Israel agrees to fund ‘strategic materials’ for Ukraine as US weapons supply shrinks: Report

Tel Aviv is also allowing NATO members to supply Ukraine with weapons systems containing Israeli components, after the White House called on them to ‘team up’ with the west against Russia

 November 18 2022

(Photo credit: Valentyn Ogirenko/Reuters)


Israel has allowed NATO member states to provide Ukraine with weapons that contain Israeli-made components and has funded the delivery of “strategic materials” to Kiev, under pressure from the White House, according to an exclusive report by Haaretz.

Citing three senior European diplomatic officials, the report alleges that several weeks ago, US officials pushed Israeli authorities to “team up with NATO and the west in the struggle against Russia.”

Specifically, Washington wanted Tel Aviv to supply Ukraine with anti-aircraft batteries, as the US is reportedly “running low” on some high-end weapons systems and ammunition to transfer to Kiev.

According to US officials that spoke with CNN, after nine months of funding hostilities, the Pentagon is seeing its stockpiles “dwindle.” As such, Washington redoubled its push to have its allies fill in the gaps, allowing the war machine to march forward undisturbed.

But after talks between US and Israeli officials, Tel Aviv instead agreed to fund the delivery of “strategic materials,” with the approval of outgoing Prime Minister Yair Lapid and Defense Minister Benny Gantz.

In order to do this, Israel transferred several million dollars to an unidentified NATO member state that is “deeply involved in supplying military equipment to Ukraine.”

The unnamed country used the Israeli funds to purchase the “strategic materials” for Ukraine, in a scheme reminiscent of Poland’s recent role as a middleman to acquire Israeli anti-drone systems for the Ukrainian military.

While Hareetz claims to have knowledge of what the “strategic materials” actually are, they have refused to identify them at the request of their anonymous sources, likely to prevent a retaliatory response from the Kremlin.

In addition, the Israeli defense ministry has reportedly “eased its guidelines and agreed that NATO members such as the UK could supply Ukraine with weapons systems containing Israeli components.”

Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelensky has repeatedly pleaded with Israel to supply his country with weapons, including the Iron Dome missile defense system. Israel – which depends on diplomatic ties with Moscow to illegally bomb Syria – has officially refused.

Russia has issued stern warnings to Israel against supplying weapons to Ukraine. But despite this, on several occasions, Tel Aviv has not only openly backed what Moscow calls the “neo-Nazis” in Ukraine, but many Israelis have flocked to join the Ukrainian army as mercenaries.

Israeli Elections: Netanyahu’s Coalition Secures 65-Seat Majority in Knesset

 November 2, 2022

Following Tuesday’s Israeli Knesset elections, counting 97% of the votes showed on Wednesday that the Right-wing coalition, led by the former premier Benjamin Netanyahu secured a governing majority of 65 seats.

Consequently, Netanyahu will form the new government as the four previous election sessions failed to give a clear majority for any of the political alliances in the Zionist entity.

Although the margins were tight, the right-wing occupation leader was leading early on in the fifth election in less than four years,.

Netanyahu’s Likud will likely take over the 120-seat Knesset with 30 or 31 seats to spare, knowing that the right-wing coalition continued till the last moment before closing the polling centers provoking the settlers to participate in the elections.

Israeli candidate and former premier Benjamin Netanyahu

The initial projections indicated that this number, along with anticipated totals for the two ultra-Orthodox Jewish parties and the extreme-right “Religious Zionism alliance,” gave the coalition supporting Netanyahu between 61 and 62 seats.

Caretaker PM Yair Lapid’s party was on track to finish in second place as expected.

This comes after the Israeli occupation’s former PM seemed to be struggling to achieve a majority in the Knesset in light of the rising anti-Netanyahu rhetoric among his opponents.

The occupation’s opposition leader would come within a single seat of having a majority in the upcoming election, which is the fifth in less than four years.

If the election process does not give either side a majority, a deadlock would dominate the political scene within the occupation’s government while assigning incumbent Prime Minister Yair Lapid with the task of managing “Israel’s” affairs as caretaker Prime Minister.

A similar deadlock saw Netanyahu ousted from office back in 2021 after four votes that did not deliver on a parliamentary majority, resulting in former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid’s coalition taking over the Knesset.

Meanwhile, the Zionist circles highlighted the augmenting fears of the Palestinian operations during the elections which may reduce the turnout percentages, noting that the area of the attacks has expanded across the West Bank.

Israeli media reported that a car ramming attack on Maccabim Checkpoint left Tuesday a Zionist officer injured and Palestinian perpetrator martyred.

The Zionist enemy, thus, cordoned off the occupied West Bank in anticipation of Palestinian attacks as the Zionist circles noted that individual attackers, who are not affiliated with certain factions, are hardening the mission of the Israeli security measures.

Arab affairs expert Zvi Yehezkeli said that some of the attackers are Palestinian policemen, which makes it harder for the Zionist occupation forces to prevent the attacks.

Arab affairs expert Zvi Yehezkeli

The Israeli circles also voiced fears of missile attacks from Gaza on the settlements, which may affect the election process.

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

Related Videos

The fifth Israeli elections in 4 years amid political confusion and internal crises
Damascus | The Balfour Declaration and the beginning of the Zionist colonization of Palestine in a symposium of the Committee to Support the Palestinian People

Related News

«نشوة النصر» الإسرائيلية تتبدّد: «الذئاب» تعود… من جنوب الضفة

 الإثنين 31 تشرين الأول 2022

قامت قوات الاحتلال بإغلاق جميع الطرق والمداخل المؤدية إلى مدينة الخليل (أ ف ب)

أحمد العبد

رام الله | دخلت الخليل وأريحا، على مسافة أيّام قليلة من انتخابات «الكنيست»، على خطّ الاشتباك، لتُبدِّد «نشوة النصر» الإسرائيلية في نابلس وجنين، ومعها جميع إجراءات الطوارئ الأمنية التي تتعزّز تباعاً خشيةَ تنفيذ عمليات فدائية. عمليات أقرّ وزير أمن العدو، بيني غانتس، أنه لن يكون في المستطاع «منْعها كلّها»، متحدّثاً عن «أثمان مؤلمة وصعبة… وتحدّيات كبيرة». وتُنذر عمليتا الخليل وأريحا بتداعيات سيتحدَّد حجمها في الأيام المقبلة، مع تمدُّد حالة الاشتباك من شمال الضفة إلى جنوبها، ما يضع المنطقة بأكملها – وذلك سيناريو الرعب الإسرائيلي – في حالة مقاومة لن يكون من الممكن تحجيمها

في ذروة الاستنفار الإسرائيلي في الضفة الغربية المحتلّة، جاءت عملية «كريات أربع» التي نفّذها الشهيد محمد الجعبري، لتهدِم نشوة المنظومة الأمنية والاستخباراتية للعدو، والتي يعيشها الاحتلال منذ ارتكب جرائمه الأخيرة في نابلس وجنين؛ كما جاءت لتُبدِّد جميع الإجراءات التي اتّخذتها المؤسستَان العسكرية والأمنية مع اقتراب انتخابات «الكنيست»، خشيةَ تنفيذ عمليات فدائية. وتُنذر عملية الخليل التي تحمل في طيّاتها دلالات عسكرية وجغرافية غاية في الأهميّة، بتداعيات سيتحدَّد حجمها في الأيّام المقبلة. وإلى مقتل مستوطن وإصابة آخرين، فإن تداعياتها تبدو أكثر خطورة، مع تحرُّك مدينة الخليل بعد أشهر من حالة الهدوء النسبي الذي عاشته المحافظة، والذي من شأنه – إذا قُدِّر له أن يستمرّ ويتّسع – أن يقلب الأوضاع في الضفة رأساً على عقب، ولا سيما أن العملية استُتبعت بإطلاق نار آخر تجاه جنود الاحتلال قرب بلدة بني نعيم.

وسارع رئيس حكومة العدو، يائير لابيد، إلى تقييم الوضع الأمني في أعقاب العملية، آمراً بتعزيز القوات الأمنية في المنطقة، على أن تستمرّ حالة التأهُّب في مختلف الساحات، فيما قامت قوات الاحتلال بإغلاق جميع الطرق والمداخل المؤدية إلى مدينة الخليل، ومنعت الدخول إليها أو الخروج منها. وإلى ذلك، اقتحمت منزل الجعبري، وأخذت قياساته تمهيداً لهدمه، كما اعتقلت شقيق الشهيد. من جهته، اعترف وزير الأمن، بيني غانتس، أنه «ليس في الإمكان منْع كلّ العمليات المسلّحة»، مضيفاً: «في الإمكان دائماً حدوث عمليات. والأثمان مؤلمة وصعبة، لكن الوضع معقَّد. وهناك تحدّيات كبيرة، واسعة وطويلة، وصمدنا أمام هذه التحديات في الماضي، وسنصمد أمامها الآن». وفي الإطار نفسه، ذكرت إذاعة جيش الاحتلال أنه سيتمّ نشْر سريتَين من «حرس الحدود» في الساعات المقبلة، لتعزيز منطقة الخليل، كما يدرس الجيش تعزيزات إضافية ستصل إلى المنطقة خلال الأيام القليلة المقبلة.
يُعدّ الجعبري، منفّذ العملية، أحد عناصر حركة «حماس» في الخليل، وهو شقيق الأسير المحرّر والمبعد إلى قطاع غزة، وائل الجعبري، وقد تمكّن من تنفيذ عمليّته بعدما نجح في الوصول إلى مستوطنة «كريات أربع»، كبرى مستوطنات الضفة، حيث استهدَف مستوطنين عند مدخل أحد أحيائها ببندقية «M16»، ما أسفر عن إصابة مستوطن ونجله، فيما أصيب الآخرون خلال محاولتهم مساعدتهما، ومن بينهم أحد قادة المستوطنين، عوفر أوهانا. وذكرت مصادر عبرية أن السلاح المستخدَم في العملية تم الاستيلاء عليه مع كمية أسلحة أخرى، قبل أشهر، من إحدى قواعد جيش الاحتلال في النقب.

ستعطي الخليل حالة المقاومة المتصاعدة في الضفة زخماً وقوّة هائلَيْن، بفعل خصوصيّتها

وبتنفيذها هذه العملية، أثبتت المقاومة قدرتها على مفاجأة العدو بضربات قويّة، وكسْر الوهم الأمني الذي يحاول ادّعاء تجسيده على الأرض، خاصّة أنها جاءت بعد أيّام من معركة شرسة خاضتها مجموعة «عرين الأسود» في مدينة نابلس، واستشهد خلالها قائدها وديع الحوح. وبهذا، تكون العملية قد كسرت طَوْق الاحتواء والحصار المفروض على المقاومة في نابلس وجنين، وأبعدت خطر تفكيك وإنهاء «العرين» أو أيّ خليّة مسلّحة. كذلك، يمكن لعملية الخليل أن تمثّل شرارة إطلاق المارد في جنوب الضفة، وتحديداً الخليل، التي تُعدّ خزاناً بشريّاً وعسكريّاً هائلاً، إذ تتوفّر فيها الأسلحة بكثرة، وكذلك المستوطنون الذين سيتحوّلون إلى أهداف للمقاومين. كما يمكن أن تشكّل امتداداً لحالة المقاومة في شمال الضفة الغربية، كونها تُعدّ ضربة قويّة في الرأس، نظراً إلى البراعة في التنفيذ، والاحترافية في اختيار المكان والتوقيت. وتعيش منطقة شمال الضفة، وتحديداً مدينة نابلس، حالة حرب متواصلة وحصاراً إسرائيليّاً مطبِقاً، في ضوء استمرار العمل المقاوم، وعمليات إطلاق النار على الحواجز العسكرية، وفشل الاحتلال في إنهاء ظاهرة مجموعة «عرين الأسود»، التي من شأن عملية الخليل أن تخفّف الضغط عنها، إذا ما تداعت أحداثها وتطوّرت على الأرض. وستعطي الخليل حالة المقاومة المتصاعدة في الضفة زخماً وقوّة هائلَيْن، بفعل خصوصيّتها، التي تنبع أوّلاً من ضرب حالة الاستقرار والهدوء التي روّجها الاحتلال لمدينة الخليل كمثال للهدوء والاستقرار كونها المدينة الأكبر مساحة والأكثر تعداداً للسكان، ودخولها على خط الاشتباك الذي سيمتدّ من جنين شمالاً إلى الخليل جنوباً، سيعني – إذا ما تحقَّق – استنزاف جيش الاحتلال وقواته. وقد جاءت العملية بعد نحو أسبوعين من بيان «العرين» الذي قالت فيه إنها تنتظر «خليل الرحمن وبيت لحم لتخطّا أوّل بيان للعرين بالدم والرصاص».

ويستهدف الاستيطان مدينة الخليل منذ اليوم الأوّل لاحتلالها، وهي تُعدّ من أكثر المناطق التي يرفض الاحتلال التنازل عنها أو تسليمها، وتحديداً بلدتها القديمة المجاورة لمستوطنة «كريات أربع». وهذا يعني أن العملية ستلقي بظلالها على ما تقدَّم، بعدما أفقدت العدو الشعور بالأمان، والذي سيتنامى إذا ما قُدّر لحالة المقاومة في المحافظة أن تنمو. وجاءت عملية الخليل في توقيت حسّاس وخطير عاشه الفلسطينيون في الأيام الأخيرة، في ظلّ محاولة الاحتلال كسْر مجموعة «العرين» بعد اغتيال قائدها في نابلس، وتكثيف بثّ الأخبار حول تسليم خمسة عناصر من المجموعة أنفسهم للسلطة، في محاولة لضرب الروح المعنوية للبيئة الشعبية الحاضنة، وللجمهور، وتشويه مقاتلي «العرين». لكنّ تلك المحاولات تبدَّدت مساء الجمعة، حين خرجت مسيرة شعبية عارمة وسط نابلس لدعم المجموعة وإسنادها، شارك فيها قادة «العرين»، محمولين على الأكتاف، في مشهد بدّد رواية الاحتلال، الذي عاد، بحسب وسائل إعلام عبرية ومن خلال «الشاباك»، لبعث رسائل تهديد إلى مجموعة من قيادة «العرين»، بتصفية أفرادها في الوقت القريب. وذكر موقع عبري، في هذا الإطار، أن التهديدات وصلت إلى القائد في «العرين»، أسامة الطويل، الذي يَعتبره الاحتلال أحد عناصر «كتائب القسام»، إضافة إلى محمد طبنجة، أحد قادة «الجبهة الشعبية» في «العرين»، وحسام إسليم أحد عناصر الذراع العسكرية لـ«حماس».
ولا يمكن إغفال الأثر الذي ستتركه العملية على الساحة الداخلية الإسرائيلية، التي تشهد انتخابات مستعرة بعد أيّام قليلة؛ ففيما حاول المتطرّف إيتمار بن غفير استجلاب دعْم المستوطنين له بادّعاء تعرُّض منزله وعائلته لإطلاق نار في العملية – وهو ما نفته المصادر الأمنية لاحقاً -، إلّا أن من شأنها أن تترك أثراً على بيني غانتس ويائير لابيد اللذين يسعيان إلى الإبقاء على حظوظهما في الانتخابات من خلال الدم الفلسطيني في نابلس، لكن عملية الخليل يمكن أن تطيحهما أيضاً.

وبعد ثمانية أشهر على إطلاقها عملية «كاسر الأمواج» للقضاء على المقاومة في مدينة جنين، عقب عمليتَي رعد خازم وضياء حمارشة، تجد إسرائيل نفسها أمام تسونامي من العمل المقاوم؛ فبينما هي فشلت في القضاء على المقاومة في جنين، فإنها انتقلت إلى مدينة نابلس التي شهدت ولادة «عرين الأسود»، فيما تثبت العملية الأخيرة أن الأمواج وصلت إلى جنوب الضفة الغربية، ما يعني أن الأخيرة باتت مرشّحة لموجة عمليات واسعة في الفترة المقبلة. وتعيش دولة الاحتلال حالة استنفار عالية، إذ جاءت العملية لتثبت مرّة أخرى أنها أوهن من بيت العنكبوت، وفق سيناريو إذا ما تحقَّق فإنه سيشكّل أسوأ الكوابيس التي كانت إسرائيل تخشاها، وهو امتداد حالة المقاومة والاشتباك في عموم الضفة الغربية.

من ملف : «نشوة النصر» الإسرائيلية تتبدّد: «الذئاب» تعود من جنوب الضفة

فيديوات ذات صلة

مقالات ذات صلة

UN Commission: Apartheid Charges Against “Israel” Will Be Investigate

October 28, 2022 

By Staff, Agencies

The open-ended United Nations Commission of Inquiry into rights abuses by “Israel” said Thursday it will investigate apartheid charges against the “Israeli” entity, confirming fears in Tel Aviv that the controversial probe would seek to brand it with the toxic term.

The ongoing UN investigation was set up by the Human Rights Council following last year’s 11-day “Israeli” aggression on besieged Gaza Strip to probe rights abuses.

The commission released its second report last week, calling on the UN Security Council to end the “Israeli” entity’s “permanent occupation” and urging UN member states to prosecute “Israeli” officials.

On Thursday, the three members of the commission said future reports will investigate apartheid by the “Israeli” entity, during a briefing at the United Nations in New York. They said the investigation had so far focused on the “root causes” of the conflict, which they ascribe to the entity’s presence in the occupied West Bank.

Navi Pillay, a former UN human rights chief who chairs the commission, called apartheid “a manifestation of the occupation.”

“We’re focusing on the root cause which is the occupation and part of it lies in apartheid,” Pillay said. “We will be coming to that. That’s the beauty of this open-ended mandate, it gives us the scope.”

Commission member Miloon Kothari also said the open-ended nature of the probe allowed it to examine the apartheid charge.

“We will get to it because we have many years and issues to look at,” he said.

“We think a comprehensive approach is necessary so we have to look at issues of settler colonialism,” Kothari added. “Apartheid itself is a very useful paradigm, so we have a slightly different approach but we will definitely get to it.”

The “Israeli” regime has refused to cooperate with the commission and has not granted it entry into the entity or access to the occupied West Bank and besieged Gaza. It rejected last week’s report, calling the panel neither credible nor legitimate. On Thursday, the “Israeli” entity’s ambassador to the UN said the panel’s members were chosen because they “abhor” “Israel”.

Reports earlier this year said the entity’s so-called Foreign Ministry was planning a campaign to head off accusations of apartheid by the commission. A leaked cable reportedly revealed “Israeli” officials were concerned about the damage the commission’s first report could do if it referred to the “Israeli” entity as an “apartheid ‘state’.”

The “Israeli” entity’s Prime Minister Yair Lapid, while serving as foreign minister earlier this year, warned that the entity would face intense campaigns to label it an apartheid state this year.

The UN Human Rights Council, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International and others have accused “Israel” of apartheid in the past two years, borrowing the term from South Africa’s system of codified race-based discrimination.

The commission presented its latest report to the UN General Assembly on Thursday.

The 28-page report accuses the “Israeli” entity of violating international law by making its control over the occupied West Bank permanent, and by annexing Palestinian land in al-Quds [Jerusalem] and the occupied West Bank and the Syrian Golan Heights. It also accuses the entity of discriminatory policies against 1948 Palestinians, of stealing natural resources, and of gender-based violence against Palestinian women.

Lapid has called the report antisemitic, “biased, false, inciting and blatantly unbalanced.”

The US has also repeatedly condemned the commission. US President Joe Biden denounced the investigation as biased during a meeting with “Israeli” President Isaac Herzog on Wednesday.

The investigation “continues a longstanding pattern of unfairly singling out ‘Israel’ and does nothing to establish conditions for ‘peace’,” the White House said.

Pillay dismissed allegations of antisemitism on Thursday, calling the claims “offensive” and “a diversion.”

“All three of us are not antisemitic. Let me make that clear, and then to add insult to injury, they said the report is also antisemitic. There isn’t a word in this report that can be interpreted as antisemitic,” she said. “This is always raised as a diversion.”

“We’re so committed to justice, the rule of law and human rights and we should not be subjected to abuse such as this. They’re totally false, all false and lies,” she said.

She said the “Israeli” regime may be guilty of international crimes, including war crimes, by transferring civilians into “occupied territory,” referring to West Bank settlements, where nearly 500,000 “Israeli” settlers live.

Kothari denounced settlers as a “paramilitary force.”

“They can do whatever the hell they want, they can raid homes, they can destroy olives,” he said.

Pillay dismissed security concerns the “Israeli” entity cites for maintaining a presence in the occupied West Bank as “a fiction” the country was trying to “hide behind.”

“Some of ‘Israel’s’ policies in the West Bank are only cosmetically intended to justify security concerns,” she said.

The commission has called for the entity to immediately withdraw from the occupied West Bank.

Aoun and Lapid Sign Maritime Deal, Eyes on Naqoura ahead of S. Nasrallah Speech-Hochstein Refuses to Take Al-Manar Reporter’s Question (Video)

October 27, 2022

Lebanese President Michel Aoun and US Energy Envoy Amos Hochstein at Baabda Palace (Thursday, October 27, 2022)

Lebanese President Michel Aoun signed on Thursday the official US letter on maritime deal, ahead of an official ceremony at the southern town of Naqoura. Meanwhile, eyes are on Beirut’s Dahiyeh where Hezbollah Secretary General is to deliver a speech that likely will address the deal.

US Energy Envoy Amos Hochstein, who arrived in Beirut late Wednesday, handed over the official letter on the deal to President Aoun, who signed on the deal.

The meeting in Baabda Palace was attended by Deputy House Speaker Elias Bou Saab, who led the indirect negotiation, and caretaker Foreign Minister Abdallah Bou Habib.

After the meeting with President Aoun, Hochstein described Thursday as a “historic day”, saying the deal would “provide stability on both sides of the border.”

Talking to reporters, Hochstein affirmed that “there are no clauses in the demarcation deal that would delay Lebanon’s exploration for energy.”

UN peacekeepers at UNIFIL post in Lebanese southern town of Naqoura (photo from June 2022).

Hochstein Meets Mikati, Berri

Hochstein then reached the Grand Serail, where he met with caretaker Prime Minister Najib Mikati, who thanked Hochstein for his efforts in brokering the deal, hoping that Lebanon would soon benefit from its offshore gas and oil resources.

After that, the US mediator headed to Ain El-Tineh to meet Speaker Nabih Berri.

Afternoon, Hochstein will attend the ceremony in Naqoura, where a ceremony to sign the deal will be held.

Lebanese newspaper Al-Akhbar reported that during ceremony, delegations representing Lebanon and the Zionist entity will sign the deal in separate rooms.

Sources told AL-Manar that the Lebanese delegation to Naqoura includes: Lebanese Presidency Director-General Antoine Choucair, Lebanese Government Coordinator with UNIFIL Brigadier General Mounir Chehade, Member of Lebanese Petroleum Administration Wissam Chbat and the Legal Adviser at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Ahmad Arafa.

“Lebanon is not expected to sign the agreement until after the Israel side does so,” Al-Akhbar said, adding that once the deal is inked, Beirut and Tel Aviv will send letters to the United Nations laying out the terms of the deal.

‘Israel’ Approves Maritime Deal

On the other hand, the Israeli cabinet approved the US-brokered maritime deal, as Prime Minister Yair Lapid signed it.

Israeli PM Yair Lapid signs the US-brokered maritime deal (Thursday, October 27, 2022).

“It is not every day that an enemy state recognizes the State of Israel, in a written agreement, in view of the entire international community,” Lapid said at the start of the special cabinet meeting to vote on the deal.

“This agreement strengthens and fortifies Israel’s security and our freedom of action against Hezbollah and the threats from the north. There is a rare consensus from the whole defense establishment on the importance of the agreement,” Lapid said, adding that the deal was also an economic achievement.

Lapid signed the agreement shortly after the cabinet vote.

د. وسيم بزي: من الآن يمكننا القول إنَّ لبنان أصبح بلداً نفطياً/ مانشيت صوت المدى

Hochstein Refuses to Take Al-Manar Reporter’s Question (Video)

 October 27, 2022

Al-Manar correspondent Hasan Hamazeh among reporters at Baabda Palace as US Energy Envoy Amos Hochstein delivers remarks (Thursday, October 27, 2022).

US Energy Envoy Amos Hochstein rejected to take a question by Al-Manar correspondent while talking to reporters after a meeting with Lebanese President Michel Aoun on Thursday.

Al-Manar’s Hasan Hamzeh took permission from Baabda Palace officials to ask Hochstein. When he started to say that the microphone is with him and that he would pose a question, US Ambassador Dorothy Shea instantly asked Rafik Chalala, the head of the Presidency’s press office, if the reporter who was talking was Al-Manar reporter.

When Shea was sure that Hamzeh was our correspondent she whispered to Hochstein, who ignored the question.

Hochstein Refuses to Take Al-Manar Reporter’s Question (Video)

Hamzeh added, meanwhile, that he was requested to move away the microphone which holds the logo of Al-Manar.

Hochstein was in Baabda Palace, where he handed over the official maritime deal between Lebanon and the Zionist entity to President Michel Aoun who signed the deal.

After leaving Baabda, Hochstein headed to the southern town of Naqoura, where a ceremony to sign the deal will be held.

Lebanese newspaper Al-Akhbar reported that during ceremony, Lebanese and Israeli delegations will sign the deal in separate rooms.

“Lebanon is not expected to sign the agreement until after the Israel side does so,” Al-Akhbar said, adding that once the deal is inked, Beirut and Tel Aviv will send letters to the United Nations laying out the terms of the deal.

Source: Al-Manar English Website

Related Stories

Russia warns “Israel” against sending weapons to Ukraine

17 Oct 2022 15:32 

Source: Agencies

By Al Mayadeen English 

“Tel Aviv” risks its ties with Russia by sending weapons to Ukraine.

Dmitry Medvedev, former Russian president. 

Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev warned “Israel” Monday against providing weapons to Ukraine, stressing that any move to boost Kiev’s arsenal will severely damage bilateral relations. 

“Israel appears to be getting ready to supply weapons to the Kiev regime. A very reckless move. It would destroy all bilateral relations between our countries,” said Medvedev on Telegram. 

“Israel” has sent humanitarian aid to Ukraine, including helmets. However, in September, Israeli media reported that an Israeli arms manufacturer is supplying anti-UAV systems to Ukraine via Poland, with “Israel” attempting to avert tensions with Russia by sending them through a transit. 

“Tel Aviv” has been attempting to strike a balance in relations between Moscow and Kiev. Many Israeli settlers emigrated from Russia and Ukraine through Zionist agencies since the establishment of the so-called “state.”

Yair Lapid, the current Israeli prime minister, told AFP that his office won’t be responding to Medvedev’s remarks. 

In July, Moscow threatened to close down the Jewish Agency, which was established in 1929, and played a key role in the colonization of Palestine and then the creation of the Israeli occupation regime in 1948. 

Some interpreted the threat as a warning against Lapid, who has taken a stricter approach to the Ukraine war than the former PM, Naftali Bennett. Last April, Lapid condemned Russia’s practices in Ukraine, describing them as “war crimes”, after which the Russian Foreign Ministry summoned the Israeli ambassador to Russia, Alexander Ben Zvi. 

Israeli occupation calls on dual citizens to leave Russia immediately

Israeli media said that “the Israeli army called on its soldiers and officers, who hold Russian citizenship and are in Russia, to immediately leave and return to Israel”.

“The Israeli army fears that its soldiers and officers, who hold Russian citizenship, will be recruited in Russia, in implementation of the partial mobilization decision.”

Russian President Vladimir Putin announced on September 21 a partial mobilization in Russia, stressing that this decision aims to protect Russia, its sovereignty, and its safety.

Following the President’s announcement, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu stated that 300,000 reservists will be called to serve in the Ukrainian war.

Related Videos

Russia warns “Israel” against destroying relations between them
Why did the Israelis turn on the Russians?

Related Stories

Lebanon and Israel Reach Gas Deal, but Will it Hold?


Steven Sahiounie

Lebanon and Israel have reached a deal concerning their maritime border dispute in the gas-rich Mediterranean Sea.

Israel’s current leader, Yarir Lapid, wants to get the Knesset’s approval before Israel’s elections on November 1, but there’s no guarantee that it will happen before then. The long-term life of this deal depends on the outcome of the Israeli election.

Lebanon’s deputy speaker Elias Bou Saab said yesterday that an agreement had been reached that satisfies both sides, and

The US-brokered final draft has gone to President Michel Aoun. US mediator Amos Hochstein worked to close the gap between Israel and Lebanon on the issues surrounding the gas deal. The text of the deal was leaked to the press, and appears to give the Karish field to Israeli control, while the Qana field would remain with Lebanon. Aoun stressed previously that this deal does not create a partnership with Israel, as the two countries remain in a state of war.

Lebanon’s Energy Minister Walid Fayad has previously said they will take over Russian gas company Novatek’s 20 percent share in a consortium licensed to explore two offshore blocs after the Russian gas giant pulled out in August. The consortium is led by France’s TotalEnergies and includes Italy’s Eni. Yesterday, a delegation from Total was in Beirut meeting the caretaker Prime Minister Mikati, who told them to start immediately exploring and drilling the area once the maritime border deal comes into force.

The deal could solve the financial, social, and political problems that Lebanon has been facing which almost brought the small nation on the Mediterranean Sea to ‘failed-state’ status.

The two nations sense the urgency to come to an agreement amid Hezbollah’s threat to defend Lebanon’s offshore energy resources by force if necessary. The Lebanese army is incapable of militarily defending Lebanon, and Hezbollah is the only resistance force capable of deterring the encroachment of borders or territorial waters. Hezbollah officials have said they would endorse a deal reached between Lebanon’s government and Israel.  Offshore oil and gas production for Lebanon could spell the end of the worst economic crisis in the world in modern history, according to the World Bank.

Previously, Lapid said Israel would begin production in the Karish gas field in the Mediterranean “as soon as possible.” That decision threatened to raise tensions with Hezbollah, as the Karish gas field was contested. Israel set up a gas rig at Karish in June, saying the field was part of its UN-recognized exclusive economic zone; however, Lebanon insisted Karish was in disputed waters. Tensions between Lebanon and Israel increased since the arrival of a floating production and storage vessel to the Karish field in June, and in July the Israeli military shot down three unarmed Hezbollah drones flying over the Karish field.

Steven Sahiounie of MidEastDiscourse interviewed Abbas Zalzali, news anchor, media instructor, talk show host and writer.  Mr. Zalzali explained how the deal might be effected by the Israeli election outcome, and also commented on the upcoming Presidential election in Lebanon.

Steven Sahiounie (SS):   Previously, we heard that Israel and Lebanon were very close to signing a deal over the gas in the Mediterranean Sea, but that the negotiations had collapsed. As of now, the deal appears to have been made. In your opinion, who caused the previous negotiations to collapse?

Abbas Zalzali (AZ):  The previous Israeli statements regarding the border demarcation agreement with Lebanon, which has now been made, fall into the category of Israeli election rhetoric. That is why we saw Benjamin Netanyahu trying to use the border demarcation file against Yair Lapid as a pressure card by making clear that it is a concession to Lebanon and Hezbollah, but all indications indicate that the agreement has been accomplished, especially after US President Joe Biden called Lebanese President Michel Aoun and congratulated him on completing the agreement, as did the US Ambassador to Beirut Dorothy Shea and more than one Arab and international official.

SS:  The Israeli officials are threatening to attack Lebanon and asked their settlers in northern occupied Palestine to get prepared for escalation with Lebanon. Netanyahu is against this new agreement between Lebanon and Israel, and in the coming election he might win. Do you think that the situation will go to a full scale war if he comes back to power?

AZ:  If Netanyahu wins, things will get complicated.  I do not think that Israel is ready to launch a war against Lebanon, not because of the demarcation of the maritime borders, or for any other reason, because the regional and international conditions are not ready, and because Europe needs Mediterranean gas as a result of the repercussions of the Russian-Ukrainian war and the conflict over energy sources.  Let us not forget that in the war with Lebanon in July 2006 Israel gained nothing. Hezbollah has gained a great deal of fighting power through its participation in the wars in more than one country, in addition to doubling its missile force.

SS:  The Lebanese Parliament should vote for a new president for Lebanon. In your opinion, are the Lebanese political parties ready to choose a president, or we will see Lebanon without a government and a president?

AZ:  The elections of a new President in Lebanon has always been an internal connection with external and internal reasons, but there are some countries meddling in Baabda Palace, and some neighboring countries that changed the political map in the country.

So we may face a stage of a presidential vacancy under a resigned government. But if the positives continue in the file of demarcating the maritime borders with Israel, and the agreement is signed, this may reflect regional and international consensus, which will be reflected inside Lebanon as an agreement to elect a new president.

Steven Sahiounie is a two-time award-winning journalist

Settling Maritime Dispute May Have Averted War with Hezbollah, Ignited another Between the ‘Israelis’

October 16, 2022

By Al-Ahed News

In an opinion piece entitled “Lebanon Gas ‘Deal’ May Have Averted War,” Yossi Verter wrote for Haaretz that the Zionist entity’s prime minister made a mistake when he admitted earlier that the Knesset wouldn’t vote on the document about Lebanon’s maritime boundaries delimitation because he feared he didn’t have a majority.

After having boycotted the Knesset for more than a year, and in the waning days of the 24th Knesset, the demand has risen to bring the ‘agreement’ for arranging the marine boundary between the ‘Israeli’ occupation entity and Lebanon for parliamentary ratification, “because it’s before an election.”

It is worthy and desirable that every diplomatic ‘agreement,’ be it “historic,” “important,” “tremendous” or “a surrender” be brought for ratification in the Knesset, be it before an election, after an election or in the middle of a term in office. At ‘Israeli’ Prime Minister Yair Lapid’s Office, they are concerned that a Knesset majority will not be obtained.

The gamble that Lapid would have taken with the ‘agreement’ if it did not win a majority is unforgivable. The ‘Israeli’ government would have looked like a failure, irresponsible and hasty. Above all, the chances that a war would break out with the Lebanese resistance group, Hezbollah, would have soared heavenward. That would have been almost inevitable, given the intelligence briefs shown to the heads of the security establishment and the cabinet ministers.

“For a long time now,” one of the ministers told me, “There hasn’t been such ‘agreement’… Even those among us who didn’t like the additional concessions that Lapid made; even those who believe it would have been possible to achieve a somewhat better ‘deal,’ did not even think of voting against it, after hearing the assessments and seeing the intelligence materials.”

In his decision not to bring the ‘agreement’ for a vote in the Knesset, whatever the outcome, Lapid fulfilled the most important obligation expected of him: He prevented a war, with high probability.

The author went on to highlight that Hezbollah Secretary General His Eminence Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah is the last person to be taken lightly.

On Wednesday evening, at the press conference with ‘Israeli’ War Minister Benny Gantz and Energy Minister Karine Elharrar, Lapid erred when he said, “We are not bringing the ‘agreement’ to the Knesset due to the opposition’s wanton behavior.” This is an invalid justification, even if it is a correct description. At the cabinet meeting that preceded the press conference, other ministers also said similar things.

Lapid nodded but at the press conference, after sleepless nights, and with the hoarseness that attacked him, the truth slipped out of him. The urgency he attributed to reaching an ‘agreement’ with Lebanon was not initially accepted with the agreement of all his advisers.

After abstaining in the ‘security cabinet’ and voting no in the cabinet, Habayit Hayehudi chairwoman and Interior Minister Ayelet Shaked posted an explanation. I read it, and read it again, and ended up more confused. A clarification conversation didn’t help either. Three times, at least, she stresses in her post that the ‘agreement’ should have been reached in a different way.

What is the different way? Here too Shaked isn’t sure of herself. She confuses essence – “surrender to Nasrallah’s threat,” which according to her led to the signing of the ‘agreement,’ and procedure – not bringing it for ratification by the Knesset.

If we go along with her, according to Verter, the moment Hezbollah hitched a ride on the indirect negotiations [which began back in May 2020] and launched attack drones at the Karish rig, ‘Israel’ should have quit the game.

“Lapid didn’t have to climb this tree,” Shaked told the author. “It was possible to have conducted it in a different way.”

Immediately after Lapid’s and Gantz’s statements at the Prime Minister’s Office, the ‘Israeli’ TV channels broadcast a brief statement by Netanyahu. Jittery and furious that he wasn’t the one who signed the ‘agreement,’ he repeated the catchy false slogans that he coined: “A disgraceful surrender ‘agreement’” and “Lapid has given Nasrallah our territorial waters! Our sovereign territory! Our gas!”

There’s also “Lebanon got 100 percent, ‘Israel’ got zero,” but actually that one belongs to David Friedman, Donald Trump’s ambassador to the occupied territories and a favorite of the Yesha Council of settlers. He’s a far-rightist and annexationist who in his safe American home isn’t hesitating to stoke war here.

Netanyahu also refreshed his arsenal of lies with the following hit: “Lapid and Gantz are letting Iran drill for gas right off our shores. They’re bringing Iran next to our northern border.”

Sayyed Nasrallah: Hezbollah Awaits Official Stance, to Maintain Readiness

October 12, 2022

Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah delivering a speech on the occasion of Prophet Mohammad’s Birthday on October 11, 2022 Click

Batoul Wehbe

Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah announced on Tuesday that Lebanon is before decisive hours with regards to the maritime demarcation deal, saying Hezbollah will await the official stances by the Lebanese President General Michel Aoun.

“Only after the agreement is signed we can say that we have a deal,” Sayyed Nasrallah said in a televised speech delivered during the celebration that was held this evening on the occasion of Prophet Mohammad’s birthday (PBUH) along with his grandson Imam Jaafar al-Sadiq (PBUH) and the Islamic Unity Week.

Lebanon received the updated proposal by US Energy Envoy Amos Hocshtein on an impending deal on the maritime dispute with the Zionist entity. The Lebanese Presidency Press Office announced on Tuesday that Deputy Speaker Elias Bou Saab handed over President Michel Aoun the proposal finalized by Hochstein.

“With regard to the demarcation file, we are before decisive hours, and we, as Lebanese, are waiting for the official stance to be announced by the President,” Hezbollah leader announced, adding “We will await the official stances and only after the agreement is signed we can say that we have a deal.”

Sayyed Nasrallah said ‘Israel’ is sharply divided on the deal, even within the “same parties and ministers in the government,” and that not all Israeli sides are satisfied with the agreement. “We are waiting for the official position of the enemy’s government and what’s important is what will happen tomorrow in the meeting of the Israeli cabinet. We all witnessed the contradictory statements in the Zionist entity over the past months and there is a rift there.”

Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid said on Tuesday that a “historic agreement” has been reached on the maritime dispute. He called a Security Cabinet meeting, followed by a general cabinet meeting for Wednesday to approve the deal, and that the deal is expected to be submitted to the Knesset for review.

“The moment the Lebanese see the delegations going to Naqoura on TV, we must remain cautious,” his eminence warned, “When the Lebanese side announces the approval of the deal, then we consider that things are done and until then we must remain vigilant.”

Sayyed Nasrallah called for attentiveness as there are those who can change their minds at every moment. He described the negotiations as difficult, “Reaching a deal was not an easy task.”

Bou Saab, Lebanon’s lead negotiator in the issue of maritime deal, said: “For Lebanon, the maritime deal has been finalized,” noting that the US mediator is waiting for the official response by Lebanon. He stressed, in remarks carried by Al-Manar, that Lebanon will have a united stance towards Hochstein’s updated proposal, noting that “no modifications have been made so far on the updated proposal.”

Hezbollah’s leader pointed that Hezbollah only cares about the extraction of oil and gas from Lebanese waters and its stance on demarcation is known. “Since the very beginning we said we stand behind the state on the issue of Lebanese demands, and I always said we want to ‘eat grapes’ and extract oil,” Hezbollah’s S.G. said.

“We have no problem when the Lebanese officials say that the agreement meets the Lebanese demands. My call is that after publishing the final text, this understanding should be approached in the spirit of national responsibility required to judge it positively or negatively away from settling accounts,” Sayyed Nasrallah indicated, hailing the cooperation spirit witnessed in Lebanon. “We are before a new experience of cooperation between state officials that was met with popular support. Lebanon will be able to achieve this great accomplishment at time when no one is concerned about its rights.”

“Where is our sea? I tell you: To us, our sea extends to Gaza, and when Palestine is liberated, we will not disagree with our Palestinian brothers on maritime borders demarcation,” his eminence said.

Sayyed Nasrallah said Hezbollah had no need to send more drones than the ones previously sent toward the Karish field on July 5, as “the objective was for the enemy to understand that we are serious.”

In this context, the Hezbollah leader hailed the resistance fighters “whose sacrifices and efforts exerted for years bore fruit within few months,” stressing that the resistance will maintain its readiness until the agreement is signed. “To resistance fighters I say: You’ll remain on your readiness, vigilance and measures until we see with our very eyes that the deal is signed, and after that is another day,” Sayyed Nasrallah said.

Sayyed Nasrallah stressed that “this is a national wealth that is not owned by a particular sect, political party or region; it belongs to the entire Lebanese people, so it must be approached with a spirit of responsibility,” and continued, “I promise you to cooperate with all the pillars of the state.” “We must benefit from the experiences of the countries that have sovereign funds,” his eminence said, adding “we must all immunize the funds that will come from the gas resources.”

Hezbollah S.G. ended up the issue of maritime borders demarcation deal by saying: Tonight, we will not issue threats. Tonight, there will only be joy and clapping.

On the internal Lebanese issue, Sayyed Nasrallah said: “On the presidential file, I have nothing new to add regarding the issue of the presidency and we call for the formation of a government.” He regretted that officials are “blowing hot and cold”” in this regard, oscillating between optimism and stagnation in the negotiations.

As for Yemen, the Hezbollah leader praised Yemenis for the huge celebrations held across the various provinces that had been plagued by eight years of war. “This people, who suffered from an eight years war and suffers from many life crises, is gathering in a scene like no other, we bow in respect.”

Turning to the Palestinian cause, Sayyed Nasrallah hailed the latest resistance might in the West Bank, saying: “What’s going on in the West Bank is percussive to the Zionist entity and all its political forces. The resistance today in West Bank needs all ways of political, media and popular solidarity. The resistance in West Bank is able to change equations, hopes are pinned on it.”

West Bank cities have witnessed a significant escalation of resistance operations lately, especially in Jenin and Nablus, at the level of shooting at the Occupation army’s checkpoints and settlers and throwing explosive and incendiary devices, in response to the Israeli crimes in occupied territories.

Sayyed Nasrallah also lauded Hamas’ decision on strengthening the relations with Syria as a courageous, wise and sound decision.

Source: Al-Manar English Website

Related Videos

Israeli interest in Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah’s speech on the maritime
Ghassan Jawad: The party will not go with a president who will “turn on him”… and talks about the “demon” of the last demarcation

Related News

    Eyes on Sayyed Nasrallah’s Speech as Lebanon Stands United on Maritime Deal

    October 11, 2022

    Marwa Haidar

    Eyes are on Beirut’s Dahiyeh on Tuesday as friends and enemies await Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah’s speech. The televised address coincides with an accelerated political activity a day after Lebanon received the updated proposal by US Energy Envoy Amos Hocshtein on an impending deal on the maritime dispute with the Zionist entity.

    Sayyed Nasrallah is to deliver a speech via Al-Manar during a ceremony held Tuesday at 20:00 (Beirut time) on the occasion of Prophet Mohammad’s (pbuh) birth anniversary.

    The Hezbollah leader is likely to address latest developments, with local and Israeli media expecting that his eminence will tackle the maritime deal.

    In his latest speech on October 1, Sayyed Nasrallah reiterated Hezbollah’s stance which fully stands behind the Lebanese State in any decision it takes regarding the maritime deal.

    Meanwhile, reports circulated on Tuesday indicated that a white smoke has blanked out the scene, with several media outlets reporting an acceptance of the updated proposal by the Lebanese and Israeli sides.

    Bou Saab Hands President Aoun Hochstein Proposal

    In Beirut, Lebanese Presidency Press Office announced that Deputy Speaker Elias Bou Saab handed over President Michel Aoun the proposal finalized by Hochstein, describing the proposal as ‘satisfying’.

    “The Lebanese Presidency considers the final version of the proposal on maritime deal satisfying as it meets demands that were debated during the last months,” a statement by the press office of the Lebanese Presidency announced.

    Deputy Speaker Elias Bou Saab hands over Hochstein’s updated proposal to President Michel Aoun.

    For his part, Bou Saab, Lebanon’s lead negotiator in the issue of maritime deal, said: “For Lebanon, the maritime deal has been finalized,” noting that the US mediator is waiting for the official response by Lebanon.

    “Any company that will carry out the offshore gas and oil drilling must not be subject to international sanctions,” Bou Saab said at Baabda Presidential Palace.

    The Lebanese deputy speaker used the term “international sanctions” instead of “US sanctions,” which Lebanon asked to be modified after being adopted in Hochstein’s previous proposal.

    Bou Saab also visited Speaker Nabih Berri in Ain Al-Tineh to submit the finalized proposal. He stressed, in remarks carried by Al-Manar, that Lebanon will have a united stance towards Hochstein’s updated proposal, noting that “no modifications have been made so far on the updated proposal.”

    Bou Saab then handed over the proposal to caretaker Prime Minister Najib Mikati, who, earlier on Tuesday met with a delegation of TotalEnergies Company, in the presence of Caretaker Energy Minister Walid Fayyad.

    Lapid Says Deal ‘Historic Achievement’

    Elsewhere in the Zionist entity, Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid said “historic agreement” has been reached on the maritime dispute with Lebanon.

    Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid (photo from archive).

    “This is a historic achievement that will strengthen Israeli security, will bring billions to Israel’s economy and ensure stability on the northern border,” Lapid tweeted, according to Israeli media.

    Lapid called a Security Cabinet meeting, followed by a general cabinet meeting for Wednesday to approve the deal, The Jerusalem Post reported, adding that the deal is expected to be submitted to the Knesset for review.

    For his part, Israeli national security adviser Eyal Hulata said all of the Israeli government’s demands in the maritime border negotiations with Lebanese officials were met.

    “The changes we asked for in the text were made. All of Israel’s security interests were safeguarded. We are on a path towards a historic agreement,” he added.

    Source: Al-Manar English Website

    Amos Hochstein Hezbollah Israel Lebanon Lebanon maritime deal Sayyed Nasrallah Yair Lapid

    لا حرب في الافق ووجود الكيان على الطاولة..!

    الجمعة 7 تشرين الأول 2022

    محمد صادق الحسيني

    ما يحصل في موضوع البحر وثرواته وشد الحبال بين صاحب الحق والارض وهو لبنان ، وبين المغتصب لحقوق اهلنا في فلسطبن ولبنان هو انعكاس لتبدل موازين القوى على الارض لغير صالح تل ابيب وطغمتها الحاكمة اياً تكن تشكيلتها الحكومية.
    والامر لا علاقة له باسم او صفة الحاكم الحالي في تل ابيب بقدر ماهو اختبار صعب المراس لكل الاسماء والرموز او الاحزاب او التكتلات المتنافسة الان عشية انتخابات الكنيست الصهيوني المرتقبة في الشهر المقبل.

    فمعادلة الارض من غزة حتى الناقورة تقول ان المنتصر بدأ يفرض شروطه بالسياسة ايضاً، بعد او اوجع العدو في الميدان.

    ولذلك فان ما صدرت من تحليلات سواء من جانب المنتصرين او من جانب المردوعبن بان : لبنان انتصر في ادارة مفاوضاته غير المباشرة مع العدو الصهيوني ، طبعا بفضل حزب الله والمقاومة ، صحيحة مائة بالمائة، ولا غبار عليها على الاطلاق .

    نعم الحزب انتصر ولبنان انتصر
    والكرة انتقلت الى الملعب الاسرائيلي شاء من شاء وابى من ابى، فهذه موازين قوى ميدانية ولا علاقة لها بالحب والبغض.

    ومابدأنا نسمعه من اصوات وضجيج من الجانب الاخر ، بعد ان وصلت الورقة الامريكية المقترحة له ، لا ولن يغير شيئا مما بات واقعاً على الارض ، ولا خيار للعدو الا الرضوخ اليه ، أيا يكن الحاكم في تل ابيب ، لابيد او نتن ياهو ..!

    وكل ما نسمعه الان في الاعلام ليس سوى بازار سياسي انتخابي سيتبدد شيئا فشيئا كلما اقتربنا من لحظة دفع الاثمان للمهزوم والمردوع.

    ولا حرب في الافق رغم كل التهويلات ومبارزات طواحين الهواء الانتخابية.

    من يتجه اليوم من بين صفوفنا الى الارتباك في التحليل او تقدير الموقف ، معتبرا اننا استعجلنا يوم قلنا باننا انتصرنا بالمفاوضات ، هو الذي يخطئ ، بل و يرتكب خطأً فادحاً اضافياً.

    لانه يكون قد استجاب عمليا لرغبة العدو للعب في ملعبه دون ان يدري.

    *فنحن لا نلعب الا في ملعبنا*

    ‏والمشكلة الان هي عند عدونا المرتبك

    فلماذا نتبرع بنقلها الى مربعنا..!؟

    ‏لابيد كان او نتن ياهو حاكم تل ابيب

    ‏ثمة ٣ حبال تلف حول عنق الطغمة الحاكمة في تل ابيب او تلك المتحفزة لانتزاع الحكم من خصمها، وهي اشبه بالشرنقة التي تلف حول عنقه :

    ‏١- خوف جيشه من الحرب المرعبة فيما لو اندلعت، وهي التي تشي باحتمال خسارته لوجوده فيها هذه المرة وليس فقط خسارته للحرب.

    ‏٢- حاجة سيدته امريكا الملحة للطاقة وهي المرتبكة من اوكرانيا الى باب المندب مرورا بهرمز.

    ‏٣- جمهوره الناخب، الذي لم يعد يثق ليس فقط بحكامه ، بل حتى بجيشه الذي هو اساس وجوده.

    فالكيان الذي لطالما ظهر على المسرح الاقليمي والدولي بانه صاحب الجيش الذي لا يقهر ، تراه يظهر لاول مرة امام جمهور الناخبين بانه جيش المهزومين من الساسة الذين يظهرون للناخب الاسرائيلي ولاول مرة ايضا على حقيقتهم :

    *كيان هزيل ومردوع اقيم على اسطورة جيش كان يوما لا يقهر فاصبح اليوم لا يقوى على الوقوف على كلتا قدميه*

    هذه الحبال الشرنقات الثلاث هي التي تلف اليوم حول رقاب المتنافسين على اكثرية الكنيست الصهيوني اليوم، فتظهر على شكل ادعاءات او تهويلات وهمية سيظلوا يطلقونها من الان حتى حين ، لمنع تكسر عظام رقبتهم ، وعلى امل وصول العون من سيدهم الامريكي في اللحظة المرجوة.

    لكن سيدهم هذا هو الاخر كما هم بات مردوعا من اقاصي الشرق الى اقاصي الشرق، ولا حيلة له الا ركوبها…!

    ‏*فمحور المقاومة بات يتقن ليس فنون القتال فحسب ، بل و شد الحبال حول الرقاب ايضاً*

    *بعدنا طيبين قولوا الله*

    فيديوات متعلقة

    مقالات متعلقة

    أما وقد فكرتم بنسف الاتفاق…

    الجمعة 7 تشرين الأول 2022

    ابراهيم الأمين  

    أمس، استفاق الجميع على صراخ مرتفع في إسرائيل. قرر يائير لابيد رفض التعديلات اللبنانية على مسوّدة الاتفاق البحري. وعشنا ساعات طويلة من التهديد والوعيد، قبل أن ينتهي المجلس الوزاري المصغر مساء إلى موقف ملتبس لا يحمل رفضاً للاتفاق، بل يحصر مشكلته مع بعض التعديلات التي طلبها لبنان. وتصرّف الجدّيون، من كل الأطراف المعنية بالملف، على أساس أن ما يجري في إسرائيل لا يتجاوز العمل تحت الضغط الانتخابي، وأن «لابيد يحاول أن يعمل أبو علي على حسن نصرالله» على حد تعبير الأكاديمي الإسرائيلي يوني بن مناحيم.

    لكن، لنفترض أن إسرائيل تريد، من خلال رفض التعديلات اللبنانية، خوض مغامرة تهدّد بنسف الاتفاق، أو أنها تريد كسب مزيد من الوقت والمماطلة والتسويف سعياً إلى ظرف أفضل لها على صعيد طبيعة الاتفاق، فما الذي يعنيه ذلك؟
    بعد جولات التفاوض الأخيرة، تعرّف العدو إلى تفاصيل لم يعتدها سابقاً من السياسيين اللبنانيين. وأدرك العدو، أيضاً، أن موقف المقاومة شكّل عامل كبح لأي تنازل إضافي يمكن أن يقدم عليه أحد في لبنان. لكن المقاومة لم تكن لتقف عند هذا الحد، خصوصاً عندما أعلمت العدو، بالخطاب وفي الميدان، أنها جاهزة لما هو أبعد بكثير من ضربة تذكيرية على غرار ما حصل يوم أرسلت المسيّرات فوق حقل «كاريش».
    يقول لنا العدو، اليوم، إنه مستعد لنسف الاتفاق، وإنه في هذه الحالة يهدّد لبنان بحرمانه من الغاز والنفط وبتهديد أمنه وما تبقى لديه في حال حصول مواجهة عسكرية.
    وما يهم العدو اليوم ليس موقف الحكومة اللبنانية فقط، بل ضمان تكبيل المقاومة من جهة، ومنع لبنان من البحث في أي واقع على الحدود البحرية أو البرية لاحقاً. وفي هذه الحالة، يُستحسن بالعدو أن يقرأ الموقف اللبناني بطريقة أخرى. ولمساعدته على ذلك، على العدو أن يعلم جيداً أن تعنّته سيقود إلى واقع مختلف تماماً:
    – إن نسف الاتفاق يعني نسف المسار التفاوضي الذي عرفناه خلال الأشهر الماضية، والعودة إلى النقطة الصفر تعني العودة إلى سقف لبناني مختلف عما جرى التداول به. وهناك بحث جدي وجوهري بأنه في حال إصرار العدو على رفض الاتفاق، فإن السقف الجديد سيكون انطلاقاً من الخط 30+، وليس الوقوف عند الخط 23.
    – إن نسف الاتفاق بحجة أن لبنان يرفض ترسيم الحدود البحرية والدولية الآن لا يُقلق المقاومة التي لا تعترف أساساً لا بالحدود القائمة الآن كأمر واقع ولا بالحدود كما رسمها الاستعمار. بالتالي فإن العدو سيكون معنياً بالجواب على سؤال يسبق كل هذا الكلام: هل يريد استخراج الغاز أم لا؟

    تأخير الاتفاق إلى ما بعد عهد عون يجعل المقاومة الواثقة بالرئيس تستعيد الهامش الذي أعطته إياه

    يعتقد العدو بأن تأخير العمل في حقل «كاريش»، مع مناورة تأخير الاتفاق، سيمنع المقاومة من التحرك، مفترضاً أن المسالة مرتبطة بـ«كاريش» فقط، ومتجاهلاً أن السبب الرئيسي لتحرك المقاومة هو القرار بفكّ الحصار الغربي عن لبنان وتحصيل الحقوق البحرية التي تساعد على مواجهة الأزمة. وسيكون مفيداً للعدو أن يطرح على نفسه سؤالاً عما إذا كانت المقاومة (في لبنان وفي فلسطين أيضاً) ستتركه يعمل بحرّية في بقية الحقول، وفق معادلة «ما بعد كاريش».
    إذا كان في إسرائيل، أو في الولايات المتحدة، من يراهن على أن تأخير الاتفاق إلى ما بعد الانتخابات، سيسهّل الأمر في ظل تغييرات يتوقع الغرب حصولها لبنانياً على صعيد الرئاسة والحكومة، فإن هؤلاء لا يفهمون أهمية ثقة المقاومة بالرئيس ميشال عون على وجه الخصوص، وأنه في حال الشغور الرئاسي، أو في ظل الانقسام السياسي الجديد، فإن المقاومة ستستعيد هامشها الأكبر الذي قلّصته بنفسها لثقتها بالرئيس عون. بالتالي، فإن الرهان على تغييرات تقود لبنان إلى تنازلات في مرحلة لاحقة ينمّ عن عدم فهم جدي لاستراتيجية المقاومة وآلية تفكيرها.
    أما الكلام المرتفع السقف الذي ضجّت به وسائل إعلام العدو أمس عن استنفار عسكري وعن تهديدات بتدمير لبنان وعن استعدادات للقيام بعملية عسكرية ضد المقاومة، فيدعو إلى السؤال عما إذا كان في إسرائيل من يصدّق أن هذا الأمر ممكن. وإذا ما غامر أحدهم، فعليه أن يستعدّ جيداً، لأن في قيادة المقاومة من لديه القدرة والإرادة على اتخاذ قرارات لا تترك معنى لأي اتفاق لترسيم الحدود البرية أو البحرية على حد سواء. أما الاعتقاد بأن التهديدات ستردع المقاومة، فالرد عليها يأتي من كلام رئيس الموساد الإسرائيلي ديدي بارنياع الذي قال أمس: «لقد تعهد نصرالله علناً ​​بمنع إنتاج الغاز من كاريش إذا لم يكن هناك اتفاق… وهناك خوف من أنه سيضطر لإظهار أنه يفي بكلمته».

    من ملف : الاتفاق الآن… أو؟

    مقالات متعلقة

    Truss Condemned for Proposing Relocating British Embassy to Jerusalem

    October 5, 2022

    British Prime Minister Liz Truss. (Photo: Simon Dawson / No10 Downing Street, via Wikimedia Commons)

    By Palestine Chronicle Staff

    The UK-based organization Friends of Al-Aqsa (FoA) condemned British Prime Minister Liz Truss’s proposed relocation of the British Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

    In a statement, a copy of which was sent to The Palestine Chronicle, FoA said that “Israel is an apartheid state whose ongoing occupation of Palestinian land is a flagrant violation of international law.”

     “As with the rest of occupied Palestine, Israel denies Palestinians in East Jerusalem basic human rights and inflicts a cruel system of oppression and domination in an attempt to ethnically cleanse Palestinians from their ancestral lands,” the statement added.

    Therefore, “a move of the British Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem would send a clear message of British support for the violation of international law,” it concluded. 

    On September 22, Truss said she is considering relocating the British embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, in a meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid, on the sidelines of the UN general assembly in New York.

    (The Palestine Chronicle)

    Can Any Lebanon-Israel Maritime Deal be Trusted?

    Posted by INTERNATIONALIST 360°

    Abdel Bari Atwan

    While the demarcation agreement is yet to be signed, scepticism on both sides signals conflict ahead

    There is a sense of optimism in Lebanon over the possibility of signing a maritime agreement with Israel that would enable the extraction of gas from Lebanese territorial waters, which could help lead the country out of its dire financial crisis.

    After the 3 October meeting that brought together Lebanese President Michel Aoun, Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri, and Prime Minister Najib Mikati at the Republican Palace, it was clear that everyone agreed with the “moderate” proposals presented by US envoy Amos Hochstein, head of the indirect negotiations between Lebanon and Israel over their common maritime border.

    Deputy Speaker of Parliament Elias Abu Saab announced after the meeting that Lebanon’s “comments” on the proposals would be sent to Hochstein, and that the Lebanese government would not provide an official answer to the proposal – pending a response from the US envoy before the end of the week.

    Israel for its part has reportedly given preliminary approval for the proposal which consists of a 10-page draft.

    Abu Saab confirmed that Lebanon had obtained its full rights in the maritime “Qana gas field,” but he cautioned that the devils lie in the detail.

    Mikati, who seems the most enthusiastic to sign the US-brokered agreement, said after leaving the presidential palace that “things are going in the right direction.” His smile was wider than ever – as though gas revenues in the billions of dollars were about to flow into the coffers of the Central Bank of Lebanon.

    Gas deal ‘leaks’

    So far, few details of the agreement have been revealed. Currently in circulation are ‘deliberate’ indirect leaks from the two negotiating parties to ‘beautify’ the agreement for their respective constituents. It reflects the desire of deal proponents to clinch an agreement as soon as possible, ostensibly to avoid a war on the Lebanese-Israeli border that could escalate into a regional war, and maybe more.

    While the Lebanese side appears uncharacteristically united and more willing to sign, sharp divisions persist in the Israeli camp, especially between interim Prime Minister Yair Lapid and his ally Minister of Defense Benny Gantz, on the one hand, and the opposition leader Benjamin Netanyahu, on the other.

    Lapid claims, through his camp’s leaks, that Israel will retain full sovereignty over the contested Karish gas field and will receive financial compensation by relinquishing part of Lebanon’s Qana gas field – paid for by French corporation TotalEnergies, which is currently in talks of its own with Israel over potential profit sharing from exploration.

    Lapid also promotes the notion that Israel made a “tactical concession in exchange for a strategic gain in stability on the northern borders.”

    Netanyahu has stepped up his attacks on the prime minister and has criticized the draft agreement for making huge concessions on the ‘Land of Israel’ and for handing over its natural resources to Lebanon and Hezbollah.

    This, he contends, is taking place without holding a public referendum or securing the approval of the Knesset (Parliament). He has also vowed to abolish the agreement if he comes to power following legislative elections scheduled for 1 November.

    Meanwhile, everyone is awaiting the results of the mini-Israeli security cabinet meeting next Thursday, which is supposed to discuss and ratify the agreement.

    The internal battle may then move to Israel’s Supreme Court to decide on the opposition’s demands to hold a referendum on the agreement, or to submit it to the Knesset for approval – or both. There are initial indications that the Supreme Court may support the opposition’s opinion.

    Uri Adiri, the chief Israeli negotiator for demarcating the maritime border with Lebanon, announced his resignation in protest of Lapid’s management of the negotiations. It seems clear that the resignation came under opposition pressure, and it is not unlikely that similar resignations will take place in the coming days.

    Negotiations leading to ‘normalization’

    There are also criticisms on the Lebanese side in some circles, chiefly over the notion that such negotiations are a precursor to normalization with the occupation state. Abu Saab, however, has insisted that no agreement or treaty will be signed with the Israeli enemy, and that there will be no document that includes a Lebanese signature alongside an Israeli signature.

    But there are several caveats worth noting:

    • Firstly: The final version of the US-brokered proposals has not yet been agreed upon, and therefore the possibilities of returning to square one, that is, before the ‘theoretical current agreement,’ are still present.
    • Secondly: The only guarantors of this agreement are the United States and France. Experiences with US guarantees are not encouraging. As we have seen with Washington’s unilateral withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) – likewise, the US guarantee of the Oslo Accord, signed at the White House on 13 September, 1993 – an American guarantee no longer invokes much confidence.
    • Thirdly: Netanyahu cannot cancel the agreement as long as it is legally approved, but he can undermine it if he wins the next legislative elections. As with the Oslo Accords – which he strongly opposed – while he could not exit the agreement, he prevented its implementation and reduced it to empty words by settling 800,000 settlers in Jerusalem and the occupied West Bank.

    Delaying the inevitable

    Finally: We cannot rule out that these Israeli disputes between the government and the opposition are just political theater intended to stall, deceive the Lebanese, and plan ahead for the inevitable response by the Lebanese resistance movement, Hezbollah.

    It should be noted that the US is Israel’s strongest global ally, that Lapid is one of Israel’s most ardent supporters of the US war against Russia in Ukraine, and that the American “mediator” Amos Hochstein is Israeli-born and served in the Israeli army.

    The only reliable guarantee for Lebanon, for its oil and gas resources, for its security and stability, is the Islamic resistance represented by Hezbollah and its huge arsenal of precision missiles, advanced drones, and one hundred thousand-strong army of resistance fighters.

    This is the first time in the history of Israel, since its establishment, that its government has offered concessions under the threat of arms and in fear of a war that threatens its existence. This is entirely due to Hezbollah’s refusal to allow Israel to extract gas before Lebanon has secured its own rights.

    The next few days could be the most dangerous for Lebanon and the region. The utmost caution must be exercised, and every word or comma in any binding agreement must be carefully scrutinized before signing.

    Remember that Netanyahu is a paper tiger, and he was subjected to humiliating defeats at the hands of the resistance in the Gaza Strip, especially in the battle of Sayf al-Quds.

    The resistance is the biggest winner of this agreement so far in both in its implementation – because it is the one who imposed it with missiles and drones – and in the event of its collapse – because it is ready for all possibilities, foremost of which is war.

    While the Lebanese people are peaceful, and have sought hard to secure a fair and equitable agreement over their maritime borders, they may yet be forced to militarily secure their national rights to Lebanon’s natural resources.

    Related Videos

    Tomorrow, the eye is on the enemy… Will he approve the demarcation?
    Do Israeli differences drop the demarcation agreement?
    Lebanon awaits the Israeli response… and does not give up
    Ibrahim Awad: Completing the demarcation means electing the president

    Related news

    Friends of ‘Israel’ Admit Its Defeat in Maritime Border Issue, Say War Still Possible

    October 5, 2022

    By Staff

    As the dispute on the maritime border between Lebanon and the occupied Palestine edges its final phase, the American friends of ‘Israel’ started lamenting that the final proposal is in favor of Lebanon in general, Hezbollah resistance movement in particular, and claiming that it is depriving the occupying entity from all of the naval resources.

    Those comments also echo former ‘Israeli’ premier and opposition leader Benjamin Netanyahu, who started attacking his rival, Zionist PM Yair Lapid, whom he accused of giving away the ‘Israeli’-occupied Palestinian maritime territory to Hezbollah.

    In the same respect, former US ambassador to the ‘Israeli’-occupied territories, David Friedman, commented on the final process in a tweet, in which he mourned that:

    “We spent years trying to broker a deal between ‘Israel’ and Lebanon on the disputed maritime gas fields. Got very close with proposed splits of 55-60% for Lebanon and 45-40% for ‘Israel.’ No one then imagined 100% to Lebanon and 0% to ‘Israel.’ Would love to understand how we got here.”

    For his part, Former US assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern Affairs David Schenker told i24NEWS that the chances of an ‘Israeli’-Hezbollah confrontation “still remain very high” despite the advancement of the US-brokered maritime border delimitation issue.

    Schenker belittled the proposal, saying it “does nothing to lower or alleviate tensions along the blue line where Hezbollah is digging in.”

    The New Jersey native served in the position during the administration of former US president Donald Trump from 2019 to 2021, during which he was assigned as the point man on the ‘Israeli’ occupied Palestine-Lebanon maritime border negotiations.

    Seemingly admitting his failure to finish the issue, whose draft proposal was formed under the mediation of the State Department’s senior advisor for energy security, Amos Hochstein, Schenker also said that it appeared that ‘Israel’ agreed to give the Lebanese “100 percent” of what they wanted, while claiming that the Qana gas field that would be under control of Lebanon contains “very little reserves.”

    He said that the administration of US President Joe Biden can claim a foreign policy win with the deal and a success in promoting regional stability, while cautioning that questions still remain about long-term calm.

    Related Stories

    Israeli media: Maritime deal united Lebanese, divided Israelis

    October 4, 2022

    Source: Israeli media

    Israeli media are highlighting a split in positions in “Israel” regarding the maritime agreement.

    Israeli media: Lebanon is united regarding the maritime demarcation agreement

    By Al Mayadeen English 

    On Monday, Israeli media reported that “Lebanon is united over the maritime agreement, and “Israel” is divided.”

    In the details, the Israeli channel KAN said that “a country suffering from conflict and is politically divided, such as Lebanon, appears more united than Israel with regard to everything related to the issue of the dispute on the maritime borders.”

    The Israeli channel commented on the speech of the caretaker Prime Minister in Lebanon, Najib Mikati, in which he said that “the agreement is acceptable to us, but we will convey some observations to the American mediator,” noting that “there is a basic consensus that the settlement proposal on the part of the American mediator, Amos Hochstein, is accepted by the Lebanese side.”

    The interviewer on KAN then asked, “Why is this important? Because “Israel” appears contrary to what it should be?”

    The response was that “it is true that a senior (Israeli) political source said yesterday that Prime Minister Yair Lapid and Security Minister Benny Gantz agreed to Hochstein’s proposal, but there are a number of question marks, not only about the crystallized agreement and how it will be ratified but also within the government and inside the cabinet.”

    Netanyahu: “Agreement is illegal, we won’t be obligated by it”

    Earlier, former Israeli occupation Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told reporters that Lapid is shamefully surrendering to the threats of the Secretary-General of Hezbollah, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah.

    According to Netanyahu, should the agreement with Lebanon be signed, Hezbollah would be “receiving Israel’s sovereign territory and a gas field worth billions of dollars” without any parliamentary debate and referendum.

    “Lapid has no mandate to give sovereign territory and sovereign assets that belong to all of us to an enemy state,” Netanyahu said.

    The former Israeli PM reiterated that the agreement with Lebanon “is illegal and we won’t be obligated by it,” in the event of returning to power after the November 1 election.

    In response, Lapid tweeted that “I understand that it pains you that you didn’t succeed in achieving an agreement, but that is no reason to join Nasrallah’s propaganda campaign.”

    Lapid said that Netanyahu “hasn’t seen the agreement,” claiming that it gives “Israel” “100% of its security needs, 100% of the Karish reserve, and even some of the profits from the Lebanon reserve.”

    Two days ago, a Lebanese source concerned with the demarcation negotiations confirmed to Al Mayadeen that “Lebanon obtained, in the written proposal it received from the Americans, all its demands,” adding that “Lebanon has not and will not give Israel any security zone that it previously demanded.”

    This comes after Lebanon received the written response from the American mediator, Amos Hochstein, regarding the demarcation of its southern maritime borders, through the American ambassador to Lebanon, Dorothy Shea.

    On his part, Hezbollah Secretary-General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah also touched on the issue of the Lebanese maritime borders, saying that the importance of what is happening today is there is a written text from the mediating party that the President, Parliament Speaker, and the Prime Minister have received.

    In turn, Israeli media said that the Secretary-General of Hezbollah, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, “succeeded in the battle of awareness in the negotiations to demarcate the maritime borders.”

    Read more: Maritime demarcation negotiations very positive: Bou Saab

    Related Videos

    Related News

    The return of the two-state solution illusion

     SEPTEMBER 28, 2022 


    By Mitchell Plitnick


    For Democrats in the United States and the political “centrists” in Israel—represented by Joe Biden and Yair Lapid, respectively—the loss of credibility for the two-state solution has meant losing more and more support for Israeli policies. As the respected polling site noted recently, among many other sources, younger Democrats are increasingly supportive of Palestinians and less so of Israeli policies. 

    These facts explain the theater we have witnessed in recent days at the United Nations General Assembly and in the American media scene, where the lone Palestinian woman ever elected to Congress has come under unrelenting attack from her own party as well as the opposition. 

    At the annual meeting of the UN General Assembly, Biden devoted one brief mention to the question of Palestine, but what he did say was telling. “And we will continue to advocate for lasting negotiating peace between the Jewish and democratic state of Israel and the Palestinian people,” Biden told the Assembly. “The United States is committed to Israel’s security, full stop.  And a negotiated two-state solution remains, in our view, the best way to ensure Israel’s security and prosperity for the future and give the Palestinians the state which — to which they are entitled — both sides to fully respect the equal rights of their citizens; both people enjoying equal measure of freedom and dignity.”

    While stumbling over his words, and certainly unintentionally, Biden said the quiet part out loud. The U.S. will advocate for lasting negotiations, the hallmark of the Oslo process; endless negotiations that lead nowhere while Israeli settlements spread farther across the West Bank, Gaza slowly dies of poverty, and the status quo in East Jerusalem gradually fades into Jewish dominance. And above all, Israeli “security” is guarded “full stop,” and if there is any room left for any Palestinian rights, those will be considered according to Israel’s wishes. 

    Acting Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid spoke at more length about a two-state solution, but said little more. Spending most of his time urging the world to abandon diplomacy with Iran and instead launch a war, presumably to change the regime there, Lapid stated that “An agreement with the Palestinians, based on two states for two peoples, is the right thing for Israel’s security, for Israel’s economy and for the future of our children.”

    Lapid’s speech was littered with falsehoods. He went on at length about how Israel is victimized by “fake news,” citing an incident in May 2021 where a photo of a toddler who was said to have been killed in an Israeli strike on Gaza circulated on social media. The post was a fake and was quickly debunked. But Lapid failed to mention that, while the toddler, referred to as Malak Al Tanani, was, indeed, made up, there was an entire family of Tananis–Ra’fat Tanani, 38, his pregnant wife Rawiye, 35, and their children Ismail, 6, Ameer, 5, Adham, 4, and Mohammad, 3—who were killed in an Israeli strike on May 13, 2021. A fact-check by the Agence France-Presse confirmed both the fake photo and the real family. B’Tselem also posted a video in May 2022 interviewing a relative of the Tanani family that was killed. 

    Having established, through misleading statements and outright dissembling, Israel as a “victim,” Lapid then made sure to let the assembly know that, while he was coming out in support of more talks, and the idea of a two-state solution, Israel would do nothing to make that solution, or any other, a real possibility. 

    “The burden of proof is not on us. We have already proved our desire for peace. Our peace treaty with Egypt has been fully implemented for 43 years now. Our peace treaty with Jordan for 28 years. We are a country that keeps its word and fulfills agreements,” Lapid said

    Aside from the fact that Lapid omits the crucial point that these peace agreements have been enforced by billions of dollars of U.S. aid to Israel, Egypt, and Jordan, Lapid elides the many times Israel has refused to agree to various conditions or interim deals, or has made demands on Palestinians it knew they could not accept

    The absence of a single word about what Israel or the United States would do to achieve freedom for Palestinians or to advance any solution, two state or otherwise, to the ongoing conditions of apartheid and dispossession is unsurprising if one considers that the goal was not to appease the Palestinians, but to address domestic constituencies. 

    Lapid surely knows he was lying when he said that “Despite all the obstacles, still today a large majority of Israelis support the vision of this two-state solution.” In fact, a recent poll by the Israel Democracy Institute found that only 31% of Israeli Jews and only 60% of Palestinian and other Arab citizens of Israel support the two-state solution. 

    But his own constituency in the Yesh Atid party supports such negotiations. More importantly, he wants to make sure he has the loyalty of the small Labor and Meretz parties, both of which support the two-state solution, against his center-right rival, Benny Gantz. Right now, all the polls show that neither Lapid nor Gantz will come close to being able to assemble the coalition of 61 seats needed to win the upcoming election, while their far-right competitor, Benjamin Netanyahu, has better, although also far from certain, prospects of reaching that mark. 

    Lapid also hopes to bolster his chances by demonstrating his compatibility with Biden and the Democrats, and they are more than willing to oblige. Targeting Rep. Rashida Tlaib plays a key role in both bolstering Lapid as a bulwark against Netanyahu—whom Democrats would not want to see back in office, given his very close ties to the Republican Party—and in trying to smother the growing support for Palestine within the party. 

    According to a poll conducted by Pew Research back in March, 61% of Americans between 18 and 29 years of age have a favorable opinion of Palestinians. Among those aged 30-49 it is 55%, and even among older voters, 45-47% have a favorable opinion of Palestinians. While many of these people also hold positive views of Israel, American sympathy for Palestinians has grown immensely over the past two decades, when only 16% of voters viewed Palestinians positively. 

    This sits poorly with mainstream Democrats and their corporate, and especially, pro-Israel funders. So, when Tlaib made a self-evident and fact-based statement, Democrats joined Republicans in piling on her and branding her an antisemite. 

    Tlaib, of course, stated that you cannot be progressive and support Israel’s apartheid government. The response was as vicious as it was disingenuous, with the usual anti-Palestinian hatemongers like Jonathan Greenblatt of the ADLAIPAC, the American Jewish Committee, and a long list of Democratic members of Congress stumbling over each other to see who could come up with the most scurrilous and spurious accusations against Tlaib, who did no more than point out what so many international, Palestinian, and even Israeli human rights groups have proven.

    It’s no coincidence that these attacks came at the same time as the UNGA speeches. Tlaib was very careful to point her finger only at the Israeli government and its policies; at no time did she ever hint at the question of Israel’s existence nor of the presence of Jews in the land. Indeed, even the avowedly Zionist group Americans for Peace Now rose to Tlaib’s defense, splitting with J Street, which shamefully supported the attacks on Tlaib.

    The two-state solution and the myth that you can support apartheid and still be true to progressive values go hand in hand. Consider the words Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz used in her hateful rant against Tlaib. “The outrageous progressive litmus test on Israel by Rashida Tlaib is nothing short of antisemitic. Proud progressives do support Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish and democratic state.”

    Rep. Jerry Nadler elaborated further. “I fundamentally reject the notion that one cannot support Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish and democratic state and be a progressive. I proudly embrace both of these political positions and identities, even as I have criticized some of the policies and actions of democratically-elected Israeli governments over time. I would happily put my progressive record and credentials up against anyone’s. It is both wrong and self-defeating for progressive leaders to abide such an offensive litmus tests.”

    The legitimacy of many of the Congressmembers claiming the “progressive” label is clearly questionable, but Wasserman-Schultz, joined by other Democrats, calling Tlaib antisemitic for expressing support for a view that Amnesty InternationalHuman Rights Watchthe United Nationsal-Haq, and B’Tselem have all expressed and backed up with extensive research is cynically perverse, whether you think Tlaib is right or wrong. 

    Both she and Nadler call Tlaib’s statement a “litmus test,” as if the question is not whether Israel practices apartheid, but whether supporting it anyway is acceptable within the bounds of anything that can be labeled “progressive politics.” 

    Nadler also talks about his occasional criticism of “Israeli policies,” as did many of the Democrats who ganged up on Tlaib. How must those words look to a Palestinian in Gaza or Masafer Yatta, or to a Palestinian-American who might be a constituent of one of these Democrats who express such passionate solidarity with Israelis and such stony indifference, if not outright hostility, to Palestinians? 

    For years, the idea of a two-state solution in Palestine and Israel has been exposed as a pipe dream. However viable it may once have been, more and more people have come to realize in recent years that it simply isn’t a realistic option anymore. 

    Some years ago, a well-informed colleague observed to me that the two-state solution is never impossible, but the costs—fiscally, politically, diplomatically—just keep getting higher. He was right, of course. It is never physically impossible to dismantle Israel’s settlements, sever the existing infrastructure in the West Bank from Israel, work out realistic borders, open Gaza, and pour the many billions of dollars into Palestine that would be required after seven decades and counting of occupation to build a truly viable state. 

    It’s all possible, but the cost would be enormous, and the price—allowing the option of refugees returning to their homes, allowing Palestine the means to defend itself like any other country, compensating Palestinians for their dispossession and suffering, all on top of reining in the most radical of the nationalist settlers, resettling the hundreds of thousands of Israelis in the West Bank, shifting borders to accommodate a connection between Gaza and West Bank, sharing water resources equitably, and a hundred other details—is far higher than anything Israel would consider in its wildest dreams. 

    But that doesn’t mean the two-state solution isn’t seen as crucial for Israel and the United States. Its implementation may be undesirable for Israel, but the idea of it serves a crucial purpose: it is the very lifeblood of the myth that one can support a “Jewish and democratic” apartheid state and reconcile that with liberal or progressive values. That allows them to characterize their “disagreements” with Israel as being about specific policies, not an apartheid system at the very heart of Israel’s character. 

    Apartheid is not a policy; it is an institution. It is a political and legal system. It is a crime under international law. It is not merely one decision to demolish a home, to detain a Palestinian without charge, to beat an elderly man at the al-Aqsa Compound, or to launch one missile at a Gaza apartment building. 

    That system is not just incompatible with progressive values, it’s incompatible even with classical Liberalism. To maintain the self-deception many Democratic supporters of Israel, in and out of politics, need for their consciences, they need to believe that there is a genuine striving for a Palestinian state that can deliver rights to those living under Israeli rule right now. 

    But it’s an illusion. Israel has been disrupting the possibility of it from the beginnings of Oslo through today, with massive settlement expansion, the isolation and starvation of Gaza, and the gradual erosion of the long-standing agreements on the holy sites in Jerusalem. 

    Joe Biden and congressional Democrats are desperately trying to save this phony duality, this illusion that you can support an Israeli ethno-state that, by definition, cannot be a state of all its citizens and must, by its nature discriminate against Palestinians and still call yourself a progressive without irony. 

    No one would suggest you can be progressive but be against a woman’s right to decide about what to do with her own body. Nor can you be progressive and oppose LGBTQIA* rights. Nor can you support racial discrimination, or autocracy. 

    Similarly, no matter how loudly you insist otherwise, you cannot be progressive and be in support of an apartheid regime. The illusion of a two-state solution that hasn’t been a viable possibility for many years doesn’t change that. It only reinforces one discriminatory illusion with another. 

    Netanyahu ‘blows a fuse’ over Lapid’s Karish concessions to Hezbollah

    21 Sep 2022

    Source: Al Mayadeen Net

    By Al Mayadeen English 

    Former Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu says Yair Lapid panicked and retreated following Sayyed Nasrallah’s threats, thus yielding to Lebanese demands.

    Former Israeli occupation Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his political rival, Israeli PM Yair Lapid

      Former Israeli occupation Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu slammed Tuesday his political rival, Israeli PM Yair Lapid, saying that the latter retreated following Hezbollah Secretary-General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah’s threats.

      In a video message posted on his Twitter account, Netanyahu said Sayyed Nasrallah threatened Lapid that Hezbollah will attack “Israel” in the event of operating the Karish field before signing an indirect gas agreement with Lebanon.

      The former Israeli Prime Minister considered that Lapid panicked and failed to operate Karish, noting that now, he [Lapid] wants to give Lebanon – without any Israeli supervision – a gas field worth billions of dollars that would help Hezbollah possess thousands of missiles and shells that will be target “Israel”.

      Addressing Israelis, Netanyahu said that on November 1, the Likud party, under his presidency, will replace Lapid’s weak and dangerous Israeli government with a stable right-wing government for the next four years; a government, according to Netanyahu, that will restore security and the dignity of “Israel”.

      “Israel” made concessions to avoid escalation in Karish: IOF official

      Earlier, the Israeli Maariv newspaper quoted Amos Yadlin, former IOF Military Intelligence Directorate as saying that “Israel has made concessions in favor of Lebanon to demarcate the border to ward off the danger of escalation.”

      “Israel is showing leniency in the demarcation of the maritime borders,” Yadlin said, threatening Lebanon that the IOF does not want it to turn into Gaza.

      He highlighted the prominent role played by Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah in this case, “which is indicative of the fact that he controls what is happening in Lebanon politically and militarily, which may push the Lebanese and the Israelis to a place that the two do not want,” as he put it.

      The former IOF official claimed that “Israel today has accepted the Lebanese line, and therefore, there is no place for Nasrallah’s demands concerning the Ras Al-Naqoura area.”

      Read more: Lebanese-Israeli maritime talks to end in few days: official

      Referring to the area adjacent to an area the IOF usurped from the Palestinians and consequently occupied, Yadlin insolently demanded “compensation for ceding the maritime economic zone in Ras Al-Naqoura and all the region to the south Qana field.”

      “We insist on these points,” he said, claiming that Sayyed Nasrallah “here has been trying to cause distortion.”

      Furthermore, Yadlin claimed that Karish is “purely Israeli” and that “we have to pump gas from there,” continuing to say, “The moment you concede to Nasrallah just once, you have to follow it with setting limits, because if the situation deteriorates toward an inevitable war, we know that we have done everything we can to prevent it.”

      This comes as Israeli media reported Monday that the signing between “Israel” and Lebanon of the agreement “on the maritime borders” is very close, stressing that what remains are “some technical details.”

      Similarly, Lebanese President Michel Aoun confirmed that negotiations related to the demarcation of the maritime border with “Israel” are in their final stages.

      Read next: US mediator made new proposal to Lebanese-Israeli maritime issue

      Fearing escalation, IOF request clarification on Karish statement

      Last week, Israeli media said that “it was the Israeli army that requested that clarification be issued regarding [an Israeli statement regarding] the Karish field, in order not to provoke tensions against Hezbollah.”

      Israeli Channel 13 stated that “the fear of a confrontation with Hezbollah has increased in recent weeks regarding the Karish gas platform. Despite Israel’s announcement that the next stage regarding the activation of the platform will begin soon, it has indicated, exceptionally, that the talk is not about extracting gas from it.”

      Channel 13 political affairs correspondent, Moriah Wahlberg, pointed out that “this clarification was not made in vain, but is rather aimed primarily at the ears of Hezbollah, as they in Israel do not want to create, provoke, and increase tensions, especially since these tensions already exist on this issue.”

      Wahlberg pointed out that “there is a disagreement in the Israeli leadership regarding the text of this statement, which was issued by the Ministry of Energy,” stressing that “some parties believed that this clarification should not be given in the matter of natural gas extraction, but parties in the army requested that this clarification be issued in order to avoid tensions with Hezbollah.”

      Read more: “Israel” fears military escalation against the Karish platform

      It is noteworthy that a source familiar with the matter revealed to Al Mayadeen, on September 11, that the US envoy for the demarcation of the maritime border, Amos Hochstein, handed Lebanon the coordinates of the line of maritime buoys, explaining that these coordinates constitute the “last point that is being negotiated,” in preparation for sending his [Hochstein’s] “full offer” next week.

      اسرائيل تقرّ بمعادلة المقاومة: الاستخراج بعد الاتفاق

      ما هي الرسالة التي بعث بها حزب الله؟ خلافات إسرائيلية يحسمها قرار رفيع بإعلان تأجيل الاستخراج

      الإثنين 19 أيلول 2022

      علي حيدر  

      أحدثت رسائل حزب الله شرخاً في التقدير والموقف لدى قيادة العدو وجيشه حول كيفية التعامل معها، في ضوء المخاطر الكامنة في كل من الخيارات الماثلة أمامهم. وفرضت مواقف السيد حسن نصر الله نفسها على المشهد في كيان الاحتلال، وخصوصاً إعلانه الأخير، السبت الماضي، عن رسالة بعثت بها المقاومة الى العدوّ تحذّر من بدء الاستخراج من حقل «كاريش» قبل الاتفاق مع لبنان. فيما استكمل الفريق التقني اللبناني الدراسة الأولية حول واقع الخطوط الحدودية، على ضوء مقترحات عاموس هوكشتين الأخيرة، مع تقديرات تشير الى احتمال الوصول الى حل لـ«المنطقة الأمنية» بما يرضي الجانبين

      شكّلت الرسالة التي أعلن الأمين العام لحزب الله السيد حسن نصر الله أن المقاومة وجّهتها إلى العدو والأميركيين، بعيداً من الإعلام، ومفادها أنه «سيكون هناك مشكل في حال بدء الاستخراج من حقل كاريش قبل الاتفاق مع لبنان»، إطاراً كاشفاً لخلفية البيان التوضيحي الذي أصدرته وزارة الطاقة الإسرائيلية وأكدت فيه أن ما ستقوم به في الأيام المقبلة ليس سوى إجراء اختباري لنظام الضخ. ومنعاً لأيّ التباس، سمحت الأجهزة الأمنية لوسائل الإعلام بالكشف عن أن الجيش هو الذي طلب من وزارة الطاقة إصدار البيان وأنه هو من أملى صياغته أيضاً. في غضون ذلك، أملت ‏وزيرة الطاقة الإسرائيلية كارين الهرار، أمس، « بصدق أن نتمكن من التوصل إلى اتفاق. لدينا التزامات تجاه السوق المحلي والدولي، لذلك يجب أن يتدفق الغاز في أقرب وقت ممكن».

      وكشفت القناة 13 العبرية عن خلافات داخل المنظومتين القيادية والأمنية، بين مؤيد ومعارض لإصدار البيان التوضيحي. وبلغ الخلاف حدّ رفعه إلى رئيس مجلس الأمن القومي إيال حولاتا الذي حسم الموقف لمصلحة إصدار البيان. فيما لم يجر تناول طبيعة الرسالة التي بعث بها حزب الله.
      ويبدو أن معارضي الرد على رسالة نصر الله، بإصدار بيان توضيحي، ينطلقون من تقدير أن هذه الخطوة ستُقدِّم إسرائيل كمن يخشى المواجهة العسكرية مع حزب الله، وتؤشر الى تسليم عملي بالمعادلة التي أرساها الحزب. كما ستؤدي الى تعزيز موقف لبنان الذي سيلمس مسؤولوه بشكل لا لبس فيه حجم حضور المقاومة وفعاليتها، ما يؤثّر سلباً على الموقف التفاوضي الإسرائيلي.

      على أن مؤيدي إصدار البيان التوضيحي لا يمكنهم إنكار هذه الدلالات. لكنهم تصرّفوا بواقعية وتعاملوا وفق مبدأ الخشية من أن يدفع الامتناع عن التوضيح حزب الله الى خطوات تؤدي الى تطورات دراماتيكية، وتضع إسرائيل أمام اختبار ميداني مفصلي، وهو ما تسعى حتى الآن الى تجنّبه. ويعكس موقف هؤلاء أيضاً حقيقة أنهم يأخذون تهديدات حزب الله بكامل الجدية، ويحرصون على ضرورة إفساح المجال للمفاوضات من أجل بلورة اتفاق يحول دون المواجهة. أضف الى ذلك أن هذا الموقف يتلاءم مع التوجه الأميركي الذي عبَّر عنه الرئيس الأميركي جو بايدن في اتصاله الأخير برئيس الوزراء الإسرائيلي يائير لابيد، وأكد فيه ضرورة التوصل الى اتفاق مع لبنان خلال الأسابيع المقبلة.

      نصرالله أهم تهديد لإسرائيل

      نقلت القناة 12 العبرية، أمس، عن قائد شعبة العمليات السابق في أركان جيش العدو اللواء إسرائيل زيف أن الأمين العام لحزب الله السيد حسن نصرالله «يشكل بالنسبة للجيش والمؤسسة الأمنية، أهم تهديد منذ انهيار الجيوش النظامية في محيطنا»، داعياً إلى «مراقبة شخصيته وطريقة تفكيره. وهذا دائماً ما كان على رأس جدول أعمال ضباط كبار، وبالتأكيد بالنسبة لي شخصياً».

      مع ذلك، فإن الخلاف داخل المنظومة المهنية – الاستخبارية يعكس أيضاً عمق هذا الخلاف وعدم استعداد أيّ من الطرفين للتنازل عن موقفه. وهو أمر مفهوم وغير مفاجئ في ضوء المعادلة الحادّة التي فرضها حزب الله: إما استخراج لبنان وكيان العدو للغاز، أو لا استخراج للطرفين مهما كانت الأثمان والتداعيات، وخصوصاً أن قيادة العدو وجدت نفسها أمام خيارين (الاتفاق أو فشل المفاوضات)، ستكون لهما تداعياتهما التي تتعلّق بموقع المقاومة في معادلة الردع، وبصورتها كضرورة وطنية لانتزاع ثروات لبنان وحمايتها، وهو ما يتعارض مع الجهود التي تبذلها واشنطن وتل أبيب بهدف إظهارها كعبء على لبنان والمنطقة.

      العدو يخاطر بالحرب: الاستخراج من كاريش لن يؤجل | فخ هوكشتين: وصاية دولية على البحر؟

       الإثنين 12 أيلول 2022

      (أ ف ب )


      الأجواء الإيجابية التي راجت في شأن قرب التوصل إلى اتفاق لترسيم الحدود البحرية، لا تلغي الحذر الشديد من مناورة إسرائيلية – أميركية لمرحلة ما بعد الترسيم لناحية فرض وصاية دولية على البحر من خلال دور جديد لقوات الطوارئ الدولية كما هي الحال على البر. ووسط تأكيد مصادر معنية في بيروت أن لبنان ينتظر أن يتسلّم من المبعوث الأميركي لترسيم الحدود البحرية عاموس هوكشتين ورقة خطية خلال ثلاثة أيام، جرى تداول أنباء أمس عن أنه سلّم مسؤولين لبنانيين إحداثيات خط العوامات البحرية تحضيراً لإرسال عرضه الكامل الأسبوع المُقبل. فيما عادت إسرائيل إلى التهويل

      عاد الإسرائيليون أمس إلى لهجة التهويل من زاوية تعيين قائد جديد للقيادة الشمالية وتسريب هذه القيادة تهديدات لحزب الله. وتحدثت القناة 12 عن تقرير للقيادة الشمالية خلاصته أنه هناك «إمكانية لمواجهة مع حزب الله قريباً». في وقت حذّر قائد المنطقة الشمالية المعيّن حديثاً اللواء أوري غوردين أن «المنظر الخلاب الهادئ في الجليل الأعلى والجولان يمكن أن يكون خادعاً، ولا يعكس عدم الاستقرار والأرض المضطربة إلى الشرق والشمال».

      وقد كان لافتاً ما نقلته صحيفة «إسرائيل اليوم» عن مسؤول سياسي أنه «بمجرد أن تصبح منصة كاريش جاهزة للعمل، سنقوم بتشغيلها كما هو مخطط لها. وسيكون حزب الله قد ارتكب خطأ كبيراً في الحسابات إذا هاجمها». كما نقل موقع «مكور ريشون» اليميني عن مصدر سياسي أن «الأسابيع المقبلة حرجة للغاية. نحن نحقق تقدماً ولكن لا يزال هناك الكثير من العمل الذي يتعين القيام به. وعلى الحكومة اللبنانية أن تقرر أنها تريد اتفاقية».
      من جهته تحدث موقع «واللاه» العبري أمس عن تدخل الرئيس الأميركي جو بايدن شخصياً في مفاوضات الترسيم. ونقل أن بايدن أكّد خلال المحادثة الهاتفية الأخيرة مع رئيس الحكومة الإسرائيلية يائير لابيد «أن ترسيم الحدود البحرية بين لبنان وإسرائيل ملف مهم ومُلح… وعدم وجود اتفاق بينهما قد يؤدي إلى عواقب وخيمة على المنطقة»، معرباً عن «اهتمامه بالتوصل لاتفاق خلال الأسابيع القليلة المقبلة».

      فخ هوكشين
      أما في بيروت، ورغم ظهور مناخات إيجابية لدى الرؤساء الثلاثة بعد زيارة هوكشتين الجمعة الماضي، إلا أن الجميع لاحظ أن ما يؤرِق الكيان والولايات المتحدة والأوروبيين هو ضبط الأصابع القابضة على الزناد لتجنيب منطقة الشرق الأوسط حرباً مفتوحة ومدمرة، مع العمل على الوصول إلى اتفاق وفق توقيت يناسب إسرائيل. وبعد الفشل في انتزاع ضمانات من المقاومة بعدم التصعيد، لجأوا إلى المماطلة الديبلوماسية للإيحاء بأن الأمور تسير على المسار الصحيح في انتظار جلاء بعض التفاصيل… حيث يكمن الشيطان عادة.
      ففي كل مرة يأتي هوكشتين يسحب من قبعته مطلباً إسرائيلياً جديداً للإيحاء بأن هناك نقاطاً عالقة تحتاج مزيداً من الوقت. وآخر هذه الأوراق «الخط الأزرق البحري» المعبر عنه بشريط العوامات القائم في البحر قبالة ساحلي لبنان وفلسطين المحتلة، طالباً تثبيته لأن إسرائيل لا يمكنها «التهاون فيه لأسباب أمنية». أما الإيجابية التي تحدث عنها، مستنداً إلى «موافقة إسرائيل على المطالب اللبنانية»، فقد تبيّن أنها غير محسومة، إذ أكد أنه يستطيع «ضمان موافقة إسرائيل على الخط 23 بنسبة 90 في المئة»، ما يعني أن كيان العدو لم يوافق على المطالب اللبنانية. علماً أن هذه النقطة أساسية، بالتالي فإن ما يطلبه هوكشتين هو تأجيل المواجهة والترسيم معاً.
      عملياً، يمارس الوسيط الأميركي عملية «خداع» لإيهام لبنان بأنه حصلَ على غالبية مطالبه، ويخترع نقاطاً جديدة لإطالة أمد التفاوض. والدليل، ما بدأ التداول به حول الجهة التي سترعى تنفيذ الاتفاق في حال أُنجِز. وفي الإطار، قالت مصادر متابعة، إن «الحديث كله يصبّ عندَ الأمم المتحدة». فعلى وهج خيار الحرب الشاملة الموضوع على الطاولة، والذي لاحت مؤشراته مع ارتفاع درجة الاستنفار، تُحاول «إسرائيل» انتزاع موافقة من بيروت على مخرج للنزاع البحري وفي بالها فرض «وصاية دولية» في منطقة معينة في المياه من خلال صيغة شبيهة للوضع في الجنوب بعد عدوان تموز 2006، فيكون هناك 1701 بحري تشرف على تنفيذه قوات الطوارئ الدولية التي ليست لها أي صلاحيات في المياه اللبنانية. لذا فإن اعتماد الأمم المتحدة كمرجع لمراقبة تنفيذ اتفاق الترسيم سيستدعي تعديلاً في مهامها وفي قدراتها وهيكلها، وربما استغلال المهمة الجديدة لتمرير تعديلات في جوهر مهماتها ودورها، وهو ما لا تتوقف إسرائيل عن المطالبة به، وتحقق بعضه في قرار التجديد هذا العام… بفعل تخاذل الدولة اللبنانية أو تغافلها.
      وهذه الورقة قد يستخدمها الوسيط الأميركي لاحقاً، في حال احتاجَ العدو الإسرائيلي مزيداً من الوقت، خصوصاً أن البحث في الجهة التي سترعى تنفيذ الاتفاق لا يقل أهمية عن الاتفاق نفسه. ولأنهم يعرفون تماماً، حساسية فكرة توسيع مهام قوات اليونيفل بالنسبة للبنان، ما يعني أن الاتفاق حوله لن يكون سريعاً.
      وبذلك يكون العدو الإسرائيلي قد ظفرَ بعصفورين: إرجاء الترسيم أسابيع الأمام مع إبعاد شبح المواجهة عنه، وتأمين نفسه بقوات دولية تكون عينها على طول الخط الأزرق البحري، وهما أمران غير مضمونين لأن أيلول سيبقى شهر الحسم.

      إسرائيل: لا نفهم عقل نصرالله وحزب الله سيحصد النتائج
      ينصبّ الاهتمام الإسرائيلي على النتائج غير المباشرة لأي اتفاق ترسيم يتم التوصل إليه مع لبنان تحت ضغط المقاومة. وفي هذا السياق، كشفت قناة كان في التلفزيون الإسرائيلي أن التقدير لدى الجيش الإسرائيلي هو أن الأمين العام لحزب الله السيد حسن نصرالله، «رغم تهديداته، يريد الحصول على اتفاق يجلب الكثير من المال إلى لبنان، ويهمه أن يبدو كمن حقق هذا الإنجاز»، في إشارة إلى المخاوف الإسرائيلية من تكريس صورة حزب الله كقوة توفر الحل الاقتصادي والمالي للبنان. وأضافت أن «الأجهزة الأمنية والعسكرية تقر بأن أحداً لا يستطيع فعلاً الدخول إلى رأس نصرالله»، و«أنهم في الاستخبارات الإسرائيلية أصحاب خيبات في محاولة التوغل في عقله». ولذلك «يعززون الاستنفار في الجيش الإسرائيلي منذ تموز حين أرسل مسيراته إلى منصة كاريش. وهو ما دفع رئيس أركان الجيش أفيف كوخافي لتوجيه رسائل إلى نصرالله» أمس. فقد حذر كوخافي من أن «أي محاولة لإلحاق الأذى بدولة إسرائيل في أي ساحة ستقابل برد حاد أو بمبادرة استباقية». واعتبر أن القرار 1701، لا ينفذ و«القذائف الصاروخية والصواريخ المضادة للدبابات تملأ جنوب لبنان» مشدداً على أن كلاً من «دولة لبنان وحزب الله سيتحملان العواقب إذا تضررت سيادة دولة إسرائيل أو مواطنيها».

      تسريبات في تل أبيب عن ضغوط أميركية… ولبنان تسلّم إحداثيات الخط الأزرق البحري؟

      من جهته، وصف الرئيس السابق لدائرة الأبحاث في الاستخبارات العسكرية، أمان، العميد يوسي كوبرفاسير، الوضع الذي يواجهه حزب الله بأنه «معقد، فمن جهة هو منظمة قوية ومركزية في لبنان، وعلى رأسها قائد مقدر جداً كونه نجح في إيصاله إلى المكان الذي وصلت إليه. لكن، من جهة أخرى، هناك الكثير من التطورات الإشكالية التي تؤدي إلى تآكل هذا الوضع القوي لحزب الله. بالتالي فإن الحديث عن ضعف حزب الله وقائده غير صحيح». وأكد على «ضرورة فهم طريقة تفكير حزب الله، والتي ليست بالضرورة طريقة تفكيرنا». وعارض الذين يستبعدون بأن يقدم حزب الله على خطوات عملية ضد إسرائيل، لافتاً إلى أن «اكتفاء حزب الله فقط برسائل تهديد لردع إسرائيل هي تفكيرنا نحن، وليست بالضرورة تفكيره».
      إلا أن الأهم الذي برز في العديد من القراءات التي وردت على لسان العديد من الخبراء وتحديداً الذين كانوا يتولون مناصب رفيعة في الاستخبارات والجيش هو بروز حزب الله كقوة وفرت الحل الاقتصادي للبنان، وأنه حامي الثروات. ويعكس هذا الأمر حجم القلق من نتائج هذا الخيار.

      فيديوات متعلقة

      مقالات متعلقة

      %d bloggers like this: