Quantcast
Channel: Respect: SALAM ALQUDS ALAYKUM – سلام القدس عليكم
Viewing all 27504 articles
Browse latest View live

Hezbollah, Syria, and Egypt on the verge of an understanding?

$
0
0

A handout picture made available by the Egyptian presidency shows Egypt's interim president Adly Mansour (R) and Foreign Minister Nabil Fahmy (L) meeting with Lebanese Foreign Minister Gebran Bassil (C), at the presidential palace in Cairo on March 10, 2014. (Photo: AFP/ Ho / Egyptian Presidency)
Published Monday, March 31, 2014

A meeting in Beirut a few days ago between Egyptian Foreign Minister Nabil Fahmy and Lebanese Industry Minister and Hezbollah MP Hussein al-Hajj Hassan marked the beginning of a dialogue between the two sides. It also complemented a series of behind- the-scenes contacts between Cairo and Tehran to open new channels of communication and end the war in Syria. Documents of meetings that Al-Akhbar obtained reveal an initiative proposed by Iran a while ago that suggests gradually transferring presidential powers in Syria to a national government. Will Saudi Arabia accept it?

Not many people paid attention to the political breakthrough that took place in Beirut during the visit by Egyptian Foreign Minister Nabil Fahmy on March 20. The visit marked the first public meeting between the Egyptian diplomat and Industry Minister and Hezbollah MP Hussein al-Hajj Hassan. This meeting sends an important message to Hezbollah, Syria and Iran. But does it mark the beginning of a shift in Egypt?

At first, the party was reluctant to accept the Egyptian invitation but, as usual, it gave precedence to national interest over personal sensitivities and the meeting took place.
There is information that Hezbollah, like Egypt, is interested in promoting openness and understanding. At first, the party was not very happy with the framework within which the meeting took place. There was a kind of disappointment with the Egyptian minister who began his quick visit to Lebanon by meeting the head the Lebanese Forces Samir Geagea and most other Lebanese leaders. And instead of asking to meet Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah, he asked that a Hezbollah minister visit him. At first, the party was reluctant to accept the Egyptian invitation but, as usual, it gave precedence to national interest over personal sensitivities and the meeting took place.



How did both sides read the meeting?

First, Hezbollah:

The party understands that Egypt needs to strengthen its relationship with Saudi Arabia right now for financial reasons and to complete the process of containing the Muslim Brotherhood and consolidating the authority of Field Marshal Abdel Fattah al-Sisi so that he can become president soon, and he will.

This understanding does not rule out a sense of disappointment and disapproval however. Some of this disapproval has to do with the way the Egyptian authorities deal with Hezbollah on the judiciary and media level. How is it possible to lump the Lebanese party with the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas in the legal case of the jail break at the 2011 Wadi al-Natroun prison as though Hezbollah is active inside Egypt? An accusation the party has denied repeatedly. The case is not based on any legal evidence according to Hezbollah, but is politically motivated.

The party denies that a Hezbollah cell played a role in releasing prisoners, including Hezbollah activist Sami Shihab, from Cairo prisons. First, Shihab was arrested on charges related to a nationalist cause, namely aiding Palestinians. The party bit its tongue when it came to arresting its activist in a case Shihab should have received honors for, not put behind bars. After he managed, with his comrades, to escape from an Egyptian prison during the chaotic period that followed the ousting of former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, all the party did is smuggle him out of Egypt when they learned of his escape. Any other claims are false. This is Hezbollah’s firm position and it has evidence to support it.

Many parties close to Hezbollah see a lot of exaggeration in the Egyptian perception of the relationship between Iran and Hezbollah with the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas. There is currently no financial ties or direct support for the Muslim Brotherhood. And the relationship with Hamas is still being tested. The Palestinian movement is expected to reevaluate its position with respect to what happened in the past three years. It is also expected to reposition itself as a resistance movement inside Palestine and not as part of a Muslim Brotherhood project in the region.

Hezbollah never felt comfortable with former Egyptian President Mohammed Mursi. The Muslim Brotherhood president disappointed many when he went to Iran and gave a speech that was unworthy of the hospitality he received or the place he was visiting. His hostile position towards Syria and Hezbollah and his decision to cut ties with Damascus created even more disappointment. Furthermore, when former Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad came to Cairo, he was not well-received and was badly treated even at Al-Azhar University. Nevertheless, Hezbollah and Iran faced two choices, either return to the ghost of Mubarak’s era with Ahmed Shafik who ran against Mursi in the presidential elections or back Mursi. They reluctantly backed Mursi.

Second, Egypt:

People close to Fahmy said that his visit to Lebanon is important even for Egyptian domestic politics because of what Lebanon represents in terms of diversity and pluralism as opposed to the ideas of religious intolerance and terrorism.

Information indicates that there are four observations from the Egyptian side:

- The Egyptians stressed that starting their foreign minister’s Lebanon tour with a visit to Geagea was the result of a logistical mistake that has to do with the embassy and preparations for the visit. They realized later on the repercussions of this mistake.

- People close to Fahmy said that his visit to Lebanon is important even for Egyptian domestic politics because of what Lebanon represents in terms of diversity and pluralism as opposed to the ideas of religious intolerance and terrorism. That is why there is genuine interest in helping and training the Lebanese army and a willingness to contribute to the effort of arming it.

- A simple meeting between Fahmy and a Hezbollah minister means a lot. First, it broke the taboo placed on meeting with Hezbollah especially that it coincided with the trials in Cairo and because there is an Egyptian opposition to the role the Lebanese party is playing in Syria. Second, it is a meeting on a ministerial level. This saves Egypt any embarrassment while at the same time it paves the way to have other meetings in order to promote further cooperation through the ministries.

- The Egyptian side emphasized that the meeting with Hezbollah means that Egypt is open to all Lebanese parties and does not discriminate between one side or another. The Egyptian foreign minister was keen in all his meetings to avoid giving an opinion about the presidential candidates in Lebanon. Cairo does not want to interfere in this issue according to Fahmy’s inner circle.



What happened at the meeting?

The Egyptian minister said: “Cairo supports the role of Hezbollah as a resistance party.” He also said that there are many disagreements between the party and Cairo including its involvement in the war in Syria. But these disagreements do not rule out the desire for both sides to come together and to develop this rapport for the interest of both countries in order to protect Lebanon and the Resistance.

Al-Hajj Hassan explained that Hezbollah decided to participate in the war in Syria because of the great dangers that beset Lebanon. He said that the threat of terrorism was more serious than some people thought. He gave several examples including the issue of border areas and the town of Arsal. He also stressed that the party is worried about the targeting of the Lebanese army and that it supports the army and stands behind it. He emphasized that Hezbollah respects the constitutional frameworks and wants to elect a president according to these frameworks and the predetermined deadlines. He described the dangers of sectarian strife and how the party has worked hard to avoid them. He stressed Hezbollah’s desire to see Egypt resume its pioneering role at a very critical juncture in the history of Palestine.

In this sense, the meeting was fruitful and it coincides with an Egyptian desire to remobilize relationships on a regional level. Fahmy drew a very successful roadmap for Egyptian foreign relations. This meticulous diplomat, son of the diplomat Ismail Fahmy who resigned because of Camp David, was not close to the military establishment. Some viewed him with a measure of skepticism because of his relationship with Mohammed al-Baradei and for studying and teaching in the United States. Their view, however, changed dramatically after his success in establishing strategic relations with Russia and expanding Egypt’s choices and that of the military leadership towards India and China. Fahmy became the real architect of Egypt’s current foreign policy. Sisi realized his great potential especially when US Secretary of State John Kerry rushed to visit Egypt on the eve of the Russian delegation’s arrival in an effort to convince Cairo of the need to maintain the primacy of the US-Egyptian relationship. Kerry praised the Egyptian leadership in Cairo at the time but he was reprimanded in the White House while Fahmy, Sisi, and the new leadership smiled.

It is through the prism of this strategy that Fahmy regards the need to reestablish regional relationships with Saudi Arabia and Iran. He is certain that the Syrian crisis cannot be solved without Cairo, Tehran, Riyadh and Ankara. There have been several initiatives on this issue. Famed Egyptian writer, Mohammed Hassanein Heikal, visited Nasrallah. Some claimed that he was not officially tasked to do so. But people close to the Egyptian minister confirm that he was indeed asked to make this visit. This paved the way for the meeting between the Egyptian and Iranian foreign ministers a while back. Fahmy’s meeting with Hezbollah in Lebanon came in this context too. Paving the way towards Iran has begun despite the sensitivity of Egypt’s current relationship with Saudi Arabia.



The terms of a new Iranian initiative

Cairo was never, and will never be, happy with Turkey’s adventures in Syria.

Ideas regarding the Syrian crisis were exchanged recently between Iran and Egypt. Iran proposed an initiative but Egypt believed it is weak because the other side might reject it. Information indicates that this initiative included four points.

- A comprehensive cease-fire at a national level.

- Forming a national unity government consisting of the regime and the internal Syrian opposition.

- Laying the grounds for a new regime by transferring presidential powers to the government whereby the government will enjoy wide-ranging powers in the years to come.

- Preparing for presidential and parliamentary elections.

Cairo believes that the basics of the Iranian initiative are good but not sufficient. This initiative might develop later if consultations expand to include Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iran and Turkey.

The Egyptian position is changing. Surely, Egypt did not head the list of Arab countries that refused to hand Syria’s seat at the Arab summit to the opposition Syrian National Coalition (SNC) but Cairo did not oppose this decision. It preferred, however, to remain in the shadows for reasons having to do mostly with its relationship with Saudi Arabia and with the Syrian opposition.

Cairo knows that the SNC is in a tight position because of its current divisions. It is also aware that the legal grounds to hand over Syria’s seat to the opposition do not exist. It knows that the SNC’s head, Ahmad Jarba, who is seeking to renew his term, wants to get rid of nine members of the coalition. It is also aware of the difficulties that the opposition is facing on the ground. It is therefore weaving serious security relations with Syria. Reestablishing diplomatic ties, however, requires a Syrian initiative that has not materialized yet that would include the release of detainees from the opposition National Coordination Committee and other bodies such as Rajaa al-Nasser.

In addition, there is the position of the Egyptian army, which always repeats that Egyptian national security is organically tied to the national security of Syria and its army. Cairo was never, and will never be, happy with Turkey’s adventures in Syria. It might have even sent something of a warning in this regard.

There is no doubt that Cairo needs Syrian initiatives. There is also no doubt that its relationship with Saudi Arabia limits its ability to maneuver. But there are important changes on the Arab scene that might help it in the next phase. A prominent Kuwaiti MP for example says that Kuwait’s official position and that of some Gulf countries now supports Syria, fighting terrorism, preserving the Syrian army and encouraging a political solution that entails the survival of Syrian President Bashar Assad. He stresses that the emir of Kuwait literally told him so.

Does the meeting between Fahmy and Hussein al-Hajj signify the beginning of major changes? Definitely. But we are still at the beginning of the road.

This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.




Palestine TV covers up the crimes of the Palestinian Authority

$
0
0



A Palestinian security officer looks at a poster of president Mahmud Abbas as he is greeted by supporters (unseen), following his trip to Washington DC, on March 20, 2014, in the West Bank city of Ramallah. (Photo: AFP-Abbas Momani)
By: Orouba OthmanPublished Monday, March 31, 2014
Gaza: It is not only some political leaders who exploit the cause of Palestinian resistance fighters, even satellite TV channels do it. An example was displayed by Palestine TV that is run by the Palestinian National Authority (PNA). The channel pretended to grieve martyred Hamas activist Hamza Abu al-Haija by featuring dramatic scenes on the screen. They entreated the Palestinians to forgive the PNA for its involvement in the killing of the martyr by the occupation forces in Jenin camp in the West Bank on 22 March.
The program Li Ajlikom (For You), presented by Manal Seif on Palestine TV last Thursday evening, began with a scene of the martyr at home with dramatic music in the background. For 14 minutes, the program dedicated to the prisoners, took its audience on a journey inside Abu al-Haija's life. The program trumped up crude emotions, ignoring the fact that the occupation had coordinated the operation to kill Abu al-Haija with the PNA's security apparatus. The station reached a climax in feigned lament for the martyr when it considered itself a main actor in the Jenin battle with Abu al-Haija, who died with two other martyrs,Yazan Jabarin and Mohammed Abu Zeina.



Li Ajlikom began by replaying an old interview with the martyr. The camera zoomed into his eyes full of tears and anguish for his father, who is serving nine life sentences for belonging to the Ezzedine al-Qassam Brigades. The program aired statements by the martyr talking about his longing for his father, and showed pictures of him with his friends and relatives. Next it moved to a segment about Abu al-Haija's resilience against the Zionist Alimam unit, which killed him after a crippling siege. The program showed the martyr's assassination without mentioning that it will have an opposite impact on the viewer.
The perpetrator had called on the PNA to remain in their headquarters until 22-year-old Abu al-Haija was killed. The program exonerated the PNA, despite the compelling evidence about its role in the assassination.


The program also failed to speak about the young man being hunted down by the PNA in his final years. PNA security forces had attempted to arrest him more than 20 times after having done so 10 times in the past. For five minutes, the song "You fascinated my soul, O martyr" rang loud, while the voices of the Jenin refugee camp condemning the PNA's involvement in the assassination of the three martyrs were muted. In the segment focusing on his funeral, the program deliberately muted the sounds of angry voices roaming the streets of the camp.

The assassination of Abu al-Haija came only a month after the martyrdom of Motaz Washha, who resisted the occupation's mightiest force alone, while the PNA refused to help him. The only action the security forces took was to carry his body in the military funeral they organized for him. But Palestine TV turned a blind eye to the truth of his killing and its Palestinian perpetrator. In both cases, the PNA had killed the two martyrs and marched in their funeral while Palestine TV’s job was to cover their tracks.
In the hospital
During Li Ajlikom, broadcast last Thursday, the cameraman and the presenter went to the hospital where Abu al-Haija's mother was admitted. Over the song "Ajmal al-Ommahat" by Marcel Khalife, the presenter approached the mother whose son's martyrdom added to her illness. With a short message, the mother congratulated her husband and her two sons Imad al-Din and Abdul-Salam, who are detained in the occupation's prisons, for Hamza's martyrdom. The program also interviewed the martyr's two sisters, a friend, and the wife of prisoner Abbas al-Sayyid who said they were proud of the young man.
Follow Orouba Othman on Twitter: @OroubaAyyoubOth
This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.


Syrian Army Chases Down Terrorists As They Flee ’Site 45’ in Latakia

$
0
0






Local Editor





Syrian armyUnits of the Syrian army chased on Monday armed terrorist groups in several areas and destroyed their weapons and hideouts, state-run news agency reported.










In Latakia, army and national defense forces establish full control over "site 45" in the northern countryside, as they continue to chase gunmen around, leaving 39 terrorists killed and 60 others injured, Al-Manar correspondent said.




The national military destroyed six fully manned vehicles on the road to Nabe'a al-Murr, while trying to flee after the army established control of site 45.


----






In Daraa, A unit of the armed forces eliminated all members of an armed terrorist group in al-Mlaiha al-Gharbiyeh in Daraa countryside and destroyed their weapons and ammunition.




The terrorist Saaduddin Qaloush , leader of the armed group, was identified among the killed.
Another army unit chased down an armed terrorist group in al-Wardat area in the countryside, leaving a number of its members killed and wounded.








In Homs, an army unit destroyed a rocket launcher and three vehicles equipped with heavy machine guns belonging to terrorists in Jebb al-Jarrah area in the eastern countryside, according to a military source.




Units of the armed forces thwarted an infiltration attempt by a terrorist group from al-Ghasbiah village into al-Dwair in the rural area, a military source told SANA, adding that a number of terrorists were killed and wounded.

Source: Agencies
31-03-2014 - 16:59 Last updated 31-03-2014 - 16:59 |








-------




وقائع _ حسين مرتضى / العالم 30 03 2014
















Related Articles

Zionism's Violent Legacy

$
0
0

By Donald Neff



On January 4, 1948, Jewish terrorists drove a truck loaded with explosives into the center of the all Arab city of Jaffa and detonated it, killing 26 and wounding around 100 Palestinian men, women and children.[1] The attack was the work of the Irgun Zvai Leumi– the "National Military Organization," also known by the Hebrew letters Etzel– the largest Jewish terrorist group in Palestine. The Irgun was headed by Revisionist Zionist Menachem Begin and had been killing and maiming Arabs, Britons and even Jews for the previous ten years in its efforts to establish a Jewish state.

This terror campaign meant that at the core of Revisionist Zionism there existed a philosophical embrace of violence. It was this legacy of violence that contributed to the assassination of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin on November 4, 1995.

The Irgun was not the only Jewish terrorist group but it was the most active in causing indiscriminate terror in pre-Israel Palestine. Up to the time of the Jaffa attack, its most spectacular feat had been the July 22, 1946, blowing up of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem, with the killing of 91 people – 41 Arabs, 28 Britons and 17 Jews.[2]

The other major Jewish terrorist group operating in Palestine in the 1940s was the Lohamei Herut Israel– "Fighters for the Freedom of Israel,"Lehi in the Hebrew acronym – also known as the Stern Gang after its fanatical founder Avraham Stern. Two of its more spectacular outrages included the assassination of British Colonial Secretary Lord Moyne in Cairo on November 6, 1944, and the assassination of Count Folke Bernadotte of Sweden in Jerusalem on September 17, 1948.[3]

Both groups collaborated in the massacre at Deir Yassin, in which some 254 Palestinian men, women and children were slain on April 9, 1948. Palestinian survivors were driven like ancient slaves through the streets of Jerusalem by the celebrating terrorists.[4]



Yitzhak Shamir was one of the three leaders of Lehi who made the decision to assassinate Moyne and Bernadotte. Both he and Begin later became prime ministers and ruled Israel for a total of 13 years between 1977 and 1992. They were both leaders of Revisionist Zionism, that messianic group of ultranationalists founded by Vladimir Zeev Jabotinsky in the 1920s. He prophesied that it would take an "iron wall of Jewish bayonets" to gain a homeland among the Arabs in Palestine.[5] His followers took his slogan literally.

Begin and the Revisionists were heartily hated by the mainline Zionists led by David Ben-Gurion. He routinely referred to Begin as a Nazi and compared him to Hitler. In a famous letter to The New York Times in 1948, Albert Einstein called the Irgun "a terrorist, rightwing, chauvinist organization" that stood for "ultranationalism, religious mysticism and racial superiority."[6] He opposed Begin's visit to the United States in 1949 because Begin and his movement amounted to "a Fascist party for whom terrorism (against Jews, Arabs, and British alike), and misrepresentation are means, and a 'leader state' is the goal," adding:
The IZL [Irgun] and Stern groups inaugurated a reign of terror in the Palestine Jewish community. Teachers were beaten up for speaking against them, adults were shot for not letting their children join them. By gangster methods, beatings, window smashing, and widespread robberies, the terrorists intimidated the population and exacted a heavy tribute.
Ben-Gurion considered the Revisionists so threatening that shortly after he proclaimed establishment of Israel on May 14, 1948, he demanded that the Jewish terrorist organizations disband. In defiance, Begin sought to import a huge shipment of weapons aboard a ship named Altalena, Jabotinsky's nom de plume.[7]

The ship was a war surplus US tank landing craft and had been donated to the Irgun by Hillel Kook's Hebrew Committee for National Liberation, an American organization made up of Jewish-American supporters of the Irgun.[8] Even in those days it was Jewish Americans who were the main source of funds for Zionism. While few of them emigrated to Israel, Jewish Americans were generous in financing the Zionist enterprise. As in Israel, they were split between mainstream Zionism and Revisionism. One of the best known Revisionists was Ben Hecht, the American newsman and playwright. After one of the Irgun's terrorist acts, he wrote:[9]
The Jews of America are for you. You are their champions ... Every time you blow up a British arsenal, or wreck a British jail, or send a British railroad train sky high, or rob a British bank, or let go with your guns and bombs at British betrayers and invaders of your homeland, the Jews of America make a little holiday in their hearts.
The Altalena was loaded with $5 million worth of arms, including 5,000 British Lee Enfield rifles, more than three million rounds of ammunition, 250 Bren guns, 250 Sten guns, 150 German Spandau machine guns, 50 mortars and 5,000 shells as well as 940 Jewish volunteers. Ben-Gurion reacted with fury, ordering the ship sunk in Tel Aviv harbor. Shell fire by the new nation's armed forces set the Altalena afire, killing 14 Jews and wounding 69. Two regular army men were killed and six wounded during the fighting.[10] Begin had been aboard but escaped injury. Later that night he railed against Ben-Gurion as "a crazy dictator" and the cabinet as "a government of criminal tyrants, traitors and fratricides."[11]

Ben-Gurion's deputy commander in the Altalena affair was Yitzhak Rabin, the same man who as prime minister was assassinated by one of the spiritual heirs of Menachem Begin's Irgun terrorist group. All his life, and especially in his last years, Rabin had opposed Jewish-Americans and their radical allies in Israel who continued to embrace the philosophy of the Irgun and who fought against the peace process, thereby earning their enduring hatred.
Baruch Goldstein wore a yellow Star of David with the German word for "Jew" to show his ardent concern for the "lessons of the Holocaust" and its meaning for all Jews. Today many hardline Zionists revere this mass murderer of Palestinians as a Jewish hero and martyr.
Thus at the heart of the Jewish state there has been a long and violent struggle between mainline Zionists and Revisionists that continues today. Despite cries after Rabin's assassination that it was unknown for Jew to kill Jew, intramural hatred and occasional violence have marked relations between Zionism's competing groups.

The core of that conflict, one that continues to divide Israel and its American supporters as well, lies in the different philosophies of David Ben-Gurion and Vladimir Jabotinsky. Both were from Eastern Europe, born in the 1880s, and both sought an exclusivist Jewish state. But while Ben-Gurion was pragmatic and secular, Jabotinsky was impatient and messianic, a leader who glorified in the heroic trappings of fascism. Ben-Gurion was usually willing to take less now to get more later, and thus he was content to accept partition of Palestine as a necessary stepping stone toward a larger Jewish state. Jabotinsky, on the other hand, impatiently preached the right of Jews not only to all of Palestine but to "both sides of the Jordan," meaning the combined area of Jordan and Palestine, or as he called it, Eretz Yisrael, the ancient land of Israel.[12]

Ben-Gurion was a gruff realist who carefully calculated his moves with a wary eye toward the interests of the great European powers and the United States. Time magazine, in a profile of Ben-Gurion in August 1948, described him as "premier and defense minister, labor leader and philosopher, hardheaded, unsociable and abrupt politician, a prophet who carries a gun.[13] Wrote his biographer, Michael Bar-Zohar: "Obstinacy and total dedication to a single objective were the most characteristic traits of David Ben-Gurion."[14]

Jabotinsky, by contrast, was flamboyant and a devoted admirer of Italy's fascist leader Benito Mussolini. His disciple, Menachem Begin, described him as "a speaker, a writer, a philosopher, a statesman, a soldier, a linguist ... But to those of us who were his pupils, he was not only their teacher, but also the bearer of their hope." Begin's biographer, Eric Silver, added: "There was a darker side to [Jabotinsky's] philosophy: blood, fire and steel, the supremacy of the leader, discipline and ceremony, the manipulation of the masses, racial exclusivity as the heart of the nation.[15] One of Jabotinsky's slogans was: "We shall create, with sweat and blood, a race of men, strong, brave and cruel."[16]

Jabotinsky died in 1940, and it was Menachem Begin who refined his wild nationalism into practical political action. Begin concluded: "The world does not pity the slaughtered. It only respects those who fight." He turned Descartes' famous dictum around, saying: "We fight, therefore we exist."[17] Central to Begin's outlook was the concept of the "fighting Jew." As he wrote:[18]
Out of blood and fire and tears and ashes, a new specimen of human being was born, a specimen completely unknown to the world for over 1,800 years, the "FIGHTING JEW." It is axiomatic that those who fight have to hate .... We had to hate first and foremost, the horrifying, age-old, inexcusable utter defenselessness of our Jewish people, wandering through millennia, through a cruel world, to the majority of whose inhabitants the defenselessness of the Jews was a standing invitation to massacre them.
From these early leaders of Zionism (Ben-Gurion died in 1973 and Begin in 1992) have emerged their direct descendants in the Israeli political spectrum. Rabin and his successor, Shimon Peres, were both protégés of Ben-Gurion, and have carried on his mainstream secular Zionism. On Jabotinsky's and Begin's side, the followers have been Yitzhak Shamir, Ariel Sharon and, now, Benjamin Netanyahu, the current leader of the Likud.

Rabin's Strategy

While the two major factions of Zionism disagree on tactics, their ultimate aim of maintaining a Jewish state free of non-Jews was the same. Rabin explained his strategy shortly before his death during an interview with Rowland Evans and Robert Novak:[19]
I believe that dreams of Jews for two thousand years to return to Zion were to build a Jewish state and not a binational state. Therefore I don't want to annex the 2.2 million Palestinians who are a different entity from us – politically, religiously, nationally – against their will to become Israelis. Therefore I see peaceful coexistence between Israel as a Jewish state – not all over the land of Israel, on most of it, its capital the united Jerusalem, its security border the Jordan River – next to it a Palestinian entity, less than a state, that runs the life of the Palestinians. It is not ruled by Israel. It is ruled by the Palestinians. This is my goal not to return to the pre-Six-Day-War lines, but to create two entities. I want a separation between Israel and the Palestinians who reside in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, and they will be a different entity that rules itself.
In the Revisionist's vocabulary, the goal was the same, if more expansionist and expressed in more direct and pugnacious words. Former Defense Minister Ariel Sharon, a leading spokesman of Zionism's right wing, commented in 1993: "Our forefathers did not come here in order to build a democracy but to build a Jewish state."[20]

The occupation of all of Palestine, including Jerusalem, in the 1967 war and the coming to power a decade later of Menachem Begin gave a profound boost to Revisionism and its radical philosophy. During this period there arose the firebrand Meir Kahane, a Brooklyn-born rabbi who openly espoused the removal of the Palestinians from all of Palestine. Under the influence of his fiery rhetoric, thousands of Orthodox Jewish Americans were encouraged to emigrate to Israel as settlers on occupied Palestinian land, adding to the radicalization of Israeli politics. After Kahane's assassination in New York in 1990 by an Arab, New York Times correspondent John Kifner reported that Kahane had been successful in the sense that many of his ideas "had crept into the mainstream" in Israel.

Dr. Ehud Sprinzak, an Israeli expert on the far right in Israel, observed: "Where [Kahane] has succeeded is in changing the thinking of many Israelis toward anti-Arab feelings and violence. He forced the more respectable parties to change. In the 1970s Kahane was in the political wilderness, but in the 1980s the center had moved toward Kahane." Observed the Jewish Telegraph Agency: "Rabbi Kahane could die satisfied that his message has impacted deeply and widely throughout Israeli society."[21]

By the mid-1990s, even Kahane's violent ideas seemed somewhat mild in the context of the radicalized politics of Israel. A new strain of religious extremism has been added to the Revisionist ranks. This became obvious on February 25, 1994, when Brooklyn-born Dr. Baruch Goldstein, a Kahane disciple, walked into the Ibrahim mosque, called the Cave of Machpela by Jews, in Hebron and killed 29 and wounded upwards of 150 Palestinian worshippers.[22] While Rabin and labor Zionists condemned him, Goldstein became a hero for Revisionist Zionists. A shrine was made of his grave and a group of Revisionists grew up called "Goldsteiners." They are dedicated to the "sublime ideals of Goldstein" and urge "all true Jews to follow his footsteps."[23]

While the Revisionists had always had an element of religious messianism, the most radical of their current heirs come from ultrareligious Orthodox Jews who are less consumed by politics than religion.[24] They believe they are God's messengers. Thus Rabin's assassin, Yigal Amir, cited the authority of God to explain the murder.

This is a sea change in the mindset – if not the violence – of the traditional Revisionists. For instance, in 1943 Yitzhak Shamir ordered the assassination of one of his closest Sternist friends, but offered an entirely different rationale that had nothing to do with God. Mainly the motive stemmed from political and tactical reasons. Shamir wrote in his memoirs, In the Final Analysis, that Stern commander Eliyahu Giladi had become "strange and wild" and had wanted to shoot at crowds of Jews and urged the assassination of David Ben-Gurion, acts that would have been highly unpopular. Wrote Shamir: "I was afraid that he had gone completely crazy. I knew that I had to take a fateful decision, and I didn't evade it."[25] Giladi was fatally shot in the back on a beach south of Tel Aviv and his killer was never found.[26]

The new Revisionists have now expanded the right to kill claimed by the early Revisionists in the name of nationalism to include a divine right. In the end, they are less interested in foreign and domestic affairs than in justifying man's acts to God. It is a powerful and inflammatory mix of nationalism and religion that is almost certain to lead to more violence unless Israel is able to look into its own soul.



Recommended Reading
  • Bar-Zohar, Michael, Ben-Gurion: A Biography, New York: Delacorte, 1978. Begin, Menachem, The Revolt, Los Angeles: Nash, 1972. Bell, J. Bowyer, '/error Out of Zion, New York: St. Martin's, 1977. Ben-Gurion, David, Israel: A Personal History, New York: Funk & Wagnalls, Inc., 1971.
  • Bethell, Nicholas, The Palestine Triangle: The Struggle for the Holy Land, 1935-48, New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1979.
  • Brenner, Lenni, Zionism in the Age of the Dictators, Westport, Conn.: Lawrence Hill, 1983.
  • Brenner, Lenni, The Iron Wall: Zionist Revisionism from Jabotinsky to Shamir, London: Zed Books, 1984.
  • Halsell, Grace, Prophesy and Politics: Militant Evangelists on the Road to Nuclear War, Westport, Conn.: Lawrence Hill, 1986.
  • Khalidi, Walid (ed.), Before Their Diaspora: A Photographic History of the Palestinians 1876-1948, Washington, DC: Institute for Palestine Studies, 1984.
  • Khalidi, Walid, From Haven to Conquest: Readings in Zionism and the Palestine Problem until 1948, Washington, DC: Institute for Palestine Studies, second printing, 1987.
  • Marion, Kati, A Death in Jerusalem, New York: Pantheon, 1994.
  • Nakhleh, Issa, Encyclopedia of the Palestine Problem (2 vols.), New York: Intercontinental, 1991.
  • Palumbo, Michael, The Palestinian Catastrophe: The 1948 Expulsion of a People from their Homeland, Boston: Faber and Faber, 1987.
  • Rubinstein, Ammon, The Zionist Dream Revisited, New York: Schocken, 1984.
  • Sachar, Howard M., A History of Israel: From the Rise of Zionism to Our Time, Tel Aviv: Steimatzky's Agency, 1976.
  • Silver, Eric, Begin: The Haunted Prophet, New York: Random House, 1984.
  • Tillman, Seth, The United States in the Middle East: Interests and Obstacles, Bloomington: Indiana Univ. Press, 1982.
Notes

[1] Sam Pope Brewer, New York Times, Jan. 5, 1948, and Khalidi, Before Their Diaspora, p. 316. Also see Palumbo, The Palestinian Catastrophe, pp. 83-4. Initial reports put the death toll at 34.
[2] Bethell, The Palestine Triangle, p. 263; Sachar, A History of Israel, p. 267. Details on the bombing and reaction of British officials are in Nakhleh, Encyclopedia of the Palestine Problem, pp. 269-70.
[3] Bethell, Palestine Triangle, pp. 181-87, 263; Sachar, A History of Israel, p. 267; Marion, A Death in Jerusalem, p. 208.
[4] Khalidi, From Haven to Conquest, pp. 761-78; Silver, Begin, pp. 88-96; Nakhleh, Encyclopedia of the Palestine Problem, pp. 271-72.
[5] Silver, Begin, p. 12.
[6] New York Times, Nov. 27, 1948.
[7] Bar-Zohar, Ben-Gurion, p. 175.
[8] Silver, Begin, p. 98.
[9] Bethell, The Palestine Triangle, pp. 308-9. An interview reflecting Hecht's views appeared in The New York Times, May 28, 1947.
[10] Silver, Begin, p. 108.
[11] Silver, Begin, p. 108.
[12] In Hebrew, Eretz Yisrael means the "Land of Israel," a phrase invested with strong nationalist feelings.
[13]Time, August 16, 1948.
[14] Bar-Zohar, Ben Gurian, pp. 77, xvii.
[15] Silver, Begin, p. 11.
[16] Elfi Pallis, "The Likud Party: A Primer,"Journal of Palestine Studies, Winter 1992, p. 45.
[17] Begin, The Revolt, pp. 36, 46. Also see Tillman, The United States in the Middle East, p. 20.
[18] Begin, The Revolt, pp. xi-xii. Also see Elfi Pallis, "The Likud Party: A Primer,"Journal of Palestine Studies, Winter 1992, p. 45.
[19] Evans and Novak, CNN, Oct. 1, 1995.
[20] Menachem Shalev, Forward, May 21, 1339.
[21] John Kifner, New York Times, Nov. 11, 1990.
[22] David Hoffman, Washington Post, Feb. 28, 1994.
[23] Khalid M. Amayreh, "Six Months On,"Middle East International, Sept. 9, 1994.
[24] Halsell, Prophecy and Politics, p. 75, provides an excellent analysis of the extremist beliefs of Jabotinsky and his followers and their alliance with American fundamentalist Christians such as Jerry Falwell, leader of the Moral Ml\iority.
[25] Clyde Haberman, New York Times, Jan. 15, 1994.
[26] Glenn Frankel, Washington Post, Nov. 6, 1995.



From The Journal of Historical Review, Jan.-Feb. 1996 (Vol. 16, No. 1), pages 42-45. This item is reprinted from the January 1996 issue of The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs (Washington, DC).

Kerry Implicated in Turkey False Flag Using AlQaeda To Start War With Syria

$
0
0
Posted on  by michaellee2009 |

A leaked conversation between Turkey’s intelligence chief and the war room reveals plot to create a casus belli for war with Syria by using ISIL, an alQaeda offshoot, to threaten a turkish shrine Suleiman Shah Tomb. Turkey has blocked youtube in order to cover up the leaks. Turkish Foreign Ministry confirmed the recording of planning for a military incursion into Syria adding that a ‘network of treason’ was responsible for leak. Part two of the leaked conversation implicates John Kerry US secretary of state in the plot.

Orient Tendencies: An American Plan for a Long War Against Syria

$
0
0

Posted on March 31, 2014 by 

Orient Tendencies
Monday March 31, 2014, no177
Weekly information and analysis bulletin specialized in Arab Middle Eastern affairs prepared by neworientnews.com
Editor in chief Wassim Raad
wassimraad73@gmail.com
New Orient Center for Strategic policies

An American Plan for a Long War Against Syria

By Ghaleb Kandil

The objective of the efforts deployed by the United States, with NATO, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, is to bleed Syria and prevent its recovery, since that alliance has realized that the fall of the regime and the overthrow of President Bashar al-Assad are impossible.
The way to intensify the war against Syria was at the center of discussions of President Barack Obama in Saudi Arabia on Saturday. The statements of U.S. officials who accompanied Obama showed that both parties have agreed to increase the U.S. aid to armed groups in Syria, described as “moderate” by Washington. It is in fact the Islamic Front and the Front al-Nosra, affiliated with Al-Qaeda, whose leader, Abu Mohammad al- Joulani, saw his name removed from the American terrorist list.
Some members of the U.S. delegation reported a training camp project for 600 rebels per month organized by Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Jordan and Turkey (the involvement of Turkey no longer needs public statements). The sources said Obama reiterated his refusal to deliver anti-aircraft missiles to the rebel groups. However, the Saudi intelligence services have given the insurgents in recent months, probably with the consent and the support of the U.S. sophisticated weapons, which have recently been used in Qalamoun battles. Large quantities of these weapons have been found in warehouses in this region.
The United States, in cooperation with its allies, want to cause a long war of attrition in Syria, by forming new armed groups, like the Contras in Nicaragua, which were supported and reconstituted despite successive defeats against Sandinista forces. Efforts are being made to send more men and weapons in Syria, to prolong the war and destruction. The monthly training project proves the existence of a long term plan, mainly based on assassinations and sabotage, in order to impede the advance of the Syrian army in the field, as well as the recovery of the Syrian state. This training plan is designed to compensate the return to state of thousands of ex-rebels, through reconciliation and presidential amnesties, and the reversal of migration flows of foreign extremists.
It is in this context that comes the direct involvement of Turkey in the Syrian war. After the last visit of Recep Tayyeb Erdogan to Tehran, Turkish media reported that Ankara had agreed with the Iranian side that priority should be to fight against terrorism in Syria. But it appeared that the realities on the ground were the opposite. Turkey has in fact planned and organized the terrorist groups attack against the Syrian town of Kassab (north of Latakia), whose inhabitants are survivors of the Armenian Genocide. The purpose of this attack is to open a new front to disrupt the organization of the forthcoming presidential elections in Syria.
But despite these efforts of United States and its allies, Syria is capable of resisting for a long time, thanks to popular support for the armed forces and the state and the support of its regional and international allies.

Statements

Michel Suleiman, Lebanese President
«I regret some parties’ decision not to participate in tomorrow’s session…I hope they will join in subsequent sessions. We must resume our discussion of the defense strategy based on the scenario that we have submitted to the dialogue committee (…)

All the terrorist acts against army soldiers and members of the ISF will not prevent these forces from implementing the cabinet’s decision to preserve security and stability, no matter the sacrifices.»
Hassan Nasrallah, Hezbollah Secretary general
«If takfiris achieve victory in Syria, we would all be eliminated in Lebanon, not just the resistance. From the beginning we said we wanted a political solution, whereas the Arab League wanted to topple Assad. Did it need three years of destruction for the Arab League to make a decision it should have done from the beginning? 

Now after three years of armament, incitement and sabotage, they are putting together terrorist lists and putting the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham and other takfiri groups on them. What is happening in Syria is no longer about reform and democracy. The armed takfiris are now fighting each other, and thousands of victims have paid the price. Hezbollah intervened in the conflict for the first time in Ghouta, in order to protect the shrine of Zeinab, prophet Muhammad’s granddaughter. 

Turkey says that it has the right to protect a shrine in Syria from ISIS fighters. Why is Turkey allowed to do this and not us? Our stance in Syria is political, not military. We intervened late. I’m not going to tell you (Lebanese opponents) to come fight with us in Syria, but to re-evaluate your stance. We didn’t bow down to this (opposition) campaign because it poses a strategic existential threat to Syria, Lebanon and Palestine (…) 

The three-way equation (the army, the people and the Resistance) established Lebanon as an important player in the region. You who speak about the failure of the three-way equation, but tell me how you succeeded in protecting Lebanon? Some have a problem with the Resistance because its fighters are Shia, but did you use to support them when they were secular fighters? Ever since the foundation of the Zionist entity, there has been a debate on the resistance. This resistance will remain solid, with its head hung high, protecting its people and its nation. Regarding the national dialogue, I don’t want to declare a stance, but this way of thinking will impact Hezbollah’s decision to participate in the national dialogue. But Hezbollah’s decision won’t affect its allies’ decision.»
Talal Arslan, MP and Lebanese democratic party leader
«The invitation to Dialogue session is not in keeping with the priorities of the current situation in Lebanon as far as the suggestion of a national defense strategy is concerned. The national defense strategy should not be limited to promoting the idea of disarmament. The priority, in our opinion, is to study production of a new political system that guarantees a comprehensive national defense strategy to protect Lebanon and bring about full sovereignty for the country inside its territory, countering any potential aggression from Israel. Any dialogue session is distinguished by its continuity and follow-up of the subject of discussion. This can only happen after the presidential deadline has been met and a new president has been elected. Based on the above we announce that we will not be attending tomorrow’s national dialogue session in Baabda.»
General Jean Kahwaji, Lebanese Armed Forces commander
«The army arrested more than 85 percent of [the assailants] involved in the explosions that targeted the army and security forces, and is tracking the movement of those who remain at large. The army knows the identities, the targets, the places of residence and the financing sources of the fugitives, and is working to arrest them. The army will not yield to any threat, and will not remain silent to any assault. Every aggressive act will be reciprocated and [the army] will immediately retaliate. The army will not yield to any threat, and will not remain silent to any assault. Every aggressive act will be reciprocated and [the army] will immediately retaliate.»
Amin Gemayel, Kataeb party leader
«Lebanon is completely absent from the international arena due to the confusion in the state institutions, which makes the external countries lose confidence in Lebanon. We are in urgent need to hold the presidential election as soon as possible, because it would revitalize the role of the institutions and put Lebanon back on the table of international meetings. We hope that Berri will be successful in managing this period wisely and firmly and help elect the president before May 25.»
Suleiman Franjieh, Marada Movement leader
«I will not participate in any round of the presidential elections without Aoun’s approval. We and the Lebanese people consider him the strongest representative. I do not care about Progressive Socialist Party leader MP Walid Jumblatt’s approval, my strength would get me elected. I do not know if Speaker Nabih Berri will nominate Aoun but we have made our decision to support him, and do not believe that March 14 will approve. If a consensus is not reached between March 8 and March 14, I have zero chances [of becoming president]. If a regional and international settlement is reached, March 14 would elect me as president, even before March 8. It would bother me if Geagea becomes president, but I admit that he is a strong leader.»

Events

A suicide bomber killed himself and at least three soldiers when he detonated a car bomb at a Lebanese army checkpoint in the border town of Ersal on Saturday, Lebanese media said. The Lebanese National News Agency reported that at least four soldiers were wounded in the blast. “A suicide bomber detonated his car in front of a Lebanese army checkpoint at Aqabet al-Jurd in the Arsal area,” an official told AFP. “There were at least seven soldiers at the checkpoint,” the official added. The attack was claimed on Twitter by a little-known group calling itself Liwa Ahrar al-Sunna in Baalbek – Arabic for the Brigades of the free Sunnis. “The next few days will see several jihadis and blessed attacks like this one. This is only the beginning,” the group said, adding that the army would be among its targets. It said the attack was to avenge the death of Sami al-Atrash, a suspect wanted in connection with car bombings. Atrash was killed during a Lebanese army raid on his house in Ersal on Thursday. Liwa Ahrar al-Sunna also claimed a March 16 car bombing in eastern Lebanon that killed two people. The same attack was also claimed by Al-Nusra Front, Al-Qaeda’s Syria affiliate, with both groups saying it was in revenge for the fall of Yabrud. The explosives-laden car used on Saturday evening was a black Kia, the NNA reported. Security forces cordoned off the area as rescue teams arrived on the site of the attack by military helicopter, due to its remote location. Residents of the eastern city of Baalbeck cut off the highway to the northern Bekaa Valley and burned tired in solidarity with the army to condemn the blast, the NNA added. On Saturday, the army made further raids in Ersal, where they have set up checkpoints this month.
Units from the Lebanese Armed Forces and the Internal Security Forces raided the house and garages of Sami Atrash, who was killed fleeing the army earlier this week, and seized twenty cars. The National News Agency reported that the security forces found car parts and stolen vehicles, which are now being inspected by the army. Sami Al-Atrash, a Lebanese man wanted for several offenses, died of wounds inflicted as he was pursued by the Lebanese Armed Forces on Thursday. Atrash was wanted for firing rockets at towns in the Beqaa, preparing booby-trapped cars, detaining citizens, providing aid to Syrian rebel fighters, participating in the killing of four civilians in Arsal’s Wadi Rafeq, killing soldiers in Arsal’s Wadi Hamid, and plotting to target an LAF officer.
President Barack Obama on Friday defended his administration’s decision not to use military force in Syria, saying that the United States has its limits. The US leader’s comments came in an interview taped ahead of his visit to Saudi Arabia, which was angered by his 11th-hour decision last year to pull back from strikes against the Syrian regime over its use of chemical weapons in the country’s civil war. “It is, I think, a false notion that somehow we were in a position to, through a few selective strikes, prevent the kind of hardship we’ve seen in Syria,” Obama told broadcaster CBS in Rome. “It’s not that it’s not worth it,” he added. “It’s that after a decade of war, the United States has limits.” Obama went on to suggest that the US military would not have been able to have much impact without committing itself long-term. “Our troops who have been on these rotations and their families and the costs, and the capacity to actually shape in a sustained way an outcome that was viable without us having a further commitment of perhaps another decade, those are things that the United States would have a hard time executing,” he said. “And it’s not clear whether the outcome, in fact, would have turned out significantly better.” Obama told King Abdullah that “he believes that our strategic interests remain very much aligned” with those of the kingdom, a US administration official told reporters.

Press review

As Safir (Lebanese Daily close to March-8 coalition)
Nabil Haitham (March 27, 2014)

The Lebanese Forces leader, Samir Geagea, has defined what should be, according to him, the characteristics of the next president, brandishing the slogan of a “strong president.” There are nevertheless some people within the March-14 coalition that do not consider that Geagea candidacy cancels the other candidates in the same political camp. In return, LF supporters report that other candidates from March-14 recognize the supremacy of Geagea and, therefore, the need for his candidacy. These same supporters defend the following principle: since the March-8 highlights Michel Aoun candidacy, it is impossible for March-14 to deal with independent candidates, or even a partisan candidate, but approaching the center, as Amine Gemayel.
The ball is now in the court of the Future Movement, especially Saad Hariri, since his honeymoon with Geagea seems to have resumed after the tensions that accompanied his meeting with Aoun.
An Nahar (Lebanese Daily close to March-14 coalition)
Rosanna Bou Mounsef (March 27, 2014)
According to people who have recently visited capitals Western, officials interviewed expressed concerns about the security in Lebanon, amid involvement of Lebanese parties in the Syrian conflict. These fears are fueled by terrorist acts recently in Lebanon. This is what makes them say that the security issue is becoming the top concern, above all else, including the socio- economic conditions. Hence the impression they seem to have retained their trips abroad: this issue is likely to prompt debate on the presidential election.
Al Joumhouria (Lebanese Daily close to March-14 coalition)
(March 29, 2014)
Maronite Patriarchate speaker Walid Ghayad said that the meeting held on Friday by Bkirki for the top Maronite leaders aimed at pressuring Speaker Nabih Berri into calling a parliament session to elect a new president. “The meeting of Maronite leaders aims at forming a Maronite pressure force [to push] Speaker Nabih Berri to open the parliament and call a plenary session to elect a president as soon as possible,” Ghayad told Al-Joumhouria Saturday. “The meeting also aims at pressuring the MPs to carry out their duties [and attend the session],” he added.
Ghayad said that the meeting was “positive, and the participants agreed to provide the quorum for the parliamentary session.”
The Bkirki spokesperson also said that Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea, who did not attend the meeting in person, approved the final statement issued following the meeting.
Geagea had sent representatives to Bkirki to meet with the patriarch before the meeting, he added.
Ghayad said that the meeting did not discuss any possible candidates for the presidential election.
“The leaders agreed to keep their meetings open, according to the development of circumstances, although every leader has his own point of view on how to hold the election.”
On Friday evening, Maronite Patriarch Bechara Boutros al-Rai met with Free Patriotic Movement leader Michel Aoun, Marada Movement leader Suleiman Franjieh, and Kataeb Party leader Amin Gemayel.
Geagea did not attend the meeting for security reasons. However, he approved of the statement issued Friday night.
Al Hayat (Lebanese Daily close to Saudi Arabia, March 30, 2014)

Maronite Patriarch Cardinal Beshara Boutros Rai called Christian leaders to run for the presidential elections. “I hope that the presidential election session will be held as soon as possible and that quorum will be reached and whoever wins, wins,” sources told Al-Hayat Sunday. Rai reportedly made these comments during a meeting with Christian leaders Michel Aoun, Amin Gemayel, and Suleiman Franjieh in Bkirki on Friday night. However, Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea was unable to attend for security reasons. Meanwhile, Bishop Samir Mathloum stressed that the Bkirki meeting was positive.
“Rai is satisfied with the way preparations for holding the presidential elections on time are going,” said Mathloum. The bishop also said that “there are no talks about a consensual president,” adding that the election will likely be “clear and democratic.”
Al Akhbar (Lebanese Daily close to the Lebanese Resistance)
Maysam Rizk (March 29, 2014)
While most political factions in Lebanon seem occupied with the upcoming presidential race, others in the country are waging a different battle. In fact, four candidates from the Future Movement have their eyes on the office of the prime minister, which will be up for grabs following the election of a new president.
The candidates are: current Prime Minister Tammam Salam, former Prime Minister Fouad Siniora, Interior Minister Nouhad al-Machnouk, and Justice Minister Ashraf Rifi.
Described as provocative ministers, both Machnouk and Rifi are exercising their powers as if they are staying in office forever. People working with them revealed that both ministers are deploying a lot of effort on the job, which they described as “normal” considering the developments in the country. Others pointed out that “both ministers are practicing for the race to succeed Prime Minister Tammam Salam, because it is impossible for former Prime Minister Saad Hariri to return to the country before the end of the Syrian crisis.”
Lebanon has officially entered the two month constitutional period to elect a new president, and although most political factions seem occupied with the race to the Baabda Palace, others are waging a parallel battle for the Grand Serail.
This undeclared battle within the Future Movement ranks started after receiving information confirming that former Prime Minister Saad Hariri won’t be returning to the country any time soon. According to sources within the Future Movement, “It is crazy to think that Hariri would return before ensuring the right conditions are present on all political, financial and security levels.” However, unlike the many candidates for the presidential race, the race to the office of the prime minister seems restricted to: Salam, Siniora, Rifi and Machnouk. According to analysts affiliated with the Future Movement, Machnouk seems the favored candidate.
As the Salam government is only expected to last until the presidential elections, members of the Future Movement, mainly those considering themselves qualified candidates, are racing to the office of the prime minister. Will Salam be reelected? Will Siniora be nominated? Will political and security developments lead to different nominees?
Some in the Future Movement rule out the possibility of renominating Salam. According to them, “the Beik has been given all what he is entitled of… he has been given a moral compensation and Saeb Salam’s political heritage has been revived.”
Meanwhile, the Future Movement is still facing many challenges “because a great majority of Sunnis are being dragged toward extremism and bearing arms.” However, sources revealed that “the movement seeks to fully recover the office of the prime minister,” because Prime Minister Salam “is not 100 percent affiliated with Hariri, he is first an independent figure.”
Does it mean that Salam will be ruled out of the race? Well not exactly, “he will try to succeed in his mission as prime minister in a way to keep his adversaries content without clashing with his allies. In fact, Salam did just that in the period that preceded the government’s formation,” even though “the Future Movement has not quite forgotten yet its discontent with Salam after his threat to quit following the obstacles during the negotiations about the ministerial declaration.”
Although Fouad Siniora remains a permanent candidate, his chances depend on political circumstances. “Siniora has a better chance in case there is a will to clash with the other side, but his chances diminish when a settlement is in place,” Future sources said. Some say that Siniora’s role has faded and he is now representing a movement within the Future Movement, and that he is considered the biggest provocation for his party’s adversaries. However, a source in the Future Movement’s political bureau denied this assumption, stressing that “there is a need for someone like Siniora inside the Movement, that role is bigger than him being prime minister. The Future Movement cannot afford to lose a person who is dynamic and who has so many plans.” Basically “Siniora has not abandoned his work despite some differences with Prime Minister Hariri about the political agenda.”
Meanwhile, sources in the Future Movement say that “Prime Minister Salam is entitled to defend his post,” just as “Siniora has the right to recover his old post.” However, both men don’t have much of a chance against Rifi and Machnouk “mainly because both are waging their battles from inside two crucial ministries.”
Closely monitored by the Future Movement, Rifi is waging his battle differently than Machnouk; he behaves as if he hasn’t been appointed a minister yet. Through his decisions and political stances, Rifi seeks to prove himself “as a spearhead… as a hawk that no one can stop from flying.” He joined the government for only one reason “to confront Hezbollah and to ward off it expansion.”
According to sources from the Future Movement “Rifi’s actions agree with the ambitions of most Sunnis and Future Movement affiliates. On the one hand, he maintains an extremist language that all Future officials are compelled to adopt due to the predominance of Islamic movements, and on the other he makes himself appear as a fighter in civilian clothes.” Together, all these factors made Rifi a serious rival to Salam and Siniora.
However, Interior Minister Nouhad al-Machnouk is apparently the favored candidate to succeed Salam. Since his first day in office, the interior minister had his upcoming battle figured out.
Machnouk never rests, sending political messages in all directions. Sources in the Future Movement say that he is adopting a smarter method than Rifi’s. As the Future Movement stresses on “its battle against Takfiris and against Hezbollah,” Machnouk adopts “a stern political address but also seeks settlements with allies and adversaries.” Machnouk is able to go to Beirut’s southern suburbs, issue a statement against Hezbollah then join coordination committees along Hezbollah officials. He visits Samir Geagea in Maarab, then heads to Aoun’s house in Rabieh, asks for an appointment with Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri, and then meets with MP Walid Jumblatt. Thus, Machnouk seeks to insure to his adversaries that though he stands by his political positions “as an interior minister, he can stand at the same distance from all parties.”
To his allies, Machnouk stresses that he can be “severe in expressing the Future Movement’s positions without allowing it to stand in the way of his contacts with the other side.”
Though this still remains an undeclared battle, a stiff competition is going on between the four candidates. Each nominee “is flexing his muscles so he can reach his goals,” however, the surprise element is still possible but as long as Hariri is absent, everyone is a candidate until proven otherwise.
Al Akhbar (March 29, 2014)
Suhaib Anjarini
The United States and its allies sound like a broken record when they claim to only “support moderate rebels” in Syria. This support, however, requires finding these moderate rebels first, a difficult if not impossible mission.
Syria: If the nature of the Free Syrian Army’s name was ambiguous since its inception in 2011, it is clear today that it is nothing but a label for media consumption. In fact, it never constituted an umbrella group and it did not succeed in creating real leadership that would direct the activities of armed groups present on the ground. Hundreds of groups claimed to be part of the Free Syrian Army (FSA). Announcing their FSA affiliation was a mere pathway to receiving foreign support. Funders – most notably Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Kuwait’s Salafis – were keen on the Islamist identity of the groups receiving support without requiring them to announce it publicly.
In 2013, the picture became clearer. The Islamist discourse became public and most groups organized under the rubric of new fronts that are predominantly jihadist in nature. Groups that used to claim affiliation with the FSA united with hardline groups that never once raised the FSA flag. An example would be the Tawhid Brigade joining ranks with Jaysh al-Islam and Ahrar al-Sham Movement in creating the Islamic Front which became the third part in a tripartite alliance of opposition forces along with al-Nusra Front and the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS). If al-Nusra Front and ISIS’s extremist credentials are well-known, the Islamic Front is no less extreme, especially the Ahrar al-Sham Movement which can be described as the Syrian al-Qaeda.
The FSA’s general staff divides the Syrian battlefield into five battle fronts. The southern front in Damascus, its countryside, Daraa and Suwaida. The eastern front in Raqqa, Deir al-Zor and Hasaka. The western front in Latakia and Tartous. The central front in Homs and Hama and the northern front in Aleppo and Idlib. We will now place these fronts under a more critical lens to look for the moderate groups.
In addition to al-Nusra Front and Jaysh al-Islam, who are affiliated with the Islamic Front, the southern front of the FSA’s offensive is teaming up with small jihadist groups such as the Green Battalion which is believed to be al-Qaeda-affiliated even though it is not well-known in the media. Saudi jihadists have a very strong presence within the group. It has pledged allegiance to the leader of al-Qaeda, Ayman al-Zawahiri, and its leaders boast that they were the first to use “immersion” operations, i.e. immersing oneself into the enemy – in Syria.
There is also the al-Baraa Brigade which claimed the kidnapping of Iranian pilgrims “because they are Shia” and the Glories of Islam Gathering which consists of five Islamist groups that allied together last October. The statement announcing their formation said that the gathering was established “for the sake of closing ranks and developing jihadist activities.” In the same month, four groups created what they called Jaysh al-Sunna wa al-Jamaa which vowed to “keep on fighting to uphold the word of God and overthrow the Iranian sponsored regime.”
All the organizations adopt the same discourse, including ones that have remained independent in the Damascus countryside such as Suquour al-Sham Battalion, Ansar al-Islam Gathering, Sham al-Rasoul Brigade and Sheikh al-Islam ibn Taymiyyah Battalion.
In 2013, the picture became clearer and their Islamist discourse became public.
In Daraa too, the Islamist groups are dominant. Such as the Muthanna bin Haritha Battalion, which defines itself as defeater of the Safavid Persians, al-Muhajireen wal-Ansar Brigade which includes foreign jihadists, the Yarmouk Band which was formed last month gathering under its Islamic banner 14 groups that pledged to “liberate Daraa from the clutches of the Alawi occupation,” under the slogan “And God is predominant over His affairs but most of the people do not know.” There are also brigades and battalions in the region that have pledged allegiance to al-Nusra Front such as al-Musayfira Martyrs’ Brigade.
In Quneitra, there is Ahfad al-Rasul (the Prophet’s Grandchildren) Brigade which is fighting under the banner of the Syrian Revolutionaries Front. The group, which the FSA’s general staff touted its moderate Islamist credentials, is the Yarmouk Martyrs Brigade formed in August 2012 under the leadership of Bashar al-Zoubi upon merging seven smaller groups. In March 2013, this brigade held members of an international peacekeeping force captive as they were passing in the demilitarized zone “because they are crusaders.”
The most prominent groups on this front are the Islamic Front and ISIS, who exercise exclusive control over Raqqa, while al-Nusra Front challenges their control in Deir al-Zour and the oil fields and is trying to control al-Khabur Basin in Hasaka. There is also the Kurdish Islamist Front which includes a 1,000 fighters and is primarily interested in fighting “infidel” Kurdish groups.
The front with the least amount of armed groups. These groups are confined to the northern Latakia countryside and they are all jihadist groups such as al-Nusra, Ahrar al-Sham, Ansar al-Sham and Junoud al-Sham. The latter is a group whose fighters are predominantly Chechen and is not related to the organization Jund al-Sham. There is also Sham al-Islam Movement, a jihadist movement whose fighters are mostly Moroccan.
This front, chronologically speaking, came in second in terms of the influx of immigrant jihadists and is still number one in terms of numbers. There, the opposition power is divided between ISIS, al-Nusra Front, Jaysh al-Mujahideen and the Islamic Front. The main components of the Islamic Front in this area are al-Tawhid Brigade and Ahrar al-Sham Movement. There was a recent announcement about new groups joining the Islamic Front in Aleppo such as Aasifat al-Shamal Brigade and Ahrar Surya Brigade. Both groups are accused of stealing, making the Islamic Front in that area a bizarre mix of hardliners and thieves.
Jaysh al-Mujahideen also takes the same hardline approach. It is the one that declared in communique number two that “the jihadists of al-Nusra Front are our brothers.” It also called on “the immigrants in ISIS to defect and join the ranks of their brothers, the honest mujahideen garrisoned at the Syrian border against the Alawi Assad regime.” One of this group’s most recent accomplishments is detaining Christian opposition activist Marcell Shehwaro and forcing her to sign a pledge promising to wear a veil. When it was formed, Jaysh al-Mujahideen included the biggest group in the region that hid behind a mask of secularism, namely, the Nineteenth Band in the Free Syrian Army.
In Idlib, Jaysh al-Sham al-Islami enjoys a strong presence. It was formed from the union of several groups last February and it upholds the slogan “Towards a Rashidun (righteously guided) Islamic Caliphate.”
It was one of the first areas in Syria to welcome jihadists through Lebanese territories. Al-Haq Brigade, affiliated with the Syrian Islamic Front, and al-Nusra Front are the two most prominent groups in the area. There is also Mujahideen al-Sham Brigade that is affiliated with the Islamic Front. While Jund al-Sham, which was the strongest group in al-Husn region collapsed, al-Faruq Brigades are still present. The group was initially known as al-Faruq Battalions and it achieved great fame through the support of the Muslim Brotherhood and its “Saudi brothers.” Al-Faruq Brigades fought with such sectarian spirit arguing that the shedding of Alawi blood is permissible. The group is now divided into Faruq al-Shamal, Faruq al-Islami, the Independent Omar al-Faruq Brigade and Hama Faruq Battalion. None of them however have abandoned the motto of shedding Alawi blood.
A somewhat weak group in the area is the Revolution Shields which was formed in August 2012 with the support of the Muslim Brotherhood. Its fighters do not exceed a thousand and until recently, the Brotherhood had promoted the group as a moderate Islamist alliance, and had pinned hopes on it. But placing the Muslim Brotherhood on the Saudi terrorist list ousted the Revolution Shields from the game.
The same did not happen to the National Unity Battalions, a group that has not actually fought since its inception in August 2012 and the number of its fighters range between 1,500 and 2,000 deployed on a number of fronts within battalions that have non-Islamic names such as Yusuf al-Azmi and Abdul Rahman al-Shahbandar. The National Unity Battalions is not an effective group and it does not have strong foreign ties or a prominent face to lead it, unlike the Syrian Revolutionaries Front, which is under the leadership of Jamal Maarouf, and is expected to absorb the National Unity Battalions into its own ranks soon.
Al Akhbar (March 28, 2014)
Radwan Mortada and Rameh Hamieh
Sami al-Atrash has been killed. The young Ersali man, who is also known as al-Karrouj, was fatally shot as the army raided a home in Ersal where he was hiding on Thursday.
The news of the raid passed quietly. No angry, political, or even religious reactions were generated. The news of Atrash’s death passed as though nothing happened, with the exception of some tension in the town following the shootout that accompanied the raid. Although a statement by the Lebanese army said that Atrash had been killed during an exchange of gunfire with the suspect, close associates of the deceased man claimed that he was executed although he displayed no resistance – a claim often made following each raid by the Lebanese army.
People in the town told Al-Akhbar that Atrash was a resident of Masharee al-Qaa and was not known in Ersal, and that he had moved to the town after the start of the crisis in Syria where he worked in smuggling and dealing in arms.
According to information obtained exclusively by Al-Akhbar from sources close to Atrash’s cell, the man was recently taking precautions in his movements, avoiding appearing in the town except when absolutely necessary. Atrash, according to sources, was recently based between Flita and the wilderness surrounding Ersal.
The sources said that the raid took place following a tip from an informant in Ersal. The army reportedly also arrested three members of the same family, named as Ali, Nasser, and Mohammed Izz al-Din, nearly half an hour before the raid on Sami al-Atrash’s hideout.
In this regard, a security source revealed that the security services detected suspicious movements by Atrash and his cell in the town ten days ago. The security services proceeded to prepare an ambush for the suspects, but Atrash discovered it on Thursday afternoon, and went into hiding in a house in the area.
As the army raided the house in question, Atrash and his men opened fire at the soldiers. A firefight ensued, and Atrash was shot in the chest. He later died of his wounds at the Dar al-Amal Hospital. The security source said that the raid also led to the arrest of four Lebanese and eight Syrian suspects, pointing out that Atrash was one of the most dangerous fugitives wanted by the security services.
Sami al-Atrash’s name entered the world of terrorism less than a year ago, alongside several individuals from his village in the Bekaa Valley. This happened when then-Defense Minister Fayez Ghosn issued his famous statement, disclosing information about the group led by Ibrahim Qasim al-Atrash, which was involved in preparing and carrying out car-bomb attacks.
Sami was a member of the group led by Omar, who was killed on October 11, 2013, along with Samer Houjeiri, when an explosive-rigged car they were driving near Ersal was attacked. Sami, Omar, and five other individuals were named as suspects involved in preparing car bombs to detonate them in Beirut’s southern suburb. But some in Ersal deny these accusations and say they are fabricated by the security services.
According to the information available to the security services, the suspects are commanded by Ibrahim al-Atrash, a man in his fifties with close to ties with al-Nusra Front and the Abdullah Azzam Brigades in Greater Syria. The same information indicates that Sami al-Atrash was a major field operative, and that the most dangerous members of the cell were Ibrahim al-Atrash and Sameh al-Baridi.
In addition to these names, another prominent suspect is Ubada al-Houjeiri, son of Sheikh Mustafa Houjeiri. The young man, according to security reports, is involved in the murder of two army officers in February 2013, and the four men killed in the Wadi Rafeq ambush.
Ubada was named as a suspect in the kidnapping of journalists, most recently a Danish and a Palestinian reporter who were released for a ransom of $400 thousand. Bear in mind that the officers of the Information Branch delivered the ransom to Mustafa, the kidnapper’s father, who acted as a mediator.
It may be worth noting that Mustafa Houjeiri, despite rumors that he had left Ersal to the wilderness areas surrounding it with the army’s entry to the town, has been spotted in Ersal, and was seen praying in the mosque where he used to deliver sermons.
After Omar Ahmed al-Atrash and Hussein Ammoun, Sami al-Atrash has now been killed. Before him, his cousin Omar Ibrahim al-Atrash was arrested on charges of transporting suicide bombers, followed by the arrest of Naim Abbas, one of the major terrorist operatives involved in the preparation of car bombs.
The members of the group that the Defense Ministry said were involved in the bombings in Dahiyeh and the northern Bekaa are falling one by one. The security services confirm that these suspects are the most dangerous in the terrorist underworld, but the suspects, or at least a majority of them, deny the charges made against them, including the leader of the group Ibrahim al-Atrash, who only admitted to one charge before the courts, namely, fighting the Syrian regime inside Syria.
Officially, the members of the group named earlier stand accused of “preparing explosive-rigged cars; firing rockets and mortars at Lebanese towns and villages; holding citizens hostage; taking part in the murder of four civilians in Wadi Rafeq in June 2013; murdering soldiers in the Hammid Valley; and planning to kill an officer using an explosive device.”
AFP (France-Press Agency, March 29, 2014)
Syrian troops made fresh gains in the strategic Qalamun area near the Lebanese border Saturday, seizing two villages from rebels, a military source told AFP.
“The army took control this morning of the villages of Ras al-Maarra and Flita, after bombing the last groups of armed terrorists there,” the source said.
President Bashar al-Assad’s troops, backed by fighters from Lebanon’s Shiite movement Hezbollah, have been waging a crushing battle against rebel positions in Qalamun, north of Damascus, since November.
They scored a strategic victory in mid-March when they overran Yabrud, a former opposition bastion in the area.
Since then, they have focused on Flita, Ras al-Maarra and other villages in a bid to seal off the border and stop rebels from bringing in weapons and fighters from Lebanon.
At the same time, Hezbollah has said its goal in backing Assad’s troops was to stop a flow of car bombs into Lebanon that it said were being prepared in Yabrud.
The military source said the latest advance “is a new step towards closing off the border with Lebanon.”
Though the takeover of Flita and Ras al-Maarra has not completely sealed off the border, “any success… helps seal the border more tightly, at least at the main crossing points that [the rebels use] to transport vehicles,” he added.
The latest advance comes a day after the air force dropped highly destructive barrel bombs on Flita, and after the head of the rebel Military Council Ahmad Nawaf Durra was killed in fighting, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.
The Los Angeles Times (March 28, 2014)
Patrick J. McDonnell
On the ragged fringes of the Old City, aid workers, clerics and government troops stood vigil, awaiting a U.N. convoy evacuating women, children and the aged from the besieged ancient quarter of a town known to many as ground zero in the Syrian civil war.
But the buses disgorged a very different class of passengers: scores of young men, haggard and sallow-faced, blankets draped over their shoulders and fear evident in their eyes. They shuffled uncertainly under the hostile gaze of Syrian troops and intelligence officers toward a makeshift processing center in a run-down banquet hall.
The men, who turned themselves in last month, were remnants of Homs’ rebel defenders, once the spearhead of the insurgency, now bedraggled and half-starved. They were placing their fate in the hands of their most bitter foe, the forces of President Bashar Assad. “What do you think they will do with us?” one after another of the dispirited men asked in hushed tones.
As the Syrian conflict enters its fourth year, one thing is clear: The U.S.-backed rebels are losing the war. Assad’s army, once dismissed as inadequately equipped, ill-prepared for guerrilla fighting and of suspect loyalty, is chalking up victory after victory.
Unlikely as it once seemed — and as unpalatable as it may be to U.S. policymakers and their allies — Assad could well end up the sole Middle East leader to remain in power after coming under threat from the so-called Arab Spring revolts.
Assad has survived in large part because of disarray in the rebel ranks, including the rise of Islamist militants hostile to Syria’s tradition of tolerant Islam; a steady flow of military and financial aid from Moscow and Tehran; and a revived Syrian military bolstered by local militiamen and Hezbollah fighters from Lebanon. The latter have proved a major asset, routing rebels close to the porous Lebanese border and providing a disciplined, well-trained force to take pressure off the overstretched military.
Assad has also benefited from a sense of war-weariness that has prompted many insurgents to lay down their arms and civilians to turn against the struggle. Barring an unexpected development, such as Assad’s death or direct foreign intervention, it’s hard to fathom how the opposition can turn things around.
Last summer, U.S. warplanes seemed poised to strike Damascus, the capital and Assad’s seat of power, a threat averted at the eleventh hour when he agreed to relinquish his chemical weapons stockpiles. Now Assad is confident enough that he is widely expected to run for a third seven-year term this summer, in an election condemned by the opposition as a fraud.
Great swaths of Syria, especially to the north and east, remain out of government hands. For Assad, retaking such far-flung territories will be problematic as long as arms and fighters flow in from the Turkish and Iraqi frontiers.
Yet much of this land is now under the sway of Al Qaeda-affiliated groups or other extremist Sunni Islamist factions disavowed by the United States and its allies. In such areas, rebel brigades are battling one another — a war within a civil war between Western-backed rebel factions and radical Islamists.
In essence, Syria has been transformed into a many-sided geopolitical board game, with Iran, Russia and Shiite Hezbollah fighters arrayed against the U.S., Israel, Saudi Arabia and Sunni Islamist fighters from around the world, each pursuing their own strategic interests as death and destruction mount.
“Syria has become a playground for international and ideological Islamist conflict,” said Jamil Salou, a pro-opposition media activist based in Turkey.
Though Syria’s majority Sunni population has been the backbone of the rebellion against Assad — a member of the minority Alawite sect — many secular Sunnis, and middle-class Syrians of all sects, appear aghast at the prospect of an Islamist takeover.
“We’re not for Assad, but we all prefer this government over the Islamists, that’s for sure,” said Bassel, a young Sunni banker encountered in the upscale Abu Rummaneh district of Damascus, which is often a target of indiscriminate rebel shelling. “How could we live with them? That would be the end of Syria.”
Essential to the government’s resurgence has been its well-armed military. Long trained for a traditional land war with Israel, it is becoming increasingly adept at fighting an insurgency.
The government’s strategy has been to focus on protecting Damascus and the major corridor north to Homs and west to the Mediterranean coast, a pro-Assad stronghold. The once-perilous route has become more secure in recent months, an indication that the approach has worked.
An extensive series of checkpoints in Damascus has cut down on car bombings. Troops are no longer ferried through dangerous areas in unarmored buses. Recent ambushes of opposition formations suggest that intelligence gathering may also be improving.
Meanwhile, the opposition, which still proclaims that victory is within reach, has no answer to the government’s air power, which has been especially devastating in the northern city of Aleppo, once home to more than 2 million.
Syrian military commanders say the heavy shelling that precedes entry by the infantry is a time-honored war strategy.

IS THE BDS DEMOCRATIC?

$
0
0

Please Sign the Palestinian Declaration Here


Is the BDS Democratic?



Open letter to Omar Barghouti, Co-founder, PACBI

by Paul Larudee / March 23rd, 2014


Dear Omar,

Let me start by saying that you have done a lot for BDS and that BDS has done a lot for the Palestinian cause.  It is perhaps for this reason that we should all be concerned with potential corruption of the movement, and you most of all.  I refer to changes of wording, changes of direction and changes of priority within the movement.

The change of wording is the infamous four words “occupied in June, 1967″ inserted into the first of three objectives in the mission statement portion of the 2005 BDS Call signed by 173 Palestinian organizations, such that the statement now demands of Israel:

“Ending its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands occupied in June 1967 and dismantling the Wall…” (added phrase in italics)

I understand your argument that this phrase only clarifies the meaning of the original statement, and that it changes the meaning not at all.  Even so, who gave you the right to make the change without consulting and getting the approval of the signatories to the original call?  Why was it inserted without even telling anyone, such that no one but you even knows when it was done?  If it is so uncontroversial, why not get it approved?
Why is the phrase needed, anyway?  You argue that it results in no change of meaning.  Why, then, is it not superfluous?  Since it is a bone of contention, just remove it and be done with it.

I also understand that the offending phrase occurs only in the ”Introducing the BDS Movement” section of the website and that the original wording is preserved elsewhere.  However, this is at best misleading and at worst disingenuous.  The “Introducing the BDS Movement” section reproduces the three demands from the 2005 Call completely verbatim, except for the added four words, and then proceeds to make the claim that this wording is endorsed by the signatories of the 2005 BDS Call.

This is deceptive and even fraudulent and must be corrected.  The altered wording has even been mistakenly quoted by Max Blumenthal in his book Goliath as being the wording of the original BDS Call.  Your misrepresentation has led directly to his error.

However, the wording is not merely a technical problem.  The wording is apparently important to you.  But why?  Could it be that the wording was needed in order to satisfy individuals or groups or interests that demanded this wording?  Was it meant as an assurance that BDS would not demand the return of all lands stolen from Palestinians but only those lands that were stolen outside the Green Line?

If this is the case, it would explain why many “soft” Zionists, who want to maintain a Jewish state but give back the West Bank, now participate in BDS, but only against institutions that support the Israeli presence in the West Bank.

In fact, that is the current priority of the movement, with little or no Boycott, Divestment or Sanctions aimed at institutions that deny equal rights to Palestinian citizens of Israel or the Right of Return to Palestinians in the shatat (“diaspora”).

Is this a coincidence or is BDS headed in a different direction than its origins would indicate?  Is it no longer a Palestinian movement, but rather a “soft” Zionist movement?

Obviously, people join movements for different reasons, and if Zionists want to boycott organizations that do business with Israel – even if only in the West Bank – their contribution is welcome.

However, it is quite another matter to effectively turn over the reins of the movement to them or to accommodate them by changing the wording of the mission statement.  A Palestinian movement that welcomes Zionists that have limited objectives is quite different from a Zionist movement that wants to limit its mission but accepts Palestinians that have wider goals.

Is that what is going on?  Perhaps not.  Perhaps my concerns are exaggerated.  But in that case, please dispel all doubt by removing the four words.

Paul Larudee

US War Plan for Europe and Russia

$
0
0


March 31, 2014 "Information Clearing House - "Press TV"- The US is prepared to plunge Europe into a war with Russia in order for Washington to preserve its hegemony over the transatlantic axis. he told us earlier in the week. The key issues are the prevention of Russia and Europe developing closer trade and political ties - stemming primarily from a vast trade in energy fuels; and, secondly, the survival of the American dollar as the world's reserve currency.

So vital are these issues for continued American hegemony that Washington is prepared to sacrifice millions of lives in a war between Russia and its so-called transatlantic European "ally".

This shocking revelation comes from a former European NATO commander. According to Christof Lehmann, editor of the news and analysis website nsnbc international, the European military officer was given the grim warning by American counterparts in an off-the-record briefing.

The European commander, now retired, subsequently confided the information with Lehmann, who says that the tensions over Ukraine between Russia and Western powers are consistent with this latent American threat.

The original threat was disclosed during the 1980s, but there is no reason to believe that the American policy of inciting a war in Europe has since changed. This is because the strategic rationale for the US bellicose logic remains the same. And recent events over Ukraine strongly suggest that Washington's destructive designs are still in place.
Says Lehmann: "In the early 1980s, a European top NATO admiral said that American colleagues at the Pentagon had told him, unequivocally, that the US and UK would not hesitate in creating a new European war if the situation ever arose that Europe and Russia, then the USSR, were to develop close relations."
Central to the American rationale was, and continues to be, the issue of energy fuel. Washington does not want to see European and Russian economies integrating on the vital issue of trade in oil and gas, the foundation for economic and social development.

Over the past two decades since the end of the Cold War between the US-led West and the former Soviet Union, Europe and Russia have seen substantial alignment of their economies, primarily due to the enormous oil and gas volumes supplied by Moscow. European-Russian bilateral trade is well over $1 trillion annually, and is some tenfold that of US-Russian trade.

Russia accounts for nearly one-third of Europe's total hydrocarbon fuel consumption. In Germany, the largest European economy, that figure rises to 40 per cent. With the new pipelines of the North Stream and the currently constructed South Stream, the role of Russia as the main energy supplier to Europe is set to grow even more over the coming decades.
Lehmann adds: "The American dominance of the Atlantic axis with Western Europe is threatened by this development of closer economic ties between Europe and Russia. Germany and the Czech Republic have since the end of the Cold War developed close economic and other relations with Russia. Both are, together with Austria and Italy, pushing a trend towards even tighter relations with Moscow."
This trend was always seen as a strategic danger by Washington. It can be argued that the Cold War from 1945 to 1990 was deliberately instigated by the US as a bulwark to counter the naturally inclined trade integration between Europe and Russia, owing to the latter's prodigious energy reserves and its continental proximity.

The strategic danger for the US is twofold. Firstly, a close relationship between Moscow and Europe would remove the rationale for America's military role in NATO and thereby its political influence in Europe. The second is that the European-Russian energy trade undermines the role of the American dollar as the world's reserve currency. Exchange in such a key world market will inevitably move to the use of the Euro/Ruble, which would spell the end of global American financial hegemony, and with that, the end of the monstrously indebted US economy.

The American economy is already teetering on bankruptcy, with a total debt of $17 trillion, and spiraling. American bankruptcy and social implosion is an eventuality that is so far only postponed by the dollar's continuance as the standard currency for international trade in fuel, and the de facto license for the US Federal Reserve to keep printing money way beyond any sound economic basis for doing so.
Says Lehmann: "The development of Russian-European partnership would leave the US politically, culturally and economically isolated within no more than 25 years. It would also mean that the US would become increasingly isolated in terms of its militarism and strategic encirclement of Russia and China. The dollar would collapse."
An important side note is the insidious role of Britain. As the top European NATO commander revealed, the American war plans for Europe were supported by Britain. This is partly because of the historical co-dependence of Anglo-American capitalism, and also, as Lehmann points out, "a weakened Atlantic axis would mean a significant loss of British influence over Germany and France."

This is the background to why Washington has sought to create a crisis over recent events in Ukraine. Washington has played the key role in fomenting regime change in that country, which has seen the rise of an unelected fascist junta in Kiev that poses a serious threat to Russia.

The Kiev demagogues have openly talked of inciting terrorism and mass murder against Russia and are willing to install American missiles on their Western border with Russia.

The debacle has led to the worse diplomatic crisis between European capitals and Moscow since the end of the Cold War. The possibility of a war between nuclear-armed powers may have receded for now, but the danger of such a catastrophe remains.

This weekend Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov met with his American counterpart John Kerry for urgent talks in Paris. Reportedly, Kerry was holding the meeting to "de-escalate tensions" between Russia and the West. The reality is that Washington has done everything to escalate this conflict, in particular between Russia and Europe, for its own selfish strategic interests. That includes, if deemed necessary by the pyromaniacs in Washington, the ignition of all-out war in Europe.
Finian Cunningham (born 1963) has written extensively on international affairs, with articles published in several languages. He is a Master’s graduate in Agricultural Chemistry and worked as a scientific editor for the Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge, England, before pursuing a career in journalism.
© Copyright 2012 Press TV. All rights reserved.

Planned Turkish False Flag Exposed

$
0
0


by Stephen Lendman



Welcome to police state Turkey. It’s no democracy. Claiming otherwise is a convenient illusion.
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan is tyrannical. He’s ruthless. He blames victims for his crimes. He’s unapologetic.
He heads Ankara’s rogue government. Turkey is one of 28 NATO countries. Erdogan partners with Washington’s imperial wars.
He’s part of Obama’s agenda to ravage and destroy Syria. At issue is ousting Assad. It’s replacing him with pro-Western puppet leadership.
It’s denying Syrians all rights. It’s exploiting them ruthlessly. It’s stealing Syrian resources. It’s eliminating an Israeli rival. It’s isolating Iran before targeting its government the same way.
It’s reckless. It’s lawless. It’s out-of-control. It risks regional war. It risks expanding it globally. It risks what no responsible leader would dare. It’s happening in real time.
Obama wants a pretext for full-scale US-led NATO intervention. Last summer’s false flag Ghouta chemical weapons attack failed.
Hoped for popular US support didn’t follow. Mass opposition emerged. Libya 2.0 was postponed. It wasn’t cancelled. It remains another major false flag incident ahead.
On March 28, RT International headlined “You Tube ban: How Turkish officials conspired to stage Syria attack to provoke war.”
At issue is pretext for invoking NATO’s Articles 4 or 5.
Article 4 calls for members to “consult together whenever, in the opinion of any of them, the territorial integrity, political independence, or security of any” is threatened.
Article 5 considers an armed attack (real or otherwise) against one or more members, an attack against all. It calls for collective self-defense.
Invoking it gives Obama pretext for war. Bombs away would follow. Libya 2.0 would entirely ravage and destroy Syria. Perhaps turning it to rubble is planned.
Potentially hundreds of thousands could die. Many more would be injured. Millions more displaced.
Humanitarian disaster conditions would increase exponentially. Obama’s rap sheet already is blood-drenched.
How many more millions does he plan to murder? Is war with Russia next? Doing so is as simple as ordering ready, aim, fire. Major conflicts start this way.
Turkey was caught red-handed. Ergodan responded lawlessly. He blocked You Tube. He lied claiming national security concerns.
Days earlier, he restricted Twitter access. He called the You Tube recording “a vile, cowardly, immoral act.”
Turkey is notorious. It suppresses press freedom. It imprisons more journalists than any other country. Speaking truth to power is criminalized.
Thousands of journalists, lawyers, activists and others are falsely accused of state terrorism. An atmosphere of fear prevails. No one is safe. Everyone is potentially vulnerable.
The Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) earlier said Turkish “authorities are waging one of the world’s biggest anti-press campaigns in recent history.”
“Dozens of writers and editors are in prison, nearly all on terrorism or other anti-state charges. The evidence against them? Their journalism.”
Erdogan restricts free expression. He denigrates it. He goes all-out to quash it. He represents hardline rogue governance.
His latest dirty scheme was exposed. What follows remains to be seen.
Leaked audio revealed comments made by Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu and National Intelligence Organization (MIT) head Hakan Fidan.
Others involved included Foreign Affairs Undersecretary Feridun Sinirlioglu and Deputy Chief of Staff Lt. General Yasar Guler.
They discussed plotting a false flag pretext for full-scale war on Syria. Davutoglu was heard saying “I’ll make up a cause of war by ordering a missile attack on Turkey” from insurgent held Syrian territory.
He called doing it “a declaration of war. He suggested targeting the Tomb of Suleiman Shah. It’s inside Syria. It’s sovereign Turkish territory. It’s authorized under 1921 Treaty of Ankara terms.
Davutoglu was heard saying:
“The prime minister said that in the current conjuncture, this attack must be seen as an opportunity for us.”
Fidan replied saying:
“I’ll send four men from Syria, if that’s what it takes. I’ll make up a cause of war by ordering a missile attack on Turkey. We can also prepare an attack on Suleiman Shah Tomb if necessary.”
Sinirlioglu said: “Our national security has become a common, cheap domestic policy outfit.”
Guler: “It’s a direct cause of war. I mean, what’re going to do is a direct cause of war.”
The full conversation reveals how rogue states operate. It continued as follows:
Davutoglu: “I couldn’t entirely understand the other thing; what exactly does our foreign ministry supposed to do?”
“No, I’m not talking about the thing. There are other things we’re supposed to do.”
“If we decide on this, we are to notify the United Nations, the Istanbul Consulate of the Syrian regime, right?”
Sinirlioglu: “But if we decide on an operation in there, it should create a shocking effect. I mean, if we are going to do so.”
“I don’t know what we’re going to do, but regardless of what we decide, I don’t think it’d be appropriate to notify anyone beforehand.”
Davutoglu: “OK, but we’re gonna have to prepare somehow. To avoid any shorts on regarding international law.”
“I just realised when I was talking to the president (Abdullah Gul), if the Turkish tanks go in there, it means we’re in there in any case, right?
Guler: “It means we’re in, yes.”
Davutoglu: “Yeah, but there’s a difference between going in with aircraft and going in with tanks…”
Guler: “Maybe we can tell the Syrian consulate general that, ISIL is currently working alongside the regime, and that place is Turkish land. We should definitely…”
Davutoglu: “But we have already said that, sent them several diplomatic notes.”
Guler: “To Syria…”
Sinirlioglu: “That’s right.”
Davutoglu: “Yes, we’ve sent them countless times. Therefore, I’d like to know what our Chief of Staff’s expects from our ministry.”
Guler: “Maybe his intent was to say that, I don’t really know, he met with Mr. Fidan.”
Fidan: “Well, he did mention that part but we didn’t go into any further details.”
Guler: “Maybe that was what he meant…A diplomatic note to Syria?”
Fidan: “Maybe the Foreign Ministry is assigned with coordination…”
Davutoglu: “I mean, I could coordinate the diplomacy but civil war, the military…”
Sinirlioglu: That’s what I told back there. For one thing, the situation is different. An operation on ISIL has solid ground on international law.”
“We’re going to portray this is Al-Qaeda, there’s no distress there if it’s a matter regarding Al-Qaeda. And if it comes to defending Suleiman Shah Tomb, that’s a matter of protecting our land.”
Guler: “We don’t have any problems with that.”
Fidan: “Second after it happens, it’ll cause a great internal commotion (several bombing events is bound to happen within). The border is not under control…”
Sinirlioglu: “I mean, yes, the bombings are of course going to happen. But I remember our talk from 3 years ago…”
Guler: “Mr. Fidan should urgently receive back-up and we need to help him supply guns and ammo to rebels.”
“We need to speak with the minister. Our Interior Minister, our Defense Minister. We need to talk about this and reach a resolution sir.”
Davutoglu: “How did we get special forces into action when there was a threat in Northern Iraq? We should have done so in there, too.”
“We should have trained those men. We should have sent men. Anyway, we can’t do that. We can only do what diplomacy…”
Sinirlioglu: “I told you back then, for God’s sake, General. You know how we managed to get those tanks in. You were there.”
Guler: “What, you mean our stuff?”
Sinirlioglu: “Yes, how do you think we’ve managed to rally our tanks into Iraq? How? How did we manage to get special forces, the battalions in?”
“I was involved in that. Let me be clear. There was no government decision on that. We have managed that just with a single order.”
Guler: “Well, I agree with you. For one thing, we’re not even discussing that. But there are different things that Syria can do right now.”
Davutoglu: “General, the reason we’re saying no to this operation is because we know about the capacity of those men.”
Guler: “Look, sir, isn’t MKE (Mechanical and Chemical Industry Corporation) at minister’s bidding?”
“Sir, I mean, Qatar is looking for ammo to buy in cash. Ready cash. So, why don’t they just get it done? It’s at Mr. Minister’s command.”
Davutoglu: But there’s the spot we can’t act intergratedly. We can’t coordinate.”
Guler: “Then, our Prime Minister can summon both Mr. Defence Minister and Mr. Minister at the same time. Then he can directly talk to them.”
Davutoglu: “We, Mr. Siniroglu and I, have literally begged Mr. Prime Minster for a private meeting. We said that things were not looking so bright.”
Guler: “Also, it doesn’t have to be a crowded meeting. Yourself, Mr. Defence Minister, Mr. Interior Minister and our Chief of Staff, the four of you are enough.”
“There’s no need for a crowd. Because, sir, the main need there is guns and ammo. Not even guns, mainly ammo. We’ve just talked about this, sir.”
“Let’s say we’re building an army down there, 1000 strong. If we get them into that war without previously storing a minimum of 6-months’ worth of ammo, these men will return to us after two months.”
Davutoglu: “They’re back already.”
Guler: “They’ll return to us, sir.”
Davutoglu: “They’ve came back from…What was it? Cobanbey.”
Guler: “Yes, indeed, sir. This matter can’t be just a burden on Mr. Fidan’s shoulders as it is now. It’s unacceptable. I mean, we can’t understand this. Why?”
Davutoglu: “That evening we’d reached a resolution. And I thought that things were taking a turn for the good. Our…”
Sinirlioglu: “We issued the MGK (National Security Council) resolution the day after. Then we talked with the general…”
Davutoglu: “And the other forces really do a good follow up on this weakness of ours. You say that you’re going to capture this place, and that men being there constitutes a risk factor.”
“You pull them back. You capture the place. You reinforce it and send in your troops again.”
Guler: “Exactly, sir. You’re absolutely right.”
Davutoglu: “Right? That’s how I interpret it. But after the evacuation, this is not a military necessity. It’s a whole other thing.”
Sinirlioglu: “There are some serious shifts in global and regional geopolitics. It now can spread to other places. You said it yourself today, and others agreed…”
“We’re headed to a different game now. We should be able to see those. That ISIL and all that jazz, all those organisations are extremely open to manipulation.”
“Having a region made up of organisations of similar nature will constitute a vital security risk for us.”
“And when we first went into Northern Iraq, there was always the risk of PKK blowing up the place. If we thoroughly consider the risks and substantiate…As the general just said…”
Guler: “Sir, when you were inside a moment ago, we were discussing just that. Openly. I mean, armed forces are a “tool” necessary for you in every turn.”
Davutoglu: “Of course. I always tell the Prime Minister, in your absence, the same thing in academic jargon, you can’t stay in those lands without hard power. Without hard power, there can be no soft power.”
Guler: “Sir.”
Sinirlioglu: “The national security has been politicised. I don’t remember anything like this in Turkish political history. It has become a matter of domestic policy.”
“All talks we’ve done on defending our lands, our border security, our sovereign lands in there, they’ve all become a common, cheap domestic policy outfit.”
Guler: “Exactly.”
Sinirlioglu: “That has never happened before. Unfortunately but…”
Guler: “I mean, do even one of the opposition parties support you in such a high point of national security? Sir, is this a justifiable sense of national security?”
Sinirlioglu: “I don’t even remember such a period.”
Guler: “In what matter can we be unified, if not a matter of national security of such importance? None.”
Davutoglu: “The year 2012, we didn’t do it 2011. If only we’d took serious action back then, even in the summer of 2012.”
Sinirlioglu: “They were at their lowest back in 2012.”
Davutoglu: “Internally, they were just like Libya. Who comes in and goes from power is not of any importance to us. But some things…”
Guler: “Sir, to avoid any confusion, our need in 2011 was guns and ammo. In 2012, 2013 and today also. We’re in the exact same point. We absolutely need to find this and secure that place.”
Davutoglu: “Guns and ammo are not a big need for that place. Because we couldn’t get the human factor in order…”
Turkish officials responded as expected. They lied calling the conversation “partially manipulated.” It was a “wretched attack” on Turkey’s national security, they added.
Rogue states caught red-handed reply this way. Their conversation speaks for itself.
It represents Turkey’s alliance with Washington. It’s Obama’s lead anti-Assad attack dog. It’s a convenient proxy.
It’s a useful stooge. Days earlier, Ankara provocatively downed a Syrian warplane.
It lied claiming it violated Turkish airspace. At most only briefly before correcting a navigational error. It crashed inside Syria. The pilot ejected. He landed safely on Syrian soil.
Turkey’s plot was exposed. Will plans proceed anyway? Will something new be proposed? Is full-scale US-led NATO war on Syria coming? Ankara appears part of a conspiracy to wage it.
Syria’s Deputy Foreign Minister Fayssal Mikdad denounced Turkey’s agenda. Erdogan bears full responsibility.
He supports anti-Syrian terrorist groups, he said. They’re responsible for numerous atrocities.
Erdogan and likeminded government officials are “insane and stupid,” Mikdad added. He’ll “achieve results similar to those achieved by all insane and stupid people.”
On Friday, Syria’s UN envoy Bashar al-Jaafari denounced Erdogan. He cited the above leaked conversation.
He called plotting aggression on Syria a “major scandal.” He wants Security Council members to address what’s revealed.
He wants Turkey held responsible for escalating terrorism on Syria. He called doing so “infringing blatantly upon the sovereignty of a UN member state.”
Whether full-scale war on Syria follows remains to be seen. Obama didn’t initiate conflict to quit. He wants another imperial trophy.
Ruthlessness defines his agenda. Rogue state hegemons operate this way. America is by far the worst.
----
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

His new book is titled "Banker Occupation: Waging Financial War on Humanity."
http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanII.html

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.

Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.

Why the EU can't 'isolate' Russia

$
0
0


By Pepe Escoba

German Chancellor Angela Merkel could teach US President Barack Obama one or two things about how to establish a dialogue with Russian President Vladimir Putin. 

As if Obama would listen. He'd rather boost his constitutional law professor self, and pompously lecture an elite eurocrat audience in the glittering Palais des Beaux-Arts in Brussels, like he did this Wednesday, on how Putin is the greatest threat to the US-administered global order since World War II. Well, it didn't go that well; most eurocrats were busy taking selfies or twittering. 

Putin, meanwhile, met with the CEO of German engineering andelectrical conglomerate Siemens, Joe Kaeser, at his official residence outside Moscow. Siemens invested more than US$1.1 billion in Russia over the past two years, and that, Kaeser said, is bound to continue. Angela was certainly taking notes. 

Obama couldn't behave otherwise. The constitutional law expert knows nothing about Russia, in his (meager) political career never had to understand how Russia works, and may even fear Russia - surrounded as he is by a coterie of spectacularly mediocre aids. His Brussels rhetorical tour de force yielded absolutely nothing - apart from the threat that if Putin persisted in his "aggression" against eastern Ukraine or even NATO members-countries the president of the United States would unroll a much stiffer sanction package. 

What else is new, considering this by supreme CIA asset and former Pentagon head in the first Obama administration, Bob Gates, is what passes for political analysis in the US. 

The $1 trillion game-changer 

Demonized 24/7 by the sprawling Western propaganda machine as a ruthless aggressor, Putin and his Kremlin advisers just need to play Sun Tzu. The regime changers in Kiev are already mired in a vicious catfight. [1] And even Ukraine's acting Prime Minister Arseniy Petrovych "Yats" Yatsenyuk has identified the gloomy times ahead, stressing that the signature of the economic part of the association agreement between Ukraine and the EU has been postponed - so there will be no "negative consequences" for industrialized eastern Ukraine. 

Translation: he knows this will be the kiss of death for Ukrainian industry, on top of it coupled with an imminent structural adjustment by the International Monetary Fund linked to the EU (maybe) bailing out a bankrupt Ukraine. 

Asia Times Online's Spengler coined a formulation: "A specter is haunting Europe, and that is the specter of a Russian-Chinese alliance at the expense of Europe." The alliance is already on - manifested in the G-20, the BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. There are military technology synergies on the horizon - the ultra-sophisticated S-500 air defense system is to be unveiled by Moscow, and Beijing would absolutely love to have it. But for the real fireworks, just wait a few weeks, when Putin visits Beijing in May. 

That's when he will sign the famous $1 trillion gas deal according to which Gazprom will supply China's CNPC with 3.75 billion cubic feet of gas a day for 30 years, starting in 2018 (China's current daily gas demand is around 16 billion cubic feet). 

Gazprom may still collect most of its profits from Europe, but Asia is its privileged future. On the competition front, the hyper-hyped US shale "revolution" is a myth - as much as the notion the US will be suddenly increasing exports of gas to the rest of the world any time soon. 

Gazprom will use this mega-deal to boost investment in eastern Siberia - which sooner rather than later will be configured as the privileged hub for gas shipments to both Japan and South Korea. That's the ultimate (substantial) reason why Asia won't "isolate" Russia. ( See Asia will not 'isolate' Russia, Asia Times Online, March 25, 2014.) 

Not to mention the much-anticipated "thermonuclear" (for the petrodollar) possibility that Russia and China will agree payment for the Gazprom-CNPC deal may be in yuan or rubles. That will be the dawn of a basket of currencies as the new international reserve currency - a key BRICS objective and the ultimate, incendiary, new (economic) fact on the ground. 

Time to invest in Pipelineistan 

Even though its centrality pales compared to Asia, Europe, of course, is not "expendable" for Russia. There have been rumbles in Brussels by some poodles about canceling the South Stream pipeline - pumping Russian gas underneath the Black Sea (and bypassing Ukraine) to Bulgaria, Hungary, Slovenia, Serbia, Croatia, Greece, Italy and Austria. The Bulgarian Economy and Energy Minister, Dragomir Stoynev, said no way. Same for the Czech Republic, because it badly needs Russian investment, and Hungary, which recently signed a nuclear energy deal with Moscow. 

The only other possibility for the EU would be Caspian gas, from Azerbaijan - following on the trail of the Zbig Brzezinski-negotiated Baku-Tblisi-Ceyhan (BTC) oil pipeline, which was conceived expressly to bypass both Russia and Iran. As if the EU would have the will, the speed and funds to spend billions of dollars to build yet another pipeline virtually tomorrow, and assuming Azerbaijan had enough supply capacity (it doesn't; other actors, like Kazakhstan or ultra-unreliable Turkmenistan, which prefers to sell its gas to China, would have to be part of the picture). 

Well, nobody ever lost money betting on the cluelessness of Brussels eurocrats. South Stream and other energy projects will create a lot of jobs and investment in many of the most troubled EU nations. Extra sanctions? No less than 91% of Poland's energy, and 86% of Hungary's, come from Russia. Over 20% of the foreign lending of French banks is to Russian companies. No less than 68 Russian companies trade at the London Stock Exchange. For the Club Med nations, Russian tourism is now a lifeline (1 million went to Italy last year, for instance.) 

US Think Tankland is trying to fool American public opinion into believing what the Obama administration should be applying is a replay of the "containment" policy of 1945-1989 to "limit the development of Russia as a hegemonic power". The "recipe": weaponize everybody and his neighbor, from the Baltic nations to Azerbaijan, to "contain" Russia. The New Cold War is on because, from the point of view of US so-called "elites", it never really left. 

Meanwhile, Gazprom's stock price is up. Buy now. You won't regret it. 

Notes:
1. Popcorn Please While "Putin's Agitators" Rule in Kiev, Moon of Alabama, March 26, 2014. 

Pepe Escobar is the author of Globalistan: How the Globalized World is Dissolving into Liquid War (Nimble Books, 2007), Red Zone Blues: a snapshot of Baghdad during the surge (Nimble Books, 2007), and Obama does Globalistan (Nimble Books, 2009).

He may be reached at pepeasia@yahoo.com.
 

(Copyright 2014 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us about sales, syndication and republishing.) 

Hamas to Iran: Palestine brings us together

$
0
0
Published Tuesday, April 1, 2014
Palestinian group Hamas is flirting with the notion of restoring its ties with Syria. Though the reconciliation process will take some time, Hamas seems determined to reenter the Iranian camp which would pave the way for normal relations with Damascus. 
In fact, Khaled Meshaal, leader of the group’s political bureau, is expected to visit Iran soon and afterward Tehran will mediate a reconciliation between Hamas and the Syrian government.
About two weeks ago, the secretary general of Islamic Jihad, Dr. Ramadan Abdullah Shalah, met with the head of Hamas’ political bureau Khaled Meshaal in Qatar “to finalize the preparations for Meshaal’s visit to Iran as a first step for the resumption of ties between Tehran and Hamas.”

According to sources knowledgeable about Shalah’s visit to Doha, “Hamas is still suffering from an internal crisis due to the positions its political bureau took on the developments in the region which shattered its relations with Iran, Syria and Hezbollah.”
“Iran has always been the group’s main supporter and is still funding and arming the Ezzeddin al-Qassam Brigades. While Tehran maintains its support for resistance parties, it is also expecting Hamas to seriously review its positions in order to restore ties with the party,” the sources explained.
Shalah’s visit “was meant to urge Hamas to make prompt decisions as a way to normalize its ties with Tehran,” sources said, adding that Shalah “suggested separating Hamas’ position from the Muslim Brotherhood’s political approach while seeking to pull the Muslim Brotherhood closer to the resistance axis.”
Mashaal approved these suggestions, and he is reportedly convinced that “Arab regimes will never liberate Palestine and are forbidden from supporting the resistance axis with a single bullet.” 

He also complained to Shalah about the “restrictions” he has been facing in Doha, including his inability to move freely, meet with whomever he wants, and travel to countries other than Sudan and Turkey.
Osama Hamdan, the head of Hamas’ Arab relations, visited Tehran recently and held several meetings with Iranian officials who reassured him of their support for the Palestinian resistance and informed him that they would welcome Meshaal. These positive signs prompted Hamas to make new decisions, which have already been implemented. Sources said that both sides have been discussing a pathway that would allow Hamas to take the next step. Among the suggested ideas is a conference about resistance and the Palestinian cause in Tehran, attended by all Palestinian factions and their leaders - including Meshaal- who will be called to address the audience.
In his speech, Meshaal would stress on refusing to recognize Israel and on the resistance being the only way to liberate occupied territories. He would also meet with Iranian officials, including Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khameni, because after all “Meshaal’s visit to Iran without meeting Khameni would be like praying without doing ablutions,” a source said.
Iranians have agreed to meet with Meshaal because some in Tehran still consider Hamas a natural ally and their alliance would reflect the Islamic unity that Iran is constantly promoting. However, a faction in the Iranian administration is opposing swift normalization with the Palestinian group and doesn’t see a need to hold a meeting between Mehsaal and Khameni for the time being.
A three-year wait
Only a short distance separates Doha from Tehran; however, crossing to the other side of the Gulf required a deep personal review by Meshaal and his group that took a whole year. People close to Abu al-Walid say that “he considers himself responsible for the confusion in Hamas, therefore he will deploy his efforts to restore the group to the status it held before the Syrian crisis then he will quit the political bureau.” However, sources said “it is not sure that the bureau would accept Abu al-Walid’s resignation, but it’s certain that he is seeking to restore Hamas’ relations with Iran and Syria to what they were before 2011.”
Hamas officials don’t like talking about a review. Actually they deny that there are disputes regarding the general political position, though everyone is aware about the obvious divisions between Palestinians inside Gaza, mainly al-Qassam leaders and officials in the political bureau outside the Palestinian territories. Palestinians in Gaza are quite aware of the size of Iranian, Syrian and Hezbollah assistance in supporting resistance efforts, therefore even amid the conflict, they maintained a connection with Tehran. This approach was adopted by Mahmoud al-Zahar and Imad al-Almi.
Beirut and Damascus after Tehran

The most critical part of Hamas returning to the resistance axis involves its relations with the Syrian leadership. Syrian President Bashar al-Assad had said that Hamas “decided to abandon the resistance axis and to become part of the Muslim Brotherhood. I hope someone would be able to convince them to return to being a resistance group again, but I doubt it.”
Many Hamas leaders reject all accusations of abandoning the resistance axis. They have their own side of the story about the tensions with the Syrian leadership but now it’s not a good time to dwell on it. Following the toppling of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, Hamas is seeking to resume its relations with Syria, not just Iran and Hezbollah.
Hamas leaders have been advised to separate their position from the Muslim Brotherhood and emphasize their characteristic as a resistance movement. Ismael Haniyeh, prime minister of the Gaza government, adopted this position as he declared at a memorial ceremony for martyr Sheikh Ahmed Yassin “Hamas is a national liberation movement concerned with the Palestinian cause alongside its Palestinian partners and all other forces”.
Obviously, Hamas’ road to Syria passes through Iran. However, relations with Iran don’t only involve resistance but also Hamas’ positions on the Syrian crisis and all parties are relying on Meshaal’s visit to Tehran to pave the way for a reconciliation with Damascus. Meanwhile, informed sources revealed that during the Shalah-Meshaal meetings, the latter was informed about the need to “reconcile with the head of the Syrian regime.” They also said that Meshaal asked Shalah to work with Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah to “transfer a message to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.”
Though Hamas hasn’t confirmed this information yet, it also hasn’t denied it. A prominent Hamas official stressed that, “We have never attacked the Syrian regime. We said that we stand by the will of the Syrian people without any foreign intervention,” adding that Meshaal, “met a while ago with Syrian opposition leaders in Qatar and told them that the solution for the crisis has to be political, explaining that the Syrian regime stood by Hamas when it was abandoned by the Arab world.”
Qassam: our bullets, our arms and our money are Iranian-made

Though many Hamas officials deny that the group’s position from the Syrian crisis caused internal divisions, the reality on the ground proves otherwise. Since the beginning of the crisis, the Ezzeddin al-Qassam Brigades refrained from attacking the Syrian regime and called for a political solution.
Al-Qassam members, in Gaza and abroad, know Syria quite well. They remember the facilities that Damascus had provided them, such as a special entrance in the airport, private convoys, apartments in Damascus, training and manufacturing centers, and facilities to transfer members to be trained in Iran. These Qassam members said “following the Egyptian siege of Gaza, al-Qassem members have not been able to visit Iran but the arms kept coming.” The brigades managed to maintain a connection with Iran through prominent leaders such as Mahmoud al- Zahar.
“We haven’t left the resistance axis for us to return to it. Iran’s aid to Hamas and Gaza is no longer restricted to the military side, in fact Iran is back to funding the Haniyeh government after a short hiatus that was due to differences in their political positions as well logistical problems at the Rafah crossing because Egyptian authorities had previously seized money belonging to Hamas.”
A while ago, Hamas official Mohammed Nasr visited Tehran and returned with financial aid for the Ezzeddin al-Qassam Brigades. Back then, Iranian officials assured him that financial and military assistance to the brigades won’t stop and that Iran won’t interfere in Hamas’ political choices. But he was also advised that “the group must not act as if it was a state because as a liberation movement, it is not bound to adopt a state’s strategies.”
Hamas and Hezbollah
Good relations with Iran would automatically mean good relations with Hezbollah and vice versa. In Lebanon, despite disagreements about the position on Syria between the Lebanese and the Palestinian resistance groups, ties between both parties have never been broken, mainly military wise.
Hamas still holds offices in Beirut’s southern suburbs, while Hezbollah officials stress that they cannot abandon Hamas “at the end, we are all working under a Palestinian flag and Hamas will always remain a resistance movement,”, adding “What unites us is far more significant than what divides us,” despite differences over the Syrian crisis.
Of course, Meshaal won’t move from Doha to Beirut like some have suggested “because internal Lebanese disputes can’t support a Hamas political bureau in the country,” but Beirut and its southern suburbs will no doubt be welcoming Abu al-Walid many times in the near future.
This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.


GILAD ATZMON INTERVIEWED BY MARK BEBAWI (PART 2) LIVE IN HOUSTON, TEXAS

$
0
0

TUESDAY, APRIL 1, 2014 AT 12:52PM GILAD ATZMON


http://youtu.be/RS3WykTNY8I


Part 2 of a discussion on Palestine in Houston. In this part I attempt to tell the truth about Jewish controlled opposition, BDS, the anti Semitic hoax. George Soros & the Palestinian NGOs and more

Though sound is not perfect, i believe that the talk is very interesting.

Part 1

NATO: Russia Could Invade Ukraine in 3-5 Days

$
0
0


Local Editor


NATO's supreme allied commander in Europe, U.S. Air Force General Philip BreedloveRussia has massed all the forces it needs on Ukraine's border if it were to decide to carry out an "incursion" into the country and it could achieve its objective in three to five days, NATO's top military commander said on Wednesday.

Calling the situation "incredibly concerning", NATO's supreme allied commander in Europe, U.S. Air Force General Philip Breedlove, said NATO had spotted signs of movement by a very small part of the Russian force overnight but had no indication that it was returning to barracks.

Russia's seizure and annexation of Ukraine's Crimea region has caused the deepest crisis in East-West relations since the Cold War, leading the United States and Europe to impose sanctions on Moscow. They have said they will strengthen those sanctions if Russia moves beyond Crimea into east Ukraine.

NATO military chiefs are concerned that the Russian force on the Ukrainian border, which they estimate stands at 40,000 soldiers, could pose a threat to eastern and southern Ukraine.

"This is a very large and very capable and very ready force," Breedlove said in an interview with Reuters and The Wall Street Journal.

The Russian force has aircraft and helicopter support as well as field hospitals and electronic warfare capabilities.

"The entire suite that would be required to successfully have an incursion into Ukraine should the decision be made," Breedlove said. "We think it is ready to go and we think it could accomplish its objectives in between 3 and 5 days if directed to make the actions."

He said Russia could have several potential objectives, including an incursion into southern Ukraine to establish a land corridor to Crimea, pushing beyond Crimea to Ukraine's Black Sea port of Odessa or even threatening to connect to Transdniestria, the mainly Russian-speaking, separatist region of Moldova that lies to the west of Ukraine.

Russia also has forces to the north and northeast of Ukraine that could enter eastern Ukraine if Moscow ordered them to do so, Breedlove said. Any such actions would have far-reaching implications for NATO, a military alliance of 28 nations that has been the core of European defense for more than 60 years.

"We are going to have to look at how our alliance now is prepared for a different paradigm, a different rule set... We will need to rethink our force posture, our force positioning, our force provisioning, readiness, etc," Breedlove said.

NATO foreign ministers meeting in Brussels this week suspended all practical cooperation with Russia in protest at its actions in Crimea and asked military commanders to draw up plans to reinforce NATO members in eastern Europe that are fearful about a threat from Russia.

Breedlove said the ministers had asked him to draw up by April 15 a package of measures that would include reinforcements by land, air and sea.

"We will work on air, land and sea 'reassurances' and we will look to position those 'reassurances' across the breadth of our exposure: north, centre, and south," he said.


Source: Websites
02-04-2014 - 16:15 Last updated 02-04-2014



Moscow Threatens to Retaliate US Blocking of Funds Transfer Moscow 

Moscow on Wednesday threatened retaliatory action against US diplomats after US bank JP Morgan blocked a transfer of funds carried out by a Russian envoy.

Russia considered as "unacceptable, illegal and absurd the decision of JP Morgan Chase bank to block the transfer by the Russian ambassador in Astana to insurance company Sogaz," said Alexander Lukashevich, a spokesman for the Russian foreign ministry.

The move was carried out "under the pretext of anti-Russian sanctions introduced by the United States," the spokesman added. Sogaz is linked to Russian bank Rossiya, which is on the list of companies and individuals subject to US sanctions over Moscow's move to annex Crimea.

"Washington should understand that any hostile action towards Russian diplomats is not only a gross violation of international law but also a prelude to reprisal measures that would not fail to have an impact on the work of the US embassy and consulate in Russia," he said. "JP Morgan Chase has therefore done a disservice" to the US administration, added the spokesman.


Source: AFP
02-04-2014 - 10:29 Last updated 02-04-2014 - 

Related Articles

Terrorism Rock Cairo University, Police General among Victims

$
0
0

Egyptians inspect the damage after twin bombs struck police posts near Cairo University in the center of Egypt's capital on April 2, 2014, which was followed by a third blast as police and journalists gathered at the scene. (Photo: AFP - Mahmoud Khaled)
Updated 2:35 pm: One person was killed in a third explosion at Cairo University on Wednesday shortly after twin bombs killed a police brigadier general there, security officials said.
There was no immediate claim of responsibility for the violence but Islamist militants have carried out similar operations against police and soldiers.
The attack was the latest by militants targeting security forces following Islamist president Mohammed Mursi's overthrow in July.
The first two bombs also wounded five policemen, the interior ministry said, identifying the slain officer as Brigadier General Tarek al-Mergawi.
A police general at the scene told AFP that the first two bombs were concealed in a tree between two small police posts.
"I was waiting for the bus when I heard two explosions. There was dust in the air and policemen were screaming," said a witness, Sakta Mostafa.
A student in Cairo University said he ran out of the campus after hearing the explosions.
"I found a lifeless man in plain clothes and a policeman bleeding from his leg," said the student, Amr Adel.
Mergawi was a chief detective who would have been dressed in civilian clothes.
The government claims militants have killed almost 500 people, most of them policemen and soldiers, in attacks since Mursi's overthrow amid a deadly crackdown on his Islamist supporters.
Most of the attacks have taken place in the Sinai Peninsula, a hub of militant activity, but the jihadists have increasingly targeted police in the capital and the Nile Delta.
Related Articles



Israel killed 12 Palestinians, arrested 364 in March

$
0
0
Palestinian teenager being arrested by Israeli soldiers in Beit Hanina
Source

Twelve Palestinians were killed and 364 arrested by Israeli forces in Gaza Strip and the West Bank during March, a study released yesterday has found.

The information appeared in the annual report issued by Ahrar Centre for Prisoners Studies and Human Rights, which documents the Israeli violations against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, the occupied West Bank and occupied Jerusalem.

According to the report, the number of Palestinians arrested from Jerusalem was 83, 81 from Hebron, 48 from Jenin, 46 from Bethlehem, 43 from Nablus, 17 from Qalqilya, 13 from Ramallah, 11 from Jericho, eight from Salfit and Tulkarm and six from the Gaza Strip.

The prisoners counted in the report were arrested in night raids from homes, kidnapped at checkpoints or during clashes between stone throwers and armed occupation forces.

Ahrar chief Fuad Al-Khufash said that the occupied West Bank is completely vulnerable to the Israeli occupation army. The West Banks cities, villages and neighbourhoods are invaded by the Israeli armed forces almost every night for the purpose of arresting Palestinians.

Hezbollah: No dialogue with “former” President Michel Suleiman

$
0
0

Lebanese President Michel Suleiman (M) With Hariri meeting Saudi King
Published Tuesday, April 1, 2014
For the first time ever, the Resistance will be absent from the national dialogue table, which was invented solely to discuss Lebanon’s defense and resistance strategy. Its absence, however, is not meant to evade important discussions, but is rather temporary, pending the election of a new president.
President Michel Suleiman regretted the absence of some of the “main pillars” of the dialogue committee, hoping that they would join subsequent meetings. However, Suleiman will not necessarily chair “subsequent meetings,” as Hezbollah has now turned the page on his term forever.
More than ten days ago, Hezbollah ministers, MPs, and leaders were advised not to comment on President Michel Suleiman’s invitation to the national dialogue session on Monday. Everyone was waiting for Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah’s speech in Ainata on Saturday, March 30. But Nasrallah did not issue a final decision and only hinted that his party would not attend the dialogue session. Nasrallah closed the door but left MP Mohammed Raad to “lock it” in a statement he made on Sunday.
Nasrallah did not want to embarrass his allies. He knew that MP Michel Aoun has certain calculations related to the presidency, and that Nabih Berri, the man who is the "patented inventor” of the national dialogue sessions, cannot be absent from the session in his capacity as the speaker of parliament.
Nasrallah is not known for seeking or reigniting controversies, especially in internal Lebanese affairs. He is not known to be thin-skinned either. He himself had in his previous speech called on the Lebanese to “calm down and take a breath.” Yet Nasrallah, a month later, chose to criticize again Suleiman’s attack on the Resistance. So is there a contradiction in his positions?


Not at all; “veering toward calm and overcoming obstacles has always been Hezbollah’s concern,” sources close to Hezbollah say. To make their case, they point out Hezbollah’s designation of MP Tammam Salam as prime minister, its compromise on the 9-9-6 formula of distributing ministerial posts between Lebanon’s rival political parties, and its flexibility in relation to the wording of the cabinet’s policy statement.
But this time, the president went too far. His characterization of the “the people, the army, and the resistance” formula for national defense as a “wooden” – i.e. outdated – notion was not criticism as much as it was a deliberate insult that deeply offended the Resistance. Nasrallah expressed this clearly when he said, “Every stab at the Resistance or an abusive characterization of it, is offensive and insulting to everything and everyone that is the Resistance. There will be reactions to this insult that will emerge in the coming days.” And so they did.
After Nasrallah’s speech on March 1, in which he took a swipe at the president over his remarks, Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri engaged in strenuous efforts to mend the growing rift. However, President Suleiman made matters worse when he made further controversial remarks, saying, “Intervention in Syria has undermined the Resistance’s place in the tripartite formula.”
During the negotiations to agree on the wording of the cabinet policy statement, all sides were looking for a de-escalation of tensions as the president championed the so-called Baabda Declaration, calling for Lebanon’s neutrality in the Syrian conflict. But Suleiman sent out the invitations to the dialogue session without preparing an appropriate climate first.
All this has aggravated the row between the president, who seemed like he was paying back debts to foreign entities, and Hezbollah, from its leadership all the way down to its popular base. It is no longer worthwhile for Suleiman, as had been his habit, to say something in public and then try to explain it in secret. So in light of all of the above, his call for dialogue appeared like an attempt to drag Hezbollah against its will to the table.
The national dialogue session would have certainly benefited the president. First, it would have been a good chance to mend the rift with Hezbollah. Second, it could have carried a glimmer of hope for the president to extend his term, although Suleiman understands that this is very difficult if not impossible.
Why, then, did the president come across as though telling Hezbollah: “Come but don’t bother showing up?” How can any dialogue discuss a national defense strategy in the absence of the main party concerned? And who has still not understood that Hezbollah is now a regional actor that no president can rule, let alone extend his term, while engaged in a dispute with simultaneously? Is there something we don’t know?
Perhaps the answer lies in the president’s quest for extending his own term. This is the heart of the problem between Baabda and Haret Hreik, home to Hezbollah’s headquarters. The man in the Baabda Palace has lost his reserve ever since he lost all hope of extending his term after Hezbollah’s secretary general stressed the need to hold the presidential election on time, a few months ago.
Hezbollah has not changed its position, and insists on nominating MP Michel Aoun for the presidency. Hezbollah will not give the president, in the last days of his tenure, any hope of a term extension.
On Saturday, Nasrallah called for presidential elections “as soon as possible,” so that Lebanon can begin a new stage. After that, he said, Hezbollah would continue the dialogue over the national defensive strategy, as well as joint efforts and cooperation to address the country’s crises. What this translates to is that Hezbollah has now closed the book on six bleak years of “former” President Michel Suleiman in office.
This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.

Related Articles

This Is How Hezbollah Retaliated for Victims of Terrorist Bombings

$
0
0
Mazen Qanso – Al Akhbar
Syria: Rima FarmsOfficial sources in the Lebanese security services said that Syria’s Qalamoun area was the starting point for the terrorist operations targeting civilians in Beirut’s southern suburb and the northern Bekaa of Lebanon during the past months.
The Resistance security apparatus is chasing in Syria those involved in such operations, in coordination with the Syrian army and the concerned agencies. Following is the detailed information published for the first time about chasing and punishing them inside the opposition-led areas.
“We know your names and we will reach you. No one assumes that he will triumph if he launches a battle against us, we will defeat you and we will determine the end of each battle,” Hezbollah Secretary-General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah said on 16 August 2013.
It has been long time since Sayyed addressed that speech, through which Takfir groups – operating within the armed groups in Syria – continued their bloody madness, and suicide bombers drove not just a few car bombs and committed massacres against civilians from all of Lebanon areas.
The Resistance people announced commitment to their choice, and a large part of the Lebanese, Syrians and Arabs quickly increased condemnation of such crimes. But a real action did not come from a strong actor to stop this bloody madness. Yet, some even kept insisting to provide excuses and justifications, which urged Hezbollah leadership to double the efforts of addressing the case as if he has the reins of power.
Hezbollah’s decision was clear from the first day. Prosecution and accountability are the state’s responsibility in Lebanon where the security apparatus of Resistance should provide all of its data to help investigations. But inside the Syrian territory, the decision to access their (terrorists) strongholds, verify their work structure, their roles, their acting officials, the participants in planning and implementation and to arrest them or to kill them is in collaboration with the Syrian army and the Syrian security services.
Following the confirmed information about booby-trapping and planning centers in Qalamoun, we’ve got information about the movement of operators and perpetrators in several areas, starting from Nabek, Deir Attiya and Yabroud, right down to Fleita and its neighboring villages, up till to Rankous and Arsal.
The largest intelligence operation was launched then, which required the development of tireless monitoring, tracking and following-up units to achieve the goal. The more villages were taken by Hezbollah and the Syrian army, the more information was flowing. Also, the arrested militants helped to provide parts of the real image, as is the case in Lebanon.
The plan was divided into two parts:
The first step was to disrupt the practical preparations, all the way to thwart moving of car bombs into Lebanon. This required tremendous efforts which succeeded in achieving many of the goals that are still classified.
The second step was to reach actors and groups involved in the attacks, starting from the decision-making process, moving cars, making explosives, booby-trapping and transporting, all the way to hunting down the suicide bombers.

Post-Yabroud
Following the fall of Yabroud in a very complicated security and military operation, amid huge collapses within the ranks of militants and their leaders, the security apparatus of Resistance sought – in cooperation with the Syrian security and military authorities – to limit the movement of its figures committed to the file.
Documented information revealed that there exist additional warehouses outside Yabroud where more car bombs were planned to be sent to Lebanon, especially after the leaders of this group took decision to hasten the suicide attacks in Lebanon immediately after the fall of Yabroud in retaliation, to declare that Yabroud victory will not stop this kind of actions.
The rush of the (armed) group to carry out terrorist attacks led to a series of errors due to the closed crossings and weak mechanisms of coordination, such as what happened in Hermel when two cars were sent, the first was disrupted near a school in the Fakeha town, and the second managed to reach the main road, although the wheels were perforated.
When the suicide bomber tried to reach help for the wheel problem, he saw Khalil Al-Khalil who gave him an address he was asking for. Khalil chased the bomber after the latter spoke to Abdul-Rahman Al-Qadi. The two men chased the bomber and hindered his way, so he blew himself up and killed them both, saving the area from huge massacre. The second bomber, however, managed to leave the car and to flee before being discovered by Army Intelligence and being exploded in the next day.

Hawsh Al-Arab Warehouse
In the meantime, security units in the resistance were tracking fugitives from Yabroud, and succeeded in forming a mechanism of communication and coordination between these groups, which enabled the units to determine the point of meeting and cooperation. Information revealed the point was located in an area known as Hawsh al-Arab, between Rankous, Maloula and Assal al-Wared, where militants had seized a two-story villa located within a farm with several other buildings in a barren area surrounded by a large fence, and close to armed groups in neighboring houses.
Surveillance operations were given the green light. Special units headed to the place, examined all its sides, and spent several nights in checking the information about the people’s movement in the region and its geographical nature and the size of its homes. The surveillance units prepared detailed maps attached with video footages that helped to discuss the next step. Discussions revealed that it may be difficult to arrest or kidnap the armed groups due to many considerations.
Deciding to eliminate the (armed) groups, many givens were reviewed, including the fact that the target point is away more than ten kilometers from the last point where the Syrian army and Hezbollah units were deployed. The area is also crowded with corridors and roads used by armed groups to move inside the area. The number of militants increased after their escape from Yabroud. There was also a need to provide a large support force in case engagement was declared.
Accordingly, it was decided to blow the villa and to kill the militants.
After several days of serious monitoring from very close distances, the resistance security apparatus accessed a detailed map of the target building and the roads leading to it. Also, the main entrances were identified in order to advance towards the building, as well as the methods of withdrawal, in addition to the firearms coverage plan in case of any mistake or exposure.
During the last surveillance operation, the identity of armed militants who used to enter to the villa at day and to leave it at night were confirmed. The villa was also equipped with a depot where cars planned for being exploded were found, and rooms where the explosive materials were prepared.

Punishment
VillaLast Friday, the decision was made to carry out the operation in a way that wouldn’t make a noise or arise suspicion but would allow the full destruction. The appropriate kind of explosives was carefully selected, as well as the number of group members who were supposed to advance.
After Saturday’s sunset, the special unit moved on, including advancing surveillance elements, communication elements that would keep up with what to happen minute by minute, engineering group that was carrying improvised explosive devices, as well as coverage groups that would secure the entry and exit process.
During the progress, a group of militants who were conducting ongoing switching operations in the region just happened to have passed. At moments, it seemed the confrontation was potential and the plan might be changed. But the gunmen moved away after they realized that there were no foreigners.

Trapping and Bombing
The unit approached the fence to the right and managed to cross the garden fence within a minute, where it began planting explosives in the courtyard, around the walls corners, near the main entrance and at the rear doors. The special force completed the installation process of explosives outside the villa within the required time limit. Note that the protection unit was seriously vigilant, after it became clear that another group of armed men are living in a nearby house less than 40 meters away.
After camouflaging the IEDs and verifying the technical items, the attacking unit withdrew hundreds of meters back. While the other unit remained very close to the target point, and had to ensure the presence of all terrorists in the villa, and the absence of civilians.
In the morning, according to the information, terrorists started to enter into the villa, and their arrival was verified by the nearby unit, one by one. After making sure that everyone was in, the concerned elements asked the nearby unit to move backward a little to the determined line of withdrawal. Then, another unit carried out the bombing from not a remote distance.
The explosion was very huge, due to the presence of a large amount of explosive materials inside the villa. The explosion demolished the villa fully, and the gunmen’s bodies remained under the rubble.
Soon a few minutes later, withdrawal process began which required another tactic for occurring in the day time, taking into account that the blast would require the arrival of large groups of insurgents in the region. However, the Resistance had provided at the time a  firearm security in preparation for any emergency, and other roads had been selected for withdrawal rather than those used during the incursion. Armored units and Syrian air force were also in a state of readiness to intervene when needed.
Translated by Eslam al-Rihani
To read the Arabic version of this article, click here
Source: Newspapers
01-04-2014 – 15:24 Last updated 01-04-2014

Related Articles

هكذا انتقم حزب الله لضحايا التفجيرات

  في معلومات الأجهزة الأمنية الرسمية في لبنان، أن منطقة القلمون السورية كانت منطلق العمليات الإرهابية التي استهدفت المدنيين في الضاحية والبقاع الشمالي خلال الأشهر الماضية. جهاز أمن المقاومة يلاحق المتورطين في تلك العمليات، في سوريا، بالتنسيق مع الجيش السوري والأجهزة المعنية. في ما يأتي، معلومات تُنشر للمرة الأولى عن تفاصيل عملية ملاحقة هؤلاء ومعاقبتهم، في مناطق خاضعة لسلطة المعارضة السور

مازن قانصو

«نعرفكم بالأسماء وأيدينا ستصل إليكم. لا أحد يفترض أنه إذا فتح معركة معنا سيحسمها هو، نحن من نحسم المعركة ونوقّت نهاية كل معركة». كانت هذه كلمات الأمين العام لحزب الله السيد حسن نصرالله، في 16 آب 2013. مضى وقت طويل على خطاب السيد. المجموعات التكفيرية العاملة ضمن المجموعات المسلحة في سوريا واصلت جنونها الدموي. انتحاريون يقودون عدداً غير قليل من السيارات المفخخة، عمدوا إلى ارتكاب مجازر بحق مدنيين من كل لبنان، وفي أكثر من منطقة من لبنان.
الشارع الحاضن، أعلن التزامه خيار المقاومة. وسرعان ما توسعت حلقة إدانة هذه الجرائم من قبل قسم كبير من اللبنانيين والسوريين والعرب. لكن أية إجراءات فعلية لم تصدر عن قوى فاعلة لوقف هذا الجنون. بل أصر البعض على تقديم الذرائع والتبريرات، ما ألزم قيادة حزب الله بالعمل بقوة مضاعفة لمعالجة الأمر، على طريقة من بيده الأمر.
قرار حزب الله كان واضحاً منذ اليوم الأول. في لبنان، الملاحقة والمحاسبة من مسؤولية الدولة. وجهاز أمن المقاومة، معني بتقديم كل ما لديه من معطيات تساعد التحقيقات. أما في داخل الأراضي السورية، فكان قرار بالتعاون مع الجيش السوري والأجهزة الأمنية السورية في الوصول إلى معاقل هؤلاء، والتثبت من هيكلية العمل والأدوار والمسؤولين الفعليين، والمشاركين في التخطيط والتنفيذ، والعمل على توقيفهم أو قتلهم إذا تعذر.
بعدما تأكدت المعلومات عن وجود مراكز تفخيخ وتخطيط في منطقة القلمون، وصلت المعلومات عن حركة المشغلين والمنفذين بين عدة مناطق. من النبك ودير عطية ويبرود، وصولاً إلى فليطا والقرى المجاورة لها، وصولاً إلى رنكوس وجرود عرسال.
وانطلقت أكبر عملية استخباراتية، تطلبت وضع وحدات الرصد والتعقب والمتابعة الدؤوبة كلها في خدمة الهدف. وفي كل محطة كانت تسقط قرى أو بلدات بيد حزب الله والجيش السوري، كانت المعلومات تتدفق أكثر فأكثر، ومن أوقف من المسلحين ساعد على تقديم أجزاء مكملة للصورة، كما هي حال من أُوقفوا في لبنان. وكانت الخطة تنقسم إلى شقين:
الأول: العمل على تعطيل الاستعدادات العملية، وصولاً إلى إحباط عملية نقل سيارات مفخخة إلى لبنان. وقد تطلبت هذه العملية جهوداً جبارة، نجحت في تحقيق الكثير من الأهداف التي لا تزال طيّ الكتمان.
الثاني: الوصول إلى الجهات المتورطة والمجموعات المشاركة من لحظة اتخاذ القرار إلى عملية نقل السيارات وصناعة المتفجرات إلى عملية التفخيخ والنقل، وصولاً إلى مطاردة الانتحاريين.

—–
بعد يبرود
بعد سقوط يبرود، في عملية أمنية وعسكرية معقدة جداً، وحصول انهيارات كبيرة في صفوف المسلحين وقادتهم، سعى جهاز أمن المقاومة بالتعاون مع السلطات السورية الأمنية والعسكرية إلى حصر حركة المعنيين بهذا الملف. وقد قادت معلومات موثقة إلى وجود مخازن ومستودعات إضافية خارج يبرود، وأن هناك عملاً قائماً فيها لإرسال المزيد من السيارات المفخخة إلى داخل لبنان، وخصوصاً بعدما قررت قيادات هذه المجموعة المسارعة إلى تنفيذ عمليات انتحارية في لبنان مباشرة بعد سقوط يبرود، كرد وانتقام وكإعلان أن سقوط يبرود لن يوقف هذا النوع من الأعمال. وأدى استعجال هؤلاء إلى ارتكاب مجموعة من الأخطاء سببتها المعابر المغلقة وضعف آليات التنسيق. وكانت محاولة الهرمل من خلال إرسال سيارتين، واحدة علقت وتعطلت قرب مدرسة في بلدة الفاكهة، والثانية تمكنت من الوصول إلى الطريق العام، برغم أن عجلاتها كانت مثقوبة. وعندما حاول الانتحاري الوصول إلى شخص يساعده على إصلاح العطل، اصطدم بالشهيد خليل الخليل الذي أعطاه عنواناً للتوجه إليه، ثم طارده بعد تواصله مع الشهيد عبد الرحمن القاضي. وطارد الشهيدان الانتحاري حتى اعترضا طريقه، فعمد إلى تفجير نفسه، ما أدى إلى استشهادهما وإنقاذ المنطقة من مجزرة، بينما عمد الانتحاري الآخر إلى ترك السيارة والفرار، قبل أن تعثر عليها استخبارات الجيش وتفجرها في اليوم التالي.
—–
مخزن حوش العرب

في هذه الأثناء، كانت الوحدات الأمنية في المقاومة تواصل عملية التعقب للفارين من يبرود، ونجحت في الوصول إلى آلية تواصل وتنسيق بين هذه المجموعات، مكنتها من تحديد نقطة التقاء وتعاون. وتبين أنها تقع في منطقة تعرف بحوش عرب، بين رنكوس ومعلولا وعسال الورد. وقد تبين أن المسلحين قد استولوا على فيلا من طبقتين، تقع ضمن مزرعة تضم مباني أخرى، وموجودة في منطقة جردية، يحيط بها سور كبير، وتوجد بقربها مجموعات مسلحة تنتشر في المنازل المجاورة.
تقرر البدء بعلميات الاستطلاع. وقد توجهت إلى هناك مجموعات خاصة، عملت على فحص المكان من كل جوانبه، وأمضت عدة ليالٍ في التدقيق في كل المعطيات حول حركة الناس في المنطقة وطبيعتها الجغرافية وحجم المنازل، وأية طوابق يجري العمل عليها. وقد أعدت مجموعات الاستطلاع خرائط مفصلة مرفقة بصور فيديو، ساعدت على مناقشة الخطوة التالية. وتبين أنه قد يكون من الصعب إنجاز عملية أسر واعتقال لهذه المجموعة، نظراً إلى اعتبارات كثيرة.
وبعدما تقرر تصفية الموجودين هناك، جرت مراجعة لمطعيات كثيرة، بينها أن نقطة الهدف تبعد أكثر من عشرة كيلومترات عن آخر نقطة فيها الجيش السوري ومجموعات حزب الله. كذلك إن المنطقة مزدحمة بممرات وطرقات تستخدمها المجموعات المسلحة المتنقلة في تلك المنطقة. وقد زاد عدد المسلحين بعد فرارهم من يبرود. كذلك هناك حاجة إلى توفير قوة دعم كبيرة إن تقرر الاشتباك.
بناءً عليه، تقرر تفجير الفيلا بالعناصر إياهم. وبعد أيام عدة من الرصد الدقيق، ومن مسافات قريبة جداً، أمكن جهاز أمن المقاومة الوصول إلى خريطة مفصلة للمبنى المستهدف والطرقات المؤدية إليه. كذلك حُدِّدت المسالك الرئيسية للتقدم صوبه وطرق الانسحاب، وخطة التغطية النارية في حال حصول أي خلل أو انكشاف.
وفي آخر عملية استطلاع، جرى تأكيد هوية العناصر الذين يدخلون إلى تلك الفيلا خلال ساعات النهار ويغادرونه ليلاً، حيث تبين أن الفيلا مجهزة بمستودع فيه السيارات المعدة للتفجير، وبغرف تجري فيها عملية طبخ المواد المتفجرة.

العقاب
يوم الجمعة الماضي، اتخذ القرار بتنفيذ العملية، بعدما اتفق على تفخيخ المبنى من خارجه بطريقة لا تحدث ضجة ولا تثير الريبة وتتيح تدميره بصورة كاملة. واختيرت نوعية العبوات المناسبة، وعدد أفراد المجموعة التي يفترض أن تتقدم.
السبت بعد الغروب، انطلقت القوة الخاصة. فيها عناصر استطلاع متقدمون. وفيها عناصر اتصال لمواكبة كل ما يحصل دقيقة بدقيقة. وفيها مجموعة الهندسة التي كانت تحمل العبوات الناسفة وتستعد لزرعها، بالإضافة إلى مجموعات التغطية التي يجب عليها تأمين عملية الدخول والخروج من تلك المنطقة.
وأثناء التقدم، صودف أن مرت مجموعة من المسلحين الذين يجرون عمليات تبديل مستمرة في المنطقة. وخلال لحظات، بدا كأن احتمال حصول مواجهة قائم، وقد تتغير الخطة. لكن المسلحين ابتعدوا بعدما تيقنوا من عدم وجود غرباء.
 التفخيخ والتفجير
اقتربت المجموعة من السور لجهة اليمين، وخلال دقيقة جرى تجاوز السور إلى داخل حديقة الفيلا، حيث بدأت عملية زرع كمية من العبوات في باحة الحديقة، وكمية أخرى عند زوايا الجدران، وكمية ثالثة قرب المدخل الرئيسي وكمية رابعة عند الأبواب الخلفية. وقد أنجزت القوة الخاصة عملية تركيب العبوات خارج المنزل ضمن المهلة الزمنية المطلوبة. علماً أن مجموعة الحماية كانت في حالة يقظة خاصة، بعدما تبين أنه يوجد على بعد أقل من 40 متراً، مجموعة أخرى من المسلحين، تقيم في منزل قريب.
وبعد تمويه العبوات بطريقة تحول دون كشفها، والتثبت من نجاح الجانب التقني، عمدت المجموعة المهاجمة إلى الانسحاب مئات من الأمتار إلى الخلف. بينما ظلت مجموعة على مسافة قريبة جداً من نقطة الهدف.
كان على المجموعة اللصيقة التثبت من أمرين: الأول دخول جميع المستهدفين إلى المنزل، وضمان عدم وجود مدنيين في المكان. وعند الصباح، وكما تقول المعلومات المدققة، بدأ الإرهابيون بالوصول إلى الفيلا، وتولت المجموعة القريبة المصادقة على وصولهم ودخولهم واحداً واحداً. وبعدما تأكد المعنيون أن الجميع صاروا في الداخل، طلب إلى المجموعة اللصيقة الابتعاد قليلاً إلى الخلف، حيث خط الانسحاب المقرر. ثم تولت مجموعة عملية التفجير من مسافة غير بعيدة أيضاً.
كان الانفجار ضخماً جداً. وأسهم في ذلك وجود كمية كبيرة من المواد المستخدمة في صناعة المتفجرات داخل الفيلا نفسها. وأدى الانفجار إلى هدم الفيلا بصورة كاملة، وظلت جثث المسلحين تحت الأنقاض.
وبعد دقائق بدأت عملية الانسحاب بصورة سريعة جداً، واستلزمت تكتيكاً آخر؛ لأنها تجري في وضح النهار، وتأخذ في الاعتبار أن الانفجار سيستدعي وصول مجموعات كبيرة من المسلحين إلى المنطقة. لكن المقاومة كانت قد وفرت في حينه، تأميناً نارياً لأي طارئ، واختيرت طرقات أخرى للانسحاب غير تلك التي استخدمت خلال عملية التوغل. بينما كانت وحدات مدرعة ومن سلاح الجو السوري في حالة استعداد للتدخل عند الحاجة.


أبو تراب: كأننا أمام إسرائيل

أحد عناصر القوة الخاصة في المقاومة الذي شارك في هذه العملية النوعية، روى لرفاقه بعد العودة أنه طوال رحلة الذهاب والإياب، كان يتذكر عمله في الشريط الحدودي المحتل في مواجهة قوات الاحتلال الإسرائيلي وعملائه من جيش لحد. المقاوم هو ابن إحدى بلدات قضاء مرجعيون، اقتحمها العدو وفجر منزل أهله فيها، ما أدى إلى استشهاد عدد من أفراد عائلته، قبل ان يستقر العدو في موقع القبع على طريق بلدة مركبا الحدودية القريبة.
ويروي «أبو تراب» أنه بعد حين، تقررت مهاجمة مواقع قوات الاحتلال في تلك المنطقة. «كنت واحداً ضمن مجموعة حملنا عبوات ناسفة كبيرة جداً، وانطلقنا في رحلة قاسية لتجاوز كمائن إسرائيلية ولحدية، ومعها منظومة معقدة من التكنولوجيا الإسرائيلية المنتشرة في الممرات إلى الشريط. وقد زرعت الطرقات بالرادارات الافرادية، الموصولة بسلسلة المواقع الضخمة، والمجهزة بعشرات دبابات الميركافا وبأجهزة رؤية حرارية وليلية ونهارية. ومع ذلك وصلنا إلى موقع العباد المشرف على بلدة حولا، حيث نُفِّذت عملية ضخمة أوقعت 15 قتيلاً وجريحاً في قوة إسرائيلية. وكان بين هؤلاء ضباط في وحدات الهندسة وكشف العبوات الناسفة في جيش الاحتلال».
«أبو تراب» نفسه، يحزن لأن هناك من قرر تكرار الأمر نفسه. وهو يتذكر أشلاء قريبة له استشهدت في تفجيرات الضاحية الجنوبية أخيراً. ويقول: «عندما انطلقنا في رحلة التنفيذ في القلمون، شعرت بأنني أتوجه إلى نفس الجناة، من صناع سيارات الموت. ونحن نعرفهم بالأسماء والتفاصيل الدقيقة والوجوه أيضاً. ونحن عندما قررنا معاقبة هؤلاء، لم نكن نثأر، ولم نفكر بأحد غير المتورطين في العمل الإرهابي. وفي وضح النهار، عمدت إلى التأكد منهم واحداً واحداً، كيف دخلوا المنزل الذي يصنعون فيه هدايا الموت لأطفالنا، وتثبت شخصياً، من أن ﻻ مدنيّ بينهم، وليس هناك من عابر سبيل».

Hamas: Al-quds waiting for “men”, the half-men fighting Syria

$
0
0
The Palestinian Hamas movement put large billboards with both Erdogan and Ismail Haniyeh and Khaled Meshaal, and the current and previous Emirs of Qatar  with the words: Jerusalem, waiting for the men ..


It seems that the traitors leading Hamas want Jerusalem to wait forever if Hamas   await such so-called men .



Jerusalem is waiting the men who fought the Israelis in southern Lebanon ,the men who funded, trained and armed Hamas and other Palestinian resistance factions.

  Jerusalem await the real men in Lebanon and in Syria and in Iran and in all Arab land supporting the resistance , but they definitely are not in Qatar .. nor in Astana .

Definitly, they are not the "half-men." who have criticized Hezbollah for July war



ِ

حماس.. لهذه الأسباب لن تتحرر القدس

وكالة أوقات الشام الإخبارية
قامت حركة حماس الفلسطينية بوضع لوحات اعلانية كبيرة تضم كل من أردوغان و اسماعيل هنية و 
خالد مشعل و كل من أمير قطر الحالي و السابق مع عبارة: القدس تنتظر الرجال

يبدو أن الاخوة في حماس يريدون من القدس أن تنتظر الى الابد.. اذا كانوا هؤلاء هم الرجال الذين 
تنتظرهم.

ان الرجال الذين تنتظرهم القدس هم من قاتلوا الاسرائيليين في جنوب لبنان, هم من سلحوا حماس و غيرها من الفصائل الفلسطينية المقاومة و مدوهم بالمال و السلاح و التدريب.. الرجال الذين تنتظرهم حماس في لبنان و في سوريا و في ايران و في كل أرض عربية شريفة تدعم المقاومة,

لكنهم و بالتأكيد ليسوا في قطر.. ولا في الأستانة.
------


مسيرة بغزة احتفالاً بفوز العدالة والتنمية التركي

مسيرة بغزة احتفالاً بفوز "العدالة والتنمية"التركي



Haneyya congratulates Erdogan on local elections

[ 02/04/2014 - 08:56 AM ]


GAZA, (PIC)-- The Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haneyya congratulated his Turkish counterpart Recep Tayyip Erdogan on the victory of his Justice and Development Party (AKP) in the recent local elections in Turkey.

In a telephone conversation with Erdogan on Tuesday, Haneyya said that AKP victory came in a very accurate timing.

For his part, Erdogan expressed gratitude to Haneyya for the congratulation, saying that his party's victory reflects the Turkish people's will.

Erdogan stressed his total support for the Palestinian cause particularly the besieged Gaza Strip.

The two men discussed ways to lift the siege on Gaza Strip and to put an end to the Palestinian people's suffering.

Related


Tripoli’s alleyway commanders have no safe haven in new security plan

$
0
0

Lebanese soldiers are seen deployed on a street in the northern Lebanese city of Tripoli on March 14, 2014. Two people were killed, including a 10-year-old girl, in the Lebanese city of Tripoli, the day before, in fighting linked to tensions over the war in neighbouring Syria, a security official said.(Photo: AFP-Ibrahim Chalhoub)
Published Monday, March 31, 2014
A new security plan for Tripoli started on Sunday amid a cautious atmosphere and continued attacks on the army. Will the plan succeed this time, or will it meet the same fate as its predecessors?



With the exception of a homemade explosive device that the security services dismantled near the municipal stadium in Tripoli, no major incident occurred in Tripoli on Sunday. But despite the decision of the so-called alleyway commanders – the leaders of the various militant groups in Tripoli’s impoverished neighborhoods – to abide by a truce, apprehension reigns in the northern city.
Despite the rumors, the implementation of the security plan started with the army and security services preventing the public display of arms by militants, confiscating weapons caches, and arresting wanted individuals.
Prior to the beginning of the implementation of the plan on Sunday, the army had completed all logistical preparations, and brought in additional reinforcements. But the districts of Tripoli that were most impacted by the plan, such as Bab al-Tabbaneh and Jabal Mohsen, were in a state of disarray.
The army deployed to Jabal Mohsen first as planned, before gradually spreading out across the neighborhoods of Baqar, Bab al-Tabbaneh, and then the rest of Tripoli. This fueled rumors that had started on Friday, claiming that “something unusual was happening” in Jabal Mohsen – with the army stepping up its presence around the home of the leader of the Alawi-dominated Arab Democratic Party, Rifaat Eid, and proceeding to apprehend wanted suspects, reportedly including the commander of the Masharfeh area in Jabal Mohsen.
Another rumor held that former MP Ali Eid and his son Rifaat, in addition to several other individuals wanted by the authorities, had left Jabal Mohsen to Syria, though officials in the area denied these reports. Other sources, however, confirmed that Eid and his son were both no longer in Jabal Mohsen as of Friday evening, saying that Rifaat Eid had dined in Zgharta on Friday night before he and a number of his associates left for Syria.
Al-Akhbar tried to contact Rifaat Eid repeatedly but to no avail. Ali Feddah, a member of Eid’s party’s political bureau, claimed that Rifaat was still in Jabal Mohsen, but that he was not answering calls because he is currently preoccupied with other matters. Feddah said that Rifaat’s father, Ali Eid, has indeed not been to Jabal Mohsen in a long time, claiming that his absence had nothing to do with any recent security incidents.
Meanwhile, sources said that the majority of wanted individuals in Jabal Mohsen have fled to Syria, as part of an unofficial settlement whereby those who refuse to turn themselves in go into hiding, because a battle with the army would be costly and would have no political cover from anyone.
However, the same sources explained that the wanted militants in Bab al-Tabbaneh have found themselves in a big predicament, saying that while the fugitives in Jabal Mohsen found refuge in Syria, their counterparts in Bab al-Tabbaneh have no similar safe haven outside Lebanon.
In recent days, a large number of militants and wanted individuals were reported to have stored their weapons and left Bab al-Tabbaneh and Tripoli altogether.



Observers believe that the confusion miring Bab al-Tabbaneh is related to the militants’ belief that the new security plan is different this time. The militants are concerned about what might happen to them, especially after Justice Minister Ashraf Rifi declared in a televised interview that “We are in a favorable regional and international position to end the cycle of violence in Tripoli,” adding that the security plan is balanced and that all political forces had endorsed it.
The same observers predicted that compromises would be made with the alleyway commanders, with the exception of some “Islamist hot-heads,” pointing out that the Future Movement had also endorsed the plan. Observers argued that most alleyway commanders would be granted some kind of immunity, because if they were to be arrested, they could name the politicians who support and finance them, which would cause huge scandals.
Successive developments have prompted the majority of militant commanders outside Jabal Mohsen to agree to the security plan, but without hiding the concerns they have expressed during meetings held almost every day since the plan was announced. These meetings have taken place in Bab al-Tabbaneh and other districts, mostly away from prying eyes, such as the meeting held in the office of Sheikh Salem al-Rifai, which was attended by most alleyway commanders as well as clerics and figures concerned with the plan.
Sources close to the attendees said certain political and security leaders were reached out to in order to overcome some obstacles, adding that security officials confirmed they would not enter the areas in question with overwhelming force. However, they affirmed that they would not be lenient with those who initiate an armed confrontation with them either.
The participants in the meetings concluded that the implementation of the security plan was an irreversible decision that was made according to local and regional “signals.” However, the participants stressed the need to deal prudently with groups that no one can influence, such as the ones affiliated to al-Qaeda sympathizers. Important figures from Tripoli noted that these groups have threatened to push back against the army and stop it from entering their strongholds in Bab al-Tabbaneh, which could implicate them and other groups in a battle.
On the ground, acting Director-General of the Internal Security Forces (ISF), Major General Ibrahim Basbous, visited the Serail in Tripoli on Sunday to coordinate the security plan. He met with the commander of the northern region in the ISF General Mahmoud Annan and the commander of the Tripoli division General Bassam al-Ayyoubi, in addition to other security officials in North Lebanon.
This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.

Related Articles


Regional developments to determine presidential election date

$
0
0
Baabda Palace, the seat of the Lebanese presidency. (Photo: Archive)
Published Wednesday, April 2, 2014
According to the constitution, the deadline for Lebanon’s presidential election is May 25. However, politically-speaking, there might be another deadline which is the last few days before the end of the parliamentary term on November 20.
The Middle East is facing a series of fateful elections. The Turkish municipal elections gave Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan a boost. The path of the presidential election in Egypt is now quite clear, and the same goes for the upcoming Iraqi elections.



There are still, however, presidential elections in Syria and Lebanon that are not as clear-cut. If we assume that Iran wants to renew the presidential term of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, there is no ambiguity at all regarding the position of Arab states that categorically reject the idea that Assad might stay president of Syria. Russia has yet to express its final position.
There is a whole other dimension to the elections in Lebanon. Leave aside online and political opinion polls, the internal discussions in political and religious assemblies, and the characteristics of the forthcoming president prescribed left and right. The 2014 presidential election is more of a regional and international affair than a local one. This is not a new development in the history of Lebanese presidential elections, whose outcome always expressed a compromise of regional and international interests.
The time for great compromises between major regional players hasn’t arrived yet and the new government was only formed to avoid a power vacuum. The only certainty today is that the main influential players are Saudi Arabia and Iran. Contact between them is underway with US supervision and Oman acting as an indirect mediator, and their talks extend beyond the issue of the Lebanese elections.
Prime Minister Tammam Salam only appeared on the scene when Major General Wissam al-Hassan was assassinated and Prime Minister Najib Mikati resigned. Salam was assigned to form a new government and stayed on as a prime minister designate without a government for 10 months as a sign that Saudi-Iranian relations had not matured yet. People should be aware that we are only talking about managing this relationship, not reaching a deal between the two sides.
As soon as the Saudi-Iranian relationship was put in order, the government was formed within hours. Objections that had been voiced by those opposed to the allocation of ministries between different political factions dissipated and the parties inside Lebanon skipped several steps and issued the decree forming the government within seconds.
Since these are not yet times for major agreements, the deal was restricted to managing the relationship between Saudi and Iran. The same scenario was repeated with the cabinet statement. Had the constitution not been firm about setting a deadline for issuing a cabinet statement, it would not have been written in the final hour before the deadline.
What does that mean?
The communication between Saudi Arabia and Iran makes it clear that neither they, nor any of the international powers with influence over Lebanese affairs want to see the country descend into a state of chaos. Instead, they want to maintain an acceptable level of stability. That is why those in charge took their time to form the new government as the possibility of a power vacuum hung over their heads.
If the channels of regional communication do not succeed in finding a compromise for the presidential elections and preparing for the elections before May 25, then these regional powers see the government in its current form - as it represents most Lebanese parties - an alternative to the president to keep charge of the domestic situation and prevent the country from falling into chaos and total collapse. This phenomenon is not new new to Lebanon. More than six years ago, the government of former Prime Minister Fouad Siniora was in charge when the country witnessed a vacuum in the presidency after former President Emile Lahoud’s term ended.



It was clear that the local and regional support that was given to the current government goes beyond its framework as a short-lived cabinet. Even the security plan for Tripoli shows the government has been given the green light to alleviate the deteriorating security situation and the ongoing Sunni-Shia conflict within the country.
Now that the government card is in the hands of regional players in anticipation of the possibility of a power vacuum, discussion of the presidential election after May 25 will be governed by other deadlines having to do with the end of the parliamentary term on November 20. This means, according to informed political sources, that the channel of regional communications might not be governed by the May 25 constitutional deadline but rather by another logical deadline which is the end of the already extended parliamentary term. This gives everyone more time until the regional picture created by the elections in neighboring countries and the shape of their new governments becomes clearer.
If the presidential election is pushed beyond the May 25 deadline towards the end of the parliamentary term, then the election will take on a new meaning and require different arrangements having to do with the complicated issue of a new electoral law for the upcoming parliamentary elections. The new president will face at the beginning of his term an important task, namely, producing an electoral law and having the first election during his term. The deal then would be a comprehensive one that would include a new president and a new electoral law similar to what the Doha agreement rendered.
Having the presidential election - which may not take place within the constitutional deadline - and developing contacts and communication between Saudi Arabia and Iran require internal measures and a purely local director. Usually, this mission is given to the Speaker of the Parliament Nabih Berri who has provided this kind of direction in many instances the last of which was forming the current government and issuing its statement. It appears so far that the same thing is going to happen and the key to the presidential election and any regional arrangements regarding Lebanon will be in Berri’s hands.

Christians, the Maronite clergy, and Maronite presidential candidates will have no choice but to stand on the sidelines again. It is not permissible to reach a state of presidential vacuum and it is necessary to have the election on time.
Viewing all 27504 articles
Browse latest View live