From the ‘Battle of Dignity’ to the shield of shame: How Jordan has fallen

APR 16, 2024

Source

Amman’s collaboration with Tel Aviv peaked last Saturday with its shocking defense of Israeli territory from Iranian drones and missiles, a move that may prove fateful for the future of the Hashemite Kingdom.

(Photo Credit: The Cradle)

Khalil Harb

The most dangerous development during Iran’s massive 13 April retaliatory strike against Israel last weekend was the defensive military alliance – comprising the US, Britain, Jordan, and France – that coalesced to defend the occupation state.

Jordan has jumped to Israel’s full defense at a time when Arabs have never been more collectively outraged by its crimes.

Particularly notable was Jordan’s role in thwarting Iran’s incoming drones and missiles. The Hashemite Kingdom was the only Arab or Muslim state to act as Israel’s “firewall,” providing direct military protection for Tel Aviv within a multilateral, regional military framework.

Despite Amman’s long-standing pro-Israel stance, this sudden reassertion of its position is indicative of some broader shifts in military strategies across West Asia. 

Patterns and calculations of confrontations across West Asia will be readjusted to adapt to this new equation and others that have emerged in the region as alliances shift to and away from the west. 

That includes the Axis of Resistance, which will likely reassess the expected range of responses in a future confrontation, given that western anti-missile capabilities are well spread throughout strategic locations – strategic sites from the Ain al-Assad base in Anbar, Iraq, to the Al-Tanf base at the Syrian–Jordanian–Iraqi border and from the Mashabim base in the Negev desert to the King Faisal base in northwestern Jordan.

Strategic shifts

Over the years, the Jordanian government has dramatically shrunk its commitments to the Palestinian cause and “Arabism.” 

This can be traced from its 1968 “Battle of Dignity” against Israel to 5 November, when King Abdullah II boasted of his country’s “success” in airdropping medical aid to the Jordanian field hospital in the Gaza Strip, and now, quite stunningly, employing its air force to protect Israel’s security from retaliatory Iranian strikes. 

This shift is not merely a reactionary measure but the culmination of years of extensive security and military coordination with the occupation state, as highlighted by a Jordanian opposition activist speaking to The Cradle. This deep-seated integration into anti-missile and drone operations reflects a strategic evolution rather than a spontaneous response.

Eyewitness reports from multiple sources to The Cradle describe the audible presence of warplanes over the Amman region, followed by the sound of explosions hours later when overhead projectiles were intercepted and downed. 

One Jordanian witness relays that the suburb of Marj al-Hamam saw the most interceptions against Iranian drones and missiles, with debris reported across the area.

Jordanian writer and journalist Rania Jabari informs The Cradle that “citizens in Jordan have felt jammed on the GPS for about two weeks,” that is, since after the Israeli airstrike on Iran’s consulate in Damascus. 

Amid rising concerns about a swift Iranian counterattack through drone incursions, Israel reportedly initiated GPS jamming operations across several regional countries, including Jordan. 

Jabari suggests that this electronic interference might have precipitated the Jordanian Air Force’s readiness to intercept any unauthorized aerial objects in its airspace, given the potential risks to national security from mistakenly guiding Iranian drones into Jordanian territory.

However, the Jordanian opposition activist casts doubt on the capability of Jordan’s Air Force – equipped with only about 60 older F-16 and F-5 aircraft – to single-handedly manage the response against hundreds of Iranian drones and missiles destined for Israel.

Regional repercussions 

Supporting these suspicions, Israeli Channel 12 reported that Israeli fighter jets had intercepted drones launched by Iran in the airspace of Jordan and Syria. 

The day after the Iranian Operation True Promise, the Jordanian government issued a vague statement, only saying that “some unidentified flying objects that entered our airspace last night were dealt with and intercepted to prevent endangering the safety of our citizens and inhabited areas.”

The statement conspicuously omitted any mention of the scale of involvement of the Israeli Air Force or the nature and role of US fighter jets participating in the operation.

Given the limitations of Jordan’s aerial fleet and the extensive geographic area these planes need to cover – a “firewall” stretching approximately 1,500 kilometers from western Iran to the occupied territories of Palestine – the involvement of international forces seems credible. 

Additionally, Iraqi sources inform The Cradle that coalition forces had shot down about 30 drones and missiles over Iraq, with explosions heard in regions like Erbil, Najaf, Wasit, and Anbar. This indicates that a significant number of the drones and missiles traversed Jordanian skies, where they were intercepted before reaching their intended targets in Israel.

The role of the Jordanian Air Force is so significant that the Iranian Mehr news agency quoted an Iranian military source as saying, “Iran will monitor Jordanian movements, and if they cooperate with Israel, Jordan will be our next target.”

The source is said to have “warned Jordan and other countries in the region before the start of the attack against cooperating with the occupying entity.”

This statement seems to have aroused the ire of the Jordanian government. On Sunday, authorities summoned the Iranian ambassador in Amman to warn against Tehran’s “questioning of Jordan’s position.”

Jordanian Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi also issued a statement saying that his government would “intercept any drone or missile that breaches our airspace, whether Iranian or Israeli.” 

However, the Jordanian oppositionist questions the accuracy of Safadi’s statement, especially about his country’s readiness to confront a similar threat coming from Tel Aviv, noting numerous occasions when Israeli fighter jets infiltrated Jordanian airspace to carry out raids on Syria. 

A history of betraying Palestine  

Jordan’s historical antagonism towards Palestinian resistance dates back to the “Black September” massacres of 1970, aimed at expelling the PLO from the country – allegedly with the support of former King Hussein bin Talal, who reportedly received backing from Israel and the US.

During the 1967 Six-Day War, Israel’s Air Force shot down and destroyed dozens of Jordanian aircraft. Following the 1994 Amman–Tel Aviv peace agreement, the two states have struck multiple defense deals, including Israel supplying Jordan with F-16 jets and Cobra helicopters.

Since the 1970s, when Israel supported Jordan during the Palestinian revolt against King Hussein, the two air forces have not engaged in combat. Israeli belligerence persists despite this. On the eve of the 1991 Gulf War, when asked about potential opposition from the Jordanian Air Force should Israel strike Iraq, then-retired Air Force Commander Avihu Ben-Nun boldly stated, “There would be no more Jordanian Air Force.”

It is very likely, moreover, that the western militaries involved in Israel’s defense last weekend utilized Jordanian bases. For example, US troops are stationed at the Mashabim air base in the Negev desert, supporting operations like the Iron Dome system. 

Similarly, UK and French military forces are present at multiple strategic locations within Jordan, including the King Faisal Air Base in Al-Jafr and the Humaymah base near Aqaba, where they play roles in regional defense and run intelligence operations.

There are also French troops at King Faisal Air Base, known as Al-Ruwaished Base, which is close to Al-Tanf. From this base, activities involving espionage operations in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, and Iran are carried out through a state-of-the-art reconnaissance center, and its airport is believed to be used by both Israeli and US drones. 

Sacrificing Jordan’s stability for Israel’s security 

But Jordan’s relations and collaboration with Tel Aviv remain deeply unpopular among the country’s citizenry, with protestors amassing for weeks near the Israeli embassy in Amman – many of them subsequently subjected to repression and tight security restrictions by Jordanian authorities. 

Adding to the pressure on Amman, the Iraqi resistance faction, Kataib Hezbollah, announced earlier this month its readiness to arm “12,000 fighters with light and medium weapons, anti-armor launchers, tactical missiles, millions of bullets and tons of explosives, so that we can be united to defend our Palestinian brothers,” adding that it would seek to “cut off the [Jordan] land route that reaches the Zionist entity.”

By participating in the interception of Iranian drones, Jordan has made a significant contribution to alleviating some pressure off Israel, but one that comes with a much more significant domestic consequence for the stability of the kingdom. 

Will Amman’s blatant alignment with Tel Aviv in this context prove to be politically detrimental for its monarch? In years to come, this decision may be viewed as a strategic error of gargantuan proportions. For now, Jordan’s political future and its position in regional politics remain uncertain – certainly as Tel Aviv and Tehran gear up for further confrontations. 

King Abdallah can jump into the fray as he did last weekend and suffer through further waves of domestic and Arab outrage, or he can resolve to stay neutral and quiet – as many larger, more powerful neighbors chose to do – and let Iranians and Israelis adversaries fight their own battles.

The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of The Cradle.

MOST POPULAR

• How Iran’s ‘strategic patience’ switched to serious deterrence
• Iran attack puts Israeli Rafah invasion on ice: Report
• Yemen’s ‘uninhibited’ attacks push French warship to exit Red Sea
• Hezbollah ambushes Israel’s Golani Brigade on Lebanon border
• Tel Aviv confirms key airbase damaged by Iranian strikes

Sayyed Nasrallah addresses the 12th Gaza Conference through a letter

January 21, 2024

Source: Al Mayadeen

Hezbollah Secretary-General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah sits at his desk and poses for a picture before a speech (Hezbollah Military Media)

By Al Mayadeen English

Hezbollah Secretary-General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah makes a monumental address to the 12th Gaza Conference in Iran, discussing a myriad of points.

The Secretary-General of Hezbollah, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, addressed the attendees of the “12th Conference of Gaza: A Symbol of Resistance,” which was held in Tehran on Saturday.

Sayyed Nasrallah’s address came in the form of a letter read out by Hezbollah’s representative Abdullah Safieddine who attended the conference in Iran.

The leader of the Lebanese party emphasized that Operation Al-Aqsa Flood struck down all attempts to eliminate the Palestinian cause. Stressing the cruciality of the conference, which comes at a historic moment for the Palestinian cause, Sayyed Nasrallah said the event demonstrates the organizers’ sense of responsibility toward the Palestinian people, their cause, and their Resistance.

“We all have grave responsibilities, which [require us to be constantly] alert to mobilize the Ummah’s capabilities in support of the Palestinian people and in support of their valiant Resistance,” Sayyed Nasrallah wrote.

Gaza’s Resistance outperformed multiple regional armies

He explained that the Palestinian Resistance “is rightly writing, with its sacrifices, heroism, the blood of its men, and [steadfastness of its people], the future of the Ummah, preserving its dignity and consolidating its strength.”

Marking the successes of the Palestinian Resistance, the leader of the Islamic Resistance in Lebanon pointed to the large human losses suffered by the Israeli occupation’s military in the Gaza Strip. He said that the amount of losses suffered far exceeds what the Israeli occupation suffered in the 1967 Six Day War, which involved the armies of multiple Arab nations.

Moreover, the leader shed light on the fact that the Israeli military, which occupied more than 69,000 km2 in the 1967 war, is currently experiencing defeat in a much smaller territory — the Gaza Strip.

Bidirectional plot to legitimize ‘Israel’: Failing

On another note, the Resistance leader discussed the political plots to “legitimize” the Israeli occupation on an international and regional level, in what he explained is a bidirectional plot to do so.

He explained that this plot has seen the cooperation of Israelis and “their masters” and concentrated on legitimizing the occupation on an international level and weakening and stifling the Resistance of the Palestinian people.

Firstly, “Israel” and its allies worked on whitewashing the occupation’s image, seeking to portray it as a “civilized entity” worthy of emulation by other governments in the region as a flawless model, Sayyed Nasrallah asserted.

He said that the plan reaped great results for the alliance, due to its hegemonic control over major international institutions and Western governments.

Secondly, “Israel” and its allies worked to weaken and stifle the Resistance and liquidate the Palestinian cause, attempting to eliminate the topic from popular discourse. In detail, the alliance depended on brute force, as well as promoting normalization with the region’s regimes.

He said that the alliance’s push to normalize relations with regimes in the region is a multi-faceted project aimed at subjugating the will of the Ummah, squandering its central cause — Palestine — and shattering the unity of political choices. Sayyed Nasrallah said that the world was on the verge of witnessing the limiting of the scope of the Palestinian cause to Palestinians themselves, which would have isolated it from the people of the Ummah, severely weakening it and placing it on the path of decline.

Al-Aqsa Flood turned the table on ‘Israel’

Related News

• ‘Israel’ failed to achieve any of its goals in the Gaza Strip: NYT
• Palestinian Resistance pounds IOF in Gaza with artillery shells

The leader of Lebanon’s Islamic Resistance continued, “At this critical moment, the Resistance’s Al-Aqsa Flood came to shuffle the cards, alter (political) calculations, and turn the threat into an advanced existential opportunity — a turning point in the [plots] that the enemies have worked [to advance] for a long time.”

Sayyed Nasrallah said the events of October 7 and what proceeded have been “deeply engraved in the hearts of the Zionists” to constantly remind them of the “irreversible defeat” that they suffered.

He said that the Operation shattered the Israeli “myth”, bringing to light the entity’s “eroding prestige” and “shaky project”. The leader said that Al-Aqsa Flood pushed back the Palestinian cause, which the Israelis sought to stifle, to dominating global discourse and politics, “reawakening it once again” to spread throughout the “world’s corridors”.

A beacon of unity

Sayyed Nasrallah said that the Operation dealt a severe blow to all conspirators, “near and far,” who attempted to “erase the Palestinian cause.” He reiterated a strong belief that the Palestinian cause “would not have survived without its Resistance, its rifle, and its sacrifices.”

He stressed that the brutal massacres and crimes executed by the Israeli regime all aim to cover up the image of resounding defeat that the occupation had suffered on October 7.

The leader stressed that despite US-UK-led West’s exhaustive attempts to impose “projects of fragmentation, deception, and manipulation,” Palestine stood solely as “the only beacon of unity.” The leader described Palestine as a “converging path, a foundation for [the Ummah’s] awakening, and a bridge to a [good] future awaited by” the people of this region.

Supporting fronts marks unprecedented achievements

In his letter, Sayyed Nasrallah paid special attention to the role of factions supporting the Palestinian Resistance, in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Yemen. He said that the actions of these factions surpassed the Israeli regime’s expectations, adding that they successfully besieged the entity with consistent fire for more than 100 days.

This, to Sayyed Nasrallah, is “an unprecedented achievement.”

The blood of the martyrs who supported Gaza on all the aforementioned fronts, in addition to Iran’s martyrs, including Seyyed Razi Mousavi, has been “united, merged and integrated with the blood of martyrs in Gaza and the West Bank.”

Marking their unity by taking aim at the common enemy has disturbed the enemies of the Ummah, Sayyed Nasrallah wrote. In this context, he emphasized the need to work on strengthening, deepening, and extending this unity, which has been marked by “blood, rifles, battlefields, and goals”.

Resistance is the only option 

Importantly, the Resistance leader said, “Whoever thinks this nation has an option other than resistance is mistaken and extremely deluded.”

He explained that “Israel” occupied Palestine through brute force — not diplomacy. Expanding on this point, Sayyed Nasrallah said the use of brute force has been a common historical practice of “Israel”, which deployed the same strategy to occupy Beirut in 1982 and today threatens the nation with its military arsenal and brute force.

Drawing a comparison to the achievements of the Resistance, Sayyed Nasrallah underlined the fact that “Israel” did not withdraw from Lebanon due to diplomacy but was forcibly pushed out by the Resistance. 

“[The occupation] will not withdraw from Gaza and Palestine except through resistance.”

Addressing the ongoing battle, Sayyed Nasrallah clarified that confronting the enemy cannot be sized down to a “one or two-day affair.” On the contrary, he said the struggle takes a continuous, ongoing, and cumulative form.

“We must remain vigilant. The arrogant countries gathering their fleets to support Israel confirms its weakness and instability. We must consolidate our determination by adhering to the choice of resistance. If the conditions for the liberation of Palestine are not available today, we must prepare for tomorrow and the day after tomorrow.”

International institutions: Futile

Sayyed Nasrallah emphasized that betting on international institutions and the so-called international community is futile and is destined to fail.

“Such a bet that only produces [feelings of] regret, loss, disappointment, and bitterness.”

The Resistance leader said that international institutions cannot advance the plight of the nation, since they are “subject to the will of the US administration.”

“Their latest farce was the decision condemning Yemen for targeting Israeli ships in defense of Gaza in order to legitimize the US-British aggression on Ansar Allah, ignoring the millions of Palestinian citizens, including martyrs, wounded, detainees, hungry, thirsty, and displaced.”

Related News

• Iraqi parliament sticks by resolution to boot out US forces
• Four Mossad officials, Peshraw Dizayee among killed in Erbil
• South Africa to sue US, UK for complicity in Gaza genocide
• Israeli media: Iranian ballistic missile crosses 1,200 km in first
• Israeli media: Large percentage of Israelis abroad refuse to return
• ‘Israel’ eyes war on Lebanon by month-end if no border deal: WashPo
• Maduro says ‘Bolivarian fury’ plan activated in face of terrorism

---

Operation Al Aqsa Flood

IT’S NOT A HAMAS-ISRAELI CONFLICT: IT’S AN ISRAELI WAR AGAINST EVERY PALESTINIAN

OCTOBER 16TH, 2023

Source

Dr. Ramzy Baroud is a journalist, author and the Editor of The Palestine Chronicle. He is the author of six books. His latest book, co-edited with Ilan Pappé, is ‘Our Vision for Liberation: Engaged Palestinian Leaders and Intellectuals Speak Out.’ His other books include ‘My Father was a Freedom Fighter’ and ‘The Last Earth.’ Baroud is a Non-resident Senior Research Fellow at the Center for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA). His website is www.ramzybaroud.net

Ramzy Baroud

At one time, the ‘Arab-Israeli Conflict’ was Arab and Israeli. Over many years, however, it was rebranded. The media is now telling us it is a ‘Hamas-Israeli conflict.’

But what went wrong? Israel simply became too powerful.

The supposedly astounding Israeli victories over the years against Arab armies have emboldened Israel to the extent that it came to view itself not as a regional superpower but as a global power. Israel, per its own definition, became ‘invincible.’

Such terminology was not a mere scare tactic aimed at breaking the spirit of Palestinians and Arabs alike. Israel believed this.

The ‘Israeli miracle victory’ against Arab armies in 1967 was a watershed moment. Then, Israeli ambassador to the United Nations, Abba Eban, declared in a speech that “from the podium of the UN, I proclaimed the glorious triumph of the IDF and the redemption of Jerusalem.”

In his thinking, this could only mean one thing: “Never before has Israel stood more honored and revered by the nations of the world.”

The sentiment in Eban’s words echoed throughout Israel. Even those who doubted their government’s ability to prevail over the Arabs completely joined the chorus: Israel is unvanquishable.

Little rational discussion took place back then about the actual reasons why Israel had won and if that victory would have been possible without Washington’s complete backing and the West’s willingness to support Israel at any cost.

Israel was never a graceful winner. As the size of territories controlled by the triumphant little state increased three-fold, Israel began entrenching its military occupation over whatever remained of historic Palestine. It even started building settlements in newly occupied Arab territories, in Sinai, the Golan Heights and all the rest.

The Six-Day War: The Myth of an Israeli David Versus an Arab Goliath

Fifty years ago, in October 1973, Arab armies attempted to reverse Israel’s massive gains by launching a surprise attack. They initially succeeded, then failed when the US moved quickly to bolster Israeli defenses and intelligence.

It was not a complete victory for the Arabs, nor a total defeat for Israel. The latter was severely bruised, though. But Tel Aviv remained convinced that the fundamental relationship it had established with the Arabs in 1967 had not been altered.

And, with time, the ‘conflict’ became less Arab-Israeli and more Palestinian-Israeli. Other Arab countries, like Lebanon, paid a heavy price for the fragmentation of the Arab front.

This changing reality meant that Israel could invade South Lebanon in March 1978 and then sign the Camp David Peace Accords with Egypt six months later.

While the Israeli occupation of Palestine grew more violent, with an insatiable appetite for more land, the West turned the Palestinian struggle for freedom into a ‘conflict’ to be managed by words, never by deeds.

Many Palestinian intellectuals argue that “this is not a conflict” and that military occupation is not a political dispute but governed by clearly defined international laws and boundaries. And that it must be resolved according to international justice.

That is yet to happen. Neither was justice delivered nor an inch of Palestine retrieved, despite the countless international conferences, resolutions, statements, investigations, recommendations, and special reports. Without actual enforcement, international law is mere ink.

But did the Arab people abandon Palestine? The anger, the anguish, and the passionate chants by endless streams of people who took to the streets throughout the Middle East to protest the annihilation of Gaza by the Israeli army did not seem to think that Palestine is alone – or, at least, should be left fighting on its own.

The isolation of Palestine from its regional context has proven disastrous.

When the ‘conflict’ is only with the Palestinians, Israel determines the context and scope of the so-called conflict, what is allowed at the ‘negotiations table,’ and what is to be excluded. This is how the Oslo Accords squandered Palestinian rights.

The more Israel succeeds in isolating Palestinians from their regional environs, the more it invests in their division.

It is even more dangerous when the conflict becomes between Hamas and Israel. The outcome is a whole different conversation that is superimposed on the truly urgent understanding of what is taking place in Gaza, in the whole of Palestine at the moment.

In Israel’s version of events, the war began on October 7, when Hamas fighters attacked Israeli military bases, settlements, and towns in the south of Israel.

No other date or event before the Hamas attack seems to matter to Israel, the West and corporate media covering the war with so much concern for the plight of Israelis and complete disregard for the Gaza inferno.

No other context is allowed to spoil the perfect Israeli narrative of ISIS-like Palestinians disturbing the peace and tranquility of Israel and its people.

Palestinian voices that insist on discussing the Gaza war within proper historical contexts – the ethnic cleansing of Palestine in 1948, the occupation of Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza in 1967, the siege on Gaza in 2007, all the bloody wars before and after – are denied platforms.

Miko Peled reflects on the nefarious intent behind the Six-Day War, a war presented to the world as a heroic triumph of an outmatched Israel.

How Media Outlets Work With Israel To Control Gaza Narrative

The pro-Israel media simply does not want to listen. Even if Israel did not make unfounded claims about decapitated babies, the media would have remained committed to the Israeli narrative, anyway.

Yet, suppose Israel continues to define the narratives of war, historical contexts of ‘conflicts,’ and the political discourses that shape the West’s view of Palestine and the Middle East. In that case, it will continue to obtain all the blank checks necessary to remain committed to its military occupation of Palestine.

In turn, this will fuel yet more conflicts, more wars and more deception regarding the roots of the violence.

For this vicious cycle to break, Palestine must, once more, become an issue that concerns all Arabs, the whole region. The Israeli narrative must be countered, western bias confronted, and a new, collective strategy formed.

In other words, Palestine cannot be left alone anymore.

Feature photo | Moroccans take part in a protest in solidarity with Palestinians in Gaza, in Rabat, Morocco, Oct. 15, 2023. Mosa’ab Elshamy | AP

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect MintPress News editorial policy.

October 1973 War: When the Arabs almost made it

04 Oct, 2023

Source: Al Mayadeen English

Egypt employed ingenious techniques ranging from divers that blocked the pipes that were supposed to set the Suez Canal on fire, to using high-pressure hoses to remove the earth barriers the Isralis had set on the Eastern bank of the canal (illustrated by: Mahdi Rtail, Al Mayadeen English)

By Ali Jezzini

In the first few days of the war, “Israel” was made to realize not only the fragility of its existence as an occupation alien from the region but also that its enemies are a force to be reckoned with.

The October/Tishrin War is, without a doubt, one of the landmark events that contributed to shaping West Asia’s political landscape to this day, with repercussions taking their toll on the Arab people who continue their struggle against Western hegemony in the region. October liberation war was waged against the central pillar of that hegemony, which is the occupation entity by the name of “Israel”.

Following the 1967 defeat (al-Naksa) that was a result of an Israeli surprise attack and the lack of Arab preparedness among other reasons, defeatism ruled the Arab general discussion and political speech. Several Arab regimes allied with the West, such as Saudi Arabia and Jordan benefitted from such a defeatist narrative to justify the so-called pragmatism in their political choices that entailed abandoning the general Arab causes. 

The defeatist narrative that ruled the discussions of that period went from pretending a certain cultural inferiority that the Arabs suffered from, to their lack of innovations and their so-called ‘stuck in the past’ general mentality. A material defeat that usually pushes nations and peoples to innovate and search for tangible reasons for such an outcome ended up demoralizing a sizeable portion of Arabs, making a lot of thinkers enter a loop of inferiority complexes and exaggerated self-blame. As mentioned earlier, such a mentality served Arab monarchies that opposed Arab nationalism and the young pan-Arab unification process at that time.

We will not be going into details regarding the military action during the October 1973 war, which the Israelis call the Yom Kippur War, but rather to illustrate briefly the impact such a war had on both the Israeli and the Arab narrative that followed the ceasing of military operations.

The Offensive

A brief look at the Israeli leadership interactions before the start of the war would reveal a significant level of arrogance, as multiple intelligence reports suggesting the Arabs would start an offensive were ignored. The sheer magnitude of the Arab defeat in 1967 convinced the Israelis of their racist biases, such as Arabs are inherently less intelligent and incapable of modern warfare. 

In the first few days of the war, “Israel” was made to realize not only the fragility of its existence as an occupation entity alien from the region but also that its enemies are a force to be reckoned with. Egypt and Syria, following 1967, went to develop their military capabilities with the help of friendly countries from the eastern block, such as the Soviet Union, Eastern Germany, North Korea, and Cuba. Various reports were made to study the causes of the 1967 defeat and to learn valuable lessons that would be useful in the next liberation war.

Egypt employed ingenious techniques ranging from divers that blocked the pipes that were supposed to set the Suez Canal on fire, to using high-pressure hoses to remove the earth barriers the Isralis had set on the Eastern bank of the canal. These barriers were angled 45 to 65 degrees and were 20 meters high at most. Their main goal was to stop any amphibious assault across the canal. Still, they had minimal impact during the opening stage after the pontoon bridges were played and 2 Egyptian armies crossed the water barrier. The Egyptian forces then proceeded to set up defensive positions filled with a multilayered anti-tank complex system. This system was composed of shoulder-held AT weapons, guided missiles, and direct-fire guns of various calibers. Israeli losses during the counter-attack were horrific as they rushed, expecting a similar result to the 1967 war.

Related News

• Turkey targets SDF military vehicle in al-Hasakah: Reports
• “Israel” proposes arming Sweida protesters via Jordan: Reports

On the Syrian front, things were not significantly different. The battle to take back the Golan Heights was costly and hard, as the Israelis were entrenched in the higher ground, firing on the advancing Syrian columns from an elevated position. After the initial push, Syrians were a stone’s throw from occupied Palestine, and panic ensued in the Israeli leadership’s rank as talks about “the destruction of the third temple” started emerging. Some reports even reveal that threats of nuclear weapons against Arab cities were made. 

Following heavy artillery barrages, Syrian tanks, and soldiers pushed hard into the dugouts and fortifications on the high ground, bypassing many of them to ensure the momentum was kept. Imagining a complete Israeli collapse in that war was not far-fetched. Syrians also made an unprecedented Helodrop on the Israeli surveillance outpost on the Jabal al-Shaikh (Hermon) mountain and took the whole team of Israeli officers prisoners. These prisoners revealed sensitive information in captivity after they were led to believe that the Arabs had won and “Israel” had collapsed. 

The US to the rescue

Responding to an immediate threat to the West’s prime enforcer and bully in the region, the US established one of the largest strategic airlift operations to help the Israelis by supplying  22,325 tons of tanks, APCs, shells, and even planes of the most modern type to replace the nonrecoverable losses the IOF suffered from. It is hard to believe that Israel would have launched its counter-offensive in the later period of the war if it was not for the US supplies. The US even used its spy planes to scout the area in the Sinea desert that was not covered by defenses and provided the information to the Israelis.

Henry Kissinger, the infamous Secretary of State of the United States and National Security Advisor to President Richard Nixon, recognized “Israel’s” precarious position and arranged for El Al, the Israeli airliners, to pick up some supplies from a Virginia-based U.S. naval base, including ammunition, high technology products, and AIM-9 Sidewinder missiles. 

Nixon, however, gave the order to launch Operation Nickel Grass in trying to replace all of the Israeli lost equipment. In 1991, author Seymour Hersh asserted that there was “anecdotal evidence” that Henry Kissinger had warned Anwar Sadat that the US airlift was necessary because “Israel” was on the verge of going nuclear.

Under Nickel Grass, more than just supplies were airlifted. Arab troops significantly damaged Israeli Air Force aircraft in the early stages of the conflict, shocking the Israelis with their aggressive deployment of SA-6 Gainful SAMs, a new Soviet anti-air system.

As a result, under Nickel Grass, at least 100 F-4 Phantom II jets from the 4th Tactical Fighter Wing, the 33d Tactical Fighter Wing, and the 57th Fighter Weapons Wing were dispatched to “Israel”. They were transported to Israeli airports, where Israeli pilots were switched out for American pilots. The planes were refueled and sent to the front once the USAF insignia had been switched out, if necessary, and frequently took off just hours after arriving. Several aircraft that flew with USAF camouflage originated from the USAFE fleet.

The aftermath

Speaking to Israeli President Isaac Herzog on October 26, 2022, US President Joe reiterated words he had already said: “If there were not an Israel, we’d have to invent one.”

As a result of the unprecedented supplies and military equipment gifted by the US to the Israelis in the 1973 war, the occupation entity managed to survive the day, and prevent the attempt from becoming a strategic victory as Lebanon’s Sayyed Nasrallah puts it. A victory against “Israel” does not only mean the liberation of Palestine and the restoration of Arab-occupied lands, but it would mean a change in the whole global system that is dominated by the US and the West in general.

Following the war, despite the lines of contact staying almost where they were before the war on the Syrian side, for the first time, the Arab regained self-confidence, as he saw that he could defeat the supremacist colonialists on the battlefield.

The Israelis, on the other hand, felt the fragility of their occupation of Palestine as one military defeat would bring an end to their usurping entity. This perception goes on to haunt the Israelis to this day, as they recognized with fire and iron that they were not the invincible Superman they thought they were.

October War… 50 years on

‘Yom Kippur’ War shook ‘Israel’s’ certainty, arrogance: Israeli media

October 2, 2023

Source: Israeli media

Israeli occupation forces take position with an anti-aircraft gun on the Syrian Golan Heights during the 1973 War on October 12, 1973 (AFP)

By Al Mayadeen English

Former Israeli occupation commanders and soldiers recount to Israeli media their “traumatic” experience during the October 1973 War.

Israeli media discussed the impact of the October 1973 War on the Israeli occupation, emphasizing that it shook the confidence and arrogance that had been entrenched in “Israel”.

During the war, Egypt and Syria sought to regain territory occupied by “Israel” during the Six-Day War in 1967, launching coordinated attacks against occupation positions in the Egyptian Sinai and the Syrian Golan Heights and catching the US-backed occupation off guard.

The Israeli i24NEWS website reported that “the joint attack – the Syrians rolling across the Golan Heights in the north, the Egyptians storming Israel’s fortifications along the Suez Canal in the south – punctured the certainty, even arrogance that had taken root in Israel.”

It said the war that began with a surprise attack by Egyptian and Syrian forces on October 6, 1973, which coincided with the “Yom Kippur” Jewish holiday, was “one of the most traumatic events” in “Israel”.

The website quoted Amnon Amikam, a former company commander during the war, as saying that the memories of the joint Egyptian-Syrian attack “are very strong.”

Amikam admitted that back then, he felt that “Israel was in danger, there was a question mark over its existence. That is how I see it.”

Related News

• Normalization with Turkey impossible until it withdraws troops: Syria
• Lebanon besieged, anti-Syria conspiracy defeated militarily: FPM chief

Just days before the war, despite increasing signs, the Israeli occupation military intelligence confidently thought that the chances of war were “lower than low,” the Israeli website highlighted.

Similarly, i24NEWS quoted reserve Major-General Chaim Erez, who led the Israeli occupation’s 421st Brigade during the war, as saying, “The day before the war broke out, I heard a lecture from a top intelligence officer. It ended with the assumption that since the Arab armies do not have a good response to the Israeli air force, there will not be a war in the coming years.”

He continued, “I wasn’t sure there would be a war, but I thought we have to do something. I called my deputy and told him to tell all the officers in the brigade to stay home next to the phone.”

The phones did indeed ring the next day while Israeli settlers were commemorating “Yom Kippur”, the website indicated, noting that although Israeli officers of the 421st brigade were prepared, the remainder of the army was not.

Oden Megido, an Israeli company commander at the time, told the Israeli website that when occupation soldiers arrived at the ammunition center, they found their tanks “completely dismantled”.

“Suddenly, you see soldiers dying, soldiers injured. It’s scary. For the first time, I realized there was such a thing as soldiers missing in action,” former Israeli occupation officer Yair Geller said.

According to i24NEWS, 47 Israeli occupation soldiers and officers of the 421st brigade were killed in the 1973 war and hundreds were wounded.

Read more: Security situation worst since 1973 war: Former Israeli CGS

Related Stories

• Clashes erupt in ‘Tel Aviv’ on Yom Kippur
• Israelis clash over religion guidlines in ‘culutral war’ on Yom Kippur
• Security alert amid Yom Kippur: Israeli media

More stories

• EU foreign ministers convening ‘historic’ meeting in Kiev: Borrell
• India’s crude oil imports from Russia soar 80% in September
• Children are dying in US hospitals plagued with ill-prepared ERs: WSJ
• BBC from the front lines in Ukraine: It’s bad, counteroffensive failed
• Who Would Ally with the West: ‘It’s Boring – The Real Excitement is in Asia’
• ‘Not 1 more cent’: Americans are done with funding Ukraine’s paychecks
• Kiev forces continue to deliberately target journalists
• Polish opposition leader Donald Tusk leads million-man rally in Warsaw
• Libyan authorities postpone reconstruction conference for Derna
• Saudi Arabia to record fiscal deficit in 2023; oil revenues to blame
• Leading hardline Republican says will move to oust McCarthy

“The Idea of Palestine Hounds Zionists.” Edward Said

September 20, 2023

Global Research,

By Edward W. Said and Nashwa Bawab

In These Times 18 September 2023

Region: Middle East & North Africa

Theme: History, Law and Justice

In-depth Report: PALESTINE

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

*** 

In September of 1982, Edward Said analyzed the Zionist invasion of Lebanon, calling for justice for Palestinians. Days later, the right wing Lebanese Phalangist militia, accompanied by Israel, embarked on a brutal massacre at the Shatila refugee camp.

Forty-one years ago, in the midst of the Lebanese Civil War, Israeli Defense Forces invaded southern Lebanon and besieged Beirut, forcing the Palestine Liberation Organization into Tunisia. With much foresight, Edward Said wrote a piece in September 1982, stating: ​

“What matters about Palestine is what has always prevented Israel from converting its military superiority into lasting political gains: that invincible Palestinian desire to keep hold of what is right and to reject what is wrong.”

Image: “Robin Moyer, USA, Black Star for Time. Beirut, Lebanon, 18 September 1982. Aftermath of massacre of Palestinians directed by Lebanese Forces with the complicity of senior members of the Israeli Cabinet and Defence Forces and conducted by Christian Phalangists and members of the South Lebanon Army in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps.” “Moyer saw flares burst above the camps, and went there to discover piles of bodies – brutally shot. He photographed for hours surrounded by the smell of death, while soldiers joked around. The killers were never brought to justice.” (Licensed under Fair Use)

Just a few days after this piece by Said was published by In These Times, the right wing Lebanese Phalangist militia, accompanied by Israel, entered the Shatila refugee camp and the adjacent Sabra neighborhood, closed off exits and went on a two day killing campaign. The Sabra and Shatila Massacre occurred between September 16 and 18 and ended with between 2,000 and 3,500 Palestinian and Lebanese men, women and children dead. This became known as one of the most horrific massacres of the Lebanese Civil War.

Today, as Israel continues its occupation of Palestine in new and brutal ways, it also continues fighting skirmishes along the southern border of Lebanon.

In 1982, Edward Said wrote:

With thousands of Israeli troops ravaging Lebanon, with literally uncountable civilian casualties caused by terror bombing, with a political campaign designed expressly to dehumanize the Palestinians (two-legged beasts, terrorists, as Begin and his minions call them) in order to kill them more easily— with all this and worse, it may now seem inappropriate to reflect on the idea of Palestine. Certainly the Philip Habib mission allowed for no such reflection, and this, like American policy itself, takes the sense out of the Middle East.

Unlike Europe, where at least there is a historical sense of the human and political meaning of the struggle for Palestine by Palestinians, the American scene is rife either with on-the-spot reductive reporting of the kind that encourages Israeli apologists to say the media lied about the war’s horrendous scope, or with endlessly dreary commentary about questions, formulated by U.S. policymakers, that skirt the issues and confine the Palestinian problem to evacuation from Beirut.

Yet in both Europe and America, the immediate drama of the Palestinian-Lebanese tragedy threatens entirely to overwhelm thought. And even though expressions of outrage, displays of attitude and pratings about ​“new political opportunities” are understandable, one must not lose sight of the ideas and values embodied in the awful scenes unfolding before us. There are three important aspects of the idea of Palestine.

First, the idea of Palestine — represented by every one of the four million Palestinians — has driven the Israeli military machine to its furious assaults on Lebanon and elsewhere. There is a simple, irreducible authenticity in the simple existence of Palestinians who speak of Palestine as their homeland, an authenticity with which Zionists have been unable to deal except by massive negation and denial. Security, peace or an end to terrorism are not the root issue, but rather the assertion by every Palestinian, militant or not, that he or she was displaced, dispossessed, dispersed by Israel when it appeared in 1948. Leaving aside Begin, Sharon and Eytan, whose outrages upon logic and life have provoked respected Israelis like Professor Yehoshua Leibowitz to speak of ​“Judeo-Nazism,” Israeli resourcefulness has always faltered. when it came to native Palestinians. Either they were ignored, or they were to be punished. For once you create a polity based, so far as Palestinians are concerned, on the advantages of being a Jew and the equal and opposite disadvantages of being a non-Jew, the collective enterprise will inevitably be called into question by the non-Jews (the Palestinians) who must live the disadvantages. The more they have done so, the more Zionists have collectively denied them. This pattern has, obviously enough, increased the level of Palestinian resistance.

The idea of Palestine—represented by every one of the four million Palestinians—has driven the Israeli military machine to its furious assaults on Lebanon and elsewhere.

Zionist Project Has Always Been Colonisation and Exclusion of Indigenous Palestinians

Israeli’s present policies are all designed to destroy the Palestinian will to national self-determination by destroying the basis for an independent Palestine. The word Palestine is forbidden on the Occupied Territories, as are any institutions expressing Palestinian nationalism — schools, universities, books, newspapers, municipal councils. Above all, it is the idea of Palestine as it has been formulated, bumblingly and perhaps confusedly by Palestinians as an idea of coeval existence in the same world now ruled by Zionists, that Israel seems to have committed its national energies to fighting. No opening articulated by the PLO, or for that matter by Zionist doves, seems unworthy of rejection, attack, abuse.

How starkly it has come down to the truth that hardline Zionists, with their purblind Western apologists in tow, stake Israel’s existence on the actual liquidation of any trace of Palestinian life. How utterly despicable is Begin’s demagoguery when it posited either Palestine or Treblinka while his armies were bombing refugee civilians without mercy a few miles away, and incarcerating many thousands of their men in virtual concentration camps, denied prisoner of war status.

Yet Israeli supporters like Conor Cruise O’Brien still rant on about the virtues of ​“peace in Galilee,” ignoring the truth. For the past year alone there have been more than 7,000 Israeli violations of Lebanese air-space, territorial waters, land boundaries, each recorded by United Nations Truce Observers. Compared to one Israeli casualty during the three months prior to the invasion, Israel killed several hundred Palestinians and Lebanese in air strikes and border raids, and maintained a cashiered Lebanese officer in an enclave inside Lebanon. This is the state that now says it is for a free and independent Lebanon, without at the same time concealing that it wants Lebanon ruled by its Phalangist allies. Far from the attempted assassination of Shlomo Argov being a real reason for the invasion, Israeli officials — Begin, Shamir, Sharon, Arens, Eytan — have repeatedly stated their intention to raid Lebanon. It has always been a question of ​“when” not of ​“whether.” As for the gravity of the supposed PLO ability to destroy Israel, so gullibly and piously reported by the tearful O’Brien, that was never taken seriously by ruling Israelis. The war’s military results have disproved it completely, although now Begin’s propaganda mills are grinding out a new confection, that Israel forestalled a Soviet takeover of the Middle East. The main point has always been Israel’s unremitting war on the very concept of Palestinian nationalism, so that the aggression on Lebanon was a required extension of colonial practices on the West Bank and Gaza. Menahem Milson has been saying exactly that for well over a year.

The last remnant of Arabism.

Second, the idea of Palestine today is the last credible and actual component of Arabism. Divided as it has rarely been before, the Arab world presents a spectacle provoking laughter and tears in equal measure. Vast wealth and potential power for good are squandered. Internecine quarrels take an unseemly toll in lives as well as resources. The greedy corruption of alienated, incompetent regimes have turned most of the Arab world into something closely resembling a prison. Along with the abrogation of democracy, the regimes justify their authoritarianism in the name of national security and of Arabism. Religious fundamentalism has been bred in direct response both to the regimes’ tacit complicity with the enemies they profess to be fighting and to the Arab world’s directionless drift. When creativity or talent appears it is routinely, and officially, silenced. Only cults of the ruler, the party, and the regime are given unlimited headway. And still the rhetoric of Arabism pours forth.

At its focal point is Palestine. Yet, as recent research has shown, it has always been popular pressure on indifferent rulers that brought them round to the Palestinian cause. This was the case in the Gulf during the 1936 Palestine General Strike when the first financial aid to the Palestinian Arabs was sent, and the pattern has continued since. Plainly, however, rulers have gotten the better of their people, since during the darkest days of the Israeli siege of Beirut all that the Arab states could muster was some pleading at the American court, and ineffective pleading at that. The question is why, and why is the question of Palestine relevant to all this?

Palestinian stand in Lebanon and elsewhere incarnates opposition (indeed, the only consistent opposition) to Israeli designs on the Arab world.

For one, the presence of a body of committed, politicized Palestinian fighters organically related to their community directly impugns every inactive Arab army and party. Yasser Arafat is on the front lines with his people, not in a palace; he walks the streets as unprotected as anyone else. His enemy is the common enemy and he fights it directly, instead of resorting to public rantings expressing enmity, even as private accommodations are made with the status quo. Can it be lost on any Arab that while 500,000 Arab troops, 900 Arab planes, 3,000 Arab tanks and three Arab countries could not withstand Israeli might for more than six days in 1967, the PLO has done so for eight weeks with scarcely 100 antiquated tanks and no air force at all?

For another, the Palestinian stand in Lebanon and elsewhere incarnates opposition (indeed, the only consistent opposition) to Israeli designs on the Arab world. Consider that for at least 50 years the Zionist vision of the region has narrowed inexorably to a ghetto state on the one hand and, on the other, an Arab world kept in a state of permanent unrest. According to a former chief of Israeli intelligence, the campaign in Lebanon wouldn’t have been possible without the safeguard of a neutralized Egypt. Israeli efforts to destabilize Lebanon have been in place since the middle ​’50s, even down to the details of a Maronite major in South Lebanon acting as an Israeli surrogate: the Sharret diaries are irrefutable evidence of this. Gen. Sharon has been open about his plans. Last December he declared that Israeli ​“strategic” interests now included the whole of the adjacent Arab world, plus Iran, Turkey, Pakistan, North Africa and Zimbabwe. Jordan he has unilaterally decided is to be Palestinian, and in addition his government has bombed Iraq, annexed the Golan Heights, penetrated Saudi land, sea and air space, to say nothing of destroying Lebanon in order to make it ​“Christian.“

Against all this, the Arab states have nothing to say, and have done less. The Palestinians are the only force actually resisting Israel in the Middle East. In this they immediately enact the ritual incantation of Arab nationalism — that imperialism must be opposed. Only the Palestinians do it because the abiding idea of Palestine, which fuels their stubbornness, has given them the courage to do so.

Third, because the idea of Palestine is grounded in the life of every Palestinian, and because it represents the only direct Arab effort against an expansionist Israel, it is also a kind of wedge opening up the discrepancy between Israel as it has appeared internationally and as it is in fact. Moral, democratic, unusual, special: These were the words baptizing Israel’s creation in 1948. Its claims on the West because of European guilt over anti-Semitism continue, although almost everywhere else Israel is synonymous with ruthlessness, cruelty and oppression. The fact that no less than 24 beleaguered West Bank and Gaza mayors signed a declaration denouncing Israel’s war on Lebanon and expressing unqualified support for the PLO is, despite Milson’s theories, something to be noted for its own sake in the annals of settler-colonialism.

Who are the Palestinians if not the functional equivalent of Israel’s blacks, or red Indians? Why, if not because of its attitude toward the Palestinians, does Israel herd together naturally with South Africa, every fourth-rate Latin American junta, the entire American right wing, from Jerry Falwell to Irving Kristol to Ronald Reagan?

As for liberals who preach support for Solidarity and tutelage for Palestinians, or those who go on sanctimoniously about terrorism and are silent when it comes to Israel’s almost apocalyptic state terrorism, they are shown up for the moral cowards and liars they are because Palestinians can be seen dying on the TV screen every night.

The idea of Palestine living in all Palestinians is not just a matter of land, water and a flag. They are important, but not the only thing. What matters about Palestine is what has always prevented Israel from converting its military superiority into lasting political gains: that invincible Palestinian desire to keep hold of what is right and to reject what is wrong. By most standards, the Palestinians are a modestly endowed people, although a people possessed by what is in the strict sense a secular ideal. They want justice, but not abstract justice. Rather, they want something that can be lived by them collectively in forms that can still be called just. In support of this, they have offered no metaphysical rationale, no divinely ordained trans-historical scheme. For them the idea of Palestine is adequate to their real memory, their actual present and their minimal requirements for the future. This is the idea’s power, which even the Lebanese conflagration will not diminish.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Edward W. Said was Parr Professor of English and Comparative Literature at Columbia University

Nashwa Bawab is Assistant Editor at In These Times. She is an organizer and reporter with bylines in The Intercept, Electronic Intifada, Texas Monthly, The Texas Observer and more. 

Featured image: Memorial in Sabra, South Beirut (Licensed under CC BY 3.0)

The original source of this article is In These Times

Copyright © Edward W. Said and Nashwa Bawab, In These Times, 2023

---

Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page

Become a Member of Global Research

Hezbollah is at the gates of the Galilee, 17 years after the Second Lebanon War

JUL 12, 2023

Despite all efforts to eliminate the Lebanese resistance, Tel Aviv faces a stronger, bolder, and undeterred Hezbollah, now locked and loaded on Israel’s northern border.

Hasan Illaik

“In April 2022, a truck with a container on it suddenly appeared on the Lebanese side in front of Avivim. The IDF watched it and did not understand its purpose. The truck placed the container near the border and inside it were stationed several members of the Radwan Force, Hezbollah’s elite force, armed with small arms but equipped with observation systems. A short time later, a concrete structure was built next to the container, and it became a permanent position. 

In its wake, more than 30 such posts sprung up, spread out along the entire length of the border, from the sea to the mountain, at a very short distance from the international border. Armed Hezbollah members stay in all of them, and during the day they carry guns, but at night they walk around armed with long weapons, and they also have machine guns and sniper rifles. 

Some of them are observation posts that monitor and document the IDF’s activities across the border, some of them are alert posts that sit on entry routes into Lebanon and are designed to delay Israeli forces that try to enter.

Inside are stationed people from the Radwan force, Hezbollah’s offensive force, which is a different unit from Hezbollah’s ground defense forces – which are mainly concentrated in villages – and has its own chain of command. What started as a few expanded companies that returned from the war in Syria, has since become a force that now has a number of brigades and more than 15 battalions deployed along the border with Israel. Their positions and armed presence are blatant violations of UN Resolution 1701, but the UNIFIL [United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon] force does not dare to confront them. 

Some of these forces are on constant alert to launch an attack into Israel several hours after the order was given. It is still unclear to Israel what the trigger was which pushed Hezbollah to deploy its forces to the front, right across the border, but this comes within a trend that has been going on for four years, in which Hezbollah is trying to exacerbate the friction with Israel.”

The above excerpt is from an article written on 7 July by Alon Ben David, an Israeli military commentator for the Hebrew newspaper Maariv, in which he comments on Hezbollah fighters setting up two tents in the occupied Lebanese Shebaa Farms area.

Israel considers this area part of its territory since it occupied the lands – along with the Syrian Golan Heights – in 1967. Despite Tel Aviv’s questionable territorial claim, the Israeli army refrained from approaching the Hezbollah tents for 50 days, while Israeli officials and media professionals expressed anger over what they perceived as a violation of their country’s sovereignty.

As Ben David notes, according to Israeli military intelligence, the significance of these new outposts lies beyond the two tents. Seventeen years ago, on July 12, 2006, Israel initiated the Second Lebanon War against Lebanon with the objective of destroying Hezbollah and expelling the resistance group from southern Lebanon.

At the war’s end on 14 August, 2006, the UN Security Council passed Resolution 1701, prohibiting any military presence in the area between the Litani River and the Lebanese-Palestinian borders, with the exception of the Lebanese army and international peacekeeping forces of UNIFIL.

Now, 17 years later, Israeli military intelligence closely monitors Hezbollah fighters along the border. These are not isolated individuals but, as Ben David highlights, brigades and battalions prepared to launch an attack into occupied Palestine when ordered to do so, according to Israeli analysis.

The public deployment of Hezbollah forces on the border did not begin in April 2022. Prior to that, Israel had been accusing an “environmental association” called Green Without Borders of forming a cover for Hezbollah to monitor the Israeli occupation army’s movements. Israeli intelligence treated every “environmental observatory” of the association, which claimed its main goal to be planting trees in southern Lebanon, as a military observatory. 

The irrelevance of UNIFIL’s ‘peacekeepers,’ and Resolution 1701

In April 2017, Hezbollah organized a media tour on the border in which a resistance field officer explained to reporters the defensive measures implemented by the Israeli army off Lebanese territory, in anticipation of a potential future attack from Lebanon.

During the visit, Hezbollah fighters – along with their military equipment – appeared in the southern Litani area, in front of the media’s photographers. It was the first time since August 2006 that Hezbollah troops were publicly seen in this region: one even carried an anti-aircraft missile launcher on his shoulder. It was then, in 2017, that Hezbollah made clear it no longer recognized the restrictions of UN Resolution 1701.

Three years later, in May 2020, Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah stated in an interview with Al-Mayadeen that:

“We are not against the survival of UNIFIL forces or against the positive relationship with them, but reducing the number of UNIFIL does not concern us. And if UNIFIL’s tasks are reviewed, we will demand that UNIFIL be on the other side of the border.”

These UN-mandated UNIFIL forces were supposed to include around 15,000 soldiers whose mission was to assist the Lebanese army in extending its authority in the area south of the Litani River.

However, in 2023, the number of UNIFIL soldiers is expected to reach 10,000 from 48 countries. While the majority of soldiers are non-Europeans, the leadership of UNIFIL has traditionally been held by officers from NATO countries such as Italy and Spain, and its strike force is French.

Yet according to Ben David, the UNIFIL “peacekeepers” do not dare to confront Hezbollah in the south. In 2021, UNIFIL refrained from implementing a decision it had made – at Israel’s instigation – to install surveillance cameras in specific locations in southern Lebanon. 

At that time, the resistance party’s supporters in the south, particularly in municipal councils, accused UNIFIL of spying for Israel, which led to the freezing of the camera project.

In 2022, UNIFIL requested the mediation of Lebanese officials to persuade Hezbollah fighters to remove a temporary outpost they had established near the border, which obstructed the movement of its patrols.

Additionally, in the same year, UNIFIL reported to the UN on multiple occasions that it had discovered training and shooting fields within its area of operation. Despite these challenges to their mandate, the international forces remained unable to effectively address them.

The field performance of Hezbollah in the south and the cautious approach adopted by UNIFIL are reflective of the shifts in the balance of power in the region.

In 2017, when Hezbollah publicly announced the appearance of its fighters in the south, its leadership had a sense of assurance due to the protection provided to its rear in Syria. 

The Damascus government and its allies had regained the military initiative in the Syrian war, particularly in the southern, central, and western regions of the country.

Two game-changing factors

However, the most significant changes can be attributed to two factors: Hezbollah’s elite Radwan Force and its precision missile project.

The fighters of the Radwan Force gained unparalleled experience on the Syrian battlefield. This conflict honed Hezbollah’s combat capabilities, allowing its members – especially the Radwan Force units – to engage in offensive battles across vast areas, utilizing a wide range of weapons, including air support.

The war in Syria enabled Hezbollah’s leadership to increase the number of elite forces while also upgrading their armament and equipment. Israel now perceives the Radwan Force as a significant threat and aims to neutralize these forces in any future conflict. Failing to do so would mean that the Israeli occupation army would have to confront the Radwan Force on Palestinian land in the future.

As for the precision missile project, the Israeli army sought to thwart it, whether by preventing the transfer of large numbers of these missiles from Iran via Syria to Lebanon, or by preventing the establishment of facilities to convert “stupid” missiles into “smart” missiles inside Lebanon. 

Hezbollah’s access to thousands of these missiles capable of hitting “any point” in occupied Palestine robs Tel Aviv of its ability to wage war whenever it wants. For more than a decade, the Israeli security establishment has considered precision missiles a weapon that breaks its military advantage. 

Simply put, these missiles can be loaded with large amounts of explosives and launched to hit their targets with precision, wherever they may be inside Israel. Practically, not just in theory, all Israeli military sites are within range of missiles that are now capable of destroying them. The discussion here is no longer only about the number of missiles, but rather about their quality – and the “quality” of the targets they destroy.

In 2017, the head of the Israeli Military Intelligence Division, General Herzi Halevi (current chief of staff), announced at the Herzliya Conference that “Iran worked in the previous year to set up precision weapons factories in Lebanon and Yemen.” 

Shutting down Israeli claims that its army was able to thwart transfers of precision missiles from Iran and Syria to Lebanon – or their manufacturing in hidden facilities along that path – Nasrallah announced in 2018 that the precision missile project had, in fact, been completed.

In his speech, the Hezbollah leader confirmed that the Lebanese resistance now possesses a number of precision missiles that enable it to wage war with Israel without fear of depleting its stocks. 

Although Nasrallah denied that his party possesses factories for precision missiles, he did not deny the existence of facilities that convert inaccurate missiles into precision ones, which is what Israel was warning about. 

What applies to precision missiles also includes remotely piloted aircraft. The general rule that Israel’s military adheres to is that every new weapons system that Iran announces (that can reasonably be expected to be transferred to Lebanon) is, inevitably, already in the custody of Hezbollah. As an example of Iran’s efficacy in stealthily transferring its military hardware, note the presence of Iranian drones in Russia’s war in Ukraine.

In addition, Tel Aviv has noted what Hezbollah has obtained from the stores of the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) since the Syrian war erupted in 2011. Israel, then, is faced with two deadly weapons that Hezbollah possesses: the Radwan Force and precision weapons. 

These two weapons gave Hezbollah the confidence to break the restrictions imposed by UN Security Council Resolution 1701, and to deploy its troops along the border with occupied Palestine. 

It is true that these two weapons are currently only being utilized to strike a balance of deterrence against Israel, but Tel Aviv is fully aware that the accumulation of defensive capabilities will inevitably lead – in the event it fails to curb them – to changing the “combat doctrine” of Hezbollah and its allies from defensive to offensive. 

Two deadly weapons, which Israel fears, are today on its borders, and are poised to wage war one day. In the 2006 war, Israel sought to get rid of Hezbollah forever, and failed. After 17 years, Tel Aviv is back to square one: Frantically trying to prevent the resistance from storming the Galilee.

The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of The Cradle.

Israel’s bloodcurdling ‘poison policy’ to replace Palestinians with Jewish settlers

JUL 04, 2023

To vacate Palestinian lands for incoming Jewish settlements, Israel greenlit covert crop-dusting operations to spray toxic chemicals that would drive out the local population.

Kit Klarenberg

A shocking document last September revealed that, during the 1948 Nakba, Zionist militias engaged in a wide-ranging chemical and biological warfare campaign to expel communities from their lands, slow the advance of intervening Arab armies, and poison citizens of neighboring states.

This unconscionable use of biological weapons on civilian targets, which sought to infect the local Palestinian population with typhoid, dysentery, malaria, and other diseases by contaminating local water supplies, was subject to a concerted coverup at the time – one that was maintained by the Zionist state for decades thereafter.

Even after its exposure, the Israeli academics who helped break the story were at pains to diminish its significance, unconvincingly arguing it was a failed strategy promptly jettisoned and forgotten about as a result.

But newly declassified Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) files starkly underline this narrative to be an abject lie. Released by the Jewish Settlements Archival Project, an initiative of New York University’s Taub Center for Israel Studies, they amply show that the Israeli occupiers employed much the same tactics in order to purge Palestinian areas to make way for illegal settlements in the West Bank, and elsewhere.

Facts on the ground

In 1967, Tel Aviv emerged victorious in the Six Day War and effectively annexed significant swaths of surrounding territory from neighboring Arab states.

Israel’s occupation of these areas, and indeed the construction of settlements for Jewish colonists, was and remains absolutely illegal under international law and has been repeatedly condemned by the United Nations. Initially, successive Israeli governments claimed the settlements were the work of individual settlers and non-governmental entities such as the Jewish Agency and World Zionist Organization, and insisted that the state neither approved of nor could prevent their expansion.

Again, the newly-released papers starkly demonstrate this to be a deliberate deception. The trail begins in January 1971, when the cabinet of then-Israeli prime minister Golda Meir met to discuss the forthcoming construction of settlements. The need for unfailing public secrecy about what was about to happen was considered paramount. At the start of the summit, the premier requested:

“Before we move forward with our discussion, there’s something I’d like to ask. It was our habit that for anything that has to do with settlements, outposts, land expropriations, and so on, we simply do and do not talk [about it]…Lately, this … has broken down, and I’m asking ministers for the sake of our homeland to hold back, talk less, and do as much as possible. But the main thing, as much as possible, is to talk less.”

This extended to Meir demanding ministers not attend settlement opening ceremonies, and avoid being seen by the media anywhere near the sites. In April 1972, this oath of silence remained very much in force, with minister without portfolio Yisrael Galili reminding his cabinet confederates at a meeting to “refrain from dealing with the matter in the press, as it could cause damage.”

Around this time, the Israelis began constructing the first illegal Jewish settlement, Gitit, in the West Bank. Kickstarting the criminal enterprise required displacing Palestinians from the nearby village of Aqraba. This was first attempted by brute force, with IDF soldiers demanding they vacate the area to make way for a new military training zone.

The Palestinians ignored them, and continued cultivating the land, prompting Israeli forces to damage their tools. When they still refused to budge, the IDF was ordered to use vehicles to destroy crops, and dispossess the indigenous population. Soldiers struck upon a radical, bloodcurdling solution: a crop duster would rain down toxic chemicals, lethal to animals and dangerous for humans, to precipitate their departure.

Still, Aqraba’s population refused to budge, prompting the IDF to up its devilish campaign’s ante quite considerably. In April 1972, the military’s Central Command met with representatives of the Jewish Agency’s settlements department. They established “responsibility and schedule for the spraying,” at such a density that it would preclude humans from inhabiting the area for several days “for fear of stomach poisoning” and animals for a full week.

The Jewish Agency was given the job of obtaining the plane, which it did from Chemair, a local crop-dusting company. The explicit aim was to “destroy the harvest” of the Palestinians, and forcibly expel them from the area in perpetuity.

The next month, the destruction was so severe that Aqraba’s mayor wrote to Defense Minister Moshe Dayan. They stated the village had 4,000 residents, who until recently had cultivated “145,000 dunams of agricultural land.” Now, after “the authorities” had burned wheat and confiscated land, the Palestinians were left with just 25,000 dunams.

“The damage is unbearable … how will we be able to provide for ourselves?” the mayor despaired.

Israeli occupation forces finally took over the land in May 1973. Tel Aviv was asked for permission to “seize the land for the purpose of establishing a settlement,” which was granted. Three months later, construction commenced.

‘Get cover for it’

While Israeli governments covertly encouraged and facilitated the creation of illegal settlements, it is clear there was some internal dissent on the issue at various times.

In 1974, the head of the Israel Lands Administration began steps to establish another Jewish settlement in the West Bank, Ma’aleh Adumim, before the government had made a formal decision on the matter. Former IDF general turned Knesset representative Meir “Zarro” Zorea actively lobbied the Jewish Agency to allocate an appropriate budget for the effort, suggesting the organization “funnel money to settlement activity and get cover for it after a while, when I request budget approval.”

At a subsequent cabinet meeting however, then-Housing Minister Yehoshua Rabinovitz was dismayed, declaring, “this has no budget, and I don’t know how work is being started without sitting down with us.” Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin attempted to calm him, stating, “that’s what we’re meeting about right now.”

“There might be room for clarifying this issue, but I wouldn’t suggest going into it today. I know it may not be following the neatest definitions, but I’m in favor of them starting to carry out this infrastructure work,” he added.

Later on, the aforementioned Yisrael Galili pressed ministers to define Ma’aleh Adumim as “an A-class area,” thereby granting it and its Jewish settler population greater benefits from the government, despite the fact it would lie in illegally occupied territory. The Israeli government officially granting the settlement this classification would, by definition, amount to a de facto endorsement, in contradiction to its official public stance.

“I’m surprised that you don’t understand that this whole subject is one of the ingenious methods to alleviate a process that could be very dangerous internally in Israel,” Galili explained.

These shocking communications remained concealed for half a century before the Jewish Settlements Archival Project released them to the world. It is almost inevitable that a great many more incriminating documents remain sealed in the IDF’s vaults. The project’s archives end in summer of 1977, and as of January 2023, there are 144 illegal Jewish settlements in the West Bank, including 12 in East Jerusalem, housing 450,000 colonizers.

Stealing that much land, and displacing so many people in the process, was a vast undertaking that frequently met bitter local resistance, which continues today. Given the efficacy of chemical and biological warfare in stealing Palestinian land over so many years, there is no reason to think this heinous approach wasn’t employed again and again over the years.

The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of The Cradle.

Israel ‘unable’ to remove outpost in occupied Shebaa: Hezbollah

July 02 2023

(Photo credit: AFP)

Hezbollah has so far rejected demands to remove the outpost despite Israel’s threats of force

By News Desk- 

Head of Hezbollah’s Loyalty to the Resistance bloc, MP Mohammed Raad, said on 1 July that Israel is “unable” to remove the Hezbollah outpost erected by the resistance group in the occupied Shebaa Farms earlier this year.

“Israel has been talking a lot for a month about the two tents on the border, as it is considered that they were placed at an advanced point on the Blue Line … it requests that these two tents be removed, and that it would be preferable for the resistance to remove them [in order to avoid a confrontation],” Raad said.

However, despite recently threatening to use force if Hezbollah does not dismantle the outpost, the MP added that Israel “does not want” war.

“No one can impose anything on Hezbollah,” he went on to say, asserting that “gone are the days” when Israel could act as it pleases “without batting an eyelid.” He made a reference to the Tammuz nuclear reactor in Iraq, which was bombed by Israel in 1981.

Addressing Tel Aviv, Raad said: “Now you are not able to remove two tents, because there is resistance.”

The Hezbollah outpost lies in the territory illegally occupied by Israel during the 1967 war. It was set up in response to the illegal border excavations and engineering works carried out by Israel in its efforts to build an extensive, million-dollar ‘defensive wall’ on the border – which began in 2018.

Lately, this engineering work has been increasingly violating Lebanese sovereignty.

Last week, Lebanese media reported that tensions on the border in early June, which prompted widespread Lebanese protests and deployment of the Lebanese and Israeli armies to the border, was an attempt by Israel to remove these posts.

Hezbollah has so far rejected demands to remove these tents from the occupied Shebaa Farms, despite reports of US pressure and Israeli complaints to the UN.

Keywords

Hezbollah Hezbollah outpost Israel Israeli occupation Lebanon Mohammed Raad Shebaa Farms UN US

ILAN PAPPE on Gamal Abdul Nasser: Why We Must Revisit the June 1967 War

June 27, 2023

Egyptian Prime Minister Nasser cheered in Cairo. (Photo: via Wikimedia Commons)

– Ilan Pappé is a professor at the University of Exeter. He was formerly a senior lecturer in political science at the University of Haifa. He is the author of The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine, The Modern Middle East, A History of Modern Palestine: One Land, Two Peoples, and Ten Myths about Israel. Pappé is described as one of Israel’s ‘New Historians’ who, since the release of pertinent British and Israeli government documents in the early 1980s, have been rewriting the history of Israel’s creation in 1948. He contributed this article to The Palestine Chronicle.

By Ilan Pappe

Nasser miscalculated Israel’s reaction. Though the Israeli government knew full well that Nasser did not intend to go to war, they used his brinkmanship as a pretense to start a war of their own, with the aim of building a mini-empire, a greater Israel.

June is the month when one recalls the June 1967 war.

Historians re-evaluate an event not only based on new evidence. Their analyses are also influenced by the passage of time, which enables them to reconsider different aspects of formative events such as this one.

And when you probe into history and use documents and solid evidence, you sometimes disappoint friends and enemies alike.

In this piece, I would like to revisit the role of former Egyptian President Gamal Abdul Nasser in that war. His role, I think, does not always match everyone’s perceptions of this great leader, and maybe disappoints perceived evaluations of his contributions to the struggle.

Nasser, Palestine and Israel

Here, I write from a Palestinian perspective, in the sense that I am less interested in what happened to Egypt because of Nasser’s role in Palestine – undoubtedly a worthy topic. Instead, I am interested in the Egyptian leader’s impact on the history of modern Palestine.

Nasser came to power as part of the Free Officers movement in the July 1952 Revolution. Very soon after, he settled in his office as deputy leader of the movement, before taking over the leadership from Muhmad Naguib.

Even as a deputy, he was interested in negotiating with Israel. He used a senior diplomat in France to initiate talks with the Israelis. His counterpart was Moshe Sharett, at the time Israel’s Foreign Minister.

Nasser saw the Nakba, indeed, as a catastrophe. He believed strongly in the right of the Palestinian refugees to return and deemed Israel as a huge threat to the Arab world. But Nasser was also a pragmatist who understood well how Israel became an essential part of the American imperialist set-up in the Arab world, thus sought ways to limit its potential danger.

Back then in 1952, Nasser did not necessarily deem the United States as the arch-enemy of progressive Arab regimes and was hoping that a realistic approach towards Israel would curry favor with the Americans.

In 1952, he made reasonable twin demands, and was surprised to learn that both Britain and the US found acceptable: An unconditional return of Palestinian refugees; and a land bridge through the south of the Naqab (the Negev) linking Jordan and Egypt. In return, he was willing to agree to a non-aggression pact with Israel and, eventually, peace.

Ben Gurion and His Two Cronies

The Israeli Prime Minister at the time, David Ben Gurion, categorically rejected any contact with the Egyptian leader. In fact, from the moment it was clear that Nasser would be the leader of Egypt, Ben Gurion searched for a way of toppling him.

Sharett, on the other hand, was more forthcoming; not that he agreed to Nasser’s conditions, but he valued the very idea of negotiations and hoped to find a compromise.

For a brief period, a compromise seemed possible, when Sharett replaced Ben-Gurion as prime minister of Israel for a year and a half, between 1954-1955.

Although he was no longer in government, Ben-Gurion left behind two cronies, who, like him, believed Nasser had to be overthrown. This belief was itself an outcome of a rooted ideology according to which only a display of Israel’s ruthlessness could tame the Arabs and obliterate any pan-Arabist agenda that could be of help to the Palestinians.

One of the two cronies was the Minister of Defense, Pinchas Lavon, and the other was the Chief of the General Staff, Moshe Dayan.

The three plotted a series of actions to defeat Sharett’s desire to reach an agreement with Nasser. It began by violating the armistice agreement with Egypt by building an illegal colony on no man’s land, followed by the infamous massacre in the village of Qibyah in the West Bank.

The Qibyah massacre was carried out by an Israeli commandos unit headed by Ariel Sharon in 1953. 65 villagers were murdered, partly by blowing up their houses while they were still sleeping inside.

But the peak of this campaign was the setup of a terrorist organization of Egyptian Jews that was ordered to plant bombs in cinemas and libraries associated with Western culture, to increase the mistrust of Nasser in the eyes of the Americans.

The terrorists were caught before they were able to carry out their actions.

Ben Gurion Back in Power

Ben Gurion returned to power after a relatively brief absence. In February 1955, he sent his army into the Gaza Strip to carry out a military operation, which resulted in the killing of 37 dead Egyptian soldiers. Until that very moment, as he indicated by Nasser himself in his memoir, the Egyptian leader was open to negotiations with Israel, sticking to a position that the Americans and the British still regarded as common-sensical and doable.

When Nasser understood that the West was unwilling to exert pressure on Israel and would not lift a finger to stop Israel’s colonial, annexationist ambitions towards the Arab world, he changed course. He now believed that Israel would attack both Syria and Jordan to expand its geographic boundaries. That called for a new way of thinking.

Nasser’s New Strategy

Then, Nasser embarked on a new strategy, which included more visible support for the nascent Palestinian guerrilla resistance efforts against Israel, attempts at pan-Arab unity, the creation of a non-alignment bloc with India and Yugoslavia, and purchasing more modern arms for his army.

On top of all these policies, he opted for what is known as brinkmanship policy – using war rhetoric and seemingly preparation for war, with the hope that this would be enough to force the West to exert pressure on Israel to cease its aggression.

This strategy included the closure of the Tiran straits connecting the Red Sea to the Gulf of Aqaba, concentrating an army in the Sinai Peninsula, and asking the UN to withdraw from the border between Egypt and Israel.

But Nasser miscalculated Israel’s reaction. Though the Israeli government knew full well that Nasser did not intend to go to war, they used his brinkmanship as a pretense to start a war of their own, with the aim of building a mini-empire, a greater Israel.

The rest, as the saying goes, is history.

Declassified Documents

Recently declassified documentation from the Israeli cabinet meetings shows clearly that the Israeli leaders understood that war was not imminent and that much depended on their own actions.

In fact, one did not need to wait for the opening of the archives to reach such a conclusion. Several Israeli leaders admitted as much. One of them was Menachem Begin, who was part of the government at the time, and who told senior officers in the Israeli army:

“In June 1967 we again had a choice. The Egyptian army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him.”

Israel’s Need for War

As in 1948, in 1967, Israel also needed wars to fulfill the typical objectives of any settler colonial movement: having more geographical space with less native population living in it.

Since 1963, Israel had prepared comprehensive plans, waiting for the perfect movement to initiate its ‘greater Israel’ project. But Israel failed because it erroneously believed that the demographic imbalances resulting from the creation of such an entity can easily be solved by oppressing, for decades, millions of Palestinians. Since it was not possible for Israel to replicate the ethnic cleansing campaign of 1948, it opted to treat the newly occupied peoples as inmates in a huge, and ever-growing prison.

The Palestinian resistance to this monstrous policy continues to this very day.

The lesson is that, even with a leftist, Labor government, which ruled Israel between 1948 to 1977, Israel did not seek peace. To the contrary, Tel Aviv hoped to impose its will on the Arab world, by allying itself closely to the West.

The consequences of this strategy were felt beyond Palestine, whose people were the main victims of this Israeli intransigence. In fact, it impacted drastically and detrimentally the whole of the Arab World.

Unfortunately, we are still witnessing the bitter fruits of this aggression, which can only be stopped by the liberation of Palestine and the creation of a democratic state over the whole of historical Palestine, which would ensure the return of its refugees.

Only this would enable us to close this dangerous and sorrowful chapter in the history of the Arab World and, hopefully, allow all of us to begin a new and more hopeful chapter.

Hasbara Industry: Deconstructing Israel’s Propaganda Machine

June 8, 2023

Israeli soldiers arresting and beating a Palestinian man in the occupied West Bank. (Photo: ActiveStills.org)

By Dr. M. Reza Behnam

Tel Aviv is, however, finding it increasingly difficult to whitewash its entrenched apartheid system and ongoing genocide, especially in light of the openly racist policies and practices of the current right-wing regime cobbled together by its legally-plagued prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu.

Most mornings as I prepare for my run, I tune in to BBC News.  Of late, the newscaster has presented, in sober British fashion, the number of Palestinians killed the night before by the Israeli army in its near-nightly raids on homes and refugee camps in the occupied Palestinian Territories.  When I canvass American news sites to learn more, there is no mention of these atrocities.  The airwaves are replete, however, with news of the Russia-Ukraine war and the death of civilians.

What many Americans won’t hear from these “news” sources is that in 2022, the Israeli army killed more than 170 Palestinian civilians, including 30 children, in the West Bank and East Jerusalem; and that since the start of 2023, Israel’s occupation army has already killed 158 Palestinians, including 26 children.

They won’t hear that Israel controls the lives and resources (access to safe clean water) of approximately 7 million Palestinians, and that Palestinian cities, towns, homes, orchards and businesses have been systematically destroyed and repopulated with upwards of 750,000 illegal Jewish squatters (“settlers”).

They won’t hear of the 56 years of Israeli occupation, dispossession, house demolitions, curfews, checkpoints, walls, blockades, permits, night raids, targeted killings, military courts, administrative detention, thousands of political prisoners, tortured Palestinian children, and 56 years of oppression and humiliation.

The ‘Exceptional’ Treatment

What explains the “exceptional” deferential treatment Israel receives, while other human rights violators are condemned or sanctioned by the United States and its allies?

Much of the explanation has to do with Israel’s powerfully effective state-run public relations industry reliant on myths and duplicity.  Since its establishment in 1948, Israel has successfully created a new illogic of its own; an illogic that has made the illegal seem legal, the immoral appear moral and the undemocratic sound democratic.  It has masterfully marketed a number of myths that have become a part of the political and mainstream media narrative.

From the outset, Israel’s Zionist founders cloaked their true goal of creating a “Greater Israel” —a Jewish state not just in Palestine, but in Jordan, southern Lebanon and the Syrian Golan Heights—in heroic terms.

Fabricated history and tropes about the “good” Israelis developing an unpopulated land, creating agrarian miracles in the desert and reclaiming an historic promised land have become deeply embedded.

In reality, Zionists, like Israel’s first prime minister, polish-born David Ben-Gurion, saw the 1948 United Nations General Assembly partition plan for Palestine as the first step toward future expansion.

Israel’s Colonization Plans

Benny Morris in his book, Righteous Victims, writes that Ben-Gurion in a letter to his son in 1937, framed the Zionist plan for colonizing Palestine:  “No Zionist can forego the smallest portion of the Land of Israel.  [A] Jewish state in part [of Palestine] is not an end, but a beginning….through this we increase our power, and every increase in power facilitates getting hold of the country in its entirety.  Establishing a [small] state….will serve as a very potent lever in our historical effort to redeem the whole country.”

That Israel would have to forcibly transfer and remove the indigenous Palestinian population to realize its colonization plans were erased from the Israeli narrative.

As a consequence of its effective disinformation campaign, many Americans have come to believe that Israel is a democratic, progressive and humane state; a small but brave nation defending itself against “foreign” violence and terrorism.

To realize its “Greater Israel” annexation mission, Israel created another fiction to legitimize its war of choice in 1967.   Although the Six-Day War, which began on June 5, 1967, has proved to be a crucial turning point in the modern history of the Middle East, the Israeli myth of vulnerability and “nation under siege” inventions remain largely unchallenged.

Zionist Mythmakers

Fifty-six years ago, the Israeli air force attacked air bases in Egypt, Syria and Jordan, destroying over 80 percent of their warplanes on the ground.  Israeli troops swiftly occupied Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula, the Gaza Strip, the West Bank of Jordan and the Syrian Golan Heights.  According to Israeli government minutes, its attack was not defensive, but a planned preemptive strike.

The Israelis were fully aware of the need to initiate a disinformation campaign alongside their planned first-strike military operations to allay adverse reactions from Washington and other Western powers.

The Israeli myth that the Jewish state was fighting for its physical survival against a more powerful Arab enemy has had a powerful hold on America’s political leaders and the public.  In fact, Arab leaders had no plans to invade Israel and Israel’s leaders knew the war was easily winnable.  The annihilation fallacy has become unassailable dogma in Washington—the “right to defend itself” mantra— has allowed Tel Aviv to continue its illegal annexation of captured Palestinian land.

Zionist mythmakers got busy again in the 1980s.  To counter the criticism it received following its indiscriminate bombing of Lebanon and massacre of Palestinians in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps in Beirut in 1982, Israel birthed the Hasbara (“explaining” in Hebrew) Project in 1983.

In that year, the American Jewish Congress sponsored a conference in Jerusalem of top executives, journalists and academics from Israel and the United States, to devise a strategy to resell Israel, cement U.S. economic and military support and make it extremely difficult to critique Israel’s actions.

Hasbara established permanent structures in the United States and Israel to influence how the world, especially Americans, would think about Israel and the Middle East in the future. The talking points they developed are recognizable in current rhetoric; among them:  Israel’s strategic importance to the United States; its physical vulnerability; its shared cultural values with the West; and its desire for peace.  Israel now labels its continuing hasbara propaganda “public diplomacy.”

News organizations, journalists, academics, politicians and entertainers have come to expect pressure if they go outside the level of acceptable discourse established by Israel and its supporters.  Alternative narratives that expose Israel’s abuses are dismissed as anti-Israel or given the feared label of anti-Semitic.  Israeli propagandists have made certain to fuse criticism of the regime—anti-Zionism—to anti-Semitism. The anti-Semitic accusation has proven to be a powerful rhetorical device to shield Israel from fault.  It has destroyed careers and reputations.

Challenging Israeli Myths

The late-Helen Thomas, noted journalist; Norman Finkelstein, prominent Jewish intellectual, political scientist and author; and Fatima Mohammed, 2023 graduate of CUNY law school are among those who have been willing to brave the onslaught of criticism they would inevitably face for “daring” to challenge Israeli myths.

Helen Thomas, national icon and senior White House correspondent for UPI, was forced to end her 57-year career in 2010 because she persisted in publicly questioning U.S. support for Israel.  Thomas later remarked, “You cannot criticize Israel in this country and survive.”

In 2007, DePaul University denied tenure to Norman Finkelstein because of his criticism of Israel.  In his books, Finkelstein claimed that anti-Semitism has been used to stifle critics of Israeli policies toward Palestinians, and that the Holocaust is exploited by some Jewish institutions for their own gain and to cover Israel’s illegal occupation of the West Bank and Gaza.  Because his name had been sullied, Finkelstein was never able to teach again.

Fatima Mohammed, in her recent commencement address to fellow graduates, condemned Israel for perpetuating the Nakba (catastrophe); stating that “our silence is no longer acceptable….Palestine can no longer be the exception to our pursuit of justice.”  Predictably, Mohammed faced immediate public condemnation from U.S. politicians and pro-Israel groups, who have accused her of anti-Semitism, and have called for the university to be defunded over her speech.

In December 2008 and January 2009, as before, Israel marshaled its public relations machine.  This time it was to counter the criticism it was receiving for its massive 22-day bombardment of the Gaza Strip, in which 1,398 Palestinians were killed.

The Israel Project

The Israel Project (TIP), a pro-Israel Washington-based group, hired Frank Luntz, a Republican operative and political strategist, to shore up its image.   Luntz conducted an extensive study to determine how to integrate Israel’s narrative into mainstream media.  His findings were reported in a document titled, “The Israel Project’s 2009 Global Language Dictionary.”

Language from Luntz’s primer, with its scripted discourse for Israeli supporters, has seeped into the thinking, vocabulary and comments of American, Israeli and European politicians, academics and mainstream media.

In his 18-Chapter primer, Luntz coaches Israeli supporters on how to tailor answers for different audiences, outlines what Americans want to hear and what words and phrases to use and to be avoided.  It provides guidance on how to challenge statements from and to feign compassion for Palestinians.  Luntz advises to always emphasize Israel’s desire for peace, although he initially states that it does not really want a peaceful solution.

Supporters are enjoined to give the false impression that the so-called “cycle of violence” has been going on for thousands of years, that both sides are equally at fault and that Palestine-Israel catastrophe is beyond their understanding.  He urges advocates to stress Israel’s need for security, emphasizing that Americans will respond favorably if Israeli civilians are portrayed as the innocent victims of Palestinian “terrorism.”

Luntz states that when Americans are told that Iran supports Hezbollah and Hamas, they will be inclined to be more supportive of Israel.  Therefore, when talking about them to repeatedly say “Iran-backed” Hamas and Hezbollah.

On the rare occasions the mainstream media reports on Israel’s abuses, it conforms to the official lexicon outlined in Luntz’s dictionary.  Israel’s army of occupation, for example, is referred to as “defense” or “security” forces, Zionist colonizers, (squatters), are termed “settlers,” Zionist colonies are called “settlements” or “neighborhoods,” Palestinians “attack,” while Israelis merely “retaliate.”

Normalizing the Abnormal

Among the more glaring fabrications is the characterization of the Israel-Palestine quagmire as a “conflict” between two peoples with equal political and military resources and equal claims; when it is, in reality, a conflict between the colonizer, Israel, and the colonized, Palestinians.

For 75 years, Israeli propaganda has allowed it to be the exception—to flout international norms and laws with impunity.  Because of the myths, Israel has been extremely influential in determining U.S. policy in the Middle East. The country’s unremitting and methodical disinformation campaigns from 1948 to the present have allowed Israel to plant the Zionist flag on Palestinian land and in the hearts and minds of Americans.

Tel Aviv is, however, finding it increasingly difficult to whitewash its entrenched apartheid system and ongoing genocide, especially in light of the openly racist policies and practices of the current right-wing regime cobbled together by its legally-plagued prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu.  Israel’s hasbara industry, however, remains undaunted.  TIP folded in 2019 after its funding dried up, but the Democratic Majority for Israel (DMFI) continues to carry on Israel’s hasbara mission.

Israel knows that the narratives it tells itself and the world are apocryphal and the Jewish state, in its present form, is unlawful and unjust.  Hence, in an attempt to make the apocryphal real and the fraudulent legal, Israel continues its ongoing ideological war to normalize the abnormal in Palestine.

– Dr. M. Reza Behnam is a political scientist specializing in the history, politics and governments of the Middle East. He contributed this article to The Palestine Chronicle.

Donate NOW  Learn More  Watch Video(The Palestine Chronicle is a registered 501(c)3 organization, thus, all donations are tax deductible.)

LATEST POSTS

• Palestinian Journalist Seriously Injured as Israeli Army Raids Ramallah (VIDEO)
• Pro-Palestinian Voices in Canada Seek to Block Upcoming Visit from Former Israeli PM
• Grand Mufti Warns of Religious War following Escalation in Israeli Aggression against Al-Aqsa
• Humanity Without Borders – A Poem
• Israel to Demolish Residential Building in Northern Jordan Valley

Normalization possible with Arab regimes, impossible with Arab people

June 7,2023

Source: Al Mayadeen English

By Ahmad Karakira 

Speaking to Al Mayadeen English, Sayed Shibl, Egyptian writer and researcher in political affairs, says Al-Awja crossing operation reflects “the true expression of the collective public opinion of Egyptians.”

No one knows what the Egyptian conscript, martyr Mohammad Salah, had in mind when he carried out the Al-Awja crossing operation on the border with occupied Palestine, where he killed three Israeli soldiers, two days before the anniversary of the 1967 Naksa (Setback).

Perhaps Mohammad was one of the 2000s generation in Egypt, whose parents and grandparents repeatedly told them on different occasions about the defeat of the Arab forces by the Israeli occupation and the loss of Arab lands such as Sinai, the Golan, the West Bank, Gaza, and Al-Quds and lamented the departure of a great Arab leader like Gamal Abdel Nasser, who united the Arab nation, supported the oppressed, and stood in the face of Western imperialism.

Perhaps he was taught that, as Abdel Nasser said, “What was taken by force can only be restored by force” and was reminded that under Operation Badr in 1973, the Egyptian army’s heroic resistance was able to cross the Suez Canal, capture the “Bar Lev Line”, and liberate a part of Sinai.

Maybe the 23-year-old is from this Arab generation that has not yet forgotten the scenes of killing and trail of destruction left behind by the Israeli occupation in its repeated aggressions against the Palestinians in the besieged Gaza Strip for 16 years, and perhaps the images of “Israel” committing the worst massacres against the Lebanese in 2006 were planted in his memory.

But for sure, he was a witness to the daily crimes committed by the occupation forces against the Palestinians who are defending their land, sanctities, and dignity across Palestine.

During the Israeli aggression on Gaza in May 2021, Mohammad wrote on his Facebook page, “Allah stands by Palestine,” in response to a post by Mike Pence saying: “America stands with Israel,” during Seif Al-Quds Battle.

"الله يقف مع فلسطين"

الشهيد الجندي المصري محمد صلاح أثناء الحرب على غزة عام 🇪🇬🇵🇸2021 pic.twitter.com/616tigJn3l

— #القدس_ينتفض 🇵🇸 (@MyPalestine0) June 5, 2023

We have the right to consider that the operation carried out by Mohammad Salah against the occupation forces expresses the will of every free and honorable person who rejects the occupation, makes it suffer, takes away its security and its settlers’ comfort, and takes revenge for the oppressed, the blood of the martyrs, and all the prisoners in occupation prisons.

In confirmation of that, Israeli occupation Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu described the operation as “serious and unusual.” The chief of staff of the Israeli occupation forces, Herzi Halevi, admitted that the operation was “a difficult incident,” during which three of the Israeli occupation forces’ “best” soldiers were killed on the border with Egypt.

Israeli media also considered that the Egyptian conscript’s operation, which succeeded despite its simplicity, exposed the complete collapse of the security system of the Israeli occupation army in this particular area, admitting that the results of the operation were indeed difficult, painful, and dealt a blow to occupation forces who suffered a serious failure in preventing “infiltration” into “Israel”.

Read more: Egyptian policeman’s operation part of multifront war: Israeli media

Touching on the latest operation, Sayed Shibl, Egyptian writer and researcher in political affairs, told Al Mayadeen English that Al-Awja crossing operation “is certainly not an individual one, but rather the true expression of the collective public opinion of Egyptians who reject the Israeli presence.”

Shibl said the evidence for this is the amount of support Mohammad Salah received on social media.

“It is very rare to find an Egyptian comment on Facebook that rejects armed action directed against Israel, and if an Egyptian happens to have this anomalous opinion, he will stop it because of how strong the public opinion stands against Zionism,” he indicated.

The Egyptian writer and researcher considered that the importance of the operation “lies in the fact that it came at a time when the Israeli entity feels threatened from all borders, except the western border with Egypt where it feels safe.”

He added that the operation “reinforces the concern of the occupation government and deprives the settlers of any sense of safety.”

“It is a message to the leaders of the entity calling on them to retreat from their aggressive path against the Arab people in occupied Palestine.”

Shibl underlined that what is certain is that there is a message that reached everyone today: normalization is possible with Arab governments, but it is impossible with the Arab people.

Despite the absence of precise figures on the percentage of Egyptians who reject normalization with the Israeli occupation, a 2019-2020 survey conducted by the Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies found that 85% of Egyptians refuse diplomatic recognition of “Israel”, while only 13% support it.

According to Shibl, Egyptians expressed their happiness in public streets, in cafes, and on social media. He noted that despite not witnessing marches or demonstrations due to the security conditions in the country, anyone who lives among ordinary Egyptians during the past few days can touch their joy over the recent operation due to their rejection of the continued Israeli occupation of Arab lands, as well as the longing of Egyptians for acts of resistance, especially if it was carried out by an Egyptian — a factor related to national pride.

Asked whether the timing of Mohammad Salah’s operation might be linked to the 1967 Naksa anniversary, Shibl said, “Maybe it has something to do with the June 5 setback anniversary, or maybe not.”

The Egyptian writer pointed out that it is natural for every young Egyptian under the age of 30 to have a father or uncle who tells them about Egypt’s wars with the Israeli enemy and the martyrs who rose during it, which plants in them “a desire for revenge,” especially since the effects of the 1967 aggression remain apparent in Palestine and Syria, and even in Egypt, under the so-called “Peace Treaty”, which still restricts the full movement of the Egyptian army inside the Sinai Peninsula.

Shibl recalled that in the aftermath of the 2011 revolution, the position of the various political currents was to reject “Israel” and organize demonstrations against its embassy, ​​which culminated in the September 2011 storming of the occupation’s embassy in the Egyptian city of Giza, which led to its evacuation in the summer of the same year.

In conclusion, the Israeli occupation, as usual, will present hundreds of arguments and justifications related to martyr Mohammad Salah, including that he suffers from a psychological disorder or that he does not represent the official Egyptian position on “Israel”, but there is no doubt that the last operation will remain stuck in the minds of the new Egyptian generation.

And who knows, we might see another Mohamed Salah in the coming days.

Read more: Israeli reports say Egyptian border incident premeditated

Related Stories

• ‘Unexpected humiliating blow’: Israeli media on Egypt border operation
• Egyptian policeman’s operation part of multifront war: Israeli media
• Israeli media flounder in confusion over Egypt border shooting details
• IOF base infiltrated; ammo, arms gone missing: Israeli media
• Calls for Adele to cancel her ‘Israel’ concert
• Actuating an Israeli ‘Solution’ – via an al-Aqsa Emergency
• Egypt says mediation efforts faltered in Gaza

‘Israel’ eager to mediate ceasefire in Sudan: What are the reasons?

Apr 28 2023

Source: Al Mayadeen English

By Ahmad Karakira 

The Israeli occupation has several reasons to rush to mediate a ceasefire between the Sudanese army and the Rapid Support forces, the most important of which is establishing its presence in yet another African country bordering the strategic Red Sea.

‘Israel’ eager to mediate ceasefire in Sudan: What are the reasons?

A few days ago, three Israeli occupation Foreign Ministry officials told Axios that “Israel” has offered to host both parties involved in the conflict in Sudan in an effort to reach a cease-fire agreement.

The proposal was handed to Army Chief General Abdel Fattah Al-Burhan and Rapid Support Forces (RSF) head General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, known as Hemedti, as Israeli occupation Foreign Minister Eli Cohen and director general of the Israeli occupation’s Foreign Ministry Ronen Levy remained in direct contact with both Sudanese generals.

Axios reported that "Israel" has been in contact with generals of both the #Sudanese Army Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), urging them to stop their fighting as the ongoing clashes put the normalization deal between #Sudan and the occupation at risk. pic.twitter.com/BFoLIcdo83

— Al Mayadeen English (@MayadeenEnglish) April 20, 2023

According to Cohen and Levy, both Sudanese generals gave the impression that they were considering the proposal in a positive light, adding that US President Joe Biden’s administration was consulted and informed. 

“Since the fighting started in Sudan, Israel has been working in different channels in order to reach a ceasefire. The progress we have made with the two parties is very encouraging. If there will be a way that Israel could help in stopping the war and the violence in Sudan we will be very happy to do it,” Cohen told Axios in a statement.

#Sudan is plunged into complete chaos one day after clashes broke out between the #Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and a paramilitary group, the Rapid Support Forces (RSF). pic.twitter.com/C4zxUOWKEJ

— Al Mayadeen English (@MayadeenEnglish) April 16, 2023

Read more: No end to war until Al-Burhan surrenders: RSF advisor to Al Mayadeen

Normalization with ‘Israel’ jeopardized by Sudan fighting: Axios

Another report by Axios revealed that the Israeli occupation fears that the ongoing clashes will hinder the formation of a prospected Israeli-allied civilian government, which would jeopardize the normalization agreement between Sudan and the Israeli occupation. 

According to the report, “Israel” has built strong relationships with both Al-Burhan and Dagalo. Before clashes ensued, Israeli officials said they were actively following up on the process of appointing a civilian-led government in Sudan.

During his visit to Khartoum in February, Cohen urged Al-Burhan to proceed with restoring civilian rule, emphasizing that it will be challenging to secure a peace agreement without it, Axios mentioned.

The news website cited Israeli sources as saying that the Israeli occupation Foreign Ministry has been in contact with Al-Burhan over the normalization process, while Dagalo and Mossad have met and discussed “security” and “counterterrorism issues”.

Israeli officials were certain of an agreement to appoint a civilian government in the upcoming days, Axios indicated. However, what transpired was fierce fighting that spread over multiple cities in the country.

The White House has also pushed Israelis to mediate a ceasefire deal between the fighting generals, the report revealed.

But why is “Israel” in a rush to complete the normalization process with Sudan?

Flashback

It all started in 2016 when the Israeli occupation urged the US to allow it to infiltrate into Sudan after the North African country severed diplomatic ties with the Islamic Republic of Iran. Following Saudi Arabia’s lead, Sudan cut diplomatic ties with Iran after the storming of the Saudi Arabian Embassy in Tehran and the consulate building in the city of Mashhad.

In August 2017, then-Sudanese Minister for Investment, Mubarak Fadel Al-Mahdi, spoke for the first time about normalization with the Israeli occupation during an interview with the Sudania24 TV station.

And when General Abdel Fattah Al-Burhan came to power after the resignation of Omar Al-Bashir, he met in February 2020 with Israeli occupation Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Uganda.

Consequently, Khartoum was removed from the US blacklist in December 2020 after 27 years of imposed sanctions.

In January 2021, Sudan formally agreed to normalize relations with “Israel” in a quid pro quo for the United States to remove it from its list of so-called “state sponsors of terrorism”, but ties were never formalized. In April of that year, the North African nation approved a bill abolishing a 1958 boycott of the Israeli occupation.

Finally, Sudan and “Israel” said in February that they agreed to move towards normalizing relations during the first official visit of Israeli occupation Foreign Minister Eli Cohen to Khartoum.

Sudan; a route to transfer arms to Palestinian Resistance

One of the several reasons that the Israeli occupation is racing against time to complete the normalization process with Sudan is to make sure that the North African country does not again become a route to transfer arms to the Palestinian Resistance in the Gaza Strip.

Before severing ties with Iran, Al-Bashir’s administration reportedly supported the Hamas movement politically and allowed it to open an office in Sudan. The Israeli occupation had previously accused Sudan of allowing the passage of arms from several countries to Gaza via its territory.

However, with the regime change in Egypt and the rise of General Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi as President, the latter ordered the destruction of tunnels between his country and Gaza, through which the Palestinian Resistance reportedly used to receive arms.

In March 2009, the Israeli occupation even targeted a 17-truck convoy in eastern Sudan that reportedly carried weapons to Gaza, and also targeted an arms factory in Khartoum in October 2012.

In March 2014, the Israeli occupation’s navy said it seized a ship loaded with weapons in the Red Sea between Sudan and Eritrea that was allegedly en route from Iran to Gaza.

To further dive into the reason for “Israel’s” eagerness to mediate a ceasefire in Sudan and consequently complete a peace agreement with the North African nation, one should tackle the history of relations between the two sides.

History of Sudanese-Israeli relations

In his book “Israel” And Relations With The Islamic World, Jihad Odeh said that “Israel’s” ties with Sudan began before the latter gained its independence from British occupation in 1956, when an Israeli trade mission comprising 50 people settled in Khartoum in 1951 to buy Sudanese products and goods and send them to “Israel” via Cape Town, South Africa, to avoid anti-smuggling measures taken by the Egyptian authorities in the Suez Port and Port Said.

The book mentioned that Israeli planes often landed at Khartoum airport to refuel and continue their flights, which prompted the Secretary-General of the Arab League at the time to send a memorandum to the British government in February 1951 to inquire about the matter.

Britain, which was ruling Sudan in partnership with Egypt, replied that Israeli planes had the right to use Khartoum Airport under the pretext that Britain and Sudan are not at war with “Israel.”

It was during the era of Abdullah Khalil’s government that the first Israeli intelligence envoy arrived in Sudan, with the consent of the Sudanese government, Odeh revealed in his book.

And as a result of contacts that began in 1954 between Sudanese politicians and “Israel”, a Sudanese figure accompanied by a Sudanese journalist met in a London hotel with a young diplomat working in the Israeli occupation’s embassy in Britain named Mordechai Gazit.

The author said that Sadiq Al-Mahdi, the head of the Umma Party, was in contact with Mossad in 1954, and met along with Mohammad Ahmad Omar, editor-in-Chief of the Nile Newspaper and spokesperson for the Umma Party, with Gazit. 

According to Odeh, the goal of Sudan at that time was to seek the help of “Israel” to win Jewish public opinion in the West to obtain independence, while Gazit wanted to establish commercial relations Between Sudan and “Israel” to reduce the intensity of Arab isolation.

Contacts and meetings between Israeli and Sudanese politicians continued after the latter’s independence in 1956, when then-Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir met with then-head of the Sudanese government Abdullah Khalil in the summer of 1957.

In those discussions between Meir and Khalil, it was agreed to send Israeli agricultural experts and civilian and military advisors to Sudan. It was also agreed that Sudan would allow EL AL planes to land and refuel on their way to South Africa, and that the Mossad would be allowed to build a station in the North African country.

Al Haya newspaper noted that the Mossad was able to establish its station again in Khartoum in 1983 during the era of then-Sudanese President Jaafar Nimeiry after the latter met with Menachem Begin’s Security Minister, Ariel Sharon.

Nimeiry revealed that he began his contacts with “Israel” in 1965 when he was an officer participating in a course on cooperation between Sudan and the US, where he established contacts with Israeli personalities who later visited Sudan in unannounced secret visits, Odeh mentioned in his book. However, when he took power in May 1969, Nimeiry followed Egypt’s footsteps against the Israeli occupation.

Nevertheless, Israeli ties with Nimeiry’s regime re-resurfaced after the Camp David Accords, which he supported, leading Mossad to rebuild its mission in Sudan.

Why Africa and Sudan?

In his book, The Israeli Foreign Policy Toward Africa: The Sudan Case, Amer Khalil Ahmed Amer pointed out that “Israel” has adopted an approach that relies on closer relations with countries surrounding Arab states, and this is evident in the strong relations with these countries at all levels, especially in the field of military and security cooperation, hidden under the cover of trade and economic relations.

In parallel with the expertise that the Israeli occupation provides to these countries, Amer continued, it has gained a foothold in military bases that oversee Arab countries, which represents a clear threat to Arab national security in general.

The occupation can threaten Arab water security and navigation in the Red Sea, due to the advanced position that it gained from establishing strong relations with Eritrea, the author pointed out.

Amer noted that the attempt to control the Red Sea is one of the most important strategic goals of “Israel” in the African continent, adding that the occupation began to establish a presence on the Red Sea in order to use it to achieve its military, economic, and political interests.

To achieve this goal, “Israel” strengthened its relations with Ethiopia in the late sixties and Eritrea after its independence from Ethiopia in 1991; it also built bases in Ethiopia after Moshe Dayan’s visit in 1965.

In addition to its military bases on the Eritrean islands, especially near Bab Al-Mandab, “Israel” built two military bases in Ethiopia near the border between Eritrea and Sudan.

According to Amer, this expansion in the Red Sea region gave “Israel” a strategic depth in Bab Al-Mandab to monitor any Arab military activity in the region.

It is noteworthy that “Israel” has military and intelligence bases for espionage and monitoring on a number of Eritrean islands, including Dahlak, Haleb, and Marsa Fatma, which are located at the southern entrance to the Red Sea, in addition to Zubair Island, which is only 22 km from Yemen, and houses a communications network and radar equipment.

The Israeli presence on these islands also includes special forces, paratrooper units, and airborne forces equipped with modern helicopters and Dolphin-class submarines. Through these bases, “Israel” threatens Yemen’s national security, where it can monitor it and spy on it smoothly, Amer argued.

During his visit to “Israel” in 1996, then-Eritrean President Isaias Afwerki signed an agreement to enhance security and military cooperation that included, in one of its clauses, an Israeli pledge to support Eritrea to confront any attempts by any force to control its strategic islands located at the southern entrance to the Red Sea, and to allow a limited military presence in these islands.

Sudan; a power to the Arab world

According to Amer, Israeli estimates since the beginning of Sudan’s independence indicated that this country should not be allowed to become a force added to the power of the Arab world, because if invested in stable conditions, its resources will make it a threatening force.

During the 1967 War, Sudan became a base for training and sheltering the Egyptian Air Force and ground forces. It also sent its forces to the Canal region during the War of Attrition between 1968 and 1970, as well as during the 1973 October War.

It is noteworthy that following the 1967 Six Day War, Khartoum hosted the Arab League summit held from 29 August to 1 September 1967. There, Arab leaders declared the three no’s: “no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with Israel.”

Related Stories

• Sudan Turmoil
• Iran FM assures Hamas chief of support to Palestinian resistance
• Conference of resistance leaders at the Iranian embassy in Beirut
• Security situation worst since 1973 war: Former Israeli CGS

«إسرائيل» ولعنة الفلسطينيين: سقوط الوهم وبداية الأفول!

السبت 18 شباط 2023

د. عدنان منصور

لم تستطع الحروب ولا العقود التي أعقبت قيام الكيان «الإسرائيلي» عام 1948، أن تمحو من ذاكرة الفلسطينيين والعرب حقيقة دامغة، وهي أنّ الكيان المحتلّ، تأسّس بفعل عامل القوة، والدعم الخارجي، وفرض الأمر الواقع بتواطؤ قوى دولية، أتاح للحركة الصهيونية وتنظيماتها الإرهابية أن تنشئ دولتها على أرض فلسطين بعد مجازر رهيبة ارتكبتها، وقيامها بتطهير عرقي للفلسطينيين، كي تكون فلسطين مقدمة لتحقيق حلم الصهاينة في إنشاء «إسرائيل الكبرى».

لقد تعاطى الصهاينة مع فلسطين على أنها أرض بلا شعب، لشعب بلا أرض، لذا أرادوا تفريغ فلسطين من سكانها، لتصبح خالية لهم، ومن ثم فرض الأمر الواقع «الإسرائيلي» عليها، ليمحوا بعد ذلك الوجود الفلسطيني برمته.

كانت العمليات الإرهابية تعكس نهج وعقيدة وسلوك القادة الصهاينة وعصاباتهم المسلحة، كي يختزلوا شعباً بأكمله، من خلال عمليات تطهير عرقي واسعة النطاق، قامت بها التنظيمات الارهابية الهجانا، وشتيرن، والارغون، أعوام1947 ، و1948، و1949، أدّت الى تمشيط وتدمير المدن والقرى الفلسطينية، التي بلغ عددها وفقاً لمصادر المؤرّخ الإسرائيلي بني موريس ودراسة إسرائيل شاحاك بين 350 و383 قرية ومدينة. علماً انّ عدداً من الباحثين العرب، مثل عبد الجواد صالح ووليد مصطفى أحصوا 472 قرية ومدينة مدمّرة، فيما سلمان أبو ستة، وبعد دراسات وإحصاءات عميقة موثقة قام بها، تعتبر من أهمّ الأبحاث في هذا المجال، أكد على أنّ عدد القرى والمدن المدمرّة بلغ 566 قرية ومدينة.

لقد ظنّ الصهاينة في ذلك الوقت، انّ القوة وحدها تستطيع أن تجعل منهم دولة. وانّ «قوة التقدّم في تاريخ العالم هي للسيف»، «نحن نحارب إذن نحن نكون»، ولولا النصر في دير ياسين، لما كانت دولة إسرائيل»! (مناحيم بيغين رئيس وزراء إسرائيل الأسبق، وزعيم عصابة الارغون الإرهابية قبل إعلان دولة «إسرائيل»)
لقد روّج أقطاب الحركة الصهيونية، وعلى رأسهم ثيودور هرتزل، وإسراييل زانجويل ، لفكرة شوّهت تاريخ فلسطين وواقعها العربي، معتبرين أنها أرض بلا شعب، لشعب بلا أرض، هذا الادّعاء الوهم، لقيَ في ما بعد رواجاً في الأدبيات السياسية للقادة «الإسرائيليين»، ما دفع برئيسة وزراء «إسرائيل» في 8 آذار 1969 لتقول: «كيف يمكن لنا إعادة الأراضي المحتلة؟!

ليس هناك من أحد نعيدها إليه! وبعد حرب حزيران1967، واحتلال الضفة الغربية، صرحت غولدا مائير يوم 15 حزيران 1969 كلّ وقاحة قائلة: «لا يوجد شيء اسمه الفلسطينيون. لم يكن هناك في فلسطين من فلسطينيين حتى يقال إننا طردناهم، وأخذنا البلاد منهم. إذ لم يكن لهؤلاء من وجود».

كان بن غوريون يريد أرضاً خالية من الفلسطينيين، كي يقيم كيانه عليها.لذلك لم يشأ عام 1948 أن يتوسع في ضمّ المزيد من الأراضي رغم مواجهته معارضة عنيفة داخل الكنيست، واتهامه بالتخاذل في عدم ضمّه الضفة الغربية، وذلك خشية وخوف بن غوريون من الديموغرافيا الفلسطينية حيث كان ردّه: «إنه لمن الأفضل تحقيق الدولة اليهودية من دون أرض إسرائيل كلها، بدلاً من أرض «إسرائيل» كلها من دون دولة يهودية.»

كان بن غوريون يدرك جيداً العامل الديموغرافي وخطورته على مستقبل الدولة اليهودية، خاصة أنّ تعداد العرب الفلسطينيين سيفوق مستقبلاً تعداد اليهود. وانّ إقامة دولة ديمقراطية على كامل التراب الفلسطيني، يترتب عنه:

أ ـ إما إشراك الفلسطينيين في الحكم بشكل فاعل ومؤثر بسبب نسبة عددهم الى «الإسرائيليين»، وهذا ما أراد بن غوريون تجنبه، ولو لوقت، تاركاً المجال للأجيال اليهودية القادمة، أن تأخذ المبادرة في تمدّد الاحتلال.
ب ـ وإما طرد الفلسطينيين على الفور. وهذا ما تمّ تنفيذه من خلال خمس موجات عسكرية قامت بها المنظمات الإرهابية «الإسرائيلية»، وفي ما بعد الجيش الذي تشكل من هذه المنظمات التي انضوت تحت لوائه. موجات التطهير العرقي الخمس، وثقها بني موريس في كتابه: «نشأة اللاجئين الفلسطينيين». موجات بدأت من شهر كانون الأول 1947، وصولاً الى شهر تموز 1949، أسفرت عن ارتكاب مجازر رهيبة، وتطهير المدن والقرى، وإفراغها من سكانها.

عقيدة الاحتلال، والتطهير العرقي، وضمّ المزيد من الأراضي عبر عنها موشي ديان بعد حرب حزيران 1967 قائلا: «إن الجيل الماضي أنشأ دولة «إسرائيل»، والجيل الحاضر أحرز ما أحرزه في حرب 1967… فعلى الجيل القادم أن يأخذ المبادرة وينطلق عبر الحدود.»!

بهذا المنطق العدواني التوسعي، أراد «الإسرائيليون» أن يختزلوا وجود الشعب الفلسطيني، وينزعوا تاريخه وحاضره، هويته وعقيدته، جذوره وحضارته، ثقافته وانتماءه. لذلك كان استخدام القوة العسكرية واللجوء الى العمليات الإرهابية غاية «إسرائيل»، لانتزاع فلسطين من ذاكرة الجيل الثاني والثالث الفلسطيني. في الوقت الذي ـ باعتقادهم الوهم ـ سيترسخ فيه «الوجود الإسرائيلي» أكثر فأكثر مع الجيل الثاني والثالث الإسرائيليين وما بعدهما !

لم يكن أمام «إسرائيل» إلا استخدام كافة وسائل القتل والإرهاب، والتخويف لإخضاع المقاومة الفلسطينية. إرهاب وقتل ترسخ في عقول العديد من «الإسرائيليين»، منهم ارمون سوفير الأكاديمي في جامعة حيفا الذي أدلى يوم 10 أيار 2004 بحديث الى صحيفة «جيروزالم بوست» جاء فيه: «فيما لو أردنا ان نبقى على قيد الحياة، يتوجّب علينا ان نقتل ونقتل ونقتل. إن لم نقتل في كلّ وقت وفي كل يوم، سينتهي وجودنا

سياسة القتل والحروب العنصرية الإسرائيلية، واستحضار المحرقة، وجعلها سلوكاً ملازماً للإسرائيليين، أثارها رئيس الكنيست الأسبق أبراهام بورغ في كتابه: بقوله: «إنّ حضور الموت الذي لا يتوقف في حياتنا، المرتبط بحروب «إسرائيل»، لا يؤدّي إلا الى الإكثار من المجازر والدمار والإبادة التي يتلقاها شعبنا. لهذا فإنّ الأموات في هذا البلد لا يرقدون أبداً في سلام. انهم دائماً نشطون، دائماً حاضرون، دائماً ملازمون لوجودنا التعيس، والمحرقة، والحروب، والموت واستحضار للذاكرة الأبدية. لقد ربحنا كلّ الحروب، ومع ذالك نحتفظ بشعور عميق بالخسارة… إنّ الحرب لم تعد استثناء بل أصبحت قانوناً. طريقة عيشنا طريقة حرب مقابل الجميع، أعداء وأصدقاء على السواء.

أمام هذه الحقيقة المحزنة، اننا على يقين أنّ «الإسرائيليين» لا يفهمون إلا لغة القوة. هذه العقلية التي تعكس بداية العنجهية الإسرائيلية في وجه الهزائم العربية، أصبحت المبرّر لأفعال عديدة، ومفاهيم سياسية غير مقبول بها في عالم عادل…»

بعد خمسة وسبعين عاماً من احتلال «إسرائيل» لفلسطين، ورغم امتلاكها ترسانة نووية، وعسكرية تجعل منها واحدة من أكبر القوى العسكرية الضاربة في الشرق الأوسط، بموازنة عسكرية تبلغ 14 مليار دولار، يضاف اليها مساعدة عسكرية سنوية بقيمة 3.5 مليار دولار تقدّمها الولايات المتحدة لها، لم تستطع «إسرائيل» أن تطفئ شعلة المقاومة، ولا ان تلغي حقائق التاريخ، أو تروّض الشعب الفلسطيني، أو تلغي وجوده، وتقضي على إرادته في مقاومة الاحتلال. كما لم تستطع أن توفر لمستوطنيها الأمن والاستقرار، والثقة بمستقبل لن يكون بالتأكيد، إلا لأصحاب الأرض والحقّ، بعد أن قلب المقاومون الفلسطينيون المقاييس، والمعادلات العسكرية والديموغرافية، والعقائدية التي بنى عليها قادة المنظمات الصهيونية منذ تأسيس دولتهم وحتى اليوم.

حساب الوهم «الإسرائيلي» لم يكن في موضعه. فالتآكل بدأ يتفاعل، والانقسام الداخلي، والتمييز العنصري ينخر بشدة المجتمع «الإسرائيلي» في الوقت الذي قلب فيه الجيل الثاني والثالث الفلسطيني المقاييس، وأطاح بالنظريات، والسياسات، والخطط، والحلول المفخخة، التي رسمتها دولة الاحتلال مع حلفائها وعرابيها بحق الفلسطينيين.
منذ 75 عاماً، وأرحام أمهات فلسطين تنجب المقاومين أصحاب الأرض الذين لم يحسب أقطاب الصهاينة حسابهم. هم المقاومون الحقيقيون البواسل. هم هوية فلسطين ووجدانها، ماضيها وحاضرها ومستقبلها. هم الذين سيجعلون العالم كله يشهد على تحرير أرضهم من الغزاة عاجلاً أم آجلاً.

انّ شعباً عظيماً، ومقاومة عنيدة لا نظير لها في العالم كله، فيها خيري علقم، وقوافل الشهداء، حاضرة في كلّ الساحات، تقول بصوت عال للكيان المحتلّ، انّ فلسطين ليست لشذاذ الآفاق، وإنما لشعب متجذر فيها، وها أنا هذا الشعب. المنازلة بيننا لن تتوقف، والإرادة الأقوى هي التي ستنتصر لا محال! إرادة قوافل شهداء الجيل الثاني والثالث الأكثر تعلقاً وثباتاً وإيماناً بفلسطين وشعبها. هو الجيل الثائر الذي يرفع منسوب مقاومته يوماً بعد يوم، والمُصرّ على تبديد الوهم الإسرائيلي، وتصحيح مسار التاريخ.
بعد مضيّ 75 عاماً على الاحتلال، هل لا زال قادة «إسرائيل» الجدد مقتنعين انّ فلسطين كانت أرضاً بلا شعب، لشعب بلا أرض؟! الجواب عند المقاومين الذين عاهدوا الله والأمة على تطهيرها من الاحتلال الصهيوني، في يوم سيسأل فيه الفلسطينيون: ما إسرائيل وما جبل صهيون، كما سأل قوم من قبل، ما عاد وما ثمود…؟

*وزير الخارجية والمغتربين الأسبق

UN Asks ICJ for Legal Opinion on “Israeli” Occupation

 December 31, 2022

By Staff, Agencies

The United Nations General Assembly [UNGA] has adopted a resolution asking the International Court of Justice [ICJ] for its legal opinion on the “Israeli” regime’s occupation of Palestinian territories.

The 193-member assembly voted on the resolution on Friday. Eighty-seven countries voted in favor of the resolution against 26 negative votes cast by the “Israeli” regime, the United States, its oldest and strongest ally, and 24 others, and 53 abstentions.

The “Israeli” regime claimed existence in 1948 after occupying huge swathes of Palestinian territories during a Western-backed war. It occupied more land, namely the West Bank, which includes East al-Quds [Jerusalem], and the Gaza Strip in another such war in 1967.

Ever since, the regime has built hundreds of illegal settlements upon the occupied territories and deployed the most aggressive restraints on Palestinian freedoms there. Tel Aviv withdrew from Gaza in 2005, but has been keeping the coastal territory under an all-out land, aerial, and naval siege since a year after it left the enclave.

Addressing the Assembly’s session before the vote, Palestinian UN envoy Riyad Mansour said the world body was about to weigh in on the resolution one day after the swearing-in of an “Israeli” cabinet led by Benjamin Netanyahu. Mansour reminded that the cabinet – which has been billed as the most extremist one yet in the regime’s history – had promised to expand the illegal settlements.

“We trust that, regardless of your vote today, if you believe in international law and peace, you will uphold the opinion of the International Court of Justice when delivered and you will stand up to” the “Israeli” officials, the envoy said.

The occupying regime’s ambassador to the world body, Gilad Erdan, however, called the United Nations a “morally bankrupt and politicized” body for deciding to go ahead with the vote. Erdan also said any decision by any judicial body that would receive its mandate from such an organization “is completely illegitimate.”

Via the resolution, the General Assembly asked the ICJ to give an advisory opinion on the legal consequences of “Israel’s” “occupation, settlement, and annexation…, including measures aimed at altering the demographic composition, character, and status” of the holy city of al-Quds.

Palestinians want East al-Quds  [Jerusalem] as the capital of their future state, while the occupying regime lays claim to the entirety of the city as its so-called “capital.”

Ever since occupying the West Bank, the “Israeli” regime has been trying to manipulate al-Quds’ status quo through various measures, including by enforcing restrictions on the Palestinians’ right to worship at the al-Aqsa Mosque’s compound – Islam’s third-holiest site – which is located in al-Quds’ Old City.

The regime’s military, however, regularly provides protection for its illegal settlers’ tours of the holy site as means of hurting the religious sentiments of the Palestinians and their fellow Muslims around the world.

On Thursday, the Palestinian Wafa news agency cited the official heading the Islamic organization that runs the compound’s affairs as saying that a record number of “Israeli” settlers, namely 48,238, had stormed the Muslim holy site in 2022.

According to Azzam Khatib, director of the Islamic Waqf Department, the “Israeli” extremists have been resorting to provocative conduct while storming the compound, including performing Jewish rituals at the site and raising the occupying regime’s flag there.

UN Votes to Take “Israeli” Occupation of Palestine to Hague Int’l Court

November 12, 2022

By Staff, Agencies

The United Nations General Assembly voted 98-17 to seek an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice on the illegality of the “Israeli” entity’s occupation of Palestinian territories on the grounds that it can be considered de facto annexation.

This resolution specifically asked the ICJ for an opinion on the status of al-Quds [Jerusalem]. The city is one of the most volatile and contentious points of discord between “Israelis” and Palestinians.

The “Israeli” entity, the United States, Canada and Australia were among those who opposed the ICJ referral when the UNGA Fourth Committee held its preliminary vote on Friday in New York.

The issue now moves to the UNGA plenum for final approval.

“There is no authority that can declare that the Jewish nation is an occupier in its homeland,” the “Israeli” entity’s ambassador to the UN Gilad Erdan tweeted defiantly after the vote.

Erdan wrote that he had warned the UN nations that an appeal to the ICJ at The Hague was the “last nail in the burial coffin” of “Israeli”-Palestinian reconciliation. “Unilateral measures” such as an ICJ appeal “will be met with unilateral measures.”

At issue is the question of whether after 56 years, the “Israeli” entity’s hold on territories it captured from Jordan Egypt and Syria in the defensive 1967 Six-Day War, can be considered tantamount to de facto annexation and thus illegal under international law.

The international community does not recognize “Israeli” “sovereignty” in al-Quds [Jerusalem] and only the US accepts the entity’s annexation of the Golan.

The “Israeli” entity withdrew from Gaza, but the international community still holds that its under “Israeli” occupation due to the “Israeli” Occupation Forces’ [IOF’s] control of much of its borders.

An ICJ opinion on the matter is non-binding, but it would help codify into international law the Palestinian insistence that all that pre-1967 territory, should be within the final boundaries of its future state.

At Friday’s meeting, the US and the “Israeli” entity charged that the resolution was an attempt to bypass a negotiated resolution to the conflict with the Palestinians and as such ran counter to past UN resolutions including at the Security Council which called for such talks.

“The Palestinian’s have rejected every single peace initiative, and now they embroil an external body with the excuse that the conflict has not been resolved but the only reason why it has not been resolved is because of their rejectionism,” Erdan said. “They claim that they are ready to negotiate, but what they fail to mention is that they are only ready to do so if they are guaranteed 100 percent of their demands before they even sit down at the negotiating table,” Erdan explained.

“Exploiting a UN organ by enlisting the UN’s politicized anti-‘Israel’ majority for the purpose of forcing your demands instead of negotiating, is clearly a unilateral step,” he added.

The United States Representative Andrew Weinstein said that the “failure” in such resolutions “to acknowledge the shared history of the Haram al-Sharif [Temple Mount], a site sacred to both Jews and Muslims, is perhaps the clearest demonstration that they are intended only to denigrate ‘Israel’, not to help achieve peace.”

After the vote, the Palestinian Authority Ambassador Riyad Mansour thanked all the nations that endorsed and supported the resolutions.

“Nothing justifies standing with ‘Israeli’ annexation and occupation,” Mansour said, noting that these actions went against the UN Charter.

“This occupation needs to end,” Mansour said.

The request for an ICJ advisory opinion, submitted for the first time this year, was tacked onto a pre-existing annual resolution called “‘Israeli’ practices affecting the human rights of the Palestinian people.”

The text of the resolution was read out by Namibia and Cuba.

A number of nations objected to the inclusion of the ICJ resolution in an already existing text rather than as a stand-alone item, noting that the matter had been pushed through quickly with little time for review.

The resolution asks the ICJ to advise on “the legal consequences arising from the ongoing violations by Israel of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination from its prolonged occupation, settlement and annexation of the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967.”

This includes, the resolution stated, “measures aimed at altering the demographic composition, character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem and from its adoption of related discriminatory legislation and measures.”

In addition, the resolution asked the ICJ to explain how Israel’s policies and practices “affect the legal status of the occupation” and what are the “legal consequences that arise for all states the UN from this status.”

Among the nations that opposed the text were Austria, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Germany, Guatemala, Hungary, Italy, Liberia, Lithuania, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, and Palau.

Many European countries abstained including Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Denmark, Finland, France, Greece, Latvia, Lichtenstein, Netherlands, Norway, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom.

Ukraine, Ireland and Poland were among those countries that supported the ICJ referral.

This is the second such ICJ referral. In 2004 the ICJ issued an advisory opinion against the “Israeli” entity’s security barrier, explaining that its construction in east al-Quds [Jerusalem] and the West Bank was illegal.

Palestinian Martyred after Injuring 5 Israeli Settlers in Car-Ramming Operation

 October 30, 2022

Israeli occupation forces have killed another Palestinian following a car-ramming operation that left five settlers injured near the city of Jericho in the occupied West Bank.

The Palestinian Information Center, quoting Israeli media, said following the Sunday attack the Israeli occupation forces fatally shot the Palestinian man who was driving the car south of Jericho.

The Palestinian news agency also cited Israeli media as identifying the driver as as 49-year-old Barkat Odeh from the town of al-Eizariya near East al-Quds.

Israeli medical said the five injured Israelis are in their 20s and suffered different injuries following the incident.

The reported attack came amid heavily intensified Israeli raids throughout the West Bank in search of alleged Palestinian gunmen responsible for a spate of deadly attacks on Israeli occupation forces by Palestinian resistance forces – which began in March.

More than 100 Palestinians have so far been killed during the Israeli regime’s brutal crackdown on West Bank’s native residents.

On Saturday, four Israelis and a Palestinian were injured in a gun attack near an Israeli checkpoint in the occupied West Bank city of al-Khalil, also known as Hebron.

The Palestinian man was reportedly martyred by the occupying forces. Local news outlets cited Tel Aviv’s army as saying that the unidentified fighter “shot live fire” at the checkpoint in al-Khalil, also home to a community of radical Israeli settlers.

“Soldiers are conducting searches in the area” for additional suspects, the occupying army said. The Palestinian Red Crescent also announced that the Palestinian victim was receiving treatment at a local hospital.

The Israeli regime occupied and annexed the West Bank, including East al-Quds, in a heavily-Western-backed war of aggression in 1967.

Ever since, it has dotted the territory with hundreds of illegal settlements that have come to house hundreds of thousands of Zionist settlers that immigrated to occupied Palestine – mostly from Europe and the US.

Source: Agencies (edited by Al-Manar English Website)

MARVEL HEADS REVEALED TO BE CLOSELY CONNECTED TO ISRAELI INTELLIGENCE

SEPTEMBER 23RD, 2022

Source

By Jessica Buxbaum

Earlier this month, activists and comic book fans alike were in uproar over Marvel Studios’ announcement that Israeli actress Shira Haas will play Zionist superhero Sabra in the upcoming Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) film Captain America: New World Order. Many Palestine advocates accused Marvel’s decision to add Sabra to the MCU as exalting Israeli abuse and war crimes.

“By glorifying the Israeli army & police, Marvel is promoting Israel’s violence against Palestinians & enabling the continued oppression of millions of Palestinians living under Israel’s authoritarian military rule,” the Institute for Middle East Understanding wrote in a tweet.

Following the backlash, Marvel said in a statement to Variety that it will take a “new approach” to the character, in a perceived attempt to placate criticisms.

Yet vows to reimagine the Sabra character, a former spy for the Israeli intelligence agency Mossad, may come across as disingenuous, especially when, upon closer examination, Marvel appears closely connected to the Israeli government and its main intelligence agency Mossad.

MARVEL AND ISRAEL’S DEEPENING RELATIONSHIP

Many individuals who have held or still maintain roles at Marvel are associated with the Israeli military, Israeli intelligence and Zionist institutions that uphold apartheid. For instance, Isaac Perlmutter, the current chairman of Marvel Entertainment who served on Marvel Comics’ board of directors until 1995, grew up in 1948-occupied Palestine (or modern-day Israel) and served in the Israeli military during the 1967 Six-Day War. Avi Arad, the CEO of Marvel Entertainment, also grew up in modern-day Israel and served in the Israeli army during the Six-Day War.

Along with his wife, Laura, Perlmutter oversees a foundation that contributes to several pro-Israel causes such as the Anti-Defamation League, Friends of the Israel Defense Forces, the America-Israel Friendship League, the Jewish Federation of Palm Beach County in Florida, and the Jewish Agency for Israel. The Laura and Isaac Perlmutter Foundation has also supported the Hebrew University and Israel’s Technion Institute of Technology.

The Perlmutters are also heavily linked to the Trump family. In 2016, their organization donated $25,000 to the Eric Trump Foundation. According to Open Secrets, a campaign finance tracker, in 2016, Laura Perlmutter donated $5,400 to former President Donald Trump’s campaign and nearly $450,000 to the Trump Victory Committee, a joint fundraising initiative by the Trump campaign and the Republican National Committee. The couple then gave more than $1 million to the Trump Victory Committee in 2019 and 2020 and contributed another $11,200 to Trump’s reelection campaign in 2019.

President Trump shakes hand with Isaac “Ike” Perlmutter, an Israeli-American billionaire and the CEO of Marvel on April 27, 2017. Andrew Harnik | AP

Isaac Perlmutter donated $5 million in 2016 to the Great America PAC, a super political action committee (PAC) supporting Trump. The couple also contributed $10.5 million in 2020 to American First Action, a PAC supporting Trump. In addition, Both Perlmutters have backed several state and federal Republican entities and candidates over the years. The hefty donations did not go unnoticed, earning Isaac a spot in shaping policies at the Department of Veteran Affairs during Trump’s time in office, according to an investigation by ProPublica.

Early Marvel Comics’ investors Carl Icahn and Ronald Perelman are also tied to both Israel and Trump. Icahn donated $5,400 to Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign and was subsequently named Trump’s special adviser

Both Perelman and Icahn were revealed as potential donors to former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s campaign ahead of the 2007 primary elections. Perelman’s foundation has also contributed to several pro-Israel organizations, including the Chabad Lubavitch’s social services agency, Machne Israel, and the Jewish National Fund, which is a leading organization in establishing illegal Israeli settlements and displacing Palestinians.

Perelman also donated $125,000 to Trump’s Victory Committee in 2017 and is reportedly friends with Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner. He was also listed in convicted sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein’s address book.

Film producer Amy Pascal, who plays a key role in coordinating the collaboration between Sony Pictures and Marvel Studios, a subsidiary of Marvel Entertainment, is a known Israel lobbyist. Leaked Sony emails reveal Pascal received email updates on the security situation in Israel from the now-defunct, right-wing advocacy group, The Israel Project.

She also received emails from Creative Community for Peace, an organization fighting the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement in the entertainment industry. In 2014, Pascal and her husband also received an email invitation to attend a private event about the situation in Israel with the Israeli Consul General of Los Angeles, David Siegel, and president and CEO of the Jewish Federation of Greater Los Angeles, Jay Sanderson.

Israeli propaganda has become deeply entrenched in Hollywood, in part because of many prominent entertainment oligarchs’ pro-Israel beliefs, as well as the global success of Israeli television series like “Shtisel” and “Fauda”. The latter television show glamorized the Israeli army, specifically the Mista’arvim unit, an undercover military wing designed to infiltrate Palestinian communities.

Israel’ only contribution to “entertainment” is to export shows and figures that commit war crimes – because that’s what they do best. War crimes are not entertaining. #FreePalestine https://t.co/Da1537aQ9b

— Diana Buttu (@dianabuttu) September 13, 2022

Israeli actress Gal Gadot’s casting as Wonder Woman also helped normalize Israel on the world stage, especially given her pride in serving in the Israeli military. Now Haas, who is set to play Sabra, is poised to be another example of Hollywood normalizing the apartheid state. Haas has been involved with pro-Israel organization, StandWithUs, participating in a StandWithUs Facebook live to talk about her success. StandWithUs presents itself as an educational resource on Israel, but the organization is responsible for silencing the Palestinian narrative in schools and blacklisting pro-Palestine voices on campuses. Haas also served in the Israeli military’s theater.

The Mossad works with the U.S. entertainment industry to promote an attractive image of Israel abroad. SPYLEGENDS – an agency made up of former Mossad spies and other ex-security officials – was established in 2021 to advise Hollywood on spy films. The Mossad has also openly welcomed the slew of thrillers showcasing the intelligence agency as sleek and prestigious in an effort to boost recruitment.

MARVEL’S LINKS TO US MILITARISM AND INTELLIGENCE

Marvel’s nationalist sentiment does not end with Israel. Cloaked in mesmerizing cinematography and flashy special effects, the American company has also been instrumental in promoting U.S. militarism with its comic book universe.

In “Captain America: The First Avenger”, the U.S. army allowed Marvel Studios to film at Camp Edward, a military training site. The 2003 “Hulk” film also benefited from access to military bases and loaned military equipment. “Iron Man” and its sequel created iconic scenes by borrowing the military’s weaponry as well. These Marvel movies — along with “Captain America: Winter Soldier” and “Captain Marvel” — received funding from the U.S. Department of Defense to help build their blockbuster enterprise.

The military’s support, however, came with a price. The Pentagon approved the scripts for “Hulk” and “Iron Man”, cutting out unfavorable references to the military, such as their experimentation on humans and dropping herbicides on South East Asia during the Vietnam War.

With the “Captain America” franchise, the army supported the Marvel movie, seeing it as “building resiliency” and considering the Captain America character to hold values of a modern U.S. soldier. “Captain Marvel” was the Air Force public relations department’s dream. The film’s release coincided with an Air Force recruitment campaign, using feminism as a way to sugar coat “Captain Marvel’s” obvious militarism. The recruitment effort clearly worked with the Air Force seeing the highest number of female applicants to the Air Force Academy in five years.

With Marvel’s U.S. military propaganda in full swing, it seems the studio is now turning its focus to Israeli nationalism. Whether Sabra will don an Israeli-flag-inspired suit remains to be seen, but what is apparent is Marvel’s close relationship with Israel and the U.S. military is manufacturing a fantasy world dripping in real-world imperialism.

Egypt demands ‘Israel’ to verify credibility of 1967 war reports

10 Jul 2022

Source: Agencies

By Al Mayadeen English 

Media outlets are circulating news about Egyptian graves west of Al-Quds, which date back to the 1967 war, and Egypt wants to know more.

Egypt demands ‘Israel’ to verify credibility of 1967 war reports

The Egyptian Foreign Ministry assigned the Egyptian Embassy in “Tel Aviv” to investigate the truth about the mass grave of Egyptian soldiers unraveled recently west of occupied Al-Quds.

The Egyptian Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced that the Egyptian Embassy in “Tel Aviv” has been assigned to communicate with the Israeli occupation authorities to investigate the truth behind what is being circulated in the media regarding the discovery of a mass grave that holds the bodies of Egyptian soldiers killed in the October 1967 war and to keep the Ministry updated. 

The Ministry also demanded a prompt investigation to verify the credibility of what is being circulated. 

A statement issued by the Egyptian Foreign Ministry read that in response to a question about reports that came up in Israeli media in relation to historical facts that occurred in the 1967 war, the spokesperson for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ambassador Ahmed Hafez, stated that the Egyptian Embassy in “Tel Aviv” was assigned to communicate with the Israeli occupation authorities to investigate the truth.

With their own bloodied hands, Israelis, again, try to hide a war crime.#Egypt #Palestine pic.twitter.com/jSEA6UuWWQ

— Al Mayadeen English (@MayadeenEnglish) July 9, 2022

In the past two days, the Israeli journalist Yossi Melman, an expert in security affairs, and who writes for the Israeli newspapers Yedioth Ahronoth and Haaretz, revealed that “Egyptian soldiers who were burned alive in the 1967 war were buried in mass graves that do not bear any signs, in a clear violation of the laws of war and with no mention of their killing,” with estimates pointing that the number could amount to tens of killed soldiers. 

Haaretz reported that there is a mass grave containing the bodies of 80 Egyptian soldiers, 20 of who were burnt alive, and whose killing was not announced during the 1967 war.

3/7 Fire Exchanges took place with IDF troops and members of Kibbutz Nahshon. Some Egyptian troops fled, some taken prisoners, and some bravely fought. At a certain point IDF fired mortar shells and thousands of uncultivated dunams of wild bush in the dry summer were set on fire>

— Yossi Melman (@yossi_melman) July 7, 2022

According to Melman, 25 Egyptian soldiers were burned alive after Israeli forces shelled them using phosphorous bombs, while other Egyptian soldiers were killed in the crossfire, bringing the total number of deaths to 80.

The 1967 war broke out between the Israeli occupation, on the one hand, and Iraq, Egypt, Syria, and Jordan, on the other, on June 5, 1967. This war lasted for six days and ended with “Israel” occupying Sinai, the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, and the Golan.

Algeria: 60 years of endless support for the Palestinian cause

July 5, 2022

Source: Al Mayadeen Net + Agencies

By Ahmad Karakira 

Algeria has always demonstrated unconditional support for the country of Palestine and the Palestinian cause, which dates back to fighting “Israel” and helping Egypt claim back Sinai in the 1973 October War.

Algeria’s unconditional support for the Palestinian cause

On July 5, 1962, after 132 years of French colonialism, Algeria declared its independence. The Evian agreements of March 18, 1962, ended the war between France and the Algerian National Liberation Army (ALN), and a referendum of self-determination took place on the first of July, 1962.

The results of the referendum came in favor of transferring power from the French to the Algerian authorities on July 3, ending decades of occupation, settler colonialism, and massacres.

The date – July 5 – was deliberately chosen by the Algerian government in reference to July 5, 1830, when the city of Algiers was occupied by France.

The seven-year war between the French occupier and the Algerian resistance left around one million Algerian martyrs on the path of Algeria’s freedom and liberation.

Endless stories about heroic epic battles by the Algerian resistance against Western colonialism can be recounted on the 60th anniversary of Algeria’s independence.

However, this piece aims to shed light on Algeria’s endless support for Palestine, the Palestinian cause, and fellow Arab states against all forms of oppression and occupation since the north African country gained its liberation through resistance.

“We are with Palestinians, be they the oppressed or the oppressors”

To begin with, Palestinians supported the Algerian Revolution from 1954-1962 and showed solidarity through organizing fundraisers for Algeria.

Despite some Arab states shamefully signing normalization agreements with the Israeli occupation in exchange for some benefits, Algeria has strongly opposed such deals, considering normalization with the occupation as a betrayal to the Arabs and the Palestinian cause.

In the early 1970s, former Algerian President Houari Boumediene said his famous phrase, “We are with Palestinians, be they the oppressed or the oppressors.”

It is noteworthy that similar to the official Algerian stance on Palestine, Algerians, according to the Center for Middle Eastern Studies, oppose normalizing ties with the Israeli occupation with a 99% rate.

One would wonder about the secret behind Algeria’s unconditional support for the Palestinian cause.

Historically, Algeria has always been advocating the Palestinian cause and supporting fellow Arab states against the Israeli occupation.

In fact, after only five years of gaining its liberation from the French occupation, Algeria supported the Arab allies against “Israel” by sending troops and aircrafts to fight alongside the Arab states in the 1967 Six-Day War.

The Algerian army also played an important role during the 1973 October war.

Significantly, when Egypt signed the Camp David Agreement and established ties with the Israeli occupation, Algeria severed its ties with Egypt.

In addition, Algeria established close relations with the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), providing it with weapons, training its fighters during the 70s, and helping the PLO obtain observer status in the UN in 1974.

After the former US President Donald Trump’s administration, the UAE, and “Israel” revealed the so-called “Abraham Accords” in August, current Algerian President Abdelmadjid Tebboune stressed his country’s deep commitment to the Palestinian cause, affirming that Algeria deems Palestine as a sacred cause.

Algiers also harshly criticized the normalizing states (the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan). It also paid the price for its anti-normalization stance, as the US acknowledged the Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara after years of unresolved disputes and unachievable status.

In trying to understand the reason behind Algeria’s official and popular support for the Palestinian cause, Sami Hamdi, the Editor-in-Chief of the International Interest magazine, explained that “Algerians feel a deep resonance with the Palestinians who have been colonized for some 82 years and believe that whatever the difficulties, resistance will eventually succeed.”

In the same context, TRT had quoted Jalel Harchaoui, a Senior Fellow at the Geneva-based Global Initiative Against Transnational Organized Crime, as saying that Algeria’s “somewhat exceptional history makes resistance against colonial powers writ large a narrative crucially central to the Algerian state as we know it.”

Algeria’s participation in the 1973 October War

Aiming to restore the lands that “Israel” occupied during the 1967 Six-Day War – Sinai in Egypt and the Golan Heights in Syria – on October 6, 1973, Cairo and Damascus launched an attack on the Zionist entity. The war coincided with the holy month of Ramadan.

During that time, Algeria played a significant role in providing Egypt and Syria with Soviet weapons and bringing in troops to the Egyptian front to fight the Israeli occupation, despite its then-instable economic situation as a result of the pre-independence era of French colonialism.

In fact, then-Algerian President Houari Boumedienne reportedly flew to Moscow to secure military aid for the Egyptians and the Syrians.

In a reiteration of its role in supporting anti-colonialist movements, Algeria sent more than 2,100 troops, 815 non-commissioned officers, and 192 officers to Sinai. It also sent 96 tanks and over 50 fighters and bomber aircraft to Egypt, according to the Egyptian authorities.

Algiers also participated in the oil embargo imposed by the Arab members of the Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) on the US over its support of the Israeli occupation during the war, which led to significant price hikes around the world.

On October 17, Arab oil producers decided to increase the price of oil by 17% and cut oil production by 5%, vowing to “maintain the same rate of reduction each month thereafter until the Israeli forces are fully withdrawn from all Arab territories occupied during the June 1967 War, and the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people are restored.”

Sharon underestimated the power of Algerian forces

In the context of the 1973 October War, the former Chief of Staff of the Israeli occupation forces, David Eliezer, acknowledged in his released diaries that “Israel” lost this war as a result of the arrogance of then-Major General Ariel Sharon, who underestimated the power of the Algerian forces and thought that they wouldn’t stand a chance against the IOF forces, thinking that they would flee as soon as they set their eyes on Israeli tanks.

Eliezer said that 900 IOF soldiers were killed and 172 tanks were destroyed in just one day during the war.

On his part, the former Israeli Security Minister Moshe Dayan revealed that all the intelligence information showed that Algerians did not have weapons capable of intercepting the Israeli forces.

Dayan also said the Israelis received intelligence about a state of division between the Egyptians and the Algerians. The Israelis were surprised by the Algerian forces downing a giant US Lockheed C-5 Galaxy aircraft by a missile, which frightened the US Staff and frustrated the Nixon administration.

The former Israeli minister said the Egyptian forces deceived the Israeli forces, making them believe that the strategic Al-Adabiya port was not fortified enough. However, the Algerian forces were in charge of protecting the port.

One cannot but hail the role of Algeria in supporting the Palestinian cause and anti-colonial liberation movements, whether on the official or popular level. Despite the geographical distances separating Palestine from Algeria, Algerians believe that the two countries share the same pain, torture, grief, sorrow, and hopefully the same liberation to be achieved in the near future.

Related Stories

• Algeria: Dotting the I’s in France’s colonial history
• Independent Algeria soon to be 60, colonial wounds still bleeding
• De Gaulle kept perpetrators of massacres against Algerians in charge