the different judgments into new division. The experience here is the ability to get the message; first a unified Iraq where the dispute is ravaging in it is better for the components of Iraq than a secession that leads to the rule of the one vote in more than Iraq. Second, the concessions which allay the concerns and extinguish the fears of the partners are the reaping of tomorrow, while scoring the points of the winning on the partner is a revenge for the past. Third, who is the strongest is the one who is demanded to give but he gives up, the one who abandons a force leads, and the one who sticks to the force rules. The competitive Iraqis on tomorrow and their roles in it have to choose between either to run as candidates to lead Iraq or to rule it, remembering always that whenever one has the opportunity to rule, it will not be as it was at the era of the former regime and the occupation.

Iraq approaches from its victory while the world and region change, but the most change that occurs is that the important players are no longer as they were, and that the thoughts which prevailed and dominated during a quarter of a century ago since the fall of Berlin Wall and the rule of the philosophy of the end of the history, and the savage uni-globalization, which the occupation of Iraq was one of its vocabularies are retreating paving the way for everything national. Now America as a symbol of the era which has passed is preparing for the coming era through its nationalism no matter how crude and exaggerated to the extent of racism it is, and in the time of sticking to the special identities and nationalism it has the sovereignty and the legitimacy as two vocabularies that approached from the level of passing and falling in the past quarter – century. By the force of the legitimacy and the sovereignty the Iraqis will discover the points of strength that they did not consider before. As the geography and the history show present elements in the present-industry by drawing the results of the wars and the options of peace, and away from the partisanships, emotions, the warmth of emotions of the biases which were inherited in the time of division, and with the replacement of all of that with the reflection in the history and geography the Iraqis will be able to draw the road map of their future.

The most important conclusion is that the unified Iraq is a power for the Iraqis, at their forefronts those who imagine that the secession is the way of independence, but the weak independence is a dependency, and in order to turn the unity into power there must be a recognition of the joy of the privacies not a call for their abolition. Iraq and Syria are Levantine Arab and Islamic base for making politics, culture, and the economy for their region, through their separation the Levant falls and the Arabs and the Muslims enter the time of rivalry and non-politics. Together they form their roles as a bridge for a dialogue between all the components of the Arab and the Muslim neighborhood and the bases of alliances for its force as well as a rehabilitation of the concept of the national security which the Kurdish Saladin Al Ayoubi has formulated for the Arabs and the Muslims and which its compass is Jerusalem.

Translated by Lina Shehadeh,

العراق وحوار ما بعد الانتصار

ناصر قنديل
– في خطوة استباقية ذكية يدعو معهد الحوار العراقي الذي يرأسه سماحة الشيخ همام حمودي عضو هيئة رئاسة مجلس النواب بالتعاون مع جامعة بغداد ومجلس النواب العراقي، وبمشاركة لافتة لكل من رئيس الجمهورية ورئيس المجلس النيابي ورئيس الحكومة ورؤساء وممثلي المكوّنات السياسية الرئيسية، لعقد مؤتمر تحت عنوان «العراق وحوار ما بعد الانتصار»، بالتزامن مع بحث مستديم في أروقة السياسة العراقية حول بنود تسوية تطال قضايا كان يُنظر إليها بالريبة والخشية من المفاتحة والنقاش بين العراقيين لعقد مضى. والعراق قلعة عربية مشرقية بحجم سكانها ومساحتها وثرواتها وعقولها ومكانتها في كل من نابضَيْ البشرية اللذين لا يتوقفان عن الفعل والحضور، التاريخ والجغرافيا.

– يدخل العراق العام 2018 وقد تخفّف من ثلاثة أعباء متلاحقة، نظام حكم انقسم حوله العراقيون حتى الثمالة، فضاق ثوبه عليهم حتى تشقق وسقط، لكن بعضهم شعر بالوجود في العراء بعده، وبعضهم شعر في الأيام الأولى للاحتلال الأميركي ببعض الدفء بالقياس لصقيع النظام السابق، ورغم عدم دوام الانقسام حول الاحتلال، فقد أورث الاحتلال انقساماً حول النظام الجديد، لا يقل عن الانقسام في ظل النظام السابق، ولو كانت فرص التعبير أوفر وأطر التغيير أكثر، ومع تخفّف العراق والعراقيين نسبياً من عبء الاحتلال، فاجأهم عبء أثقل أعاد بعض الاحتلال وبعض النظام السابق وبعض الانقسامات حولهما، مع عبء داعش، لكنّ الأهم أن النسبة الأغلب من العراقيين بصورة عابرة للعرب والأكراد والطوائف تماسكت في خوض حرب المواجهة والخلاص والبحث عن حوار يجدّد العقد الاجتماعي بين العراقيين على قاعدة اليقين بأن قوة العراق الأولى تأتي من درجة تماسُك داخله لا بدرجة تمسُّك بعض داخله ببعض خارجه بوجه بعض آخر من الداخل متمسّك ببعض آخر من الخارج.

– الحوار العراقي هذه المرة امتحان خبرة قبل أن يكون امتحان وطنية لا تنقص أحداً من العراقيين، ولو تفاوتوا في الاجتهاد في توصيف مفاتيحها واختلفوا في تحديد محرّماتها. والخبرة وحدها هي التي تعصمهم عن تحويل الاجتهادات المختلفة إلى انقسام جديد، يحملون سلاسله الثقيلة تجرجرها أقدامهم ببطء يحول دون انطلاق مسيرتهم. والخبرة هنا هي في القدرة على استخلاص العبرة، وأولها أن عراقاً موحداً يعصف فيه الخلاف أفضل لكل مكونات العراق من انفصال يؤسس لحكم الصوت الواحد في أكثر من عراق. وثانيها أن التنازلات التي تهدئ الهواجس وتطفئ المخاوف لدى الشركاء هي استثمار في الغد، بينما تسجيل نقاط الربح على الشريك هو انتقام للماضي. وثالثها أن الأقوى هو المطالَب بأن يعطيَ ويتنازل، ومَن يتنازل عن قوة يقود، ومن يتمسك بالقوة يحكم، وأمام العراقيين المتنافسين على الغد وأدوارهم فيه أن يختاروا بين أن يترشّحوا لقيادة العراق أم لحكمه، متذكّرين دائماً أنه مهما تيسرت لأحدهم فرصة الحكم، فلن تتيسّر، كما كانت للنظام السابق وللاحتلال، وما دامت.

– يدخل العراق زمن نصره، والعالم والمنطقة يتغيّران، وأهمّ ما يتغيّر هو أنّ اللاعبين الكبار، لم يعودوا كما كانوا، وأن الأفكار التي توسّع انتشارها وطغت خلال ربع قرن مضى منذ سقوط جدار برلين وسيادة فلسفة نهاية التاريخ والعولمة الأحادية المتوحشة، التي كان احتلال العراق أحد مفرداتها، تتراجع مخلية المكان لعودة كل ما هو وطني. وهذه هي أميركا كدولة رمز للحقبة التي مضت تستعدّ للحقبة المقبلة بوطنيتها مهما بدت فجة ومبالغاً بها حدّ العنصرية. وفي زمن التمسك بالهويات الخاصة والوطنيات تمتلك السيادة والشرعية، كمفردتين قاربتا حد الزوال والسقوط في ربع القرن الماضي، بريقاً وجاذبية وفاعلية لم تمتلك مثلها في عصرها الذهبي، وبقوة الشرعية والسيادة سيكتشف العراقيون كثيراً نقاط قوة لم يقيموا لها حساباً مشابهاً من قبل، بمثل ما تظهر الجغرافيا والتاريخ عناصر حاضرة في صناعة الحاضر ورسم نتائج الحروب وخيارات السلم. وبالتجرد عن العصبيات والعواطف وحرارة انفعالات الانحيازات التي تمليها اصطفافات موروثة من زمن الانقسامات، واستبدال كل ذلك بالتمعن البارد في التاريخ والجغرافيا سيتمكن العراقيون من رسم خارطة طريقهم للمستقبل.

– أهمّ الخلاصات أنّ العراق الموحد قوة للعراقيين وأولهم مَن يتخيّلون الانفصال طريق استقلال. والاستقلال الضعيف تبعية. وأن الوحدة كي تصير قوة فهي جمع لا قهر ولا طرح ولا قسمة ولا ضرب بين مختلفين، بل اعتراف بفرح الخصوصيات لا دعوة لإلغائها. وأن العراق وسوريا قاعدة صناعة السياسة والحضارة والاقتصاد لمنطقتهم، مشرقية وعربية وإسلامية، بتفرقهما يسقط المشرق ويدخل العرب والمسملون زمن التناحر واللاسياسة، يصيغان معاً دورهما جسر حوار بين سائر مكونات الجوار العربي والإسلامي، وقواعد التحالفات لقواه، ورد الاعتبار لمفهوم للأمن القومي صاغه الكردي صلاح الدين الأيوبي للعرب والمسلمين بوصلته القدس.

(Visited 1٬023 times, 1 visits today)

Identitarians vs. Patriots – Elaborating on Progressive duplicity and the Rise of the Right (video)

December 29, 2016  /  Gilad Atzmon

In this Manhattan gathering I examine the ideologiesthat were set to divide the  working people and their ability to resist Globalisation. I point at the bond between the New Left and Jewish progressive intelligentsia.

Those who are interested in my work may find this talk very interesting.

https://youtu.be/ewvTPCJl3F8

حفل استقبال ناري يليق بالجيش التركي يعده الجيش السوري والحلفاء .. والدعوة عامة

بقلم نارام سرجون

سأتهم كل من يدعي أنه لا يعرف تفسيرا للحركات البهلواينة الاميركية والتركية في شمال العراق وسورية بأنه ليس ساذجا بل متساذج ويريد أن يأكل حلاوة بعقولنا ..

 فما يحدث من الموصل وحتى الباب هو معركة حلب الكبرى حيث يقعقع السلاح ونسمع صرير سلاسل الدبابات وصرير أسنان المسؤولين العسكريين الأتراك والأميركيين وهم يدفعون لمغادرة حلب بالقوة .. والرسالة الاميركية التركية هي فرملة اندفاع الجيش السوري وحلفائه وتهدئتهم فقط حتى انقشاع غبار الانتخابات الاميركية التي ينتظر فيها الاسلاميون هيلاري كلينتون “مرشحة الاسلام السني” ضد ترامب مرشح “الاسلام الشيعي” .. لأن كلينتون حسب أدبيات وفلسفات وحسابات السياسة لدى التيارات الاسلامية العميلة تريد الحفاظ على القاعدة في غلافها الجديد (جبهة النصرة) كرأس حربة الاسلام السني ضد المشروع الصفوي .. فيما لا يريد ترامب أن يستمر في حرب سورية ولايكترث لاسقاط النظام الذي هو في منظور الاسلام السياسي الوهابي رأس الهلال الشيعي ويجب تدميره .. وتحولت الحولة الانتخابية الاميركية في المناقشات العربية الى مرشحة للسنة ومرشح للشيعة !! ..

في الشمالين السوري والعراقي تصالح الأمريكان والأتراك بسرعة واختفت المؤامرة على أردوغان بعد أن قيل أن الأتراك تخاصموا مع الامريكان بسبب ماقيل انه محاولة انقلاب تورط فيها الأمريكان وحاولوا فيها اغتيال زعيم الاسلام أردوغان بقصف الفندق الذي كان يقيم فيه .. ولكن ان صح هذا فان هذا سيكون أقصر خلاف سياسي في التاريخ بين متآمر ومتآمر عليه .. ولم يدم أكثر من ثلاثة ايام بين طرفين كان أحدهما يقال أنه أراد قصف أردوغان في الفندق الذي يستريح فيه .. هذا الزعل الخاطف والرضا السريع بين المتآمرين الأمريكان المغضوب عليهم تركيا وبين المتآمر عليهم لاشك أنه يطرح سؤالا وجيها ان كانت المسرحية الانقلابية كالعادة في تركيا تمثيلية قدم الأمريكان كل أسرارها هدية لأردوغان من أجل افشالها لتحطيم بؤر الرفض والمعارضة التي كانت تتنامى في وجه المشروع الاسلامي التركي على غرار الرفض الشعبي المصري الذي أطاح بالاخوان المسلمين .. لأن عملية اجتثاث الانقلاب كان غريبة وامتدت الى كل مفاصل وأعماق المجتمع التركي ووصلت الى عظامه واندست أصابع الاسلاميين حتى في مؤخرات الأتراك وأعضائهم الحميمة بحثا عن المؤامرة .. وجردتهم من قوى وبؤر الرفض المدني والعلماني .. وهذا التناغم بين الامريكان والاتراك لايمكن تفسيره على أنه اتفاق مصالح .. فكيف يكون اتفاق مصالح بين طرفين كاد احدهما ان يدمر الآخر بانقلاب ثم يعودان حتى قبل اجراءات بناء ثقة؟؟ .. بل ان الادعاء أن خشية تركيا من الحزام الكردي هو سبب التقارب لأن اميريكا قدمت الأكراد على مذبح العلاقة مع اردوغان وكانوا قرابين هذه المصالحة يبدو ادعاء تضليليا .. لأن من يحل موضوع الأكراد لتركيا هو السوريون والروس وليس أميريكا على أساس ان الدولة السورية مع الروس قادرة على التحرك بحرية أكثر في الحزام الكردي لأنها في أراضيها لمنع تمدده دون حاجة تركيا للتورط وارسال جيشها الى أرض معادية ..

بل اتهمت مصادر غربية الأكراد أنهم كانوا في منتهى السذاجة وقدمتهم اميريكا مجانا لتركيا حيث أوعزت لهم في لحظة حساسة جدا ودون مبرر ان يسرعوا متعجلين دون تفكير لاعلان التحرك لاقامة كانتون خاص بهم شمال سورية .. وكان التوقيت غريبا جدا بعد أن بدا أن الامريكان والاتراك مختلفون وسيمر الأكراج من شقوق الخلاف ويتسربون الى دولتهم كالماء في شقوق الصخر .. وهنا وقع الأكراد في الفخ حيث خرجوا من مكمنهم دون أي مبرر وتوقيت مقنع ليجدوا أن أردوغان كان بانتظارهم عسكريا .. وتبين ان الامريكان استعملوا الأكراد ودفعوهم للتمرد على الدولة السورية في لحظة دقيقة وأقنعوهم أنهم مع الأكراد يتشاركون العداء مع سورية ومع اردوغان ووعدوهم انهم سيساعدونهم في الشمال السوري نكاية بحزب العدالة والتنمية .. فابتلع الاكراد الطعم ويقال ان صالح مسلم لم يبتلع الطعم بل ساهم في اعداده عن اطلاع وسابق اصرار وترصد لأنه قبض ثمنا سياسيا لهذه الحركة الكردية سيظهر لاحقا .. لأنه باسهامه بنصب الفخ للأكراد سيساعد تركيا في التسلل الى الشمال السوري دون اغضاب روسيا وبتحييد دمشق وطهران وهما تريانه يساعدهما عن غير قصد في اعادة التمرد الكردي الى مكامنه ..

وهاهو مخطط اردوغان واميركيا يتبين .. فالتحرك التركي جاء لأنه هناك حسابات أن معركة حلب لامناص من خسارتها لأن التحضيرات النارية والعسكرية الروسية والسورية وحلفائهما غير مسبوقة .. ولايمكن أن يتجاوز احتمال كسبها من قبل القاعدة والنصرة أكثر من 0% .. ولكن هناك طريقة غير مباشرة لمنعها بتهديد الجيش السوري بالاقتراب التركي من مدينة الباب .. ويصبح ظهر الجيش السوري الذي يحاصر حلب محاصرا .. ويمكن للنصرة التي تلبس ثياب الجيش الحر أن تشن هجمات عنيفة على ظهر الجيش السوري المكشوف .. وتمنعه من التحرك نحو الأحياء الشرقية ونحو ادلب ..

وقد سمعت من بعض المتابعين العليمين والراسخين في العلم السياسي أن السوريين وحلفاءهم كانوا يتابعون التحرك التركي ضد الأكراد وكانوا أمام خيارين وهما: اما أن يتركوا صالح مسلم يستولي على الشمال بايعاز أمريكي وهناك احتمال أن يصمت أردوغان بالتنسيق مع الامريكان لأنهم سيجدون في المشكلة الكردية عبئا اضافيا على الدولة السورية حيث سنجد انفسنا كسوريين في مواجهة مع أمر واقع وهو اننا نواجه كتلة عسكرية وديموغرافية اضافية مشتقة من مكون سوري كردي بحيث أن اي صدام للجيش السوري معها سيتم استغلاله للتحريض على الجيش الذي سيصور على أنه يقتل الأكراد هذه المرة بعد أن قتل أهل السنة والجماعة ونضيف عدوا لانريد معاداته .. ولكن أي تجاهل للحركة الكردية سيؤسس لأمر واقع وحركة تطهير عرقي تعمل عليها أميريكا سيتدفق من خلالها الأميريكيون والاسرائيليون لاحقا ولو عبر جمعيات أممية وانسانية وقرارات دولية ويضربون الوجود السوري في الشمال مع حبسها ضمن الحدود السورية .. وأما الخيار الثاني فهو أن يترك أردوغان يدخل وتفتح له الطريق عبر تسجيل اعتراض سياسي دون اعتراض عسكري .. ولكن هذا الوقت كاف لوضعه هو في مواجهة الدعاية التي يروج لها بنفسه وهي أنه جاء لتحطيم الاكراد .. وعندما يدخل الفخ الذي كان ينصبه لنا .. سيتم استقباله بما يليق به .. وسيضرب ضرب غرائب الابل وتملأ دماوه الأرض من غرب الفرات الى شرقه ..

هذه أول مرة أعتقد أن علينا أن نشكر مجرما كبيرا مثل رجب اردوغان .. ليس لأنه يفتك بكرامة الجيش التركي ويذله .. وليس لأنه يفكك ويذيب منظومة الجمهورية التركية بمحاليل الاسلاميين وشعاراتهم التي جعلت المجتمع التركي مجتمعات متعددة فدرالية قبل التشقق .. فهناك مجتمعات اسلامية ومجتمعات علمانية وهناك مجتمعات قومية تركية ومجتمعات عربية ومجتمعات كردية ومجتمعات سنية ومجتمعات علوية .. الخ .. وتركيا لن تعود كسابق عهدها لأنها بركة من البنزين الذي تسرب من خزانات الجمهورية التي حبست فيها منذ أيام أتاتورك وجاء الاسلاميون وفتحوها في وقت شبت فيه نيران كثيرة حول تركيا دينية ومذهبية وعرقية .. وكما يقول الأعراب ان الحليب لايعود الى الضروع بعد أن تحلب ..وهذا البنزين الذي حلبه العثمانيون من ضروع المجتمع التركي الشرقي لن يعود قبل عدة عقود .. ستتكفل النيران القريبة بتفتيت تركيا عندما يرمي أحدهم قطعة من نار عليها اذا آن الأوان ..

الشكر الكبير لأردوغان في الحقيقة لأنه خاض في المستنقع الذي رفضت اي قوة في العالم أن تخوض فيه بنفسها وهو الدخول الى أرض ليست لك .. فحتى روسيا فضلت التدخل في سورية “من فوق” .. حيث السماء .. لاالارض .. وأميريكا سحبت جيشها من العراق بعد درس قاس ولن تكرر الخطيئة على الاطلاق وبدا هذا في ترددها في دخول أي من أراضي الربيع العربي حتى بذريعة السلاح الكيماوي .. أما أردوغان فانه دخل الفخ برجليه وهو يظن أنه يضرب العصافير ويجمعها بيديه .. فهو يضرب الأكراد ويبعدهم عنه ويدفع في نفس الوقت بالمنطقة الآمنة .. ويتسلل الى سورية ويناور في حلب ويتسرب الى الموصل .. ويرسل الجيش العلماني الذي قد ينقلب عليه مجددا لينشغل في الحروب على الحدود ..

الهدية الثمينة التي قدمها لنا اردوغان هو أنه دخل وخرج من أرض الناتو ودخل أرضنا وصار في مرمى النيران بعد أن دخل برجليه .. وكلنا كنا نعلم أنه سيدخل من ثغرة الخطر الكردي عليه ولذلك خفضنا صوتنا حتى ارتفع صوته كثيرا وصار يظن أنه معصوم عن العقاب .. الا أننا الآن نستطيع أن نؤكد أن حفل الاستقبال لجيشه في بدأ .. وقد أعلن ناطق باسم قوات الحلفاء في سورية أن الاقتراب منها أكثر صار خطرا جدا وأن هناك من يتهيأ للفتك بجنود أردوغان عبر عمليات غوريللا ومقاومة شعبية قاسية للغاية اذا خرج عن اطار اللعبة التي قيست له بالميلمتر المربع .. لايستطيع الجيش التركي ان يحول دونها لأنه في أرض مكتظة بالعدو .. العدو العربي المحلي والعدو الكردي المحلي الذي لم تتمكن خطة صالح مسلم من تحويله الى خصم للدولة السورية وهو يرى أن من قتله هو الدولة التركية عدوة الدولة السورية .. وعدو تركيا القاتلة أقرب الى الصديق ..

اردوغان لايستطيع أن يحميه غطاء الناتو من حركة المقاومة الشرسة التي قد تطلق ضده لأن خبراء حرب العصابات السوريون والايرانيون عجز عنهم الاميركيون في العراق .. وهو لن لن يحميه غطاء الناتو الذي ثرثر وجعل يسمعنا أنه يؤيده لأن الناتو ببساطة لايريد حربا مع روسيا وصواريخها التي ستذل السلاح الجوي الأطلسي .. بل يريد من اردوغان أن يدخل بهذا الضجيج والتحضير للمنطقة الآمنة (بتأييد مرتقب من الناتو) الى ظهر حلب ويفلت عصاباته من هناك التي انتقلت معه من ادلب الى تلك المناطق لمنع تحريك الجيش السوري الذي يحضر لدخول أحياء حلب الشرقية وييبد جبهة النصرة ولن يخرج من تلك الأحياء مقاتلون أحياء للنصرة (وهم بالآلاف) وهذا ماسيقصم ظهر جبهة النصرة في الشمال السوري .. ومن يتابع التحركات واللقاءات لابد لفت نظره الاجتماع الديبلومسي الثلاثي الروسي الايراني السوري في موسكو والذي يراه متابعون كثر أنه سيكون لتوقيت اعلان انطلاقة معركة حلب بناء على توصيات العسكريين الذين قدموا تصوراتهم ومواعيدهم كما طلبت الديبلوماسيات الثلاث لاعلان ساعة الصفر ..

الروس الذين سمعوا بتصريحات الأمريكان والاتراك ولاحظوا بعض التحركات القريبة من الأجواء السورية أظهروا كل البأس والتحدي في تحريك قطع البحر نحو السواحل السورية وهي منظومات تحد وردع .. وكلها تقول ان الجيش السوري وحلفاءه يعزفون لحن النهاية في سمفونية معركة حلب .. كما أن وجود أميريكا وتركيا في حلب يعزف لحن الخاتمة ..

انتم مدعوون جميعا لمشاهدة عرض لايقوّت وحفل استقبال الجيش التركي في شمال سورية بل والاشتراك فيه .. حفل عظيم لن ينساه الأتراك على الأطلاق .. لأن اذلال الجيش التركي بدأه اردوغان في شوارع استانبول وسيكمله في الشمال السوري على أرض العدو .. وليرينا أردوغان رجولته ..

وأنتم أيضا مدعوون جميعا الى حفل يعزف فيه الجيش السوري وحلفاؤه سيمفونية النهاية في معركة حلب بالرصاص والصواريخ والدبابات والوحدات الخاصة وكل أنواع السوخوي .. المعركة التي أتمنى أن تقدم هدية للرئيس الاميركي القادم في يومه الأول .. هدية متواضعة موقعة باسم الجيش العربي السوري .. وحلفائه .. وبقية الألحان السورية والقدود الحلبية تأتي تباعا .. سواء للمرشحة السنية أم للمرشح الشيعي في الانتخابات الرئاسية الأمريكية .. هدية من سورية التي ستسقط شعارات المرشحة السنية والمرشح الشيعي في الانتخابات الامريكية .. ليبقى في الشرق فقط المشروع الوطني الشامل .. والهوية الواحدة .. والشعب الواحد .. والاسلام الواحد .. والعدو الواحد .. اسرائيل ..

NIGERIAN CHRISTIANS STAND WITH SHEIKH ZAKZAKY 8 MONTHS INTO HIS UNJUST IMPRISONMENT

zakzaky christians 2

by Jonathan Azaziah

Eight months. Eight long, grueling, harsh, despicable, PROFOUNDLY unjust months have passed since Sheikh Ibrahim Yaqoub al-Zakzaky was locked up on false charges and his partisans were massacred in Zaria by the increasingly disgusting, tyrannical and collaborationist regime of US-‘Israeli’-Saudi servant Muhammadu Buhari. This murderous despot, who claims to be a representative of African “democracy”, has tried his best to paint the Sheikh as a “Shi’a terrorist” who threatens “state security” in an attempt to brainwash the Nigerian everyman into thinking that there isn’t a criminal Zionist-Imperialist scheme at play here. Buhari’s ploys, cooked up in Riyadh, Herzliya and Langley, may have worked on large chunks of Nigerian “Muslim” society–i.e. that “Islamic” sector bought and paid for by Saudi petrodollars–as well as “The Ummah” at large which remains disturbingly and horrifically indifferent to the plight of Zakzaky–also due to Al-Saud’s filthy money–but it has not had any affect on Nigeria’s Igbo Christians, who stand with the Sheikh in full, beautiful, inspiring, cross-communal solidarity.

Sheikh Ibrahim Yaqoub al-Zakzaky has spent his life striving tirelessly to bridge ethnic, religious and sectarian gaps in Nigerian society opened up by the Rothschild-financed British colonialists and he prides himself on having many close Christian comrades. Clearly, those efforts have paid dividends as Christians are now coming to his defense in defiant droves and have in fact been calling for justice on behalf of the Zaria Martyrs since the unspeakable crime was committed by Buhari’s Zionist-backed army last December. These gorgeous, resistant followers of ‘Isa al-Masih (A.S.) are sending a strong message to the Buhari regime and its backers: We shan’t be fooled by hasbara! We shan’t be tricked by the lies of a Zio-Empire-owned dictator! And we shan’t be divided!

As World Zionism works day and night with its “clash of civilizations”, its war on Jesus Christ (A.S.) via Hollywood and its simultaneous dissemination of Islamophobia and Wahhabi-Takfirism to sow discord between Muslims and Christians, one can’t help but cheer and smile incandescently upon seeing Nigerian Christians stand up for the Sheikh and the oppressed Islamic Movement of Nigeria. May their efforts not only reverberate throughout the Nigerian state but the entire globe, so all free people and all Moustazafeen, Muslim and Christian alike, stand up as one and demand the immediate release of the saintly, revolutionary Ibrahim Yaqoub al-Zakzaky and retribution for the innocent lives taken at Zaria’s Huseiniyyah Baqiyatullah. Looks like one more struggle can now be added to the growing “We Are One Hand” list! #FreeZakzaky #LongLiveZakzaky #MuslimChristianUnity #DeathToTheBuhariRegime #WeAreOneHand

zakzaky christians 1

zakzaky christians 3

America’s Self-Inflicted Defense Woes

August 1, 2016 (Ulson Gunnar – NEO) – The United States poses as a champion against the great threats facing global security and stability, an uphill battle it claims requires equally great sacrifices, especially in terms of defense spending. It must be just a coincidence that the many policy think-tanks promoting this notion just so happen to be funded by huge multinational defense contractors.

The Atlantic Council, for instance, includes among its corporate members, Airbus, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Thales, Boeing and Northrop Grumman, just to name a few. So when Atlantic Council authors wrote about the subject of close air support (CAS) aircraft, it should come as no surprise that the development or procurement of a new system was the option of choice, this despite the fact that a brand new aircraft, the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II, was already supposed to fill this role.

The Atlantic Council’s article, “Starting with the Answer in Procurement: The USAF’s plans for new close support aircraft show an unusual willingness to move out quickly,” would claim:

…after years of hearing that the F-35A would be the sort-of replacement for the A-10C, it’s worth reviewing why it never could be. It’s not for the gun or the armor. It’s the increased threat: Russian motorized rifle brigades now run with lots of their own 30 mm guns, looking up. Missiles are now a bigger problem too. As Colonel Mike Pietrucha USAF wrote for War On The Rocks last month, the heat from that huge engine is itself a huge target for heat-seekers. Lockheed has worked hard to suppress the signature, but physics dictate there’s only so much that can be done. Overall, the hundred-million-dollar jet is just too expensive to hazard to for busting tanks that way.

The projected cost of the F-35 program in total is estimated to be well over 1 trillion USD. The cost for each aircraft averages 100 million USD. That the Atlantic Council’s authors deem it “too expensive” to use for one of the roles it was allegedly proposed to fill, should make US and allied taxpayers wonder just what they have mortgaged their futures for.

Currently for CAS, the US Air Force depends on the Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II, as well as multirole aircraft like the Lockheed Martin F-16. To replace the A-10, the US plans to use F-16’s more widely, that is, until a new CAS system is developed.

IHS Jane’s Defence Weekly’s article, “USAF considers future CAS options,” reports that:

In the short-term the USAF has plans to replace some A-10s with Lockheed Martin F-16 Fighting Falcons, but in the medium- to longer-terms there are plans to procure or develop either a platform that that can operate either in a permissive environment only, or one that can operate in both a permissive and contested environment. The options are being considered under the auspices of the recently announced A-X project.

So in addition to the 1 trillion USD F-35 program, there will be an additional program to develop the next generation of CAS aircraft for the US Air Force. One wonders if the F-35’s other slated roles will also require parallel defense programs to fill as the fundamental flaws of the entire program begin to unfold.


The F-35 is Just One Symptom of a Wider Malady…

A trillion dollars spent on a useless aircraft that requires multiple parallel defense programs to compensate for, represents different problems to different people depending on their perspective. To some, it appears to be supreme incompetence and poor planning. To others, a tragic waste of national resources. But to others still, it appears to be the only logical conclusion a nation and its tax dollars can arrive at, when it is driven by special interests in pursuit of power and profits, rather than any particular purpose.

The 1 trillion USD going into the F-35 program is not disappearing into a black hole. Lockheed Martin is receiving that money. With it, it will purchase more lobbying power in Washington, more clout on Wall Street, more authors to pen favorable “policy” proposals within the halls of think tanks like the Atlantic Council and more journalists across the international press to promote these proposals to the general public. It will also use this wealth to help promote the wars that will in turn, drive demand for yet more costly defense programs it will undoubtedly share a stake in developing and profiting from.

While the F-35, the new CAS program being developed to augment it, and virtually every other defense program the US and its allies are moving forward with, are predicated on maintaining national defense, it appears quite clear that the self-preservation of the corporations involved takes primacy over the former.

The US will not be safer with the F-35 in the air. In conflicts like the 2008 Georgian invasion of South Ossetia, the ongoing conflict in Ukraine or the war raging in Syria, Russia has proven that a fraction of the resources spent on defense, if spent properly, can meet or exceed the performance of US-NATO military capabilities.

On what is a shoestring budget by comparison, Russia’s combination of pragmatic military spending and proper strategic planning and implementation has become a case study of how a Middle East intervention should be done. The Syria Russia is helping preserve through its military intervention is one with a stable, secular government that has and will continue to be a valuable ally against armed militants throughout the region. Compare this in contrast to the trillions of dollars spent on US interventions throughout the Middle East, North Africa and Central Asia where the apparent, or at least evident purpose was to divide and destroy nations, leaving them tinderboxes of violence and conflict as well as breeding grounds for extremism, seemingly, purposefully, inviting conflict after unending conflict.

The US is spending more to make the world a more dangerous place, with unnecessary weapons systems even analysts working for think tanks funded by their manufacturers admit are too expensive and impractical to use on the battlefield for the roles they were intended to fulfill.

It is not that the US and its industry are incapable in technical terms of creating a functional and premier national defense, it is that the US and its industry are incapable of adhering to a rational policy that would require such a national defense. Defense dysfunction amid a world intentionally destabilized, it turns out, is much better for business, and the F-35 with its emerging parallel defense programs it now requires, is symptomatic of this.

Ulson Gunnar, a New York-based geopolitical analyst and writer especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

Short report about Syrian secularism

 

 

U.S. Support for Al Qaeda-Linked Rebels Undermines Syrian Ceasefire

05/21/2016

Michael Hughes

Foreign Policy Analyst

The United States needs to do more than wag its finger at Syrian rebel groups for “comingling” with Al Qaeda-affiliated Salafist jihadists or else an already tenuous ceasefire accord between government and opposition forces is destined to collapse.

Earlier this week, the International Syrian Support Group (ISSG) co-chaired by the U.S. and Russia agreed to render persistent violators of the ceasefire as “fair game” on the battlefield, relegating them to the same status as the Islamic State and Jabhat-al Nusra, or the Nusra Front, which is Al Qaeda’s franchisee in Syria.

On Tuesday, State Department spokesperson John Kirby expressed concerns that U.S.-backed Syrian opposition factions such as Ahrar al-Sham have been cohabitating with the Nusra Front. However, Washington has doggedly resistedcalls to add the Al Qaeda collaborators to the UN terrorist list – claiming it would damage the ceasefire – which journalist Finian Cunningham sees as an “unwitting U.S. admission” about who is really leading the Syrian “rebellion.”

Ahrar al-Sham along with Jaysh al-Islam, another Western-sponsored faction, not only have zero inclination to respect the ceasefire, they have aspirations that completely contradict the U.S. stated goal of ushering in a Jeffersonian democracy to replace Syrian President Bashar Assad.

Both organizations, according to University of Ottawa extremism specialist Kamran Bokhari, share the common goal of instituting an Islamic state governed by sharia law. Further, Bokhari argues, the real reason the U.S. opposes designating them as terrorists is because they are proxy groups supported by American allies Saudi Arabia and Turkey. Hence, it has nothing to do with concerns about the ceasefire.

Moreover, on May 12, according to the pro-opposition Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, Ahrar al-Sham collaborated with the Nusra Front in an assault on the Alawite-majority village of al-Zara, killing at least 19 civilians, including women and children. Point being, the attack provided clear evidence that Ahrar al-Sham is doing more than intermingling with Al Qaeda’s Syria branch.

Three days later, The New York Times reported that Al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahri plans to create an alternate headquarters in Syria to “lay the groundwork for possibly establishing an emirate through Al Qaeda’s Syrian affiliate, the Nusra Front,” which some experts claim complicates Washington’s support for the rebels even further.

“The United States has placed itself in a very difficult situation because many of the rebel groups that it wants to become principal holders of state power in Syria work hand and glove with Al Qaeda,” University of Oklahoma Center for Middle East Studies Director Joshua Landis told Sputnik on Monday.

Islamists are not only leading the Syrian opposition’s charge on the military front, they are dominating its role in the peace talks in Geneva as well. The rebel political delegation is being led by Jaysh al-Islam and other Islamist parties while the secular Syrian Kurds have been excluded, a surreal development fully sponsored by the United States.

During the early stages of the intra-Syrian talks in January, Washington Kurdish Institute Director of Media and Policy Yousuf Ismael said without the Kurds the creation of an Islamic system of government in Syria was inevitable based on the current constitution of the opposition’s High Negotiations Committee (HNC).

Even more disconcerting is the lack of outrage or any major objections to U.S. policy emanating from either Congress, the media or the public at large. American media outlets, including CNN, the Associated Press and the Washington Post, among others, have consistently propagated the fictional narrative that the United States is supporting “moderate opposition forces” on the battlefield and in the peace talks in Geneva. Not to mention the media’s primary focus has been on Syrian government ceasefire violations with little attention paid to opposition transgressions.

Secretary of State John Kerry has long claimed that the United States is committed to seeing a “whole, unified, pluralistic, nonsectarian Syria,” which is hard to believe given the State Department’s objection to classifying these two organizations as what they truly are: jihadist terrorist groups that should be excluded from any cessation of hostilities.

Which prompts a fair question that goes beyond simply upholding a fragile ceasefire:

How in the world does the U.S. government believe for a second that a post-Assad regime in Syria will be secular to any degree based on the current makeup of the opposition’s negotiating team, whose members by and large have openly proclaimed that they want to establish an Islamist state?

The unfortunate answer is that the U.S. government has never absorbed the lessons of previous policies based on the credo, “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.”

Washington is following the exact same playbook employed during the jihad against the Soviets in the 1980s, in just one example, wherein we supported the most radical and virulently anti-Western factions within the mujahideen to achieve geopolitical ends at all costs, leading to the well-documented blowback known as Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda.

Despite all this, Washington’s love for jihadists has apparently not waned. As a result, the tragic irony is we are now facilitating the resurgence of these very same elements – in some cases literally the same figures – all in the name of a secular and unified Syria.

Obama’s ISIL ‘Cause is Lost’. Thanks to PUTIN

Obama: ISIL Group’s ‘Cause is Lost’

The so-called Islamic State in Iraq and Syria terrorist group is on the defensive and “their cause is lost,” US President Barack Obama said Wednesday after meeting with CIA chiefs and other security officials.

ObamaObama paid a rare visit to CIA headquarters in Virginia to discuss progress of ‘Operation Inherent Resolve’, the 20-month-old U.S.-led failed campaign in Iraq and Syria.

“ISIL is on the defensive, and we are on the offensive,” Obama said. “We have momentum, and we intend to keep that momentum.”

Obama pointed to alleged US air strikes that killed three senior ISIL leaders and a report this week showing the group’s ranks are at their lowest level since 2014.

“In the days and weeks ahead we intend to take out more (leaders.) Every day, ISIL leaders wake up and understand it could be their last,” Obama said.

“Their ranks of fighters are estimated to be at the lowest levels in two years and more and more are realizing that their cause is lost,” he added.

Obama stressed the importance of ending the five-year war in Syria as key to facilitating a lasting defeat of the ISIL terrorist group.

“So we continue to work for a diplomatic end to this awful conflict,” he said.

Source: AFP

14-04-2016 – 12:14 Last updated 14-04-2016 – 12:14 |

 

Balkanising Syria is Not Plan B, it’s Plan A

March 29, 2016 (Maram Susli – NEO) – Last month, US secretary of State John Kerry called for Syria to be partitioned saying it was “Plan B” if negotiations fail. But in reality this was always plan A. Plans to balkanize Syria, Iraq and other Middle Eastern states were laid out by former U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in a 2006 trip to Tel Aviv. It was part of the so called “Project For a New Middle East”. This was a carbon copy of the Odid Yinon plan drawn up by Israel in 1982. The plan outlined the way in which Middle Eastern countries could be balkanized along sectarian lines. This would result in the creation of several weak landlocked micro-states that would be in perpetual war with each other and never united enough to resist Israeli expansionism.

“Syria will fall apart, in accordance with its ethnic and religious structure, into several states such as in present day Lebanon, so that there will be a Shi’ite Alawi state along its coast, a Sunni state in the Aleppo area, another Sunni state in Damascus hostile to its northern neighbor, and the Druzes who will set up a state, maybe even in our Golan… ” Oded Yinon, “A strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties”,The leaked emails of US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton reveal advocates of the Oded Yinon plan were behind the US push for regime change in Syria. An Israeli intelligence adviser writes in an email to Hillary,

“The fall of the House of Assad could well ignite a sectarian war between the Shiites and the majority Sunnis of the region drawing in Iran, which, in the view of Israeli commanders would not be a bad thing for Israel and its Western allies,”.

Kerry’s plan B comment came right before UN’s special envoy de Mistura said federalism would be discussed at the Geneva talks due to a push from major powers. Both side’s of the Geneva talks, the Syrian Government and the Syrian National Coalition flat out rejected Federalism. Highlighting the fact that the idea did not come from the Syrian’s themselves. The Syrian ambassador to the United Nations, Bashar Al Jaafari, said that the Idea of federalization would not be up for discussion. “Take the idea of separating Syrian land out of your mind,” he would say.

But some may not completely understand the full implications of federalism and how it is intrinsically tied to balkanization. Some cite the fact that Russia and the United States are successful federations as evidence that federation is nothing to fear. However the point that makes these federalism statements so dangerous is that in accordance with the Yinon plan the borders of a federalized Syria would be drawn along sectarian lines not on whether any particular state can sustain its population. This means that a small amount of people will get all the resources, and the rest of Syria’s population will be left to starve. Furthermore, Russia and the US are by land mass some of the largest nations in the world, so federalism may make sense for them.

In contrast Syria is a very small state with limited resources. Unlike the US and Russia, Syria is located in the Middle East which means water is limited. In spite of the fact Syria is in the so-called fertile crescent, Syria has suffered massive droughts since Turkey dammed the rivers flowing into Syria and Iraq. Syria’s water resources must be rationed amongst its 23 million people. In the Middle East, wars are also fought over water.

The areas that the Yinon plan intends to carve out of Syria, are the coastal areas of Latakia and the region of Al Hasake. These are areas where a substantial amount of Syria’s water, agriculture and oil are located. The intention is to leave the majority of the Syrian population in a landlocked starving rump state, and create a situation where perpetual war between divided Syrians is inevitable. Ironically promoters of the Yinon plan try and paint federalism as a road to peace. However, Iraq which was pushed into federalism in 2005 by the US occupation is far from peaceful now.

Quite simply, divide and conquer is the plan. This was even explicitly suggested in the headline of Foreign Policy magazine, “Divide and conquer Iraq and Syria” with the subheading “Why the West Should Plan for a Partition”. The CEO of Foreign Policy magazine David Rothkopf is a member of to the Council of Foreign Relations, a think tank Hillary Clinton has admits she bases her policies on. Another article by Foreign Policy written by an ex-NATO commander James Stavridis, claims “It’s time to talk about partitioning Syria” .

The US hoped to achieve this by empowering the Muslim Brotherhood and other extremist groups, and introducing Al Qaeda and ISIS into Syria. The Syrian army was supposed to collapse with soldiers returning to their respective demographic enclaves. Evidence of this could be seen in the headlines of NATO’s media arm in 2012, which spread false rumours that Assad had run to Latakia, abandoning his post in Damascus. The extremists were then supposed to attack Alawite, Christian and Druze villages. The US hoped that enough Alawites, Christians and Druze would be slaughtered that Syria’s minorities would become receptive to the idea of partitioning.

Then NATO planned on shifting narratives from, ‘evil dictator must be stopped” to “ we must protect the minorities”. Turning on the very terrorists they created and backing secessionist movements. There is evidence that this narrative shift had already started to happened by 2014 when it was used to convince the US public to accept US intervention in Syria against ISIS. The US designation of Jabhat Al Nusra as a terrorist organisation in December of 2012 was in preparation for this narrative shift. But this was premature as none of these plans seemed to unfold according to schedule. Assad did not leave Damascus, the Syrian army held together, and Syrian society held onto its national identity.

It could be said that the Yinon plan had some success with the Kurdish PYD declaration of federalization. However, the Kurdish faction of the Syrian national coalition condemned PYD’s declaration. Regardless, the declaration has no legal legitimacy. The region of Al Hasakah where a substantial portion of Syria’s oil and agriculture lies, has a population of only 1.5 million people, 6% of Syria’s total population. Of that, 1.5 million, only 40% are Kurdish, many of which do not carry Syrian passports. PYD’s demand that the oil and water resources of 23 million people be given to a tiny part of its population is unlikely to garner much support amongst the bulk of Syria’s population.

Former US National Security Adviser Henry Kissinger understood that the key to dismembering a nation was attacking its national identity. This entails attacking the history from which this identity is based upon. In an event at Michigan University Kissinger stated that he would like to see Syria balkanized, asserting that Syria is not a historic state and is nothing but an invention of the Sykes-Picot agreement in the 1920’s. Interestingly, Kissinger is using the same narrative as ISIS, who also claims that Syria is a colonial construct. In fact, ISIS has been a key tool for Kissinger and the promoters of the project of a New Middle East, as ISIS has waged a campaign of destruction against both Syrian and Iraqi historical sites.

In spite of efforts to convince the world of the contrary, the region that now encompasses modern day Syria has been called Syria since 605 BC . Sykes-Picot didn’t draw the borders of Syria too large, but instead, too small. Historical Syria also included Lebanon and Iskandaron. Syria and Lebanon were moving towards reunification until 2005, an attempt at correcting what was a sectarian partition caused by the French mandate. Syria has a long history of opposing attempts of divide and conquer, initially the French mandate aimed to divide Syria into 6 separate states based on sectarian lines, but such plans were foiled by Syrian patriots. The architects of the Yinon plan need only have read Syria’s long history of resistance against colonial divisions to know their plans in Syria were doomed to failure.

Maram Susli also known as “Syrian Girl,” is an activist-journalist and social commentator covering Syria and the wider topic of geopolitics. especially for the online magazineNew Eastern Outlook.”

Hillary Clinton And The Syrian Shoah

March 19, 2016  /  Gilad Atzmon

By Gilad Atzmon

From: Sidney Blumenthal To: Hillary Clinton Date: 2012-07-23

Quoting an Israeli security source Sidney Blumenthal wrote:

“[I]f the Assad regime topples, Iran would lose its only ally in the Middle East and would be isolated. At the same time, the fall of the House of Assad could well ignite a sectarian war between the Shiites and the majority Sunnis of the region drawing in Iran, which, in the view of Israeli commanders would not be a bad thing for Israel and its Western allies.”  (https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/12171)

In 1982, Oded Yinon an Israeli journalist, formerly attached to the Israeli Foreign Ministry, published a document titled ‘A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties.’  The strategic plan later named ‘The Yinon Plan’ suggested that for Israel to maintain its regional superiority, it must break its neighboring Arab states into smaller sectarian units engaged in endless tribal wars. The Yinon Plan implied that Arabs and Muslims killing each other was an insurance policy for Israel.

Most commentators on the Middle East and American foreign affairs now realise that the chaos in the Middle East has a lot to do with Israel and its supportive Jewish lobbies around the world. However, thanks to the newly leaked Clinton email archive we may have a document that provides confirmation that the Yinon Plan was, de facto, an Israeli strategy to create sectarian chaos in the Middle East.

According to the Wikileaks archive of former US Secretary of State Clinton, it appears that in 2012 the Israeli intelligence service considered a potential Sunni-Shiite war in Syria a favorable development for the Jewish State and the West.

In an email sent by Sidney Blumenthal to Hilary Clinton, an Israeli source is quoted suggesting that Iran would lose “its only ally” in the Middle East if the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad collapses. Such a development in the view of Israeli commanders “would not be a bad thing for Israel and its Western allies,” Blumenthal wrote.

It is crucial to point out that in his email to Clinton, Blumenthal also quotes an alternative view that is more reasonable and is far less enthusiastic about the escalation in Syria. “Israeli security officials believe that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is convinced that these developments (expanding Arab civil war) will leave them [Israelis] vulnerable, with only enemies on their borders.”

This email allows us to look at a vivid Israeli political debate that occurred back in 2012. The Jewish State had to decide whether to destroy the Syrian people just to weaken Iran or alternatively to destroy Iran dor the sake of destroying Iran. History suggests that a decision was taken to destroy the Syrians first.  And the outcome must be disappointing for Israel —Iran is now stronger than ever.

Shockingly, in late 2015, after three years of disastrous Syrian civil war with hundreds of thousands of fatalities and millions of displaced people, Clinton, so it seems.  still clung to the formula that Israel’s concerns with Iran should be fought on the expense of the Syrian people. In an email that US presidential candidate Hillary Clinton sent to an unknown account on 11/30/2015 Clinton wrote:

“The best way to help Israel deal with Iran’s growing nuclear capability is to help the people of Syria overthrow the regime of Bashar Assad.”

Israel is not the only one to blame for the Syrian shoah; Hilary Clinton shares some of the responsibility. I suggest that Ms. Clinton consider inviting at least a few Syrian refugees to settle in Clinton’s suburban home. Such a move would prove that she can be empathic, merciful and hopefully regretful.

%d bloggers like this: