التذاكي التركي والكلفة الباهظة

البناء
سبتمبر 19, 2021 

قدمت القيادة التركية خلال السنوات الست التي أعقبت التموضع الروسي في سورية نموذجاً عن أسلوب التذاكي والمماطلة والخداع الذي تعتمده في التعامل مع المتغيرات، التي فرضت حضورها بإسقاط المشروع الأصلي الذي شكلت تركيا بقيادة رجب أردوغان ركيزته الرئيسية بهدف إسقاط سورية، ضمن إطار تخديم تركيا للمشروع الأميركي في المنطقة لقاء عائدات اعتماد تنظيم الإخوان المسلمين كوكيل للمصالح الأميركية في المنطقة.

عندما اصطدمت تركيا بالتموضع الروسي كان في حسابها جر الغرب لمعركة مع روسيا، وعندما خذلها الغرب لجأت إلى التذاكي للتملص من دفع فواتير دورها المحوري في خطة الحرب على سورية، وصارت تشتغل مياومة وشراء الوقت وتقديم التنازل تفادياً للمواجهة لحفظ ما تبقى، لكنها لم تنخرط إطلاقاً بخيار صناعة السلم والحل السياسي، بل تصرفت باعتبار كل عناوين آستانة مجرد إطار لشراء الوقت ريثما تأتي ظروف تتيح تحقيق مكاسب لمشروع أردوغان الذي تطلع دائماً لامتلاك أوراق تأثير وعبث في المعادلة السورية تحت عناوين مختلفة.

حاولت القيادة التركية تحويل مجالات التعاون خارج سورية مع روسيا وإيران إلى مصادر توسيع لهامش مناورتها في شراء الوقت، وحققت بعض النجاحات، لكنها كانت دائماً تكشف منهج التذاكي الذي ما كان يتأخر ليعبر عن ذاته ويكتشف الروس والإيرانيون، خصوصا ًعندما تلوح في الأفق بوادر عودة غربية للتصعيد، فيترسمل بها الأتراك للتكشير عن أنيابهم.

تحملت سورية الكثير بانتظار أن تبقي خطواتها  محسوبة ومدروسة بصورة لا تفكك الحلف الذي صنع النصر، فتفهمت الاعتبارات التي تحكمت بمواقف حليفيها الروسي والإيراني، والروسي على وجه الخصوص، سواء أثناء الحركة التركية نحو ليبيا التي بدت مصلحة روسية بتعطيل أنبوب الغاز الإسرائيلي- المصري نحو أوروبا برعاية أميركية كمنافس لخط الأنابيب الروسي- التركي، أو خلال حرب أرمينيا وأذربيجان حيث شكل التدخل التركي عنصر توازن برر لموسكو الدخول كوسيط مقبول لوقف النار.

خلال الشهور الأخيرة ومع الانسحاب الأميركي من أفغانستان والاستعداد الروسي مع الحلفاء لبدء مرحلة جديدة لملء الفراغ الناجم عن التراجع الأميركي والدفع بالأميركي لمزيد من التراجع ظهرت تركيا صاحبة مشروع خاص، فقدمت استعدادها لتخديم حلف الناتو في أفغانستان وأذربيجان، بصورة موجهة مباشرة ضد روسيا، والبلدان يقعان على الحدود الروسية، بينما ذهبت تركيا في ليبيا لتحويل عائدات وجودها لفرض مشروع شراكة خاص يعطل فرص روسيا كشريك دولي في صناعة الحل السياسي.

تبلورت في موسكو معادلة حاسمة بوجه الدور التركي، تمهد لخطوات تعيد تذكير أردوغان بلحظات ما بعد إسقاط الطائرة الروسية التي جلبته إلى آستانة، وتبدو سورية مقبلة على تطورات انتظرتها طويلاً في منطقة إدلب بوحي هذه المتغيرات.

التذاكي وشراء الوقت يصلان إلى المسافة صفر من لحظة الحقيقة.

 سفينة نوح اللبنانية

سفينة نوح اللبنانية

ناصر قنديل

يطلق عادة تشبيه سفينة نوح على إحدى حالتين، الأولى هي تعدد المكونات التي تحملها سواء كان التعدد إشارة للكثرة أو للتناقص، والثاني هو الطابع الإنقاذي الذي مثلته سفينة نوح بتجنيب ركابها خطر الغرق في الطوفان، وسفينة المحروقات التي جلبتها المقاومة من إيران وعبرت ناقلاتها حمولة المحروقات عبر الحدود السورية إلى لبنان، تشبه سفينة نوح في المسار الذي تمثله لجهة تعدد المجالات التي أطلقت فيها مسارات جديدة لم تكتمل عناوينها بعد، أو لجهة موقعها الإنقاذي بتجنيب لبنان خطر الغرق في طوفان كان يهدّد كل شيء بالغرق.

جاءت سفينة المقاومة كطليعة لأخواتها لتفتح الباب لجملة تطورات في العديد من الملفات، ففي الملف السياسي كانت السفينة رسماً لمعادلة جديدة عنوانها نقل مفاعيل معادلة الردع التي أرستها المقاومة في البر إلى البحار، في لحظة تراجع وارتباك أميركية بعد الانسحاب من أفغانستان بما حمله من تعبير عن الاعتراف الأميركي بفشل اللجوء إلى فائض القوة العسكري لصناعة السياسة، وسعي الإدارة الأميركية لتفادي الانخراط في مواجهات تعرض قواتها وسياساتها للخطر من دون أن تكون هذه المواجهات دفاعاً صريحاً عن الأمن الأميركي بوجه تهديد غير قابل للتأويل، وفي لحظة نزف مستمر لكيان الاحتلال تحت وطأة معادلات المواجهة في فلسطين والقلق من تسييل قوة المقاومة من لبنان نحو فلسطين تحت شعار القدس تعادل حرباً إقليمية، بحيث صارت السفينة تحدياً لقرار بحجم التورط الأميركي «الإسرائيلي» بحرب، أو تقبل تمدّد معادلة الردع نحو البحار كمسار قابل للتوسع، ليست عملية التنقيب عن النفط والغاز واستخراجه إلا أولى الخطوات المرشحة لتشكيل حلقة من حلقاته، أو البحث عن بديل ثالث، بدأت طلائعه برفع الحظر الأميركي عن استعادة العلاقة مع سورية نقيضاً لما بشر به قانون قيصر، من بوابة أولى ستتسع كلما كانت المعادلة حاضرة، وهي ستحضر، والبوابة كانت بالتراجع عن منع رسمي لاستجرار الكهرباء الأردنية والغاز المصري عبر سورية، والخطوة الأهم في البديل التراجعي أمام مسار السفينة كانت بالتدخل الأميركي المباشر للضغط لولادة عاجلة للحكومة ومسابقتها لوصول السفينة، وفتح الباب لتجديد تمويل دعم استيراد المحروقات من قبل مصرف لبنان، وكل الذي يجري يعني القول بالتسليم بالفائض السياسي لمعادلة الردع على البر مقابل تجميد مفاعيلها في البحر، والتجاذب مستمر بين المسارين.

جاءت السفينة لتصيب كبد النظام الريعي الذي جمع فيه قطاع المحروقات ما كان يمثله أصلاً في بنية النظام الاقتصادي في الحرب الأهلية وبعدها، مع ما ورثه من موقع ومكانة القطاع المصرفي الشريك الكامل في اقتصاد المحروقات الذي تحول إلى ميدان حصري للعمل المصرفي مع توقف نظام الاستثمار في الدين وسندات الخزينة، وقد تحول اقتصاد المحروقات منذ بدء الأزمة إلى نقطة تقاطع الاحتكار وتجار الأزمات ومهربي الأموال إلى الخارج، فهذا الاقتصاد استحوذ بفضل الدعم المشبوه على أكثر من عشرة مليارات دولار من أموال المودعين، شكلت الأرباح منها أكثر من سبعة مليارات منها ما حول للخارج خلسة ومنها ما تحقق عبر التهريب والسوق السوداء، وتشاركت فيه قوى سياسية وتجار كبار ومصارف، وجاءت السفينة لتصيب هذا الاقتصاد في الكبد، فهي تبشر بدخول لاعب كبير، بقياس حجم الكميات التي ستدخل الأسواق، ونظيف وشريف، بقياس عدم سعيه لتحقيق الربح، ووطني، بقياس التزامه بعدم التمييز بين اللبنانيين على أساس المناطق والطوائف في التعامل مع هذا الملف خصوصاً، وبذلك تعيد السفينة تشكيل المشهد الاقتصادي بصيرورة مفتوحة على إعادة تشكيل للأحجام والأدوار والأنماط، وتتيح عبر مركزية قطاع الطاقة وضع الأسس لمفهومين جديدين، التوجه شرقاً، ورفع مكانة القطاعات الإنتاجية.

جاءت السفينة لتربك التنظيم الاجتماعي القائم على زيادة الأغنياء غنى والفقراء فقراً، لتضع أولوية جديدة في المفهوم الاجتماعي عنوانها أولوية مكانة الفقراء، سواء بحجم مكانتهم في الأولويات أو بحجم النتائج التي ستترتب على جداول نفقاتهم، وسيكون مفاجئاً التعرف إلى ما بدأت ملامحه في مناطق ما كانت لتنفتح يومياً على المقاومة، وأقيمت بينهما جدران عالية، حطمتها السفينة، ولأن الخطر الأكبر الذي أطاح بكل مفاعيل مسعى تغييري شعبي كان الانقسام الطائفي القابل للتحول بسرعة إلى عصبيات قاتلة، فان أهم ما بدأت ملامحه بالظهور مع السفينة هو هذا الانفتاح للمناطق على بعضها من خارج جدران الطوائف والعصبيات، حتى بدأت القوى الطائفية تتحسس الخطر.

سفينة نوح اللبنانية جمعت عناوين مصيرية كبرى في السياسة والاقتصاد والمجتمع، وشكلت نقطة انطلاق لمسار إنقاذي من الطوفان الذي كانت بوادره تقترب.

فيديوات متعلقة

مقالات متعلقة

MBZ is performing a U-turn that could reshape the Middle East

Profile picture for user David Hearst

15 September 2021 10:57 UTC

David Hearst

David Hearst is co-founder and editor-in-chief of Middle East Eye. He says Middle East Eye is funded by “individual private donors” but he won’t name them. He said that his organisation is not funded by Qatar – or any other state or group – and is here to stay. He appears as a commentator on the Middle East for Al Jazeera English and Alaraby TV, TRT, Masr Al-Aan TV.

For years, Emirati foreign policy has been a disaster. Now, on the anniversary of the fundamentally flawed Abraham Accords, a rethink is underway

Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed is pictured in Berlin in June 2019 (Reuters)

The fall of Afghanistan to the Taliban has triggered an earthquake that has travelled across the Gulf. The tectonic plates that defined who did what to whom in the region are shifting. 

Alliances that only a year ago seemed to be set in concrete are cracking. The vacuum created by the US withdrawal from Afghanistan has been felt just as keenly in Riyadh, Abu Dhabi and Tel Aviv as it has in Kabul.

The clearest sign of swaying buildings and buckling tarmac are the pledges and significant amounts of money being promised by the de facto leader of the UAE to Turkey, states that are vigorous competitors for regional influence.

It is pragmatism, not a fundamental change of heart, that is causing the latest handbrake turn in Abu Dhabi’s foreign policy

And Turkey has not been the only sign of the apparent U-turn in UAE policy. Shortly after his recent meeting with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Tahnoun bin Zayed, UAE Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed’s brother and security chief, flew to mend fences with Qatar.

Only a year ago, the UAE was urging Saudi Arabia not to lift the blockade of Qatar. This latest visit is a recognition that the blockade was a spectacular failure. Qatar has emerged as US President Joe Biden’s strongest partner in the Gulf, and the one on whom he depended for evacuating Afghans and communicating with the Taliban.

How different from the start of the blockade, when Qatar was painted as a refuge for terrorists and Islamists, and former US President Donald Trump tweeted his approval of the Saudi action. 

Billions promised

Erdogan is keeping the transcript of his recent telephone conversation with MBZ close to his chest. Only a trusted few know what the crown prince promised. According to my sources, MBZ offered Erdogan more than $10bn in investments.

Unlike the military side of the government of Sudan, or indeed President Kais Saied in Tunisia, Erdogan is not being made to wait long for the money to arrive. The Dubai-based courier Aramex is reportedly in talks to buy the Turkish delivery company MNG Kargo.

There is much secrecy in Ankara, but one thing is clear: the momentum for this reset is coming from Abu Dhabi. Erdogan is wary, and the foreign policy establishment in Turkey is sceptical. Both have good reason for caution.

UAE National Security Adviser Sheikh Tahnoun bin Zayed and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan meet in Ankara on 18 August 2021 (Turkish Presidency)
UAE National Security Adviser Sheikh Tahnoun bin Zayed and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan meet in Ankara on 18 August 2021 (Turkish Presidency)

This was the state that, according to Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu, spent $3bn attempting (and very nearly succeeding) to topple Erdogan on 15 July 2016. Cavusoglu did not name the UAE, but it was clear who he was referencing when he mentioned “a Muslim country”.

The same state funds neoconservative Washington think tanks that regularly debunk Erdogan and his ability to sustain the lira. It competes for influence with Turkey in Syria, Yemen, Libya, the Horn of Africa, Egypt and Tunisia. It was the brains behind, and one of the funders of, the counter-revolution that toppled former Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi – and it has tried repeatedly to rearrange the furniture in Tunisia, Sudan and Yemen. Emirati planes at one point provided air cover for renegade general Khalifa Haftar’s ill-fated attempt to recapture Tripoli.The UAE’s military interventions have led to disaster – not stabilityRead More »

It has also created armies of “electronic flies” to condition public opinion through social media. The UAE’s interventions far beyond the Gulf have wreaked havoc throughout the Middle East. 

Turkey has long been on the receiving end of this. So why would a leopard on a mission to hunt down political Islam and render it extinct, change its spots? It is not a question that can be convincingly answered.

Nor is this the first attempt at a kiss and make up: the UAE made a similar overture to Ankara when it thought Hillary Clinton would become US president. When Trump won, this was instantly dropped. It is pragmatism, not a fundamental change of heart, that is causing the latest handbrake turn in Abu Dhabi’s foreign policy. The sceptics in Ankara are right to be cautious. 

Nevertheless, it could still be happening. The flood of signals coming out of Abu Dhabi towards Erdogan and Turkey mostly take place in private forums, and the message is consistent, even if you don’t believe it.

‘Strategic reassessment’

According to people with knowledge of these conversations, top UAE officials claim to be conducting a “strategic reassessment” of foreign policy.

It starts with Biden. The UAE noted two features of its changed relationship with Washington since his administration came to power: the first was a consistent message from the new US administration to “de-escalate” tensions in the Middle East. The second was the unpredictability of US foreign policy. 

The new policy, then, is apparently to spread influence through economic cooperation, rather than military intervention and political competition

This was surely already apparent under Trump, when he refused to bomb Tehran after Iran and its Iraqi proxies sent armed drones to cripple two Saudi oil facilities, temporarily halving crude production. If ever Saudi Arabia and the UAE felt unprotected by the US military umbrella, it was then.

Coupled with this, they claim, is a hard-headed assessment of what the UAE has actually achieved. Its interventions have indeed beaten the Muslim Brotherhood back as a political force in EgyptTunisiaYemenSyria, and partly in Libya. But the cost of the UAE’s secular jihad is enormous.

Three of these countries are in smoking ruins, and the other two, Egypt and Tunisia, are nearly bankrupt. What has MBZ gained for the billions of dollars he has invested in Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi?

The new policy, then, is apparently to spread influence through economic cooperation, rather than military intervention and political competition.

Saudi-UAE rift

They don’t say it, but when questioned, there is clearly also coolness with Riyadh. One emissary claimed that the UAE delayed its pullout from Yemen for a year to allow Saudi Arabia to end the war with the Houthis, but it is clear that Yemen is a sore point between the two military allies.

Saudi Arabia recently announced a series of moves to weaken Abu Dhabi, the latest being the pullout of Al Arabiya and parent media company MBC from Dubai. It has clamped down on tax-free goods from an Emirati free trade zone, as well as insisting that foreign multinationals base their headquarters in Riyadh rather than Dubai. There is a lot more sibling rivalry to the brotherly relations between the two Gulf countries these days.

MBZ meets Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman in Jeddah in 2018 (Bandar al-Jaloud/Saudi Royal Palace/AFP)
MBZ meets Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman in Jeddah in 2018 (Bandar al-Jaloud/Saudi Royal Palace/AFP)

Publicly, the UAE’s licensed political analysts are hinting at a different set of regional priorities. Political scientist Abdulkhaleq Abudulla tweeted that the main message from Washington was that the US would not defend the Gulf. “And the Arab Gulf states are at a crossroads; how should they adapt to the post-America Gulf stage?”

Spot the notable absences from this list: Saudi Arabia and Egypt, its closest allies in 2013.

Abraham Accords lose value

Abu Dhabi is not the only signatory of the Abraham Accords which is reassessing the value of a pro-US bloc in the Gulf. One year on from the signing in Washington, the Abraham Accords are losing their shine. A year ago, they seemed to have so much going for them. It was a marriage of brains and brawn, the military might and technological superiority of Israel with the dollars of the Gulf.UAE-Israel deal: Abraham accord or Israeli colonialism?Read More »

It was a way of bypassing the Palestinian conflict, without the need for messy, time-wasting things like negotiations, elections or popular mandates. The accords were a solution imposed from above – a fait accompli, which the Arab masses would have to live with.

But like the megacities of Saudi Arabia, the accords were built on shifting sands. 

They had two fundamental flaws. Firstly, they depended on individual leaders – not states – meeting at first in secret as their drivers. This means that when two key players were removed from the picture – Trump and former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu – the project itself lost sponsorship and momentum. 

The other problem was that they were all about the relationship between regional states and the US. They did not address the fundamental problems of relations between the key regional actors themselves. 

The UAE’s motive for moving closer to Israel was to cement its relationship with Washington. Recognition of Israel was always a means to an end, not the end in itself. 

Bahraini Foreign Minister Abdullatif al-Zayani, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, US President Donald Trump and UAE Foreign Minister Abdullah bin Zayed sign the Abraham Accords in 2020 (AFP)
Bahraini Foreign Minister Abdullatif al-Zayani, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, US President Donald Trump and UAE Foreign Minister Abdullah bin Zayed sign the Abraham Accords in 2020 (AFP)

For Israel, on the other hand, the Abraham Accords were all about cementing its own security by increasing its regional influence. It fundamentally misread Arab intentions by conceiving of normalisation as a military and diplomatic safety net for its own continued existence.

Zvi Barel, writing in Haaretz, observed: “The kaleidoscopic shifting of international relations will require Israel to examine its place in the newly-forming alignment. The idea that there’s a pro-U.S. bloc that provides Israel with a military and diplomatic safety net and acts alongside it as an informal coalition against Iran, is beginning to fall apart.”

Regional realignment

The US not only supplied the carrots and sticks necessary to coerce states such as Sudan to join the accords, by removing it from its list of terrorist states. It was the very reason for the accords themselves.

The Emiratis, being quick off the mark, have seen the future shape of the post-oil world. Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) has yet to reconcile himself to the US military absence. Maybe he will now that Biden has just withdrawn his Patriot missiles from the kingdom and lifted the bar imposed by two of his predecessors to confidential documents on allegations of Saudi government links to two of the 9/11 hijackers

It has taken eight long years for the penny to drop. But if indeed it has, this realisation presents a genuine opportunity to reshape a post-American Middle East

Unlike MBZ, MBS harbours personal grudges. He cannot forgive Erdogan for the role he played in keeping the murder of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi on the agenda in Washington. In so doing, Erdogan permanently damaged MBS’s international reputation, making a repeat trip to London and the US impossible for the future Saudi king.

MBS’s psychology – for all its modernist patina of posing as a reformer – is still rooted in his Bedouin past. Being the future king, he considers and treats his people as his property. He is their lord and master. Deals with other states are made by him alone. He decides whether his kingdom will recognise Israel or whether, as is now the case, he could turn to Israel to provide him with missile defence systems.

Although all of these moves are brittle and by nature reversible, given that they are triggered by events outside the region and not within it, there could be light at the end of this dark, dark tunnel of permanent intervention. If regional actors themselves can establish a working relationship with each other – and no more than that is required – stability will not depend on a small group of despots. How will US disengagement shape the Middle East?Read More »

Relations between regional powers are more likely to represent state interests, rather than the personal ones of their leaders. That in itself would be progress, if indeed any of this comes to fruition. 

MBZ’s decision to reassess his foreign policy has to be genuine and not a temporary swerve. He is right to reassess his foreign policy. It has been a disaster, a complete waste of his money. It has weakened once strong states, such as Egypt, and caused massive refugee flows. 

It has taken eight long years for the penny to drop. But if indeed it has, this realisation presents a genuine opportunity to reshape a post-American Middle East.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.David HearstDavid Hearst is co-founder and editor-in-chief of Middle East Eye. He is a commentator and speaker on the region and analyst on Saudi Arabia. He was The Guardian’s foreign leader writer, and was correspondent in Russia, Europe, and Belfast. He joined the Guardian from The Scotsman, where he was education correspondent.

Imposing Human Rights conditions on Afghan Government.

September 15, 2021

Imposing Human Rights conditions on Afghan Government.

By Zamir Awan for the Saker Blog

The US is exerting pressure on the Afghan Government for respecting human rights. Also, the US is lobbying with its allies to exert pressure on Afghanistan and should not recognize their legitimacy unless they meet few demands, among which is Human rights at the top of the list.

What the US was doing in Afghanistan for twenty years? Was it in respect of Human rights? Bombing Marriage parties, funeral ceremonies, Mosques, Shrines, Schools, Hospitals, was respecting Human rights? Dropping Mother of all bombs, extensive use of force, weapons, and ammunition was it the respect of Human rights? Use of dirty tricks, and high-tech weapons and technologies, was in respect to Human rights? The US was maintaining several jails in Afghanistan, was it in respect of Human Rights? Keeping many detention centers, was it in respect of Human rights? Creation of so many torture cells, was it the rest of Human rights? So many investigation centers, was am to protect human rights? The US involved 46 countries to attack Afghanistan was it human rights exercise? Additional 11 countries also supported in war against Afghanistan, was it aimed to protect human rights? Keeping 150,000 troops in Afghanistan (peek time), was it respecting human rights? Killing innocent citizens, children, civilians, women, elder people, was part of the American Human Rights adventure? Use of drones and killing Taxi driver along with his two young children, was it also the respect of Human right? Excessive use of powers, draconian laws, and extrajudicial killings, was part of US policy of Human Rights? How many women were raped, insulted, humiliated, is this American rest to Human rights? Child abuse was a common phenomenon, is this the American way of resting human rights? Shame! Shame! Shame!

The US has no moral authority to talk about Human Rights and put extraordinary conditions on the Afghan Government and irrational excuses to coerce Afghans. The entire world knows, what happened in Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen, and in many other countries, the American role is very much obvious and known to everyone. The US is a partner in extreme violations of Human rights in Palestine and Kashmir. The US is extending extraordinary support to Israel and India, which are notorious for Human rights violations. Yet, if the US is talking about human rights, is beyond our imaginations. A country, who is committing the worst human rights violations, is talking about Human rights, is not matching its actions and words. Even, inside America, what so ever is happening with minorities, immigrants, and black people, is well-known to everyone.

American human rights violations and war crimes in Afghanistan must be trial and fix responsibilities on all individuals involved. Punish them according to respective law according to the degree of crime and level of involvement.

However, in Afghanistan, life is rapidly restoring toward normalcy. 20 years of American illegitimate occupation has ended and the Taliban are restoring peace, stability, and law & order situation, which is improving gradually. Now people feel safer and secure. Government offices are functioning properly. Women are working with full confidence as usual. Girls are getting an education in a routine matter. Taliban government has ensured the safety of all its citizens. People of Afghanistan are happy and have welcomed the Taliban.

Taliban are real representatives of Afghanistan and very much loyal and sincere with their country and enjoy public support and trust. Unlike President Noor Muhamad Turkey, President Hafizullah Amin, President Babrak Karmal, and President Dr. Najeeb, who were traitors and planted by the USSR, and were working on foreign agenda, the Taliban are keeping the Afghan interest at the top. Unlike President Hamid Karzai, and President Ashraf Ghani, who were CIA agents, and puppets, and installed by the US. Both of them were implementing and serving their masters. Taliban are Afghans and serving Afghans only.

If the US demands to include such traitors, it may not be possible, as it is illogical to bring traitors and foreign agents back. Taliban fought for twenty years for freedom and finally defeated the US. Taliban has sacrificed many precious lives, close relatives, suffered jails, tortures, and exiles, and now after victory, they have the right to form their own government. It is their legal and legitimate right, the world must accept this fact and realize it, the sooner the better.

Taliban are true Afghans, they understand their culture, traditions, and tribal society, and they will form a system of government, which suits Afghanistan. There is no need for any dictation from the outside world. Let Afghans lead their country and manage their affairs in the best possible manner, which suits them. Outside interference needs to reach an end. The status of human rights in Afghanistan under Taliban rule is much better than in the last twenty years of American occupation. People feel relaxed and thank the Taliban for providing them dignity, safety, respect, and protection. Under American occupation, no one was sure that if he or she leaves home, and come back safe. Any time anywhere anything can happen, as the US troops were wild and treating Afghans just like sheep and goats, mistreating them, insulting and humiliating them. Especially, the women can be raped, tortured, humiliated by troops. How many young Afghan girls were smuggled and trafficked to America and Europe to work in the sex industry? Can Americans justify it as human rights? Taliban has provided respect and protection to women. Majority of women are very happy with Taliban rule. Exceptions must be there, we may not deny exceptional cases, but vast majority of women are happy and satisfied.

Taliban were freedom fighters and won the long war of twenty years against a superpower and they are competent and equipped with all modern knowledge. They understand how to manage a country and how to run a country. Of course, they are facing huge challenges, but these challenges are created artificially by the US and its allies. Like freezing Afghan assets, using IMF, World Bank, International Financial Institutions, and donors, to coerce Afghans.

The US has planned something else, but what happens is the opposite. The US evacuated its troops from Afghanistan in a haphazard manner to create a vacuum, leading toward civil war. The US deployed around twenty thousand private defense contractors to create unrest and civil war in Afghanistan. The US shifted ISIS-K to Afghanistan, equipped them, funded them, and provided those training, to create unrest and civil war in Afghanistan. But on the ground Taliban has managed very well and avoided any civil war or unrest on the ground. The US is desperate, taking measures to destabilize the new government in Afghanistan.

The US is using various tricks to destabilize Afghanistan, it includes economic measures, human rights excuses, women’s rights, etc. to create unrest. The US is pursuing allies and other countries to exert pressure on Afghanistan to achieve its ill-designs. Pakistan is facing such pressure from the US. Unfortunate!

However, the Taliban performed very well on grounds, and the world has seen and witnessed that the Taliban are capable and honest, kind, gentle, competent. Taliban got international recognition already. The Qatar deputy foreign Minister has already paid an official visit. Many other countries are ready to establish good relations with the new Government as soon as they announce formally.

The Whole region suffered a lot due to the American invasion of Afghanistan for twenty years, and cannot afford any further unrest. All the regional countries with a stable, safe, and prosperous Afghanistan. If few countries like America, want to spoil it, may not succeed.

Author: Prof. Engr. Zamir Ahmed Awan, Sinologist (ex-Diplomat), Editor, Analyst, Non-Resident Fellow of CCG (Center for China and Globalization), National University of Sciences and Technology (NUST), Islamabad, Pakistan. (E-mail: awanzamir@yahoo.com).

عالم متحوّل… «إسرائيل» مجرد حاجز طيار وكيانات البترودولار ستختفي قريباً

 محمد صادق الحسيني

الخبر الآن هو سحب واشنطن لبطاريات پاتريوت من السعودية على رغم تزايد هجومات أنصار الله عليها.

‏ وأنّ الأميركيين يغادرون المنطقة نهائياً وإن بالتدريج على رغم خطورة التحولات.

ويقولون للعرب كما لليهود:

‏دبّروا حالكم بأنفسكم وكل واحد يقلع شوكه بأظافره…

البداية من أفغانستان والأمر سارٍ على سائر البلدان، وكذلك لبنان.

‏هذا هو لسان حال الدوائر الأميركية لمن يقرأ جيداً، الموازين في الميدان والتقارير في الكواليس.

والتي تقول :لن يطول الزمان الذي ستصبح فيه حتى القاعدة الأميركية المتقدمة المقامة على اليابسة الفلسطينية والتي اسمها «إسرائيل»، إلا وتكون على جدول الإغلاق مثلها مثل مئات القواعد الأميركية المنتشرة في العالم، وذلك في إطار تطبيق برنامج أو خطة أميركا أولاً..!

‏الكيان إلى زوال إذن ولو بعد لأي.

 وإمارات النفط والغاز والبنزين تختفي قريباً من خريطة الوطن العربي، بخاصة بعد تقرير اقتصادي للأمم المتحدة يتوقع إفلاسها في عام 2024.

وما سيسرع في ذلك انتهاء وظيفتها الكيانية التي استحدثت من أجلها.

باختصار مكثف: أميركا إذن تقرر تغيير عقيدتها العسكرية للمرة الأولى منذ الحرب العالمية الثانية. وتأخذ قرارها النهائي بسحب عديدها وعتادها من مراكز الانتشار العالمي لإعادة الحياة إلى دورة الاقتصاد الأميركي الداخلية الكاسدة.

والصين في المقابل تتقدّم بخطى حثيثة بناء على رؤية استراتيجية ثاقبة لوصل شرق الصين بشرق المتوسط بطريق سريع يمرّ عبر أفغانستان وإيران من دون وجود عسكري غربي.

في هذه الأثناء نشرت وكالة «أسوشيتد برس»: صوراً فضائية قبل أيام تظهر سحب واشنطن منظومات «باتريوت» من السعودية على رغم تواصل الهجمات من اليمن كما أشرنا.

من جهة أخرى فقد علم من مصادر أوروبية استخبارية رفيعة، بأن واشنطن أبلغت الدوحة قبل أيام عبر وزير خارجيتها بلينكن، بأنّ ملف أفغانستان سيتمّ نقله بالكامل إلى ألمانيا، وأنّ دور الدوحة سيتحول إلى دور لوجيستي محض.

واشنطن هذه كانت قد أبلغت تل أبيب عبر وزير خارجيتها بينيت وغيره بأنها لم تعد مهتمة في أي خطط قد تفكر بها تل أبيب ضد طهران أو سورية أو حتى لبنان، فهي لديها ما يكفيها من مشاكل داخلية ودولية، وتتجه بقوة نحو مضيق «مالاقا» وبحر الصين.

إن أسباب ما ذكر أعلاه يمكن وضعه في تقدير الموقف الذي يستنتجه كل من يطالع بدقة التقارير التي يتم تداولها في الكواليس والأروقة الخلفية على المستوى الدولي والتي تؤكد ما يلي:

1 ـ كان قرار القوى الخفية، التي قررت أن ترشح ترامب إلى الرئاسه يتلخص في استخدامه لإنهاء الوجود العسكري الأميركي في أفغانستان و»الشرق الأوسط» أولاً ومن مناطق أخرى في العالم لاحقاً بعد هزيمتها في كل الحروب التي شنتها منذ ما بعد الحرب العالمية الثانية.

2 ـ فشل ترامب في ذلك بسبب ضغوط مجموعات الضغط اليهوديه في أميركا، ومنعه من ذلك بحجة الخوف على أمن «اسرائيل».

3 ـ لكنه بقي مصراً على تنفيذ الانسحابات وهو يسألهم عما تريده «إسرائيل» لضمان أمنها ؟ فجاء الجواب: تطبيع مع الدول العربية/ اعتراف أميركا بيهودية الدولة/ نقل السفارة الأميركية إلى القدس/ الاعتراف بضم الجولان.

4 ـ تمّ ذلك ولكن القوى الخفية لم تتراجع عن قرار تصفية الوجود العسكري الأميركي تدريجياً في «الشرق الأوسط»/ غرب آسيا.

من هنا جاء تنفيذ قرار الانسحاب من أفغانستان على يد بايدن، الذي وصل إلى الحكم بموافقة نفس القوى الخفية التي جاءت بترامب.

5 ـ لا تراجع عن هذا القرار لأسباب استراتيجية تتعلق بالأمن القومي الأميركي على صعيد الصراع الدولي بين القوى العظمى.

6 ـ إذ إنّ الصراع لم يعد يقتصر على النواحي العسكرية وإنما اتخذ شكلاً اقتصادياً أكثر أهمية من الفترات السابقة.

فالصراع أصلاً اقتصادياً ينتج منه الصراع السياسي الذي يتحول، عند استحالة حسمه سياسياً إلى صراع عسكري…

هذا ما عرفه الجنرال الألماني كارل فون كلاوسيڤيتس بالقول «إنّ الحرب هي استمرار للسياسة بأدوات أخرى».

7 ـ إذن الصراع الاقتصادي الدائر بين روسيا والصين هو صراع وجودي بالنسبة لواشنطن. إذ لا يمكن لأميركا منافسة الصين اقتصادياً، على الصعيد الدولي بسبب شحّ الأموال الأميركية (النقدية) وتوفرها مع الذهب لدى الصين وروسيا والجزائر وإيران.

أي أن القوة العسكرية الأميركية لم تعد قادرة على تأمين المصالح الأميركيه من دون استثمارات أميركية ضخمة، كتلك التي قامت بها واشنطن بعد الحرب العالمية الثانية، أي خطة مارشال لإعادة إعمار أوروبا، والتي أدّت إلى استحواذ رأس المال الأميركي على ما يقارب 40 في المئة من الاقتصاد الأوروبي. وهذا هو سر سيطرة واشنطن على قرار أوروبا/ بواجهة حلف شمال الأطلسي.

8 ـ إذن لا بدّ لأميركا من إعادة بناء البنى التحتية الأميركية، بما في ذلك البنى التحتية العلمية والتكنولوجية، حتى تتمكن من الصمود، إلى حد ما، أمام التحدي الروسي الصيني الذي بات يفوقها بمراتب، والذي ستنضمّ إليه الهند، مضطرةً، في القريب من السنوات. وهذا يتطلب تقليص الوجود العسكري الأميركي في العالم.

 إنّ مجموع هذه التحولات الكبرى هي من سيسرّع في ضمور دور الحاجز الإسرائيلي الطيار، المقام على أرض فلسطين أولاً ومن ثم زواله في أقرب الآجال.

بعدنا طيبين قولوا الله…

US Pulls Missile System in Saudi Arabia amid Yemeni Resistance Ops

September 11, 2021

US Pulls Missile System in Saudi Arabia amid Yemeni Resistance Ops

By Staff, Agencies

The United States removed its most advanced missile defense system and Patriot batteries from Saudi Arabia in recent weeks, even as the kingdom faced continued aerial operations from Yemen’s Ansarullah resistance movement.

The redeployment of the defenses from Prince Sultan Air Base outside Riyadh came as Gulf Arab countries nervously watched the chaotic withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan, including their last-minute evacuations from Kabul’s besieged international airport.

While tens of thousands of American forces remain across the Arabian Peninsula as a counterweight to Iran, Gulf Arab nations worry about the US’s future plans as its military perceives a growing threat in Asia that requires those missile defenses.

“Perceptions matter whether or not they’re rooted in a cold, cold reality. And the perception is very clear that the US is not as committed to the Gulf as it used to be in the views of many people in decision-making authority in the region,” said Kristian Ulrichsen, a research fellow at the James A Baker III Institute for Public Policy at Rice University.

“From the Saudi point of view, they now see Obama, Trump and Biden – three successive presidents – taking decisions that signify to some extent an abandonment.”

Prince Sultan Air Base, some 115km southeast of Riyadh, has hosted several thousand US troops since a 2019 missile-and-drone operation on the heart of the kingdom’s oil production. That operation was claimed by Yemen’s Ansarullah resistance.

Just southwest of the airbase’s runway, a one-square-kilometer area set off by an earthen berm saw American forces station Patriot missile batteries, as well as one advanced Terminal High Altitude Air Defense unit, according to satellite images from Planet Labs Inc. A THAAD can destroy ballistic missiles at a higher altitude than Patriots.

A satellite image seen by The Associated Press news agency in late August showed some of the batteries removed from the area, though activity and vehicles could still be seen there. A high-resolution Planet Lab satellite picture taken on Friday showed the batteries’ pads at the site empty, with no visible activity.

The redeployment of missiles had been rumored for months, in part because of a desire to face what American officials see as the looming “great powers conflict” with China and Russia. However, the withdrawal came just as an Ansarullah drone operation against Saudi Arabia wounded eight and damaged a commercial jetliner at the kingdom’s airport in Abha. The kingdom has been locked in a stalemate war with the Ansarullah since March 2015.

Pentagon spokesman John Kirby acknowledged “the redeployment of certain air defense assets”. He said the US maintained a “broad and deep” commitment to its Middle East allies.

Deer Show | How US returns Afghanistan to Taliban in 20 years’ efforts?

September 11, 2021

Deer Show | How US returns Afghanistan to Taliban in 20 years’ efforts?

When you feel life is going nowhere, just think: with 4 U.S.

presidents 20 years 2 trillion dollars 2,300 soldiers’ lives… the regime of Afghanistan changes from Taliban to… Taliban

Nuances of a silent expansive explosion

Nuances of a silent expansive explosion

September 09, 2021

By Fabio Reis Vianna for TheSaker blog

When the world system was still in its infancy in that appendix of the Eurasian continent we know today as Europe, Babur, the King of Kabul, entered India from the northwest to establish the Mughal Empire in 1526, outlining an empire that would later be consolidated by his grandson Akbar (1556 – 1605).

The splendor of the great Eastern civilizations took place in a historical period when the world’s economy, cultural activities, and military power were concentrated in places such as China, India, and the ancient Persian Empire, now known as Iran.

The strategic withdrawal of China of the Ming – the most advanced civilization among the great pre-modern empires – from the great expansionist game, may have been the delimiting point between the before and the after of the geopolitical rise of those, as historian Paul Kennedy would say, “dispersed and relatively unsophisticated peoples who occupied the western part of the Eurasian landmass”, namely, the Europeans.

The Chinese vacuum still remains a great mystery to many historians: Why would Admiral Cheng Ho have withdrawn his fleet and that great rising civilization have given up its expansion toward an undisputed hegemonism in the Eurasian world system?

More than five hundred years after these events, we see the current hegemon of the modern world system, heir to the violent and predatory expansionism invented by the Europeans, withdrawing in an impromptu manner from that territory that in the past was part of the great Mughal Empire of King Babur and his grandson Akbar, Afghanistan.

According to most Western media analysts, the US withdrawal from Afghan territory should have been done in a coordinated manner with the puppet government, allies, and after all the Afghans who collaborated with the invasion and occupation had already left the scene.

It so happens that both the abrupt exit from Afghanistan, and Biden’s first speech justifying the exit, would confirm something that analyses centered on an American leadership of the past no longer follow.

The current expansive explosion of the world system, which began in the 1970s and shaped itself into imperial contours after the collapse of the Soviet Union, seems to be at a unique moment and certainly generated by pandemic chaos.

It is true that even before the Covid-19 crisis the increase in competitive pressure was already visible, reflecting the entry into the game of the new emerging powers, especially Russia and China.

The intensification of interstate competition, therefore, would have led the United States to give up its global leadership based on the diffuse values of the so-called “Liberal Order” instituted after World War II.

The 2017 national security strategy published during the Trump administration, which in practice had already been outlining and deepening since the first incursion into Iraq in 1991, would now reveal itself without masks.

The tearing of the fantasy of the old benevolent hegemon had come true.

The big news of what happened in Afghanistan would be revealed at the last G7 meeting, when the European leaders demanded from the United States a more responsible posture in its global leadership.

However, what is still hard for the European allies to understand, or accept, is that the United States has given up any global leadership, and in this new strategic configuration – which was not a point out of the curve created by the erratic Trump administration – the national interest, and only the national interest of the United States, will be the priority.

This being so, and taking into consideration that the United States’ military presence in Afghanistan, paradoxically, would not be negatively affecting the Chinese economic projects, and, on the contrary, favored them by guaranteeing stability in the region, it is absolutely plausible the line of reasoning that would justify the way out: to establish chaos in a region where the Eurasian enemies would be interested in stability.

The fourth expansive explosion of the world system reveals itself in frightening appearances by indicating, besides the increase in competitive pressure and the escalation of conflicts in itself, a displacement of what the professor of the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, José Luís Fiori, would call a “black hole” of destructive force.

The black hole, therefore, would be at this very moment moving to a new war epicenter, which would probably be the Indo-Pacific, as well as previously unthinkable regions such as South America itself.

In a recent poll, USA Today indicated a rise in Joe Biden’s unpopularity rating after what happened in Afghanistan, which could have erroneously indicated a possible step backwards in the American exit. However, what is likely to happen is just the opposite: the bid for more systemic chaos and global destabilization.

The world system feeds on the permanent expansion of power, and this becomes even clearer when those at the top of the system find themselves challenged and losing ground to their adversaries.

More than ever perhaps the time has come for the Eurasians to fill that void left by Admiral Cheng Ho’s squadron in 1433.

Fabio Reis Vianna, lives in Rio de Janeiro, is a bachelor of laws (LL.B), MA student in International Relations at the University of Évora (Portugal), writer and geopolitical analyst. He currently maintains a column on international politics at the centennial Brazilian newspaper Monitor Mercantil.

US retreat from Afghanistan signals a wider regional withdrawal

Sep 10, 2021

The Secret Withdrawal Of The US From Syria

4 SEPTEMBER 2021

By Sonja van den Ende

Source

The Secret Withdrawal Of The US From Syria

Rumors have been going for the last week since the chaotic withdrawal from the US and NATO from Afghanistan, but now it’s confirmed by the Arabic TV station Al-Alam TV. The US and its allies are losing on all fronts and withdrawing from three US bases in Syria, including the oil fields.

Rumors have been circulating since last week, after the not so glorious retreat of the US and its allies NATO, who have been waging a “dirty war” in Afghanistan for twenty years and destroyed the country, bombing them back to middle-ages. On 22 August I wrote an article: “As The US & NATO Flee Afghanistanwhen will they flee from Syria” and this is what is happening now, in secret, because another defeat is the last blow for the US and NATO empire and difficult to communicate to the Western audience.

According to Al-Alam TV, Syrian military sources tolled them that they have observed the withdrawal of US forces from three US military sites: two of the sites are in Al-Hasakah governorate (province), namely Tell Baider and Quasrak, situated close to Quamishli and one in Deir-ez-Zor. The Al-Amr oil field area close to the oil wells was evacuated as well. This is the most important oil field in Deir-ez-Zor. In june 2021, the Syrian Arab News Agency (SANA) reported:A missile attack was carried out (june 2021) on the US-controlled Al-Amr oil field from Mayadin district in Syria’s Deir-ez-Zor province, which is under the control of the Syrian government and defended by Hezbollah. Al-Amr, Syria’s largest oil field, occupied by the US and the Kurdish YPG/PKK, was attacked with Grad missiles, according to local sources. Also, during that same time the US carried out an airstrike on Hezbollah and the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) in Syria’s al-Bukamal district bordering Iraq.

Parts of Deir ez-Zor to the east of the Euphrates River are under the occupation of the US-backed YPG/PKK terrorist organization, while the city center and east and west of Deir-ez-Zor are under the control of the Syrian government. This also explains the increasing bombing of the Israeli air force last month and yesterday. They randomly attacked Damascus and also al-Qusayr. Al-Qusayr is a strategic town, not far from the Deir Mar-Jacub Monastery situated in Qara, close to the Lebanese border. Hezbollah is present in the region and has many relief projects for the Syrian population, which the US and NATO deny and their excuse for bombing is the aggressive stance of Hezbollah towards the Syrian population. But Hezbollah is seen as liberators, by all religions, especially the Christians, and they are happy they liberated them, especially in al-Quasayr, which is a Christian town.

Furthermore, the military source revealed to Al-Alam TV that the US has or had by now thirteen military bases in Syria and is facing a lot of opposition from the Syrian population, as I wrote before. It’s not about military strength but about the attitude of the people, the resistance and their hatred against the crumbling empire. As I wrote before, US servicemen and women are actually afraid of the resistance and if they don’t withdraw now, they will face attacks like what happened in Iraq or Afghanistan the last twenty years. According to the Syrian military sources, the US is preparing for a total exit from Syria.

President Joe Biden said the following on July 21, 2021, again a lie, it was all planned to exit Syria. The Trump Administration had said so, like they did with Afghanistan, and if the world would have taken notice of this, it would have come to no surprise that they are leaving Afghanistan, Syria and perhaps Iraq:

Roughly 900 U.S. troops, including a number of Green Berets, will remain in Syria to continue supporting and advising the Syrian Democratic Forces fighting the Islamic State. … “In Syria, we’re supporting Syrian Democratic Forces in their fight against ISIS,” the senior administration official said to Joe Biden on July 21, 2021”.

This is what President Trump said in 2018. Trump has been clear about his intentions in Syria:

As he told the world in April 2018, after years of fighting foreign wars, in his view it was time for the United States to withdraw from Syria, passing responsibility for the mission to hold territory taken from the Islamic State to regional states. We will have, as of three months ago, spent $7 trillion in the Middle East the last seven years,” he also said. “We get nothing out of it, nothing.— nothing except death and destruction. It’s a horrible thing.”

Did Joe Biden or his Administration listen to this and saw that waging war on Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq and Libya is useless? They don’t know the mentality of the Middle East. Or was it to please Israel, who still dreams of a ‘greater’ Israel, as has been mentioned in the Yinon plan, or is it their new plans and strategy, the great reset, which means the oil is not very useful anymore, so why bother to occupy the Middle East? Maybe only a few bases to control the people, but that’s a grave mistake. The people of the Middle East have suffered too much to be occupied again. I go for the last option, although Trump spoke wise words in 2018, but I doubt if he was pleased with the “great reset”plans, which was laid out already in 2018 and then practiced in 2019 with Event 201, ofwhich Trump thought in 2020, that is was still an exercise during a conversation with Fauci. Accidentally (or not) the microphone was still on and Fauci replied yes it is and Trump was very annoyed about that. To summarize it all, the world has entered a new PSYOP in 2019, and closed the era of the War on Terror, which was aimed at the destruction of much at the Middle East and to fuel hatred against Muslims. Now we entered the so-called COVID world and a new totalitarian order, which aims to enslave the whole world on Big Pharma and enter the digital information era in a new technocratic totalitarian world order, but I doubt if it will be in the whole world, that will be difficult.

ارتباك اللاقرار في واشنطن بعد الصدمة… وزمام المبادرة

أيلول 4 2021

 ناصر قنديل

لا أحد يستطيع تفسير كلّ حالات الفشل الأميركي والغربي بمعايير الخصوصية التي تحيط بكلّ حالة منها، لمجرد الرغبة بنفي صفة المشترك بينها، وهو التراجع التاريخي للمشروع الغربي وفي طليعته المشروع الأميركي. فالمعادلة التاريخية سياق وليست حدثاً منفصلاً يليه حدث منفصل تفسرهما الخصوصية، وثمة مسار بين نهاية الحرب العالمية الثانية والانسحاب من أفغانستان وبينهما سقوط جدار برلين يحكي حكاية تراجع مسار السيطرة، حيث الأميركي الذي كان يمثل 6% من سكان العالم ويستحوذ على 50% من ثرواته، وصار عام 1990 يمثل 4% من سكان العالم ويستحوذ على 40% من الثورات، هو اليوم أقل من 3% من سكان العالم ويستحوذ على أقل من 30% ثروات العالم. والأميركي الذي أنهى التحالف النازي الذي قادته ألمانيا بالشراكة مع الاتحاد السوفياتي، ثم أنهى الاتحاد السوفياتي وتفرد في حكم العالم، أمضى عقدين من الفشل والتراجع في كل الحروب التي خاضها في محاولة فرض نموذجه كمثال عالمي أحادي يمثل نهاية التاريخ، وهو لا يملك اليوم سبيلاً سياسياً أو عسكرياً للخروج من هذا الفشل، والفشل في أفغانستان يختصر هذا العجز، حيث السبيل السياسي انتهى بالفشل، والسبيل العسكري لن يحل شيئاً ولو بقي لعشرين عاماً أخرى كما قال جو بايدن، والبديل الثالث هو الذهاب لتفاهمات دولية كبرى تمنح الخصوم الكبار انتصارات كبرى، أو الدخول في مسلسل عنوانه العناد على البقاء منعاً لذل الهزيمة، وانتقاماً لصورة الهروب الكبير من أفغانستان، أو الانسحابات المتلاحقة وصولاً لمزيد من الفراغ يملأه الخصوم المحليون أو الإقليميون أو الدوليون، منفردين أو مجتمعين، كما يقول مثال أفغانستان أيضاً.

يتداخل في الوضعية الأميركية والغربية، على رغم الكلام الانفعالي الأوروبي وأوهام الانفراد العسكري والسياسي، كل شيء، فالغرب كله أمام خطر الهزيمة الإستراتيجية، لأن ساحة المعركة هي آسيا، وفي آسيا أكثر من نصف سكان العالم وأكثر من نصف مساحته وأكثر من نصف ثرواته وأكثر من نصف قوته العسكرية، وجوهر عنوان المعركة هو استقلال آسيا، التي تنتمي اليها كل دول وقوى المواجهة مع أميركا والمشروع الغربي على تنوعها، ولا ينتمي إليها أي من دول الغرب، ولذلك فالغرب بقيادة الأميركي يخوض مواجهة يائسة من الخارج مع نضوج ونمو قوى الداخل الآسيوي سياسياً واقتصادياً وعسكرياً وشعبياً لمعركة الاستقلال، واختلال التوازن لصالحها، وأفغانستان ليست إلا العينة الصغرى لهذه المعركة، ولم يعد ممكناً للأميركي بعد أفغانستان إلا الاختيار بين مواجهة قد تتصاعد نحو حرب، تحت شعار استعادة الهيبة المجروحة في أفغانستان، ووقف مسلسل الانهيارات، أو مواصلة الانكفاء والتراجع تفادياً للمواجهة، والاختبار هو في العراق وسورية، وفي هذه الحال سيكون أمام مواجهة مع قوى ودول ليس عندها مجال للتهاون مع بقاء القوات الأميركية وليس لديها الاستعداد لمنح الأميركي جوائز ترضية كثمن للانسحاب، ما يعني أن الشهور المقبلة ستحمل تصاعداً تدريجياً في المواجهة، وصولاً إلى انفجارها بصورة دراماتيكية بمجرد انكشاف صورة القرار الأميركي برفض الانسحاب، بعد نهاية المهلة المعقولة لاحتواء نتائج الانسحاب من أفغانستان، وفي هذه المواجهة التي ستتحول إلى حرب، أمام الأميركي ومن خلفه حلفائه في الغرب فرضية كان قد ناقشها مراراً، وهي أن أي خيار مواجهة يعني فرضية حرب كبرى، قد تشترك فيها دول كثيرة في المنطقة وخارج المنطقة، لكن الأخطر فيها هو أن «إسرائيل» ستصبح ميدان الرمي الحر في هذه الحرب، وهو ما سبق وقاله الرئيس الأميركي السابق باراك أوباما في حوار مع صحيفة «هآرتز» عام 2012 في تفسيره لسبب عدم تكرار نموذج ليبيا، مع سورية، وكل شيء يقول إن «إسرائيل» لن تستطيع الصمود وجودياً إذا واجهت هذه الفرضية في أي حرب مقبلة.

البديل المتاح هو مواصلة الانكفاء، والانكفاء الذي بدأ في أفغانستان قدم مثالاً، فهو بدأ بتفاوض لعام كامل مع حركة طالبان بشراكة حليف موثوق لواشنطن هو دولة قطر، وانتهى إلى تفاهم على حكومة شراكة بين طالبان والنظام الذي أقامه الأميركيون في كابول، يحميها توازن عسكري يمثله الجيش الذي قاموا ببنائه مقابل مقدرات طالبان العسكرية، لكن كل شيء تهاوى عندما بدأوا الانسحاب، فتقدمت طالبان وتفكك نظام أشرف غني وجيشه وهرب الرئيس وأركان حربه، ثم ذهب الأميركي إلى الخطة (ب) والتي تقوم على الانخراط مع طالبان بتفاهمات تقطع الطريق على خصوم واشنطن الكبار، روسيا والصين وإيران، وتحرمهم من الوقوف على خط الرابحين، لكن الأمور سارت سريعاً باتجاه مخالف، فروسيا ضامن ضروري لحسم طالبان مع أحمد مسعود الذي يدعمه بعض الغرب وينغص على طالبان نصرها بحكم محورية دورها في طاجكستان، وإيران مصدر الضرورات الحياتية اليومية لأفغانستان من محروقات ولحوم وخضار وطحين، والصين هي دولة التمويل المتاح بسخاء لإنعاش الاقتصاد وشق الطرق وسكك الحديد وخطوط نقل الطاقة واستكشاف واستخراج الثورات المعدنية وتطوير صناعاتها، كما قال قادة طالبان علناً، وإذا كرر الأميركي تجربة الانكفاء في حالتي سورية والعراق كما فعل في أفغانستان، ستنهار التشكيلات التي بناها في البلدين بأسرع من انهيار حكومة غني وجيشه، وسيتقدم الروسي والصيني والإيراني أسرع مما يتقدمون في أفغانستان، والأخطر هو أن محور المقاومة الذي يمثل القوى المحلية الصاعدة سيمسك بزمام المبادرة في الإقليم وسيضع أمن كيان الاحتلال في دائرة الخطر عاجلاً أم آجلاً.

لبنان في قلب هذا الارتباك الأميركي في الخيارات، وفي قلب محاولة محور المقاومة الإمساك بزمام المبادرة، كما يقول اختبار سفن المحروقات الإيرانية، الذي أطلقته المقاومة، غداة الانسحاب من أفغانستان، يسرع حسم الخيارات الأميركية، ويجعل معادلة خاسر خاسر أسرع بالنسبة للأميركيين بعد رهانات لسنوات على إسقاط لبنان على رأس المقاومة، وإظهار المقاومة سبباً لكل ما لحق ويلحق بلبنان، وإذا بواشنطن تظهر وهي تعلن أنها ستفك بعضاً من حصارها لتنافس المقاومة على صورة من يخفف المعاناة، وكانها تعترف بأن هذا الحصار هو السبب الرئيسي للأزمات، ولكنها تصيب حلفاءها بالذهول لتجنبها خيار المواجهة، واعتمادها طريق المنافسة على حلول لأزمات كانت هي المسبب الرئيسي لها.

فيديوات متعلقة

فيديوات متعلقة

ELECTION SEASON NEARS IN THE UNITED STATES AS POLITICAL CRISIS GAINS TRACTION

 03.09.2021 

Election Season Nears In The United States As Political Crisis Gains Traction

The United States 2021 elections are drawing near, with the majority of them taking part on November 2nd, 2021.

Many are taking place on the surrounding days.

It is a volatile season, as the Democratic Party won the Presidential Elections in the face of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, and holds a majority thanks to the vice president in the Congress.

In the House of Representatives, the Democrats hold the majority.

Interestingly, in the Senate the Republicans have 50 senators, but still Democrats hold majority with 48 senators, due to Kamala Harris swinging the vote.

Political instability was introduced in the United States following the fiasco that the withdrawal from Afghanistan turned into.

Americans were abandoned, Afghan allies were left behind, and an ISIS terror attack left 13 Americans and hundreds of Afghans dead.

This political instability didn’t simply appear out of nowhere with the fiasco in Afghanistan.

It was brewing when former President Donald Trump faced Joe Biden in the polls, and even before that.

This could also be a way to set the stage for Biden’s resignation, for health reasons or otherwise. A power grab is in order by Vice President Kamala Harris and the neoliberals she represents and whose interests she fights for.

Conservatives and traditionalists would surely come in the spotlight and receive quite a bit of negative attention focused at them. After all, they are the ones who elected Trump, and almost even re-elected him.

Various neoliberal movements, such as BLM and others will become the norm at Washington level, and that is when the true suppression attempts can begin.

This leading ideology will marginalize the states that are more conservative. There will likely be an ideology split within the United States, and even within singular states themselves.

Local authorities, as well as the local business elites and opinion leaders, will be strained, they will need to guide the population in one direction or another.

As a result, every state that’s strongly conservative or liberal will play a significant, leading role in the upcoming events ahead of the election, and after it.

If Texas remains strongly conservative, pro-Republican, as there is not even a Democrat candidate, it is likely that changes might be coming. Some states may wish for more independence in spending, development, legislation and more and be freed from some compulsory factors coming from Washington.

This doesn’t relate to a splitting of the federation into smaller countries, but rather a US in “two speeds”, similar to what is being observed in the European Union.

Texas is second in the US – second richest, and with its 29.1 million residents in 2020, is the second-largest U.S. state by both area and population. It is also a staple of conservatism and the Republican party, it promises to remain as such.

Naturally, the winner of the elections will become an important figure.

Currently, the governor of Texas is Greg Abbott, from the Republican Party.

Election Season Nears In The United States As Political Crisis Gains Traction

He seems like a rather conservative, but adequate leader of his state, with the population having a generally positive opinion of him.

It is an up-and-down, however.

Recently, the most radical abortion law in the US has gone into effect, despite legal efforts to block it.

A near-total abortion ban in Texas empowers any private citizen to sue an abortion provider who violates the law, opening the floodgates to harassing and frivolous lawsuits from anti-abortion vigilantes that could eventually shutter most clinics in the state.

Senate Bill 8 ushered through the Republican-dominated Texas legislature and signed into law by the Republican governor, Greg Abbott, in May, bars abortion once embryonic cardiac activity is detected, which is around six weeks, and offers no exceptions for rape or incest.

He is also widely considered to have failed the COVID-19 pandemic. Texas was also woefully unprepared for the freezing cold, and citizens were left without power and heat for days.

Still, despite controversy, he is the favorite.

When CPAC, the nation’s leading conservative political conference, met in Dallas earlier this month, speakers included former Dallas state Sen. Don Huffines. And while Huffines bashed President Biden, he spent most of his time on stage blasting a fellow Republican: Gov. Greg Abbott.

Huffines invoked the story of the Alamo and praised Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, then said:

“Well, we don’t have a Donald Trump as governor. We don’t have Ron DeSantis as governor. We don’t have William B. Travis as governor. Unfortunately, we’ve got a career politician that’s a political windsock, a RINO (Republican in name only.)”

Abbott, citing the kickoff of the legislative special session, wasn’t there to defend himself. Huffines used his absence against him, attacking Abbott’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic.

“He doesn’t want to face you,” Huffines said, “because he shredded our constitution. He put 3 million Texans on unemployment and dependent on the government in one day.”

But Huffines wasn’t just speaking out of passion. He’s also one of two candidates challenging Abbott as the governor seeks a third term in 2022. The other: former Texas Republican Party chairman Allen West, who’s made many of the same charges against Abbott’s pandemic response.

Essentially, the situation in Texas is such – the Republican party, more or less, has the victory certain. The favorite appears to be Greg Abbott, but his two main competitors are also from the Republican party.

The two main candidates: Don Huffines and Allen West are simply pushing the same platform, and want to win over the state away from Abbott, who has gone rogue, according to them.

There’s little to mention about West, he simply wants to “overthrow” Abbott, and he even gave up on the chairmanship of the Republican Party in Texas for the purpose. Both him and Huffines are on the same “team”.

In the case of Huffines, experts say that he didn’t win his own seat when he ran for Senate (in 2018), and it’s a seat that was more Republican than the state as a whole when he lost it. It is unlikely that this time he would have success.

Still, when he announced his campaign, he made no mention of Abbott.

It took aim at “politicians who offer nothing but excuses and lies” and promised to take on the “entrenched elites of the Austin swamp.” In promising more decisive action, Huffines said Texas needs to “finally finish the [border] wall” and that he would put the state “on a path to eliminating property taxes.”

Huffines was a strident conservative in the Senate. His announcement highlighted his record on issues important to the right, as well as his successful push to shut down the Dallas Public Schools bus agency amid reports of financial mismanagement there.

He got to the Senate in 2015 after unseating Sen. John Carona, R-Dallas, in the primary, attacking him as too moderate. But the Dallas-based Senate District 16 swung toward Democrats under former President Donald Trump, and Johnson beat Huffines by 8 percentage points in 2018.

Huffines stayed politically active after leaving the Senate and especially so in the past year, as conservative angst simmered over Abbott’s pandemic management. Even then, Huffines has an interesting family connection to the governor’s circle: His brother is James Huffines, whom Abbott tapped last spring to chair the Governor’s Strike Force to Open Texas.

Southern Methodist University political science professor Cal Jillson said the odds are that Republicans will ultimately get everything they’re pushing in the current special session, even if it takes several more special sessions to get those priorities passed.

“Right now, the Republicans have the Democrats strung up by their thumbs with their feet barely touching the ground,” Jillson said. “I think the Republicans are going to win on the substance, and how the Democrats frame their eventual loss very much will determine whether or not the two bases are equally energized by this fight or one is energized more than the other.”

In his most recent gubernatorial race in 2018, Abbott won with 55.8% of the vote.

Abbott has money too.

He’s sitting on a war chest of $55 million.

But despite rampant rumors that former Congressman Beto O’Rourke or even actor Matthew McConaughey will get into the race, Democrats still don’t have a declared candidate for governor.

Still, the Democrats appear to have given up on Texas, as there is no candidate, two months prior to election.

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

UK Defense Secretary Says US Is No Longer a Superpower

 September 1, 2021

Source: The Guardian

By Al Mayadeen

British Defense Minister Ben Wallace says that a superpower that is not ready to commit to something may as well not be a superpower, referring to the United States, according to sources close to him.

UK Defense Secretary

UK Defense Secretary Ben Wallace considered that the United States could no longer be considered a superpower. 

He said, “A superpower that is also not prepared to stick at something isn’t probably a superpower either. It is certainly not a global force, it’s just a big power.”

When asked if the exit from Afghanistan showed the limits of British power on the world stage, Wallace said: “Britain is clearly not a superpower… but a superpower that is also unwilling to commit to something may as well not be a superpower as well,” making a reference, according to those close to him, to the United States of America. 

Wallace also contrasted the Ministry of Defense’s handling of the evacuation crisis with the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO). Over the weekend, it emerged that officials from Dominic Raab’s department had failed to read thousands of emails from MPs and charities tackling urgent cases of Afghans trying to flee from Kabul. 

“All of us have big email inboxes, we have already analyzed ours, we’ve sent defense intelligence analysts around Whitehall to help deal with that,” Wallace said.

The final withdrawal was authorized in April by Joe Biden; a decision that disappointed the UK. 

Bin Salman Is Said To Have Played Role in Kabul Airport Attack

September 2, 2021 

Bin Salman Is Said To Have Played Role in Kabul Airport Attack

By Staff, Agencies

A Saudi opposition figure, Abdul Rahmad Suhaimi, has spoken of the role of crown prince Mohammad Bin Salman [MBS] in supporting Daesh [the Arabic acronym for terrorist ‘ISIS/ISIL’ group] elements during the attack on Kabul airport.

According to the opponent, sources close to the Saudi government in Bin Salman’s offices and ministries have confirmed the Saudi Crown Prince’s support for the Daesh terrorist group in the attack on Kabul Airport.

As Suhaimi described, MBS has sought to show the Taliban is incapable of ensuring Afghan people’s security and prove that under the Taliban Afghanistan will be a hub of terrorism.

Two suicide bombers and gunmen attacked crowds of Afghans flocking to Kabul Airport on Thursday, August 26.

A “complex attack” on Thursday at the airport in Afghanistan’s capital caused a number of US and civilian casualties, the Pentagon said.

Several US service members were also killed in the attack.

US Global Wars Cost 900k Lives, $8 Trillion Over Two Decades

 September 2, 2021

US Global Wars Cost 900k Lives, $8 Trillion Over Two Decades

By Staff, Agencies

The US so-called war on terror has taken almost one million lives across the globe and cost the country $8 trillion, over the past two decades, says a new report.

A report issued by Costs of War Project at Brown University, at end of the disastrous US withdrawal from Afghanistan, estimated 897,000 to 929,000 people have lost their lives as a direct result of war, whether by bombs, bullets or fire, in some 80 countries.

“The war has been long and complex and horrific and unsuccessful… and the war continues in over 80 countries,” said co-director of Costs of War, Catherine Lutz on Wednesday.

The death toll, includes US military members, allied fighters, opposition fighters, civilians, journalists and humanitarian aid workers, the report said.

The figure, however, does not include the many indirect deaths the war has caused by way of disease, displacement and loss of access to food or clean drinking water.

“The deaths we tallied are likely a vast undercount of the true toll these wars have taken on human life,” said Neta Crawford, another co-founder of the project.

The project also revealed that the wars have cost the US an estimated $8 trillion in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan and Syria.

Of the $8 trillion, $2.3 trillion is attributed to the Afghanistan/Pakistan war zone.

“The Pentagon and the US military have now absorbed the great majority of the federal discretionary budget, and most people don’t know that,” said Lutz.

“Our task, now and in future years, is to educate the public on the ways in which we fund those wars and the scale of that funding,” she added.

Another researcher of the project, Stephanie Savell said, “Twenty years from now, we’ll still be reckoning with the high societal costs of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars – long after US forces are gone.”

US Global Wars Cost 900k Lives, $8 Trillion Over Two Decades
Source: Costs of War Project – Brown University

The United States and its allies invaded Afghanistan in October 2001 as part of the so-called war on terror. While the invasion ended the Taliban’s rule in the country back then, it is now ended with the return of the group to power.

On August 31, the picture of US Army general Chris Donahue appeared on the news as the last US soldier to leave Afghanistan. US media outlets had headlines indicating that the US war in Afghanistan was finally over.

US President Joe Biden also addressed the nation, and defended his decision to withdraw, saying, “I was not going to extend this forever war, and I was not extending a forever exit” and “It’s time to end the war in Afghanistan.”

For the first time in 20 years now, there is no US military presence in Afghanistan, but observers say no troops on the ground does not mean that the US war in the country is over.

They said the withdrawal simply means that one method of waging war in Afghanistan is no longer occurring.

As ‘Israelis’ Watch Afghanistan, they Remember Lebanon

September 2, 2021

As ‘Israelis’ Watch Afghanistan, they Remember Lebanon

By Staff, New Lines

In a commentary following the humiliating US defeat and withdrawal from Afghanistan, Neri Zilber wrote for New Lines that senior ‘Israeli’ military officers have looked on at the chaotic and speedy events with a glimmer of recognition.

“Those now leading the ‘Israeli’ military came of age as young soldiers and junior officers during the Zionist entity’s own ill-fated foreign expedition in southern Lebanon during the 1980s and 1990s: A bloody, inconclusive guerrilla war — “‘Israel’s’ Vietnam” it came to be known — that culminated in an equally shambolic withdrawal in May 2000, after two decades of fighting” said Zilber.

While ‘Israel’ isn’t the US, and Lebanon isn’t Afghanistan, the common themes that run through both sets of wars are jarring, especially in the way a Western democracy tries to end a military campaign and how it manages [or not] the fate of local allies who fought alongside it.

“‘Israel’ left Lebanon with its tail between its legs,” Brig. Gen. Eli Amitai, one of the last Zionist commanders in southern Lebanon, told the author. “This wasn’t a withdrawal — it was a house of cards, like dominoes falling.”

The Zionist occupiers started their misadventure in Lebanon. Later on, Hezbollah began firing rockets into northern ‘Israeli’-occupied territories, causing fatalities among Zionist occupiers places in the so-called Security Zone at some two dozen a year. Increasingly, the impression inside the Zionist community was that this was a campaign with no end and with no discernible objective.

The withdrawal started becoming popular and the political tide was shifting.

By early 2000 Hezbollah increased its resistance operations on the Zionist military inside Lebanon.

In the ensuing weeks, the Zionist military began thinning the number of its forces inside the so-called ‘Security Zone’ and handing off outposts to its militia in Lebanon, the so-called ‘South Lebanon Army’ [SLA].

As resistance operations stepped up, then Zionist Prime Minister Ehud Barak was left with no choice: He ordered the military to move up the withdrawal, starting immediately. The last of the Zionist military’s positions was blown up, and soldiers evacuated May 23-24.

Closing the gate behind him, the last ‘Israeli’ soldier to leave Lebanon was the Zionist commander for the ‘Security Zone’, Benny Gantz, the ‘Israeli’ entity’s current war minister. A 20-year scheme of war and occupation was undone in four days.

The question remains, however, whether a dramatically “better” way could have been found. The real lesson of the Zionist regime’s experience in Lebanon is likely that the decision itself to withdraw unleashes its own dynamics.

The hasty withdrawal [“with its tail between its legs”] from Lebanon emboldened Hezbollah and decreased ‘Israeli’ deterrence vis-à-vis its enemies.

Meanwhile, watching events unfold in Kabul over the past two weeks, Zionist officials are less concerned about what it says about the US commitment to the Zionist entity and other close allies. “I’m not sure it’ll have a major impact on us directly and on how the US does things here,” one senior ‘Israeli’ government official told the author when queried regarding Afghanistan. Yet there is concern in some ‘Israeli’ quarters that a similar dynamic will play out among America’s enemies as happened after the Lebanon withdrawal.

“Everyone is looking at these pictures,” a senior IDF official told me.

As Tel Aviv found out the hard way, even after you rightfully end a war, the war never really ends.

الأميركي ومعادلة «الخسارة الممكن إلحاقها بحزب الله هي أن ندعه يربح»!


أيلول 2 2021

 ناصر قنديل

وصل الأميركيون بعد عشرين عاماً إلى قناعة في أفغانستان أن إلحاق الهزيمة بحركة طالبان مستحيل، طالما بقي الأميركيون قوة احتلال في أفغانستان، وبقيت الحكومة التي يرعونها وينفقون عليها المليارات مجرد حكومة عميلة غارقة في الفساد، وأن الإصرار على هزيمة طالبان سيعني منحها فرصة الانتصار الكامل لأنها تستثمر على صفتها المتنامية كقوة مقاومة للاحتلال والحكومة العميلة التي نصبها على أفغانستان، وأن الخسارة الواقعية التي يمكنهم إلحاقها بطالبان تتوقف على أن يتقبلوا هزيمتهم أمامها، وتجرع مرارة كأس الانسحاب من دون شروط، فتنال طالبان هدف الوصول الى الحكم، وتنأى واشنطن بنفسها عن الخسارة الأكبر، وتتقبل التعامل عن بعد مع أفغانستان وهي ترى كيف ستنفتح عليها الصين وروسيا وإيران، وكيف تتبلور صورة جديدة لشمال شرقي آسيا، لم تكن واشنطن ترغب برؤيتها لكنها أقل الخسائر.

في التعامل مع حزب الله تبدو الصورة أشد تعقيداً، لارتباط موازين قوة حزب الله بأمن كيان الاحتلال الذي يحتل مكانة أولى في السياسات الأميركية تجاه المنطقة، لكن ذلك لا يخفي الارتباك الأميركي أمام كيفية التعامل مع حزب الله، بعدما صارت الحرب شبه مستحيلة، في ظل قناعة أميركية «إسرائيلية» بأنّ ما لدى حزب الله كاف، في حال اندلاع حرب، لتشكيل تهديد وجودي على كيان الاحتلال، وبذلك تحوّل الرهان على اتباع سياسة تدفع بلبنان نحو الانهيار عبر إيقاف تجاوب الصناديق المالية الدولية التي تحركها القرارات الأميركية مع طلبات التمويل اللبنانية، بعدما أدمن النظام المالي اللبناني عليها وصار مهدّداً بالسقوط بمجرد توقفها، وعبر إيقاف كلّ طريق تمويل جانبي كانت تؤمنه دول الخليج، بما في ذلك حركة السياح الخليجيين والودائع الخليجية نحو لبنان، وكان الرهان أن يقود الانهيار إلى القول لحزب الله إن لبنان سيسقط على رأسه، وإن سلاحه سيفقد قيمته، وإنّ التسليم بجعل هذا السلاح ودوائر تأثيره في موازين القوى مع كيان الاحتلال، موضوعاً للتفاوض هو أقلّ الخسائر لتجنب السقوط الكبير.

قالت التجربة الواقعية إن هذا الطريق تحوّل بالنسبة لحزب الله من تحد إلى فرصة من بوابة سفن المحروقات الإيرانية، وهي فرصة مزدوجة، فمن جهة تقول هذه السفن كما قرأ «الإسرائيليون» إنّ حزب الله يتميّز عن الآخرين في الداخل والخارج بأنه لا يكتفي بالأقوال، بل يملك أفعالاً تخفف المعاناة ولو لم تشكل حلاً كاملاً للأزمة، ومن جهة موازية تقول مسيرة السفن إنّ مدى الردع الذي بناه حزب الله على البر يتحوّل على مدى بحري واسع ممتد من موانئ إيران عبر المضائق والبحار إلى الساحل اللبناني، لأنّ أيّ اعتراض لمسار السفن عسكرياً سيؤدي إلى الحرب التي يسعى الأميركي و»الإسرائيلي» إلى تفاديها، وبات واضحاً أن المزيد سينتج المزيد المعاكس، وأن الإصرار على جعل حزب الله يخسر ينتج العكس ويجعله يربح أكثر، كما هو توصيف تجربة ما بعد القرار 1701، الذي بدلاً من أن ينتهي بتقييد قوة حزب الله، نجح حزب الله بمضاعفة قوته في ظل هذا القرار، وحال الرهان على الحرب على سورية وتأثيرها في قوة حزب الله في المنطقة، بحيث تحولت هذه الحرب إلى مصدر لتنامي قوة حزب الله الإقليمية بعدما كان الرهان على جعلها مصدراً لاستنزافه وتشتيت قواه، ولم يعد خافياً أن النقاش الأميركي حول لبنان قد بدأ، وعلامات البداية بما قالته السفيرة الأميركية في بيروت عن نوايا وتوجهات لإعادة النظر بمنظومة العقوبات التي يفرضها قانون قيصر على العلاقات اللبنانية- السورية، لتسهيل استجرار الغاز المصري والكهرباء الأردنية، من جهة، ومن جهة مقابلة ما قاله السيناتور الأميركي كريس ميرفي، والذي يشغل رئيس اللجنة الفرعية للعلاقات الخارجية في مجلس الشيوخ، قبيل زيارة وفد من الكونغرس برئاسته إلى بيروت، “أن الولايات المتحدة يجب أن تخفض أولوية الردع الإيراني وتحث المملكة العربية السعودية على «التصالح» مع نفوذ حزب الله في لبنان”. وهذا النوع من السياسات يعني صرف النظر عن الرهان السابق على إسقاط لبنان أملاً بأن يسقط على رأس حزب الله، تسليم بالقلق من أنّ لبنان يتجه بسبب هذه السياسات للسقوط في حضن حزب الله، كما قال “الإسرائيليون”.

تستشعر أميركا أنها تدخل مرحلة جديدة في العالم، ليست فيها فرضيات الربح، بل المفاضلة بين خسارة أعلى وخسارة أدنى، وأن مقابلها أعداء وخصوم دخلوا مرحلة تصبح فيها كل سياسة أميركية تجاههم هي فرصة ربح، وعليها أن تختار بين منحهم فرصة الربح الأعلى أو الربح الأدنى، وبعدما كانت معادلة رابح رابح تعني في الماضي الربح المتبادل لطرفي الصراع عبر التسويات، صارت معادلة رابح رابح تصح في حال خصوم واشنطن، الذين سيربحون مهما كانت عليه الحال في السياسات الأميركية، وفي حالة حزب الله تبدو الأمور شديدة الوضوح، ويبدو أن أفضل فرص إلحاق «الخسارة» بحزب الله هي بتركه يربح من دون مواجهة، فإذا كانت النظرية التي تفسر طلب الاستقالة من الرئيس السابق سعد الحريري قبل سنتين، هي ترك حزب الله يواجه الأزمة وجهاً لوجه، ليدق الباب متوسلاً طلباً للتفاوض، تبدو النظرية السائدة أميركياً اليوم هي تسريع قيام حكومة يبذل حزب الله جهوده لولادتها وتركه يربح بولادتها، بما تعني من زوال لمرحلة الضغوط الشديدة على لبنان، أملاً بأن تحول دون إطلاق يد حزب الله في تقديم نموذج مختلف يظهر للبنانيين إمكانية تقديم حلول، قد تكون الاستثمارات الصينية وجهتها النهائية.

أولويات جديدة لواشنطن تصيب الحلفاء بالذعر


أيلول 1 2021

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is %D9%86%D8%A7%D8%B5%D8%B1-%D9%82%D9%86%D8%AF%D9%8A%D9%84-780x470.jpg
 ناصر قنديل

لم يعد مهماً النقاش مع الذين حاولوا بحسن نية ومخاوف مشروعة، أو بسوء نية لتجميل صورة الهزيمة الأميركية، بالقول انّ واشنطن انسحبت من أفغانستان ضمن خطة هجومية لتفجير ألغام بوجه روسيا والصين وإيران، فكل ما جرى منذ الإعلان الأميركي بدء الإنسحاب يظهر حجم الارتباك الأميركي، وحجم الانهزام السياسي الذي تتحرك تحت وطأته، وجاء المثال غير المسبوق في كيفية التعامل الأميركي مع ما بعد تفجيرات مطار كابول وسقوط الجنود الأميركيين بين قتلى وجرحى، وخروج القيادة الأميركية بعدها لتسريع الإنسحاب غير آبهة بمعنويات جيشها وسمعتها ومهابتها، التي كانت إصابتها بأضرار أقلّ مما حدث في مطار كابول كافية لغزو دول وإشعال حروب، ونصف النفوذ في العلاقات الدولية يقوم على المعنويات والمهابة، ويظهر في المقابل أنّ الثلاثي الروسي الصيني الإيراني يتفاعل إيجاباً مع ما بعد الانسحاب الأميركي من أفغانستان، ورغم كل الحذر الذي حكم تاريخ العلاقة بحركة طالبان، تبدو علاقات الثلاثي مع طالبان وأفغانستان ما بعد الإنسحاب مفتوحة على المزيد من الإيجابية، ويكفي كمثال، بقاء السفارات العائدة لهذه الدول في كابول تقوم بمهامها، في ظل سيطرة طالبان وعدم شعورها بالذعر الذي اجتاح السفارات الغربية، وتالياً الامتناع الروسي الصيني عن التصويت على المشروع الفرنسي البريطاني الذي أقرّه مجلس الأمن، والذي يخاطب طالبان بلغة التحذير والشروط.

لم تعد واشنطن تخفي الخلاصة الرئيسية التي حكمت قرارها بالانسحاب من أفغانستان، وتحملها الجراح المعنوية لتبعات الانسحاب، والجراح المادية التي رافقته، وجوهر هذه الخلاصة كما بكرر الرئيس الأميركي جو بايدن، أن القوة العسكرية لم تعد أداة صالحة للتأثير في نوعية أنظمة الحكم في الدول التي كانت تلجأ واشنطن الى الحرب لإلحاقها بمعسكر التبعية، وفرض المثال الغربي عليها، ورسم سقف جديد لمبررات التدخلات العسكرية يجعل الأمن القومي الأميركي هدفاً وحيداً تستخدم القوة العسكرية في حمايته، والمقصود هو حماية الداخل الأميركي من أي خطر حصراً، وهو هدف وجود القوة العسكرية في الدول الصغرى، بعكس كلّ نظريات المدى الحيوي للمصالح الذي قامت عليه نظريات التوسع والهيمنة، وتمييز الدول الكبرى والدول العظمى عنها، واللجوء الى الأدوات السياسية والاقتصادية والحروب الناعمة لتحقيق المصالح الاستراتيجية الأميركية، وفقا لما يرسمه بايدن وإدارته، في الحديث عن مواجهة قادمة مع الصين أو مع روسيا، وخصوصا مع إيران، وبالبداهة فإن من عجز عن تغيير أفغانستان بالقوة لا يمكن أن يفكر بالحرب مع إيران.

يثير المنهج الجديد لرسم الأولويات الأميركية عاصفة من التداعيات، لدى أقرب الحلفاء لواشنطن، ولا يحتاج المرء الى التنقيب عن المواقف الصارخة والمتكررة في دول حلف الناتو الأهم، سواء بريطانيا أو فرنسا أو سواهما، ليكتشف مصطلح الخيانة الأميركية، أو أن واشنطن ظهرت حليفاً لا يمكن الاعتماد عليه، أو حليفاً غير جدير بالثقة، والوصول لاستنتاجات من النوع الذي صاغه جوزيب بوريل مفوض السياسة الخارجية للاتحاد الأوروبي عن الحاجة لبناء قوة عسكرية أوروبية مستقلة عن واشنطن والناتو للدفاع عن المصالح الخارجية لدول الاتحاد، وهو كلام كاف للتعبير عن الذعر الذي يصيب الحلفاء الذين بنوا سياسات دولهم على الاستثمار المشترك في الحروب تحت الراية الأميركية، ويسمعون بالتغيير الأميركي من الإعلام، وهو ما قصده بوريل بعدم سؤال أوروبا عن رأيها، والقصد ابعد من قرار الانسحاب من أفغانستان، وهو جوهر التخلي عن الرهان على القوة العسكرية لفرض المصالح السياسية، وهذا يكشف حجم الذعر الأوروبي من الاستراتيجيات الأميركية الجديدة، بمعزل عن مدى قدرة أوروبا على بلورة تدخلات عسكرية مؤثرة دون الاستناد على القوة الأميركية، وهو ذعر لا يخص أوروبا وحدها، بل يصيب كل الحلفاء الذين بنوا علاقتهم بواشنطن، على حجم تأثير قوتها العسكرية، وبنوا سياساتهم وعدواتهم وصداقاتهم على إعتبار هذه القوة وتأثيرها عاملاً غير قابل للتغيير.

في طليعة المذعورين في المنطقة، ثلاثة، كيان الاحتلال الذي سارعت نخبه السياسية للحديث عن قلق مصيري ووجودي في ضوء الاستراتيجية الأميركية الجديدة، التي عبر عنها قرار الانسحاب من أفغانستان، والذي يتوقع «الإسرائيليون» أن تليه انسحابات، ولو تأخرت قليلا، من العراق وسورية، ويبشرون بمرحلة مقبلة عنوانها «إسرائيل» وحيدة، أمام موازين قوى تغيّرت بعكس صالحها في المحيط القريب والبعيد، الطرف الثاني الذي بدأ يستشعر بالخطر هو القيادات الكردية التي عملت في سورية تحت راية الاحتلال الأميركي، وقطعت كل جسور التواصل مع الدولة السورية بوهم أبدية الحماية الأميركية، أما الطرف الثالث الذي لا يخفي ذعره فهم عرب التطبيع الذين يشعرون بأنهم قد يكون عليهم دفع فواتير سيرهم وراء النصائح الأميركي بالتطبيع، فيما الأميركي غير مستعد لحماية توقيعه وموقعه في الصور التذكارية، مستعيدين تجربة الانسحاب الأميركي من لبنان وما رافقه من تداعيات يرويها الرئيس السابق أمين الجميّل في مذكراته، وتركه يواجه وحيداً التركة الأميركية المسماة بإتفاق السابع عشر من أيار الذي لم يصمد طويلاً بعد هذا الانسحاب، بعدما صار إلغاؤه شرطاً لاستعادة الحدّ الأدنى من الاستقرار مع الداخل اللبناني والجار والشقيق السوري الذي أخذ الأميركي على عاتقه تحجيمه لحماية الاتفاق، كما وعد دول التطبيع بتحجيم إيران.

البعض يضع قمة بغداد بين قوسين، بصفتها قمة المذعورين، لوصل منخفض مع إيران استعداداً للآتي، كي لا يكون أعظم، بعد انسحابين متوقعين للقوات الأميركية من كلّ من سورية والعراق.

Quick update on the Kabul situation

August 30, 2021

The Saker

Quick update on the Kabul situation

Since I wrote my overview about the causes and implication of the Kabul disaster things have not improved in the last.

It is clear that the “Biden” administration has tried very hard to do some damage control, but that only made things even worse (just think of Biden’s talks to the nation).  It is also clear that there is no way the US can evacuate all its citizens, nevermind former employees, before the Taliban deadline expires.  Besides, the Taliban have already sealed off the airport and do not let any Afghan nationals enter anymore.

One sentence spoken by a Russian analyst about what Biden called the “American heroes” struck me as particularly well suited to the current chaos: “soldiers have to become heroes when their commanders make a major mistake“.  This is almost always true, with some exceptions, of course.

Then there is the not so heroic “retaliation” promised by Biden.  Apparently, so say local TV, a US attack drone did kill a local ISIS fighter already driving a car with explosives towards the airport.  That strike, in downtown Kabul, also destroyed 2 homes and killed three families, 12 civilians including 7 kids (ages 2 to 10)!  That will *not* help anything or convince anyone to take US threats seriously.  Remember the Takfiri slogan “we love death more than you love life“?  But the hatred will only increase following this latest atrocity.

By September 1st, in 2 days from now, the situation of the many tens of thousands of collaborators, employee, local aides, etc. and their families will become extremely dangerous unless some major power intervenes and puts pressure on the Taliban.  Possible, but not very likely.

I need to mention one hypothesis: that the ISIS-K suicide bombers might have had accomplices inside the Taliban.  If we consider Taliban as one unitary uniform movement, this hypothesis makes no sense.  But if we see the Taliban as a loosely federated movement of different entities and tribes, then this makes a lot more sense.  Keep in mind that five of the current Taliban “ministers” are former GITMO residents with all that implies…

As for the Taliban, they appear to be truly trying to first restore some order to Kabul.  They are also trying hard to explain what they intend to do.  It sure looks like the new Taliban are a notch up from the old one.  That does not mean that I like them, or approve, just that this is what I am observing now.

For example, the Taliban have promised a general amnesty to all those who collaborated with the US, but that only means that orders to shoot are less likely to come from the top.  But the local gun-toting Taliban foot-“soldiers” (I use this term very generously) will, as always, do whatever the hell they want, locally and away from cellphone cameras.

The Saker

Terrorists Increase Bombings in Syria; Is False Flag Looming?

MIRI WOOD 

Archive of terrorists described as medics by the NATO liars.

Terrorists armed and supported by NATO countries, who refused reconciliation with the government, and rejected getting on those air conditioned green bus to join other al Qaeda savages in the temporary haven provided by NATO invader Erdogan, have increased deadly attacks against Daraa al Balad.

The NATO supremacist junta ruling the UN was wailing its tears for the savages, on Wednesday, one day after the first batch of the beasts with two legs, along with their concubines and unfortunate biological footprints, had been shipped out. The second parcel of human garbage was sent on its way, on Thursday — with some reports claiming they were en route to somewhere in Europe.

Daraa Balad green buses to evict ISIS and Al Qaeda terrorists to northern Syria

On Saturday, terrorists who went into hiding with their NATO weapons — weapons do not fall like manna from the heavens — and used ground to ground mortars to blow up a civilian home, murdering two children, and injuring their older siblings, and mother. Lest it still not be clear after more than one decade of heinous atrocities, the NATO rabid dogs of war would still have us believe that the savage terrorists are altruistic human beings, yearning to be free — likely from pre-NATO Spring affordable food, housing, schooling, and full employment — and will stop at no lie to continue the barbaric, war criminal lies.

Reuters lied , defended terrorists against murderous crimes.

NATO stenographer Reuters, recently notorious for fraudulent fact checks, lied about Saturday’s terrorists bombings.

On Sunday, the NATO sponsored terrorists bombed the building of the Internal Security Forces, murdering one policemen and injuring two others in Daraa al Balad.

Our NATO double standards of murderous hypocrisy and other war crimes are increasing, along with attacks by terrorists in Syria. NATO stenographer-media will wax poetic about hushed reverence among grieving families under gray skies as caskets with dead US soldiers are returned from a Taliban terror attack in Kabul, and ignore Syrian Arab Army soldiers coming under terrorists’ bombings, and lying about murdered civilians.

Demented Joe checks his watch at the somber occasion of Americian troops killed by terrorists coming home in caskets.
Somber Joe Biden checks the time as US troops return home in caskets.

We provide the photo of President Biden and the watch, not to point out a singular bit of rudeness, but to bring attention to his increasingly coming under attack, even by those ignoring his obvious dementia (despite his meds, his massive herding noted at the inauguration and at the G7 meeting, his likely getting plenty of sleep, his recent onset of some extrapyridimal side effects — caused by neuroleptics noted in his gait). That much of the bipartisan country is perturbed by him suggests it may be time for another false flag, to divert attention to a 10 minute hate.

To help us continue, please visit the Donate page to donate or learn how to help us with no cost.
Follow us on Telegram: http://t.me/syupdates link will open the Telegram app.

In September 2016, uninidicted war criminal Barack Obama accidentally slaughtered 83 Syrian Arab Army soldiers in al Thardeh, near the Deir Ezzor Airport. These soldiers were about to wipe out the hiding place of a small army of ISIS terrorists, who were accidentally rescued by this little faux pas of the 44th president.

slaughter in Deir Ezzor by terrorists in suits.
Mass funeral for 83 Syrian Arab Army solders accidentally murdered by Obama terrorists.

Syria News mentions this seeming ancient history as preface to the response of then US ambassador to the UN, also unindicted war criminal, and NATO supporter of terrorists in Syria, Samantha Power.

Power was enraged that the Russian ambassador had disturbed her by calling an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council. At her presser, she not only voiced her annoyance, she not only ignored the fact that the US led coalition bombing the SAR was a war crime, but she also let the proverbial cat out of the bag, albeit via the geopolitical version of Freudian projection — that is, blaming another country for the nefarious actions one’s own country has previously perpetrated, and is amenable to perpetrating again (e.g., the Gulf of Tonkin ‘incident.’)

She explained that when there is a problem, the puppeteers of the terrorists create a diversion; her admission in 2016 hold true, today.

US Americans are increasingly faced with home evictions, endure unaffordable healthcare, are terrorized by COVID and its ever-increasing variants, are watching food costs skyrocket. Do they really care about fraudulent monthly meetings on the ridiculous chemical Syria files?

Or, while they complain about Afghanistan being ‘abandoned’ to terrorists, are they in need of a need false flag by terrorists against the people of Syria, so they may enjoy a short-lived dopamine rush to divert attention from their very real problems?

— Miri Wood

To help us continue, please visit the Donate page to donate or learn how to help us with no cost.
Follow us on Telegram: http://t.me/syupdates link will open the Telegram app.

Congress Supremacists Remind White House of Regime Change Doctrine in Syria

https://syrianews.cc/congress-supremacists-remind-white-house-of-regime-change-doctrine-in-syria/embed/#?secret=IUyo9nAaJC

9 Women and Children Injured Trying to Put Out a Fire in Al-Hol Camp

https://syrianews.cc/9-women-and-children-injured-trying-to-put-out-a-fire-in-al-hol-camp/embed/#?secret=b3UxLExcy3

NATO Turkish Army Drone Bombs NATO Kurdish SDF Vehicle in Hasakah

https://syrianews.cc/nato-turkish-army-drone-bombs-nato-kurdish-sdf-vehicle-in-hasakah/embed/#?secret=ap5sz1a5vD

%d bloggers like this: