قوى الطوائف مع دولة مدنية في لبنان The forces of sects with a civil state in Lebanon

أكتوبر 30, 2019

د.وفيق إبراهيم

يطغى شعار الدولة المدنية على كل الشعارات الأخرى في المرحلة الحالية في لبنان، متحكماً بالسنة السياسيين وقادة الأحزاب بشكل مذهل يدعو الى طرح سؤال وحيد، اذا كانت كل هذه القوى مع الدولة المدنية، فأين هي أحزاب النظام الطائفي المسيطر على البلاد منذ 1948 ؟

وكيف استطاع هذا النظام الصمود بمذهبيته العميقة، فيما تؤيد كل مكوناته مدنية الدولة؟

هنا تكمن إحدى المعجزات الكبيرة التي لا يفهمها إلا السياسيون اللبنانيون المتمكنون إلى حدود الاحتراف في تقديم صور متعددة لانتماءاتهم السياسية. فهل هناك مثيل للوزير السابق وليد جنبلاط الذي يترأس حزباً مذهبياً وإقطاعيا ومناطقياً وتقدمياً واشتراكياً وأخيراً مؤيداً للدولة المدنية!

أما رئيس حزب القوات السيد سمير جعجع فابتدأ حياته الاحترافية قائداً في حزب فجر حرباً طائفية استمرت حتى تسعينات القرن الماضي، مستفيداً من دعم إسرائيلي للبنان، أيدته القوات الجعجعية وشاركت فيه بالمزيد من اقتراف المجازر الطائفية.

وهذا ينطبق على جميع أحزاب لبنان العاملة ضمن إطار النظام السياسي مقابل أحزاب وطنية ويسارية وقومية تؤمن بالدولة المدنية ولم تنتم يوماً إلى مؤسسات النظام.

لقد وصل هذا التلفيق إلى حدود القوى الدينية، التي تعلن تأييدها للحراك الشعبي فهل تؤيد حقاً الدولة المدنية؟

علينا أولاً الإشارة إلى أن الدولة المدنية تقوم على فصل التأثير الديني عن تفاعلات السياسة وحصره في إطار خاص به يعتبر أن الدين وسيلة للعبادة وليس للسيطرة السياسية.

هذا ما فعلته اوروبا واميركا واليابان والصين وروسيا، وبلدان أخرى كثيرة.

لذلك فإن الدولة الفرنسية مثلاً ألغت التقسيم الطائفي للسلطة بين الكاثوليك والبروتستانت وجعلت من الانتماء الوطني المفتوح قاعدة للدمج الاجتماعي بالمساواة الكاملة لمواطنيها في الحقوق السياسية والاجتماعية والاقتصادية، وعلى اساس الوطنية والكفاءة، وبذلك اعادت الدين الى مواقعه في الكنائس مع حصر دوره في العبادات، حتى أن الزواج الفرنسي الزامي في البلديات، حتى يصبح شرعياً.

ونحت معظم دول العالم على الطريقة نفسها لكن الدين في العالم العربي والاسلامي يجري استخدامه وسيلة للتحشيد وتشكيل العصبيات السياسية فالوهابية في السعودية اداة لضبط السكان في طاعة آل سعود، ومفتي الأزهر أقوى مؤيدي كل نظام مصري جديد.

ان احوال القوى الدينية متشابهة في العالم الاسلامي ومهمتها الوحيدة تطويع الناس لخدمة المسؤولين السياسيين.

أما لبنان فبالغ في طائفية نظامه السياسي نظراً لتعددية المذاهب والاديان فيه. ففيما يحرص الدستور في مصر والمغرب والجزائر والسودان والاردن على اسلامية الدولة والرئيس، يذهب النظام السياسي اللبناني نحو «مذهبة» رؤساء مؤسساته الدستورية ونوابه ووزرائه والموظفين الاداريين والقضاء والجامعات وكل شيء تقريباً.

وهذا ما ادى الى تجذير الطائفية في لبنان، متيحاً لطبقته السياسية بالهيمنة على كل شيء تقريباً، وهذا حول المواطن متسولاً يبحث عن لقمة عيشه عند المسؤول عن طائفته، حتى أصبحت الطائفية معممة في العلاقات بين اللبنانيين وعلى كل المستويات.

فانتفخت الاحزاب واصبح لكل طائفة احزابها الناطقة باسمها والمستولية على قواها عند كل المكونات ومن دون استثناء.

لقد ادى هذا النمط من العلاقات السياسية الى تراكم اكبر فساد سياسي معروف في دولة بحجم لبنان مستتبعاً سطواً كاملاً على مقدرات البلاد باسلوب علني يحتمي بالتحشيد الطائفي، ما انتج بطالة وتضخماً وافلاساً وعجزاً ويناً عاماً يزيد على المئة وعشرين مليارا دولار في دولة لا يتعدى ناتجها الوطني العشرين ملياراً.

وغابت الكهرباء والمياه وتكدست النفايات واصبح الأمن فئوياً يخضع لسلطة الزعماء الذين اضافوا الى قوتهم ميزة القداسة الدينية.

هذا ما يدفع الى الحيرة في احزاب طائفية تسللت الى قيادة التحرك الشعبي المتواصل وتطالب بدولة مدنية، فهل هي جدية في مطالبتها ام انها تحاول السيطرة على هذا الحراك الشعبي ذي السمتين الجديدتين على لبنان وهما:تبلور شعور طبقي مع اتجاه نحو الاحساس بالوطنية على حساب تراجع هيمنة «المقدس» القامع لمصالح الناس باللعب عن العصبيات الطائفية والمذهبية.

لعل هذا يؤكد أن الاحزاب المحركة للمتظاهرين، تستعمل هذه الاساليب في إطار صراعاتها مع احزاب اخرى ضمن السلطة، لذلك تذهب نحو استغلال انتفاضة اللبنانيين على النظام الطائفي بتبني شعاراتهم حول ضرورة الدولة المدنية.

والدليل أن الحريري يقدم نفسه «بيي السنة» وجنبلاط سلطان الشوف وعالية وجعجع المدافع عن القديسين، وللامانة فإن هذا الوضع يشمل كل احزاب السلطة من دون استثناء. فهل نحن عشية تحول لبنان دولة مدنية؟

يحتاج هذا الأمر الى احزاب سياسية حقيقية تؤمن بمدنية الدولة، هناك الكثير منها خارج السلطة، لذلك فليست بقادرة على تغيير النظام الطائفي.

ان هذاالتغيير يحتاج الى موازنات قوى شعبية لها قياداتها الفعلية والتحرك الاخير هو الحركة الاساسية في رحلة الألف ميل للقضاء على نظام طائفي متلون يستعمل كل الشعارات الديموقراطية الحديثة وهي براء منه، لذلك فإن اللبنانيين ذاهبون نحو بناء دولة مدنية فعلية تحتاج الى قليل من الصبر والكثير من موازين القوى.

Translation By Word 2019

The forces of sects with a civil state in Lebanon

October 30, 2019

Dr. Wafiq Ibrahim

The slogan of the civil state dominates all the other slogans at the current stage in Lebanon, controlling the Sunni politicians and party leaders in a stunning way to ask the only question, if all these forces are with the civil state, where are the parties of the sectarian regime that has controlled the country since 1948?

How has this regime been able to withstand its deep ideology, while all its components support the civil state?

Here lies one of the great miracles that only lebanese politicians who are able to the limits of professionalism understand in providing multiple images of their political affiliations. Is there an instance of former minister Walid Jumblatt, who heads a sectarian, feudal, regional, progressive, socialist and finally a supporter of the civilstate!

The head of the Forces Party, Mr. Samir Geagea, began his professional career as a leader of the Party that blew up a sectarian war that lasted until the 1990s, taking advantage of Israeli support for Lebanon, which was supported by the Geagea forces and participated in more sectarianmassacres.

This applies to all parties in Lebanon operating within the framework of the political system as opposed to national, leftist and nationalist parties that believe in the civil state and have never belonged to the institutions of theregime.

This fabrication has reached the limits of the religious forces, which declare their support for the popular movement. Do you really support the civil state?

First, we should point out that the civil state is based on separating religious influence from the interactions of politics and limiting it to its own framework that considers religion to be a means of worship, not politicalcontrol.

This is what Europe, America, Japan, China, Russia and many other countries havedone.

The French State, for example, abolished the sectarian division of power between Catholics and Protestants and made open national belonging a basis for social integration with the full equality of its citizens in political, social and economic rights, on the basis of patriotism and efficiency, thereby restoring religion. To his positions in the churches with limited his role in worship, so that French marriage is compulsory in the municipalities, until it becomeslegal.

Most of the countries of the world are in the same way, but religion in the Arab and Islamic world is being used as a means of shaping political tensions, Wahhabism in Saudi Arabia is a tool to control the population in obedience to the Al Saud, and the Mufti of Al-Azhar is the strongest supporter of every new Egyptianregime.

The conditions of religious forces are similar in the Islamic world and their sole mission is to recruit people to serve politicalofficials.

Lebanon, on the other hand, has over-sectarianism in its political system because of its multi-confessional and religious system. While the constitution in Egypt, Morocco, Algeria, Sudan and Jordan is keen on the Islamic state and the president, the Lebanese political system goes towards the “gilded” heads of its constitutional institutions, its deputies, its ministers, administrative officials, the judiciary, universities and almosteverything.

This led to the rooting of sectarianism in Lebanon, allowing its political class to dominate almost everything, and this is about the citizen who is seeking a living at the head of his community, until sectarianism became generalized in relations between the Lebanese and at alllevels.

The parties have blown up and each group has its own own parties and has taken over its powers in all components withoutexception.

This type of political relations has led to the accumulation of the biggest known political corruption in a country the size of Lebanon, following a complete robbery of the country’s capabilities in a public way that protects sectarian ism, which has resulted in unemployment, inflation, bankruptcy, deficits and public debt of more than 120 billion dollars in a country that does not exceed Its national product is 20billion.

Electricity and water were absent, waste was piled up and security became a category under the authority of leaders who added to their power the advantage of religiousholiness.

This is what causes confusion in sectarian parties that have infiltrated the leadership of the popular movement and demands a civil state, is it serious in its demand or is it trying to control this popular movement with two new poisons on Lebanon: the crystallization of a class feeling with a trend towards a sense of patriotism at the expense of the decline of hegemony « Al-Maqdis» suppressing the interests of the people by playing about sectarian and sectariantensions.

Perhaps this confirms that the parties driving the demonstrators, use these methods in the context of their conflicts with other parties within the authority, so they go towards exploiting the uprising of the Lebanese on the sectarian system by adopting their slogans about the necessity of a civilstate.

The proof is that Hariri presents himself as “Bay sunnah”, “Jumblat sultan al-Shuf” and Aalay and Geagea, the defender of the saints, and to be honest, this situation includes all parties of power without exception. Are we on the eve of Lebanon’s transformation as a civil state?

This needs real political parties that believe in the civility of the state, there are many of them outside power, so they are not able to change the sectariansystem.

This change needs the budgets of popular forces that have their actual leadership and the last move is the main movement in the journey of a thousand miles to eliminate a sectarian system that uses all the slogans of modern democracy and is innocent of it, so the Lebanese are going towards building a real civil state that needs a little bit of Patience and a lot of powerbalances.

 

Saudi Prisons and Courts: Is There Anything More Unjust?

Saudi Prisons and Courts: Is There Anything More Unjust?

By Latifa al-Husseini

Beirut – Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman is continuing his clampdown on every voice of dissent. It makes no difference whether power lies in his hands or those of his father, King Salman. He changed, deposed and imprisoned whoever he wanted. Things are done according to his will. He kills, buys or sells. He exercises control over whatever he wants. There is no obstacle blocking his way. Bin Salman’s policy of tyranny is evident across all of the kingdom’s internal matters. His behavior does not recognize the rights, opinions and demands of others. And for that reason, he believed there is simply no need for anyone to speak up. Therefore, the best solution is to silence and liquidate them.

Arrests and executions on the rise

When it comes to basic freedoms in the Kingdom, the situation is only getting more complicated. Activists have long complained of harassment and persecution. But the reign of Salman bin Abdul Aziz, which began four years ago, witnessed a sharp rise in the percentage of executions and unfair trials of prisoners of conscience, religious clerics and those taking part in peaceful movements. This is contrary to Bin Salman’s claims of reform that he made after the overthrow of former Crown Prince Mohammed bin Nayef in 2017.

This year alone, there have been 164 executions so far, and arbitrary arrests have exceeded dozens. The scale of these executions suggests that there is no decline in unfair liquidations. In 2016, the Kingdom executed 153 citizens who were denied fair trials. In 2017, more than 100 detainees were executed, and hundreds of clerics, academics and writers were jailed. In 2018, authorities arrested and tortured dozens of female and other human rights activists.

Organized crimes are committed on the orders of the higher-ups. In 2015, these officials opened the doors of employment for those wishing to join its team of executioners. The security services report directly to the crown prince’s office. At the forefront of the security services is the State Security, which has been charged with arrest campaigns against political, social, and human rights activists from different currents in addition to the princes belonging to the ruling family who may pose a potential threat to Bin Salman. Also, in the crosshairs are tribal elders and businessmen who have had their significant wealth confiscated by the authorities.

In the absence of international accountability, Bin Salman’s apparatuses are moving towards more repression and tyranny. Information from within the Kingdom reflects a dark atmosphere. There are no resolutions, but rather a deepening crisis.

A prominent Saudi lawyer, Taha al-Hajji, spoke to Al-Ahed News Website about the very poor human rights situation, which appears to lack even the slightest glimmer of hope. Al-Hajji says that the Saudi judiciary usually does not announce its intention to execute prisoners. Instead it accumulates the number of prisoners it plans to put to death and then carries out mass executions. These often coincide with political developments in the region, especially those concerning Iran.

Indications that new executions are imminent & those most at risk

In light of recent reports that the authorities are preparing to execute a number of detainees, al-Hajji points to heightened activity on the part of the judiciary in the past weeks. It is speeding up trials and rushing hearings. Whereas before they were only held every two months. This indicates that authorities are striving to achieve a goal, especially since the Saudi judiciary has never held back-to-back hearings in this manner.

Al-Hajji’s remarks back reports circulating about sessions held by the specialized criminal court in the past two weeks for a number of preachers, most notably Salman Al-Odah and Safar Al-Hawali. Al-Hajji’s hypothesis is that the Saudi regime is preparing for a new batch of mass executions. He points to a long list of political prisoners and explains that their conditions vary judicially. Some are appearing before the appeals court and others before the Supreme Court. There are some detainees whose cases are still new, and no judgment has been issued. However, the prosecution is requesting the death penalty (it submits its application to the court and the court then decides).

According to al-Hajji’s data, the number of death sentences in Saudi Arabia is much higher than published. He warns that the detainees most at risk of execution are Ali al-Nimr, Abdullah al-Zaher and Daoud al-Marhoun, who face old sentences that came into force but were stopped due to international pressure.

Mock trials and violations of prisoners’ rights

Those who keep up with the human rights situation in the Kingdom would notice that the detainees who appear in court are not granted fair trials, and that the judiciary does not listen to them or their representatives. Due to his experience with the Al-Saud courts for many years, Al-Hajji asserts that it is difficult to figure out who is being sentenced to death. The authorities make these rulings public through state-run media, which announces that death sentences were handed down, but they do not name the defendants.

However, their common denominator is that they were all accused of crimes stemming from participation in the political movement.

Al-Hajji, who left the kingdom after getting fed-up of the Saudi judiciary’s persecution of prisoners, explains that some judgments are issued before the indictment is made, especially when it comes to detainees who participated in demonstrations and what the authorities consider inciting public opinion against the regime.

“The trials of political detainees take place in the specialized criminal court, which is dedicated to terrorism and state security cases. This gives a clear picture of how the regime treats the peaceful demonstrator,” he adds.

According to al-Hajji, the features of the mock trials resemble those of real ones: an accused, a lawyer, a prosecution and a hearing. Up to this point, everything appears normal. But the reality is different. What takes place in the courtroom is nothing but a skit in which the case is over before it even begins. Moreover, sentences are often accompanied by confessions referred to as legal confessions that are extracted under torture.

The file is submitted to the judge only after the detainee has been forced to sign the confessions the authorities want. The judge only has to ask, “Is this your signature?” Then, the case is closed. The presumed “defendant” does not know what he signed and is later returned to solitary confinement and abused.

Al-Hajji points out that he always challenged the confessions on which the court bases its ruling, in an attempt to prove that they were extracted under duress and torture in order to underscore its invalidity. But the court does not take the challenge seriously.

He evokes his bitter experience with the judiciary saying, “I always demanded video footage during the interrogation and medical reports proving that the detainee had been tortured, but the court does not oblige the prosecution on this matter and completely ignores it.”

Violations of the rights of the detainees are never ending. The court does not allow a prisoner to appoint a lawyer until after the case begins in court. Accordingly, he is forbidden to communicate with his family during the investigation period. To make matters worse, it may take more than a year after being arrested to bring the accused to court. Sometimes the case is brought to the court of terrorism and then referred the same day to the criminal court, al-Hajji stresses.

Since the kingdom’s judiciary lacks integrity and credibility, Al-Hajji decided years ago to boycott the Saudi courts, after it became clear that the lawyer is only an ‘extra on set’, serving the authority and whitewashing its performance before the Western media. And the detainee never benefits from him.

The pain of those forgotten in prisons

Al-Hajji describes prison conditions as tragic. According to his previous observations and what is happening today, it is another world in detention, one not even seen in the movies. It is a strange wild world. And yet the authority carries out a huge media campaign to polish its image and the image of its prisons. The latest of which was shown on National Day when a large number of celebrities entered the prisons to praise the services there.

“The buildings are modern and well-equipped, but what about the torture chambers and solitary cells? These are violations in the dozens,” Al-Hajji says. “Mrs. Nassima Al-Sadah has been in solitary confinement for more than a year now. While it has been leaked that Loujain Al-Hathloul has been subjected to horrific forms of torture and harassment. There are some detainees who were imprisoned and were only set free after being murdered.”

Al-Hajji asserts that all those who enter prison are subjected to particularly harsh treatment during the first interrogation period. He points out that Shia political detainees are banned from practicing their religious rites and so are some books.

Al-Hajji draws a clear distinction in the way terrorist prisoners from Al-Qaeda and ISIS are treated. They are subjected to counseling programs, imprisoned for a few months, then released and given in-kind and material gifts in spite of their heinous crimes.

“This program does not include Shia detainees or prisoners of conscience. The authorities tried to say that they do it with them. However, the truth shows that it is carried out only at the end of the term that prisoners of conscience are serving, that is, before the prisoner is finally released. This means that none of the Shia detainees had been released before completing the sentence. They are not subjected to the counseling program at all. And this applies to the Sunni prisoners of conscience,” he adds.

The tragic situation of the detainees under Mohammed bin Salman’s reign worsened despite claims of reform. This grim picture prompts al-Hajji to predict new atrocities on the part of the authorities, especially since activists abroad are being chased and their families inside the Kingdom are being put under great pressure, where no dissident or opposition figure is free.

إيران والهجوم التركي على شمال سورية

أكتوبر 12, 2019

د حكم أمهز طهران

عندما يستخدم الاعلام الإيراني مصطلح الاعتداء التركي على شمال سورية، ندرك مباشرة حجم المخاوف لدى طهران من مخاطر عملية التوغل العسكرية التركية. لأن الإيراني لا ينظر الى الامن في المنطقة من منظور جزئي بل من منظور كلي، اي ان أمن المنطقة من امن إيران والعكس صحيح، لذا نجده دوماً حريصاً على طرح المبادرات العامة لا الجزئية، مثل، مبادرة معاهدة عدم الاعتداء في ما بين دول المنطقة التي تقدم بها وزير الخارجية محمد جواد ظريف، ومبادرة الأمل لأمن الملاحة في الخليج الفارسي التي عرضها بعده الرئيس حسن روحاني في الامم المتحدة والهادفة الى تشكيل مجموعة من دول المنطقة تشارك فيها الامم المتحدة.

لهذا كان موقف ظريف في المقابلة التي أجرتها معه صحيفة الرأي الكويتية الخميس، بأن الامن الاقليمي لا يمكن تفكيكه .

من هذا المنظور تتعامل إيران مع «الاعتداء» التركي على سورية، باعتبار مهدداً للاستقرار والامن في المنطقة، ويهدد بشكل مباشر سورية وسيادتها ووحدة اراضيها، باعتبار ان الاعتداء يستهدف منطقة شرق الفرات التي تعتبر أكثر من استراتيجية، ونقطة تضارب مصالح لدول متخاصمة ومتطاحنة، وأي اهتزاز فيها من وجهة نظر إيران، يمكن ان يعرقل دور محور المقاومة، ويهدد بعودة التكفيريين والارهابيين اليها، وصولاً الى مخاوف الصدام بين الجيشين التركي والسوري. وهذا ما يريده المشروع الصهيوأميركي. لا بل ان الاخطر في الموضوع، ان طهران التي تربطها علاقات جيدة مع تركيا، بالرغم من الاختلاف بشأن الملف السوري، وتشكل معها ثلاثياً ضامناً لاجتماعات استانة مع روسيا، ليس من مصلحتها ان يتضرر اردوغان في اللعبة الأميركية المخططة للمنطقة، حتى لا يصيبه ما اصاب صدام حسين عندما اوحى الأميركيون له بقبولهم باجتياح الكويت، ثم جعلوا من ذلك مبرراً لضربه.

وقد قرأنا امس، في تغريدات الرئيس الأميركي دونالد ترامب ما يوحي بذلك، فهو هدد اردوغان بتهديدات غير مفهومة المقصد، فتوعّده بعقوبات مالية قاسية،، وقال مغرداً، لدينا واحد من ثلاثة خيارات: إرسال الآلاف من القوات وتحقيق نصر عسكري، ضرب تركيا بشدة من الناحية المالية وعبر فرض عقوبات، أو التوسط في اتفاق بين تركيا والأكراد! . وبعد ذلك خرج مسؤول في الخارجية الأميركية وقال إن تركيا لم تتجاوز الخط الأحمر بعد، وان ترامب كلف دبلوماسيين للتوسط بين الطرفين لوقف إطلاق النار، وتوعده بالعواقب إن تجاوز هذا الخط.

ماذا يفهم من ذلك؟ هل ترامب لم يعط الضوء الاخضر لاردوغان؟، ام أنه يجعل من الهجوم مبرراً لتوجيه ضربة مالية قاسية لحليف استراتيجي لم يحن موعد استبداله بعد؟ بل يكتفي معه بـ فركة اذن فقط من خلال العقوبات المالية؟

ولماذ استفاق ترامب فجأة على هذه المواقف بعد ان اعلن الجمهوريون العمل على قرار لفرض عقوبات على تركيا، بحيث يواجه اردوغان ونظامه «عواقب وخيمة» بسبب الهجوم بلا رحمة على مَن وصفتهم بالحلفاء الأكراد في شمال سورية؟

هنا تدرك طهران أن من اولويات أميركا الحفاظ على العلاقات الاستراتيجية مع تركيا، لكنها تخشى من ان تقوم واشنطن، وعلى عادتها في بيع الحلفاء والشراء بهم، بازاحة اردوغان من المشهد، والإتيان ببدائل ذات ولاء كامل لواشنطن، لا سيما أن الأخيرة متهمة بالمشاركة في الانقلاب الفاشل عليه، في العام 2016. ومصدر الخشية هو المخطط الأميركي السعودي، الهادف للقضاء على مشروع الاخوان المسلمين في العالم، لمصلحة المشروع الوهابي السعودي، فاذا ما قضي على الاخوان، تخلو الساحة السنية للوهابية.

الصراع طاحن بين مشروع الاخوان الذي يقوده حاليا اردوغان ومشروع الوهابية الذي تقوده السعودية. والكل يدرك ان رؤوس الاخوان قطعت في غير دولة، بدءاً من عزل الاخوان في مصر من الحكم وسجنهم، مروراً بإقصاء الاخوان عن المشهد التونسي، وتقييدهم في المغرب، ومحاصرتهم في غزة، وضغطهم في قطر، وصولاً الى عزل الرئيس السوداني الاخواني عمر البشير بالرغم من انحيازه أخيراً للسعودية وارسال جيشه للقتال الى جانبها في اليمن. بمعنى انه كما يقول المثل: «لم يبق من العجرمة الا هذا المسّاس». أي انه لم يبق من قادة الاخوان الفاعلين، الا اردوغان، الذي يشكل رأس حربة هذا المشروع حالياً، فاذا ما سقط اردوغان انتهى مشروع الاخوان عملياً في العالم، وتسيّد المشروع الوهابي الخادم المطيع للأميركي والاسرائيلي، هنا لا نبرئ المشروع الاخواني ايضا، لكن نضيء على صراع بين مشروعين احدهما اقرب الى الأميركي الاسرئيلي .

من هنا كانت ردة فعل الخارجية الإيرانية غاضبة مستنكرة، داعية انقرة الى وقف الهجوم فوراً وإخراج قواتها من سورية، والعمل على تنفيذ اتفاق أضنة الذي يزيل المخاوف والقلق التركي… لأن طهران تدرك حجم خطر هذه العملية على تركيا اولاً، وعلى محور المقاومة ثانياً، باعتبار ان المنطقة المستهدفة تدخل في اطار جغرافية حركة المحور الممتدة من افغانستان الى إيران فالعراق وسورية ولبنان وفلسطين.. وهو بالنسبة لها، اهم من خط الحرير الصيني الذي يمرّ في تلك المنطقة ايضاً.

ولكن لا بد ان نشير الى ان من مصلحة طهران ايضا القضاء على القوات الانفصالية الكردية في سورية باعتبارها امتداداً للانفصاليين الاكراد في الداخلي الإيراني، مع التذكير بأن إرهابيي منظمة پیجاك الكردية الإيرانية الانفصالية، يتقلدون مناصب هامة وقيادية في التنظيمات الانفصالية الكردية في الداخل السوري.. وكذلك مصلحة الرباعي التركي السوري العراقي الإيراني وحتى مع الخماسي الروسي، انهاء الفكرة الكردية بالانفصال، لكون هذا الفريق الانفصالي يعتبر اسرائيل ثانية في المنطقة، بحسب خصومه.

وتدرك إيران ايضاً ان اجتياح تركيا للاراضي السورية، سيدخلها في حرب استنزاف على غير مستوى، بما يوصلها في النهاية الى الانسحاب تحت الضغط عاجلاً أم آجلا.. ولن يحميها الحزام الامني الذي تسعى لإنشائه على الحدود على غرار الحزام الامني الاسرائيلي في لبنان الذي ضم ميليشيات انطوان لحد التي تخلى عنها الاحتلال فور اندحاره عن ارض لبنان.

ستبذل إيران قصارى جهدها، لإنهاء الاعتداء العسكري التركي بأسرع وقت، بالتعاون مع الروسي، وستحاول طمأنة اردوغان الى وضعه السياسي والانتخابي لاحقاً لأن احد اهداف التوغل تعزيز شعبيته المهتزة، وتذكيره بمحاولة الانقلاب الفاشلة التي قيل بعد وقوعها، إن إيران لعبت دوراً هاماً في افشالها وإعادته الى السلطة، لان البديل كان أميركياً 100 بالمئة. وكذلك ستحاول مع روسيا وبالتنسيق مع الحكومة السورية، طمأنته، الى دوره في اي تسوية في سورية، من خلال حفظ حقوق تركيا على الحدود، وفي ضبط من يخاف منهم ويسميهم الارهابيين في الداخل السوري.

والا فان الاسرائيلي الداعم الأكبر للانفصاليين الاكراد، بدأ بتحريك الكونغرس والشارع الأميركي ضد ترامب لتحريضه على اردوغان، والتحريض خلال الحملات الانتخابية لدورة رئاسية ثانية، له أهميته الخاصة في الحسابات الداخلية الأميركية..

أيضاً ستسعى إيران الى إقناع مجلس سورية الديمقراطية ، بالعودة لحضن الدولة السورية، وتبديد هواجسه، مستفيدة من الدرس الذي تلقاه الاكراد، بتخلي أميركا عنهم وبيعهم اكثر من مرة سواء في سورية او العراق. لتؤكد لهم ان ليس هناك من حصن واقٍ لهم الا دولهم الأم، الوحيدة التي تحتضن دون ان تخوّن او تبيع أبناءها.

Related Videos

Related Articles

Trump Ally Graham: Syria Pullout Would Be Nightmare for «Israel»

Trump Ally Graham: Syria Pullout Would Be Nightmare for «Israel»

By Staff, Agencies

US President Donald Trump’s sudden decision to pull back US troops from northern Syria drew quick, strong criticism Monday from some of his closest allies in Congress, among them South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham, who warned that the move would ultimately be “a nightmare” for the “Israeli” entity.

“By abandoning the Kurds we have sent the most dangerous signal possible,” Graham said on Twitter.

“America is an unreliable ally and it’s just a matter of time before China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea act out in dangerous ways. The US now has no leverage and Syria will eventually become a nightmare for ‘Israel’,” the normally close ally of the president said.

It was condemned, too, by Kurdish fighters who would be abandoned to face a likely Turkish assault after fighting alongside Americans for years against the Wahhabi Daesh [Arabic acronym for “ISIS” / “ISIL”].

The announcement threw the military situation in Syria into fresh chaos and injected deeper uncertainty into US relations with European allies.

Syria’s Kurds accused the US of turning its back on allies and risking gains made in the years-long fight against Daesh.

Trump defended his decision, acknowledging in tweets that “the Kurds fought with us” but adding that they “were paid massive amounts of money and equipment to do so.”

“I held off this fight for almost 3 years, but it is time for us to get out of these ridiculous Endless Wars, many of them tribal, and bring our soldiers home,” he wrote.

If the Turks go too far, he tweeted later, “I in my great and unmatched wisdom” will destroy their economy.

Hours after the White House announcement, two senior State Department officials minimized the effects of the US action, telling reporters that only about two dozen American troops would be removed from the Turkey-Syria border, not all the US forces in the northeast of the country. They also said Turkey may not go through with a large-scale invasion and the US was still trying to discourage it.

Both officials spoke only on condition of anonymity to discuss what led to the internal White House decision.

Both Republicans and Democrats in the US have warned that allowing the Turkish attack could lead to a massacre of the Kurds and send a troubling message to American allies across the globe.

US troops “will not support or be involved in the operation” and “will no longer be in the immediate area,” in northern Syria, White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham said in an unusual late-Sunday statement that was silent on the fate of the Kurds.

There are about 1,000 US troops in northern Syria, and a senior US official said they will pull back from the area – and could depart the country entirely should widespread fighting break out between Turkish and Kurdish forces.

For the moment, the US troops are not leaving Syria, officials said.

A US official confirmed that American troops were already moving out of the security zone area, which includes the Syrian towns of Ras al-Ayn and Tal Abyad. That official was not authorized to speak for the record and was granted anonymity to comment.

Sunday’s announcement followed a call between Trump and Erdogan, the White House said Sunday.

The decision is an illustration of Trump’s focus on ending American overseas entanglements – one of his key campaign promises. His goals of swift withdrawals in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan have been stymied.

As he faces the impeachment inquiry at home, Trump has appeared more focused on making good on his political pledges, even at the risk of sending a troubling signal to American allies abroad.

Saudi Executions to be Continued: 39 Shia Detainees on Death Row

Saudi Executions to be Continued: 39 Shia Detainees on Death Row

By Staff

In the course of the Saudi regime’s continued crackdown against the Kingdom’s eastern province Shia population, activists warned that 39 detainees from Qatif are facing execution.

Detainees who come from the Shia-populated Qatif include 5 who are facing a final execution sentence and 8 are facing a preliminary sentence.

In further details, human rights activists urged urgent action is imperative to stop the government’s brutality following unfair mass trials, during which the detainees were tortured.

Earlier in April, the Saudi regime blatantly executed 37 Saudi youth for being opponents amid sickening international silence.

Giving empty pretexts and neglecting any talk of human rights, the Saudi interior ministry announced Tuesday the execution of 37 Saudi men.

“The death penalty was implemented… on a number of culprits for adopting extremist “terrorist” ideologies and forming “terrorist” cells to corrupt and disrupt security as well as spread chaos and provoke sectarian strife,” the state news agency said in a tweet.

Related

 

Bahrain Crackdown: Health of Hunger-striking Detainee Deteriorating

Bahrain Crackdown: Health of Hunger-striking Detainee Deteriorating

By Staff

Bahraini human rights activist Ebtisam al-Saegh reported that the health condition of detainee Osama al-Saghir has been deteriorating as he fainted in the washroom after spending 15 days of an ongoing hunger strike.

Al-Saghir, sentenced to 60 years in prison for political charges, started bleeding after the incident, al-Saegh said, adding that “although the bleeding stopped, he has been injured and in pain, and is still deprived from making phone calls and going out to the courtyard.”

For his part, Osama’s father said that all what his son demands is a private visit, a jacket and a blanket to feel warm.

Not to mention, it has been 9 months since Osama al-Saghir stopped receiving visitors due to the inspection and humiliation of his mother as she comes to visit him. Osama’s mother suffers from a heart disease, and her son demands granting her a private visit inside the prison while respecting her health situation.

Related Videos

Related News

 

Putin’s Multipolar Offer to Saudi Arabian Exceptionalism

Image result for Putin’s Multipolar Offer to Saudi Arabian Exceptionalism
Tim Kirby
September 18, 2019

Global Islamic Terrorism is universally recognized as today’s big threat and has been the justification for all sorts of changes, especially to life in the West after 9/11. The Islamic terrorists whom we are supposed to fear on a daily basis more or less believe in some form of Wahhabism, which grew up in and is spread from Saudi Arabia. Surprisingly the US and the Saudis have been and still are staunch allies. This makes little sense on the surface but Saudi exceptionalism extends to Russia as well. Russia and former parts of its territory have been some of the biggest victims of Wahhabism and still fight it to this day and yet President Putin just vowed to protect them from air threats via Russia’s top of the line equipment. So this raises the question by what logic would Russia want work with the Saudis who prop up the ideas that murder their citizens? The short answer is Multipolarity.

During the Cold War we saw two great powers with massive spheres of influence dividing the planet between themselves. This Bipolar (in the literal sense) structure forced everyone on America’s side to be Capitalist / Western-style Democratic and everyone on the USSR’s side to be Communist. So for every Communist revolution that succeeded Moscow’s sphere of influence grew while Washington’s shrank.

Now in the 21st century this dynamic is much different as the sole Hyperpower is fighting against any upstarts who challenge its status, which means that every nation that succumbs to the Washington status quo is a victory for Monopolarity, while any nation that begins to act on its own or under the influence of anyone besides the US/NATO/The West is a victory for Multipolarity.

This is why today, unlike during the Cold War Russia has a policy of being open to working with anyone who is willing to work with them regardless of ideology. Of course during the Cold War the US and the Soviet Union would work with countries outside their political theory of preference to some degree, but now Russia is free from the burdens of Communist ideology and is thus free to associate with anyone and Moscow is willing to work with anyone because any nation that rises up to a high level of sovereignty creates another crack in the monolith of Monopolarity.

This is why Moscow has been cooperating with Turkey who at times has been very aggressive towards them, shooting down a Russian planeforcing their way into Syria and working against Assad’s and Russia’s interests in the region, and opening Turkish Universities across parts of the Former USSR challenging Russian cultural influence. These all sound bad, but Moscow has a bigger fish to fry and the upstart Turks, despite being in NATO are beginning to push for a more powerful sovereign pro-Turkish foreign policy, which is bad for Russia in doses, but on the whole is a huge stride towards a Multipolar World that Russia so desperately needs.

And this is the logic that applies to the Saudis. True the Saudi Wahhabism and loud inaction in terms of containing Wahhabism have lead to the deaths of many Russian-speaking people the world over, but the Multipolar mission takes precedence, thus Putin offered the Saudis to buy Russian S-400 systems because “Our (Russian) air defenses can protect you, like they do Turkey and Iran” and that “These kinds of systems are capable of defending any kind of infrastructure in Saudi Arabia from any kind of attack.”

Syria and Turkey are both major Multipolar victories so perhaps in Putin’s words there is a hint that Saudi Arabia could jump on the Other World Order’s boat by buying these defense systems. The S-400s in question could be used to defend against a local neighbor, but we could suppose that a massive surface-to-air set up would best be used to defend against NATO, who is the only serious missile launching threat.

To an extent it is very possible that this offer by President Putin to the parties indirectly responsible for a great deal of suffering in Russia could actually be an invitation to the Multipolar World.

Saudi Arabia has been very much the exceptional Arab nation in the Middle East when it comes to NATO’s actions, but nothing lasts forever. The Saudis have oil and little means to defend it, while at the same time maintaining an ideology that has been demonized by the Mainstream Media for almost 20 years, prepping the West with a casus belli when the time comes. The fear of Monopolar aggression could force the Saudis to buy into team Multipolarity.

See Also

%d bloggers like this: