Lebanon: Consolation Prizes for PM Losers

Salam Vows to Protect Lebanon in Tough Times

By: Ibrahim al-Amin

Published Saturday, April 6, 2013

 

A Saudi friend asked me yesterday: When Ghazi Kanaan used to impose his orders on Lebanese officials, did he at least let them claim that they were the ones who came up with the idea? This is how Walid Jumblatt claims he brought Tammam Salam to the post of prime minister.

Outgoing prime minister Najib Mikati, on the other hand, has a long explanation for what pushed him to resign. Mikati had hoped for that President Michel Suleiman would hold on to him as a partner in running the country. He was even ready to entertain Suleiman’s wishes for a bigger piece of the government.



الانقلابيون فشلوا... ونجح الانقلاب

Jumblatt went to sleep with the nomination key around his neck. He understood the magnitude of recent economic and international transformations. However, he thought he could re-nominate Mikati by making a deal with March 8 and convincing the Saudis of a governmental formula that would allow March 14 to join the government.

The accord between Suleiman, Mikati, and Jumblatt was supported – or at least not rejected – by influential Arab and western capitals. They wanted him to carry out a palace coup against Hezbollah and its allies.

They aimed for taming the Resistance and telling it that times have changed. They wanted to entice Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri with his own space, away from Hezbollah, and give Michel Aoun a choice between “being realistic” or stepping back to the benefit of others.



Lebanon: Mikati’s Last Days at the Serail

Many stories and rumors are circulating about those difficult final hours. However, one thing's for sure: it was not part of the Three Musketeers’ calculations.

First of all, Hezbollah surprised Mikati by not holding on to him as prime minister. To be more precise, they were not ready to pay additional costs by keeping the current government.

Second, the West surprised Mikati by indicating that getting rid of this government has become desirable. They were also not worried about instability and could ask their allies in Lebanon to ease the tensions.

Third, the Saudis surprised Jumblatt by welcoming Mikati’s resignation, ending their campaign against him in return.

الانقلابيون فشلوا... ونجح الانقلاب

All of a sudden, they all found themselves in a dark tunnel. It was a constant headache for Michel Suleiman. The March 8 government did not accept his plan for the parliamentary elections and ignored his decision to seclude himself. To top it all off, he was informed of the decision to name Salam as if he was a regular MP.

Mikati discovered that he was quickly pulled out of the race. Last minute developments indicated that only Hezbollah stood by his side and had proposed his return. He was morally compensated by allowing him to announce his withdrawal before Salam’s nomination was announced.

However, the “quarrel” will be with Jumblatt, who was late to realize that the margin of maneuver was narrow. His consolation is telling the public that he was the one who brought Salam.

جنبلاط يسدد للسعودية شيكات بلا رصيد... في السويداء

Jumblatt, who is nevertheless frantic for several reasons, did not realize he was tripping over his shadow. It is enough to watch him speak about the Syrian crisis, describing “disengagement” as Mikati’s most important achievement, then accusing Hezbollah and groups in the North of violating this position. Then, to remind people of his stature, he sits up, lifts his eyebrows, and calls for the killing of any Druze who supports Bashar al-Assad.

The cost of the uncalculated adventure of the Knights of Wasted Time was to quickly push Lebanon from the sponsorship of Anjar and Awkar, to the patronship of Bandar. God knows if it will stop at this.

Ibrahim al-Amin is editor-in-chief of Al-Akhbar.

This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.

 

Lebanon: Tammam Salam’s Path to Prime Minister

Riyadh had to choose one of two names: Salam or Brigadier General Ashraf Rifi, head of the Internal Security Forces. (Photo: Haitham Moussawi)

 

By: Hiyam Kossayfi

Published Friday, April 5, 2013

 

How did Lebanon and Saudi Arabia’s power brokers decide on Tammam Salam as the country’s next prime minister? Al-Akhbar explains how former prime minister Mikati’s calculations failed him and paved the way for Salam’s rise.

When former prime minister Fouad Siniora delivered his speech to the massive crowds at the funeral of Wissam al-Hassan, the assassinated intelligence chief, standing next to him was none other than Tammam Salam.

Last night, Siniora and Salam were side-by-side once again, this time at Saad Hariri’s downtown mansion. The Arab and international signal had been given to begin negotiations on a new prime minister. With that, MP Salam is now the next prime minister in waiting.

Today is the beginning of a new phase in a path that was plotted months ago. Riyadh had to choose one of two names: Salam or Brigadier General Ashraf Rifi, head of the Internal Security Forces. The latter had been asked two months ago, but he nominated Rafik Hariri’s sister and Saida MP Bahia Hariri. She preferred to run for parliament.

In those two months, the situation took a different turn. Rifi was slated for an extension in his position, but fell into the quarrel between Hezbollah and MP Michel Aoun, on one side, and Mikati, on the other.

In the last few days, the Saudis proposed Rifi’s name to its visitors. The last such visitor was MP Walid Jumblatt, who found it difficult to defend a character who is “confrontational” with Hezbollah.

Like they did with Mikati, however, the Saudis wanted to push Jumblatt into a final and decisive position. Then, they put Salam’s name in the negotiation basket.

Rifi was picked by both Hariri and the Saudis for several reasons. His security abilities would be useful to control the situation in Tripoli and Saida. He has good ties with the Arab (read: Saudi) and Western intelligence communities.

Salam is a purely Saudi suggestion. Hariri was unhappy with the choice until the last moment. However, Hariri did not want to give back the clout to someone who had kept a distance from the Future Movement.

But the Saudis spoke and Hariri met the son of former prime minister Saeb Salam. Saudi Prince Bandar Bin Sultan met with Hariri and, all of a sudden, Salam became the opposition candidate. The Saudi ambassador to Lebanon went around Beirut informing all those concerned of Riyadh’s position.

Jumblatt chose the easiest of the two names, Salam, as a candidate for consensus, given first by March 14, before March 8 had announced its position.


Mikati’s Sin

When Mikati threatened to resign for the “umpteenth” time, there was no one to stop him this time. He committed a serious error in an appropriate time and situation. He thought he was indispensable; everyone will come back to him or Arab and Western capitals will call for his return. But his political calculations failed.

The capitals demonstrated that their support for the current government was weak. They were primarily concerned with the question of Lebanon’s stability. As Paris told Mikati on the eve of his visit in February 2012, they will receive the Lebanese prime minister, no matter who he is.

This was repeated yesterday. Mikati is a guarantee for Lebanon’s stability only as long as he is head of government. Otherwise, a replacement is ready and all governments will be willing to deal with his successor.

When he resigned, Mikati could not find anyone to support him. Hezbollah and Aoun owed him nothing. Only Jumblatt remained at his side until he was accused of politically burning him.

Mikati, the MP from Tripoli, had come to power in alliance with the Future Movement and then turned against them. Hariri has declared a veto on Mikati as prime minister and as MP in the next elections.

This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.
 

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

 

 

The Cuban Missile Crisis Revisited, This Time in Korea

     
Apr 5 2013 / 8:21 pm

The harder the US presses N. Korea to abandon its nuclear weapons, the more they feel menaced.

 

By George Katsiaficas

The current threat of a major war in Korea is akin to the Cuban missile crisis of 1962, when the US and the USSR nearly waged nuclear war. Peaceful coexistence was assured only after an agreement was reached for Russia to withdraw its missiles from Cuba and for the US to pull its own out of Turkey.

In recent weeks, as a similar standoff has escalated in Korea, the US has sent B-2 bombers from Missouri and B-52s from Guam to fly up to the Demilitarized Zone between South and North Korea. These flights are as close to a threat of a first strike—possibly a nuclear one—that the US can make.
President Obama’s recent policy shift to an “Asian pivot” is perceived in North Korea as a direct threat to its existence. Before the Asian pivot, Saddam Hussein agreed to disarm, after which Iraq was invaded and he was killed. Gaddafi faced a similar fate after he destroyed his major weapons systems. North Korea is clearly interpreting these events as reasons NOT to disarm. The harder the US now presses North Korea to abandon its nuclear weapons, the more they feel menaced.

In 1993, the US came quite close to bombing North Korea’s Yongbyon nuclear plant. Harvard professor Ashton Carter publicly stated he was telephoned by the Pentagon and asked to assist them in determining bomb targets. Only the personal intervention of former President Jimmy Carter prevented a US first strike. Carter flew to Pyongyang, met Kim Il-sung (Kim Jong Un’s grandfather) and negotiated an “Agreed Framework,” according to which North Korea shut down Yongbyon and the US and its allies were supposed to supply fuel oil to the North.

For decades now, North Korea has stated that it will forsake its nuclear weapons and rocket program if the US Senate signs a peace treaty to end the state of war. (The armistice of 1953 was only a cease fire.) Whether one believes them or not, isn’t diplomacy worth another attempt to diminish the threat of war?

As the world’s preeminent military power, the US has a responsibility to prevent wars. One such means to do so in Korea would be for President Obama publicly to state that the US will not make a first strike against North Korea. Rather than seeking to reduce tensions, however, the US has ratcheted them up, and as a result, US companies will sell billions of dollars of missile systems to South Korea, Japan, and Taiwan.

President Obama has repeated stated that our main strategic partner in Asia is Japan, even as Japan presses territorial claims against China, both Koreas, Vietnam, and the Philippines concerning islands it took when the Japanese Empire expanded before the end of the second world war. Unlike Germany, which has apologized for Nazism, educated its citizens, and paid reparations, Japan has never apologized for the war, never properly explained its atrocities to its citizens, and refuses to express its regret to the more than 100,000 “comfort women” who were forced into sexual slavery. In fact, Japan has repeatedly refused to apologize to these women even when pressed by US congressional resolutions. In the long run, the US should consider multilateral alliances, rather than a preeminent one with Japan, in order to diminish regional tensions.

In the past few days, Fox News and others have repeatedly called attention to that “nut” in North Korea who’s trying to prove himself. Yet Kim Jong Un is a mere figurehead in the world’s most Confucian society, where young people must respect their elders and listen to them. An aging military bureaucracy runs North Korea, not the young grandson of their “Dear Leader.” If we allow Kim Jong Un to be demonized while a major war breaks out, hundreds of thousands of people will perish in its first hours—no matter who is to blame.

It is not too late for the Obama administration to change course and find a peaceful solution to this crisis—if that is what they want to do.

- George Katsiaficas is a professor of Humanities at Wentworth Institute of Technology, USA and author of Asia’s Unknown Uprisings. He was a Senior Fulbright Fellow in South Korea in 2008. This article was contributed to PalestineChronicle.com.

Related posts:

1. A North Korea Lesson for Iran
2. Ivan Eland: US Military Presence in S. Korea Not Model for Iraq
3. Ivan Eland: Missile Defense Obsession Lessens U.S. Security
4. Israel Most Negative Country: BBC Poll
5. Ramzy Baroud: Nuclear Dual Standards

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Khaled Helbawy

الهلباوي و حماس .. بين التزكية والترقيع واحضان حمد

 

 re3q

 

‏السبت‏، 06‏ نيسان‏، 2013

أوقات الشام

نمير سعد

رغم إقتحام غير ملفات ومواضيع للذهن واحتجاجها و" ثورتها " في ساحاته معلنةً أنها الأحق بالإهتمام والأولى بالمتابعة كونها مفصلية ومصيرية ، إلا أن الذهن أبى إلا أن يكون ديكتاتورياً ، فقمعها وزجرها وأعلن أنه سينظر في شأنها قريباً جداً ، وبرر فعلته وموقفه قائلاً أنه لا يستطيع إلا أن يرد على الاستفزازات الحمساوية بدءًا من تزكية مشعل مروراً بما يختزنه كل من الماضي القريب والحاضر من مشاهد حمساوية مشينة ومخجلة وإنتهاءً بمحاولات الترقيع والتلميع والتشذيب التي يحاول بعض قادة حماس عبرها فك براغي العقول العربية وإعادة تركيبها بشكل تتقبل معه التموضع الحمساوي الجديد وتتفهمه ... .

لا عجب أن يضع خالد الإسخريوطي يده في يد حمد الذي خان الرحم الذي احتضنه و " البذرة " التي زرعته في ذلك الرحم ، حمد الذي فاق غولدمائير صهينةً و تفوق على أبي لؤلؤة .. غدراً ، وعن حمد يطول الحديث إن بدأ يطول لكنه سيكتفي اليوم بالحديث عن أحد المتمسحين ببلاط حمد ، اللاعقين لكل ما يراد له حمد أن يلعق ، المنحين لقامة حمد الفيلية الهيئة ووجه حمد الذي يزداد كما صفحات تاريخه و عمره .. اسوداداً ، المشذبين لشارب حمد الذي قد يعني كل شيء عدا دلالات الرجولة . الحديث اليوم هو عن أحد الذين ابتهلوا بدل الله .. لحمد ، وركعوا في حضرة حمد ، وسجدوا لحمد وتلقوا الهبات الحمدية ريالاتٍ ودنانير وسلموا أنفسهم خاتماً في إصبع حمد وإرتضوا أن يتحكم هذا البعيري في عقولهم وقرارتهم ومواقفهم وتموضعهم وتحالفاتهم وخياراتهم المصيرية .. .

لا غرابة أيضاً أن يضع خالد الإسخريوطي يده في يد من باع دينه بدنياه ، وإسلامه بماله ، وربه بعبده ، ونبيه بأبا رغالٍ القطري الجنسية ، و إستبدل تقوى الإيمان ببضع حباتٍ من الفياغرا وعقد نكاح وجسد مراهقة بريئة ، ووزع فتاويه على تابعيه طبقاً للإرادة الصهيوحمدية ، فهذا الإخونجي نافق على حلفاء الأمس من أصحاب " غير ملل " إلى أن وجد ضالته في الكفر القرضاوي الطابع والطعم والهوية ، وباع حلفائه بدنانير حمد ورفاهية قصور حمد وخان دماء المقاومين و تنكر لسنين أسرهم واعتقالهم وتعذيبهم ، وتناسى غصات الألم والقهر لدى عامة الفلسطنيين ، وفضل أن يمارس أحب الهوايات إلى قلبه ... الإنحناء وتقبيل الأيادي الآثمة اسوةً برفيق دربه في " النضال " إسماعيل هنية .

وهنا لا بد أن نقول أن البداهة تفترض هنا أن ينضم إلى فريق مشعل معظم رجالات حماس " القادة " ممن باعوا مواقفهم المبدئية وأحنوا رؤوسهم للأوامر الحمدية بتزكية مشعل فزكوه وكأنهم يؤدون فرضاً من فروض الدين ، وكان على رأس هذا الفريق هنية الذي لم ولن ينسى له الشعب السوري تموضعه المشين في الحرب على سوريا وتصريحاته الوقحة تجاه قيادتها و مواقفه التآمرية على الوطن السوري الذي كان له وللحركة التي ينتمي إليها سنداً ودعماً طوال عقود ، ولن يمحى من ذاكرة السوريين موقفه من الهتافات الإخونجية في مصر أثناء زيارته لها في بداية العام المنصرم ساعة بلع القط الطائفي لسانه ولجم التكفير المذهبي عقله ،، فتجمد عقلاً وفقد ملكة النطق و تحول إلى إسماعيل الأطرش أو إسماعيل الأخرس حين جعجع إخونجية مصر على مسمعه بهتافاتٍ معادية ومناهضة ووقحة وطائفية ضد الرئيس الأسد وإيران وحزب الله ، الحقيقة الوحيدة التي شغلت كل مساحات ذهن هنية آنذاك هي الإنتماء الطائفي الذي يجمعه وتلك الجموع التكفيرية تماماً كما يجمعه وإياها الولاء للقرضاوي وإتباع فتاويه الإلهية المنزلة ...

وليس مدهشاً أن ترتد حماس مشعل وهنية عن مواقفها المبدئية وتهرب من حلفها الإستراتيجي المقاوم لترتمي في احضان موزة وزوجها . وأن تطعن حماس مشعل هنية الحليف الذي فتح لها كل الأبواب يوم كانت كل الأبواب في وجهها موصدة ، الحليف الذي إحتضن حماس يوم كانت مهددة بالتحول إلى قشة في مهب الرياح الإسرائيلية ، الحليف الذي فتح لحماس مسالك الإستمرارية والوجود وأعطاها فرصة إثبات الذات . من يخون هذا الحليف السوري المخلص وينكث بكل " أقاويله " عن التحالف الإستراتيجي المقاوم مع سيد المقاومة أمين عام حزب الله ومع الحليف الإيراني الذي قدم المال والسلاح بلا حدود لحماس ومشعلها ،، لن يكون فيه خيرٌ لكائن على وجه الأرض بدءًا من أهل بيته . وأما عن عدم وجوب الدهشة والإستغراب والعجب فمرده أن حماس ولدت أصلاً من نطفةٍ إخونجية وتربت في رحمٍ اخواني ولم يكن أي إنتماءٍ عندها يوماً أقوى من انتمائها الطائفي ، فمشعل الذي إرتدى على مدى عقود قناع المقاوم المتكاتف مع المسلمين من أبناء غير طوائف في وجه العدو المشترك ، هو منتمٍ رسمياً للإخوان طيلة أربعة عقود ومنذ سنوات أولى شبابه ، إنه الحمساوي الإخونجي الإنتماء والعقيدة والتنشئة والهوى .... .

إذاً فالصفقة قد تمت برعايةٍ صهيوقطرية ومباركة أمريكية إسرائيلية ، والصفقة هنا ليست في فوز مشعل برئاسة المكتب السياسي لحماس وحسب ، بل في تثبيت وترسيخ التموضع الجديد لحماس ، الإرتماء الحمساوي في الحضن الذي يكونه فخذاً أعرابياً وآخر عثماني فيما تلتف يدٌ إسرائيلية على خصر حماس من ذات اليمين وأخرى أمريكية من ذات الشمال ، على أن يكون ما بين الفخذين حمدياً بإمتياز . والصفقة تعني فيما تعني أن نبارك للشيخ الإخونجي الطائفي خالد مشعل الذي إنضم رسمياً للفريق المذكور منذ رفعه على أرض غزة علم الإنتداب الفرنسي ورمز العصابات السلفية الإخونجية التكفيرية الإرهابية المنضوية تحت لواء ما يسمى " جيشاً حراً " ؟! .لكن الصفقة تعني أيضاً إعلان الموت السريري لحماس المقاومة لسنوات طويلة قادمة وتعني نعي كل المفردات النضالية التي تغنت بها حماس عبر سنوات نضالها ومقاومتها ، ذاك النضال الذي أسس له تحالفها مع محور المقاومة والإحتضان والدعم الذي تلقته من خلاله ،، سيما في دمشق ومن قيادتها ... .

وتعني أيضاً أن الحلقات القادمة من مسلسل العار الذي أخرجه برنارد ليفي وانتجه حمد القطري ولعب فيه مشعل أحد أدوار البطولة ، سوف تشهد بيعاً إضافياً للكثير من المكتسبات في سوق النخاسة الصهيوأعرابي ووأد مفهوم المقاومة ومصطلح الدولة الفلسطينية أو القضية الفلسطينية وتبني مخلوق مشوه إبتدعته قمة العار الأخيرة في دوحة حمد يدعى " السلام مع إسرائيل " وترسيخ وشرعنة هذا المصطلح ورعايته وتحويله إلى إتفاق سلام مذل بالشروط الإسرائيلية تنجزه حماس بالإتفاق مع فتح أبو مازن أو بدونه ، برعاية أعرابية ومباركة غربية واسلاموية ، لقد كانت أولى بوادر شرعنة هذا التوجه هي الفتاوى الحمساوية التي تحاول حماس من خلالها فرض نفسها مرجعاً أساسياً ووحيداً للقرار السياسي والعسكري عبر النهج الديني التشريعي ، ومثال ذلك فتوى حماس التي تحرم العمليات الفدائية " الجهادية " ضد العدو الإسرائيلي فيما تتحول الهجمات الإرهابية في سورية في نظر حماس واعراب البادية وبعض " رجالات " الدين الإسلامي إلى عمليات جهادية ثورجية !! ... .

حماس الجديدة تقدم اليوم فصلاً من الجحود غير المسبوق لسوريا .. لدماء أطفالها و شهدائها ودموع نسائها وغصات القهر في صدور ابنائها تماماً كما تخون البندقية السورية التي قدمت لها وتغدر برصاص ابطال هذا الجيش لترد خدماته الجليلة رصاصاً في صدور أبنائه عبر ميليشياتها التي انضمت بيدقاً في الحرب المستعرة على سوريا ، وما آخر الأنباء التي اوردتها صحيفة التايمز عن تدريب الجناح العسكري لمليشيات " الجيش الحر " سوى غيضٌ من فيضان الولوج والولوغ والغرق الحمساوي في بحر الدماء السورية ، وحماس تتنكر قبل هذا وذاك لنضالات شهداء غزة وصواريخ قسامها ورغيف خبز ابنائها وابنيتها العتيقة الفقيرة وأسقفها التوتيائية واسمها وتاريخها وماضيها ومستقبلها ... .

إنه خيار تحويل غزة إلى دنشواي يجلد أهلها خالد الهلباوي أو مستر إتش الحمساوي الذي لا يختلف في شيء عن هلباوي حادثة دنشواي المصرية الذي سلم رقاب المصريين لحبال مشانق الإحتلال الإنكليزي ... جلاد غزة ... مشعل الخيانة . إن خالد الهلباوي يعلن أخيراً عبر تموضعه الجديد حرقه لصفحات نضال الحركة المقاومة بمشعله المشبع بغازات حمد ونفطه ، المشعل المبارك قرضاوياً والمدعوم غربياً وإسرائيلياً ، لينال وسام إستحقاق من الدرجة البعيرية تكريماً لجهوده التآمرية على سوريا وقيادتها ، وينال صك براءة مدمغ بنجمة داؤود عن ما سبق وما سيأتي من خياناته للقضية الفلسطينية وجحوده لدعم حلفائها ومحتضنيها . أين سيجد حمد مشعلاً كمشعل يحرق به ما تبقى من مقاومة فلسطينية ويشعل من خلاله المخيمات الفلسطينية تحريضاً على الجيش السوري والقيادة السورية والرئيس الأسد شخصياً ؟؟ ... .

رغم كل محاولات تلميع صورة حماس وقادتها عبر تصريحاتٍ متفرقة كالتي ادلى بها أسامة حمدان أخيراً لتشذيب موقف حماس وتسويق فهم خاص لتموضعها الجديد و " حيادتها " ، إلا أن الخيانة هي تماماً كشمس الحقيقة .. كألهبة النار .. وقذائف البراكين .. تحس بها العين حتى لو كانت مغمضة لأنها تستشعر وهجها ، ولأن لهيب نار الخيانة تحرق " خلايا " الضمير والوجدان وترصدها العقول كما الأقمار الصناعية ... .

Top of Form

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Palestinian Amer Nassar, aged seventeen: A last poem

 

April 5, 2013

Amer Nassar

by Felicity Arbuthnot

 

Last night and overnight, two unarmed teenagers, cousins Amer Nassar (17) and Naji Abdul-Karim Balbeisi (18) were shot dead by Israeli Defence Force troops.

The two were from the village of Anabta, near the town of Tulkarm, in Palestine’s West Bank. Tulkarm was founded in the 13th century, its name derived from the Aramaic “Toor Karma” meaning “mount of vineyards.”

Amer died from a bullet in his chest at 22.30 on Wednesday night, according to eye witnesses. Hearing shots, three boys from the village went out and found Amer lying on the ground, with soldiers standing over him. When they tried to reach him, the soldiers opened fire, injuring one, Fadi Abu-A’sr, in the arm, and subsequently hospitalized.

The three say that ambulance crews were prevented from reaching Amer for thirty vital minutes, with threats to shoot anyone attempting to intervene. Deiyaa’ Nasser, who did attempt to reach Amer:“was arrested by the Israeli Army and taken to an unknown location.”

Naji Abdul-Karim Balbisi, was found as dawn broke this morning, lying in a field. He was reported to have been shot from behind.

Tensions have been high in Gaza and the West Bank since the death of Maysara Abu Hamidya in Israel’s Soroko prison on 2nd April. Sixty five year old Abu Hamidya was a former high ranking officer in the Palestinian Authority (PA) prior to his arrest, which took place when the IDA invaded the West Bank, destroying PA Headquarter buildings, in May 2002.

Palestinian authorities have claimed that the prison was withholding treatment for his cancer. On Monday released prisoner Ayman Sharawna alleged that Hamdiya was in a life threatening condition in the prison infirmary – with his hands and feet shackled.

The Director of the Palestinian Prisoner Society has held the Israeli regime fully responsible for his death.

So, as Palestinians mark another onslaught, the massacre in the Jenin refugee camp (April 1st-11th 2002) the mourning, heartbreak, lost lives and lost youth grind on. But so does the spirit, in young and old.

Seventeen year old Amer Nassar left a poem. When others of his age write on Facebook of their dreams, aspirations, exams, plans, dates, travels, on 15th March, his last entry, he wrote (translated):

“Point your bullet where ever you like in my body
I will die today, but my homeland will live tomorrow
Be careful, Palestine is a red line.”

He did not die on March 15th, but just two weeks and three days later, at the hands of “the most moral army” and the “only democracy in the Middle East.”

(The writer is indebted to the resident of Palestine who drew attention to and translated Amer’s poem and to the International Solidarity Movement, for their careful details of another tragedy.)
- Felicity Arbuthnot is a freelance journalist specializing in social and environmental issues with a special knowledge of Iraq.

• Facebook
• Tumblr
• Twitter
• Email
• Print
• Pinterest
• Digg
• Reddit
• StumbleUpon
• LinkedIn
• Google +1

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Ikhras Shoe Of The Month Award Winner – March 2013

April 6, 2013
 

The Ikhras awards committee is pleased to announce the winner of the Muntadhar Zaidi Ikhras Shoe of the Month for March, 2013 is Lebanese journalist Octavia Nasr. Nasr is receiving this coveted award for an article she wrote titled “What the city of Haifa taught me.” The article first appeared in Arabic in the Lebanese newspaper Al-Nahar, and the English version appeared the next day on the website of the Saudi family news channel Al-Arabiya.

Nasr begins her article reminiscing about the “countless stories about Haifa’s golden days pre-1948.” The reader can almost detect a mocking undertone, as if life in pre-Nakba Haifa was not quite as “Golden” as relayed by the Palestinian refugees she encountered growing up in Lebanon, or was at least only part of the story of Haifa. Sure enough Nasr then goes on to share her awakening:

“Then the awakening came at my first meeting with a current Haifa resident more than twenty years ago…I listed all the locations that grew dear to my heart over the years: Saint Elias Church, Mount Carmel, College Des Freres school, Selizian School, Wadi al-Nasnas… To my surprise, they were all still there and flourishing with fresh new generations of Palestinians. I later met a Jewish family from Haifa and got to know a different side of the story of the majestic city. I learned about the Hadar area, Hertzel Street and Ben Gurion Boulevard. From the Druze of Haifa I learned about Isifya and Daliya village on Mount Carmel. Not to forget the Muslim community of Haifa which can be found everywhere in the Arab sections and the very prominent Baha’I faith with its majestic gardens and Abbas Dome, one of the most beautiful gardens and architectural structure in the world.”

Nasr, does refer to the “atrocities committed and the complete takeover of the land and displacement of its original people”, but only in passing. What goes unmentioned, however, is that the perpetrators of the ethnic cleansing that paved the way for the establishment of the racist, colonial entity remain there today as occupiers and continue to deny the original inhabitants of Haifa the right of return to their homes, land, and city. It’s as if the Nakba was a passing event in the distant past rather than an ongoing crime against the vast majority of the original inhabitants of the majestic seaside city that gets its name from the ancient Canaanite Arabic word al-Hayfah. The Canaanites emerged from the shores of the Arabian Peninsula to become the first group of people to settle Haifa in what originally came to be known as the Land of Canaan.
The very recent history of Haifa and the ethnic cleansing of the indigenous Arab population of Palestine in order to establish a Jewish-exclusivist, colonial-settler entity have been well documented by Palestinians, Arabs, Westerners, and Israel’s own “New Historians.” Only a select few Zionist fanatics continue to cling to the myth of a “Land without a people…” or the lie that the Palestinian Arabs, after inhabiting this land since the beginning of time, in 1948 suddenly decided to pick-up and leave voluntarily.

Between the partition plan adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on November 29, 1947 and the 1949 ceasefire between the newly established Zionist entity and the Arab states that ended the war, the vast majority of the indigenous population of Palestine became victims of a pre-meditated expulsion plan by foreign invaders backed by the most powerful empire at the time. It was a deliberate and systematic political-military strategy carried out through mass violence, terrorism, and massacres in order to lay the groundwork for the establishment of the modern state of Israel as envisioned by the Jewish exclusivist ideology of Zionism

As for Haifa, the attack began on April 21, 1948 when 5000 heavily armed fighters from the Zionist terrorist militia known as the Haganah descended upon the city which was poorly defended by 300-400 Palestinian volunteers. Of the 61,000 Palestinian Arabs that inhabited Haifa only 3500 were allowed to stay. The rest of the Arab population was literally pushed into the sea and forced to flee by boat to Acre, Tyre, Sidon, and Beirut, Lebanon. Some of the Palestinians that ended up in Acre were ethnically cleansed again a few weeks later and forced to flee to Lebanon.

Almost 65 years later the people of Haifa continue to be denied their basic right of return, a fact to which Nasr appears oblivious when she writes:

“For some reason, Haifa was always a common denominator and it kept creeping up into my world, as the example of how integrated living between — not just Arabs and Israelis would look like — but also how the harmony among Christians, Sunnis, Shiites, Druze, Baha’is and Jews can be exemplified. During a recent visit to this great city, I learned that indeed Haifa is a symbol of tolerance and co-existence.” (Emphasis ikhras editors).

The questions that immediately jump out to the reader are, first, how does a city ethnically cleansed of an indigenous population that has not yet been allowed to return become a “symbol of tolerance and co-existence”? And how can a city ruled by a colonial regime as part of a racist, exclusivist entity be described as an example of “integrated living” and “harmony”?

It’s not surprising to read such pro-Zionist bile from a militant supporter of the fascistic, Lebanese right-wing that has always been allied with Israel. Nasr began her journalism career in Lebanon at the LBC network, the propaganda arm of the Lebanese Forces established by Bashir Gemayel with the help and support of Israel. This right-wing, sectarian Christian militia was responsible for some of the ugliest massacres and crimes during the Lebanese civil war including the Sabra and Shatila massacres. This fringe element within Lebanon has always been openly hostile and racist towards Lebanese Muslims, Palestinians, Syrians, and Arabs in general and very sympathetic to Zionism and Western colonial powers. With her background in journalism and an extremist, right-wing political orientation Nasr was well prepared to move on and spend 20 years at CNN as the token Arab carefully following the script of mainstream US media before her career-ending tweet hastened her exit.

In her short piece Nasr, like many of her colleagues in the Western media, found the space to lecture the Palestinians on the virtues of non-violence.

“People who still believe in the military struggle as the only way to Palestine should learn a lesson from Haifa. Peaceful Palestinians have found a way to protect the land and safeguard it despite all the pressures and abuses.”

She seems to forget that it’s only through the continuing inherent violence of the occupation that the people of Haifa have yet to return to their city. Nasr also fails to mention that for 20 years after the start of the Nakba the Palestinian refugees did not engage in any armed resistance, and whenever those “peaceful Palestinians” attempted to visit their homes unarmed during that period they were shot and killed by the same Israeli army the right-wing sectarian militias she supported in Lebanon considered friends and natural allies.

Nasr concludes her piece with the following obscene passage:

“I know a little boy who was baptized in the Saint Elias Maronite Church in Carmel some seventy years ago. He might never see that church again, but it must be comforting for him to know that it is still standing and brings together Muslims, Christians, Jews and Druze for worship and for lessons in co-existence only Haifa can offer!”

Yes, you read that correctly. Nasr is actually saying that a Palestinian refugee forced to flee his own city can, nevertheless, find “comforting” in knowing an Israeli-occupied Haifa to which he is denied the right to return or even visit remains a place that offers lessons in “co-existence.” Haifa’s history does indeed offer lessons in co-existence, but Haifa’s present can only serve as a blatant illustration of racism, colonialism, ethnic cleansing, exclusivism, and intolerance. Haifa under Israeli occupation is not the city of co-existence and tolerance it was prior to the advent of Zionism. Haifa will inevitably return to its tolerant, cosmopolitan past, but only after the liberation of Palestine and the return of her indigenous population and rightful owners to her.

What is most disturbing about Nasr’s article may not have been what she wrote which amounts to boilerplate Zionist propaganda, but rather its glaring omission. Not once does Nasr remind her readers that the original inhabitants of Haifa living in refugee camps less than a 90-minute drive from their homes would not have been allowed to accompany her on what appears to have been a lovely vacation. Nasr, in all likelihood, traveled to Israel on a Business class seat and went through customs at Ben-Gurion airport with a Western passport as it is illegal for any Lebanese citizen to travel to the usurping Zionist entity.*

After her recent visit to Israel in blatant disregard of the anti-normalization campaign in Arab world, and for then sharing her vacation experience in an article that reads like a travel brochure put out by the Israeli Foreign Ministry, and on behalf of all Palestinians in the diaspora, the ikhras awards committee is pleased to present Octavia Nasr with the March, 2013 Ikhras Shoe of the Month.

*As of the date of this writing Nasr has not been detained or questioned by the Lebanese authorities regarding her recent trip to Israel.

***

Every month Ikhras awards the Muntadhar Zaidi “Shoe of the month” to the House Arab or Muslim individual or organization whose behavior that month best exemplifies the behavior of what Malcolm X described, in the language of his own time, as the “house negro” (see video). The award is named in honor of the brave Iraqi journalist Muntadhar Zaidi who threw his shoes at the war criminal George W. Bush at a time House Arabs and Muslims were dining with him at the White House and inviting him to their mosques. Arab dictators and puppets of the empire are also qualified to enter the shoe of the month competition based on their own subservience to U.S.-led global imperialism. Contest guidelines prohibit any one individual or organization from winning the award more than 3 times a year.

 

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

No More Khatib-isms for Syrian Opposition

استمرار عودة اللاجئين السوريين الى بلادهم

By: Elie Hanna

Published Thursday, April 4, 2013

 

Statements from Moaz al-Khatib are becoming their own brand. The former Syrian National Coalition head is now playing solo. No longer representing the coalition in his pronouncements, Khatib only represents himself. Some of his colleagues believe his rhetoric is emotional and expresses “hopes and sorrows.” They lack diplomatic finesse.

As a sign of his support for a political solution, Khatib recently suggested a televised debate with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Yet these types of suggestions are no longer viewed as litmus tests for the regime, like the time when Khatib called for the release of detainees from Syrian prisons prior to any negotiations.

He knew his requests would be rejected by the regime. A coalition member told Al-Akhbar that Khatib would often make impromptu suggestions “from outside the general consensus.”

Khatib is not a man of war and aspires for a solution to the Syrian crisis. He is busy knocking on doors and considers it a challenge. But he also believes it is a dead end, the coalition member added.

The majority of the coalition members have not commented on Khatib’s statements. They did not take their usual positions in front of the cameras and say monologues about how “Khatib’s initiative” is a personal one and that the coalition would meet to bring things back to normal.

After the latest “initiative,” the coalition did “bring things back to normal.” They met and decided that any call for dialogue can only happen through the general assembly.

It is unacceptable to enter negotiations unless their goal is a political transition to power, coalition member Hisham Mroue told Al-Akhbar.

However, Mroue believes that Khatib’s earlier proposal led to an important international breakthrough. It conveyed that the opposition could win the battle either politically or militarily, and that it is not afraid of dialogue.

Members of the coalition told Al-Akhbar that, though Khatib will officially end his duties on 11 May 2013, they will not disavow their president. “The remaining time does not warrant a political shock,” according to coalition member Khaled al-Nasser.

Khatib agreed to remain in his position while the coalition decides on another president. “It’s not worth it,” one of its members told Al-Akhbar. “He is only here for an additiona; one month and ten days.” Khatib’s pronouncements are, “by default,” more or less personal opinions, he explained.
However, Khatib “is the son of this revolution and we want him to remain with us, since the differences are not substantial,” he continued.

The National Coordination Committee for Democratic Change in Syria (NCC) praised his position on negotiations and his resignation.

An NCC official in Damascus said that the external opposition does not have any initiative, much like the regime. Both sides, in his opinion, are burning the political solution. He added that after witnessing 600 protests each Friday at the beginning of the revolution, they are now down to ten.

The forces who control the coalition want a Syrian Ahmad Chalabi, the NCC official added.

This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Sectarianism, Saudi-Qatar Jostling Prevail in Syrian Opposition

صراع السلطة داخل «الائتلاف» السوري المعارض: تجاذب قطري ـ سعودي والغلبة بخيارات طائفية

 

Syrians dragging cart during their escape from the neighborhood of Sheikh Maksoud in Aleppo

By: Mohammad Ballout Translated from As-Safir (Lebanon).

اقرا المقال الأصلي باللغة العربية

The Syrian opposition finds itself at a standstill, following the moment of rapture when the National Coalition appropriated Syria’s seat at the Arab League.

The pace of consultations within the coalition points to a lack of urgency in moving forward toward the next step of forming an “interim government,” following the appointment of Ghassan Hito as its head. The task of forming the government is hindered by an American and Qatari insistence on nominating people who would help restructure and expand its level of representation and legitimacy, so that posts and ministries are more equitably divided. It also awaits a Qatari-Saudi consensus on the manner in which Hito’s government would be run, and the nature of that government: technocratic or political.

The Saudis have put all their media and financial potential at the service of the Syrian opposition, with the aim of reducing Qatar’s monopoly over the opposition, to the point of encouraging and enlisting secularists in their fight with Doha. Furthermore, the Americans, in the last few days, have also requested that the formation process be put on hold, as a result of it becoming a great point of contention between the different political and military Syrian opposition factions.

The delay in forming the government is not solely caused by the lack of answers to these issues; the coalition itself, which is considered the reference point for the government, will not be able to survive much longer if the Qataris continue running it in the same confrontational manner they used to force the appointment of Ghassan Hito as prime minister, and them imposing, with the help of their Muslim Brotherhood allies, on the Syrian opposition.

Additionally, the faction that endorses the quick formation of a government and calls for the northern part of Syria to be put under its control is nothing more now than an effective minority alliance comprising the Brotherhood and Doha. The Qataris, along with the Mustafa Al-Sabbagh and Brotherhood blocs, now possess approximately 40 votes, giving them the majority needed to impose their will on the coalition.

The list of oppositionists is composed of various factions, the most important of which being the Unified Military Councils, which rejected Hito’s appointment, and still refuse to move forward in the formation of any government until the coalition is properly expanded. The president of the coalition, Ahmed Moaz al-Khatib, and his vice president, Riad Seif, are also among them, along with a group of nine who froze their memberships in the coalition. These include Kamal al-Labwani, Walid al-Bunni, Marwan Hajj Rifai and Mohammed al-Assi al-Jarba. But this group of people lacks a common vision on contentious issues.

While Khatib espouses a forceful, nationalistic discourse and possesses a great deal of independence, allowing him to revolt against the Qataris to the point of demanding that a negotiated settlement be reached [for the Syrian crisis], and criticizing Qatari meddling in the opposition’s affairs; he seems reluctant to translate his positions into a real break with the coalition, the Brotherhood and the Qataris. Such a break would free the opposition from their domination, allowing him to form an alliance with internal opposition factions that support a negotiated settlement.

The aforementioned list of dissenters also includes newcomers representing different sectarian and ethnic agendas, which is unheard of in the Syrian political scene. For, in the past few weeks, many factions, both Western and Arab, have strived to include representatives of sectarian communities in conferences held in Cairo and Istanbul, purportedly representing Alawite, Christian or Turkmen interests, so that they may be included in the coalition and increase its legitimacy.

This gathering of sects represents the Western perception of what a solution for Syria might be. That perception assumes that toppling the regime requires that minorities desert it, and those afraid be reassured, by giving them important roles to play inside the coalition, without that affecting the situation on the ground — at least in relation to the level of influence and power that each of them would possess based on the assumptions being made at the British, French and American foreign ministries. Those supervising the Syrian issue at all three ministries have believed, ever since they created the coalition, that giving it legitimacy requires the inclusion of religious sects and minorities in its makeup. This notion was clearly expressed by former US secretary of state Hillary Clinton, when she criticized and proclaimed the death of the National Council for its failure to attract minorities.

Opponents of Qatari and Brotherhood domination have no avenue but to try and infiltrate the coalition, overwhelming it from the inside with a new opposition bloc formed of minorities, women and representatives of civil society, while betting on those groups’ intrinsic animosity toward the Brotherhood. It is worth noting, however, that the Brotherhood was the first group to exploit political piety and hide behind secular facades such as Burhan Ghalioun, or Christian ones such as Georges Sabra, allowing them to assume the presidency of the National Council. As a result, those trying to contain the Brotherhood espoused the slogan of expanding the coalition and raising its membership from 66 to 100, thus putting on the back burner the issue of the formation of the government in order to prevent the Brotherhood from spreading its political and administrative control over the areas that would be administered by such an interim government. This would result in those areas being transformed into a Brotherhood entity.

The opposition says that the Brotherhood couldn’t care less about Syria being partitioned. They cite the deputy head of the group, Mohammed Farouk Tayfour, who said that he backs the establishment of a state in northern Syria with Aleppo as its capital, and the administration of whatever land can be conquered, without waiting for a military takeover of Damascus.

One Syrian opposition figure attributed the current state of affairs to the conflict mutating from a revolution to a struggle for power. He said that the coalition’s stance seems to emanate from the probability that Syria will be indefinitely ruled by two different governments, or maybe even partitioned. He stated that the peril lies in the fact that it might be difficult to reunite the different ensuing states. He conveyed Khatib’s belief that the real danger was not in separating the country’s north from its south, but in the refusal of some regions controlled by the opposition to submit to the authority of any new government.

But the condition of expanding the coalition before forming the “governmen, while it serves as a lifeline for those opposing the Brotherhood from the inside, is a crude and illogical tactic. Expanding the coalition based on sectarian affiliations would change nothing in its function, since the latter is defined by the countries that sponsored the coalition’s formation — and are still financing it, and refuse to change their agendas.

According to Syrian opposition sources, next week will witness meetings by experts on Syrian affairs at the foreign ministries of eleven countries that attended the Friends of Syria conference. These include Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Jordan, France, the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany and Italy. They will all study the future of the coalition, the formation of a government, its funding and the ongoing armament efforts.

The international and Arab envoy to Syria, Lakhdar Brahimi, warned that recognizing the coalition and attempts to surrender Syria’s seat to the coalition at the Organization of the Islamic Conference, among others, will only lead to the failure of any political solution. He stated, “Any further steps toward recognizing the Syrian opposition might lead to added intransigence on the part of the Syrian regime, which still is endowed with superior military might in the face of the Syrian revolution; ultimately resulting in the failure of any political solution.”

 

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Syrian Korean Iranian alliance, reforming the map of the world

جديد السيد نون .. خارطة العالم تتشكل من جديد .. بتحالف سوري كوري ايراني

 Russia: Group of Our Warships Sent to Mediterranean   دام برس – اياد الجاجة : امريكا حاولت ان توجد لها بديلا في المنطقة يحافظ على مصالحها وتتفرغ هي لمواجهة الصين وذكرنا وقتها ان الامريكيين قد اسسوا لقيام حلفين حلف بقيادة فرنسا ومشاركة تركيا لتقسيم بلاد الشام وإدخاله في الحلف وهذا هو من يقود الحرب على سوريا ،وحلف آخر بقيادة اسرائيل ويضم عرب البعير لمواجهة ايران على ان يجتمع الحلفان اولا بالحرب على سوريا ثم بعد الانتصار على سوريا كما حلموا يتوزع الحلفان كل حسب مهامه ،وبناء على قناعة امريكا بتحقيق الانتصار على سوريا وان مخططها سينجح بدأت التخلي عن المنطقة لتعزز تواجدها في بحر الصين لخوض معارك جديدة في كوريا . ولكن ما الذي حدث؟ ان فشل امريكا وحلفائها في سوريا جعلها توحد الحلفين وتلغي الحلف الفرنسي التركي لتضم مهام الحلف الاخر وهو الاسرائيلي ودول البعير وتكون فرنسا وتركيا داعم لهذا الحلف على ان يتم استدراج مصر لاحقا . كان الامريكي متيقنا بأنه سيحقق مخططاته لما هو مرصودا لها من قوى ومسلحين واموال ،ولكن صمود سوريا قاده الى التهلكة. المخطط الامريكي كان يهدف لإنشاء حلف نووي تقوده اسرائيل ويستطيع هذا الحلف الوقوف بوجه ايران وروسيا وبالتالي تنفرد امريكا بالمواجهة مع الصين . التصرف الروسي الصيني بمواجهة المخطط الامريكي. في عام 2007 كان هناك اجتماعا مغلقا بين الجانب الروسي والصيني والسوري واتفق المجتمعون على اهم استراتيجية في هذا القرن وهي سحب التجارة الخارجية من اليد الامريكية. وكانت خطة البحار الخمسة ...التي طرحها الرئيس السوري وتتضمن اقامة نقاط استراتيجية في العالم تقوم باستقطاب الدول الناشئة لمنع السيطرة الامريكية عليها وتقرر ان تكون مركز هذه النقاط سوريا . كان الجانب الروسي والصين على يقين بان الامريكي لن يترك الامر يمر بالسهولة وكان معروفا انه سينتقم من سوريا. كانت النقاط الاستراتيجية لخطة تجارة البحار الخمس هي "سوريا ،واوكرانيا،وروسيا البيضاء، وفنزويلا ،وجنوب افريقيا" وهذه الدول اعتبرت هي مراكز تجمع المنتجات في العالم حيث يتم تشكيل اساطيل بحرية تجارية تعمل عمل سرفيس دائم وبذلك يتم ربط التجارة العالمية بشكل استراتيجي. طرح الجانب الروسي والصيني مشروع معاهدة دفاع مشترك مع الحلف الاستراتيجي ولكن الجانب السوري طلب الابقاء على المعاهدة سرا كي لا تنشأ احلاف جديدة بقيادة امريكية وتم الالتزام بذلك والاكتفاء بإعلان المعاهدة الايرانية السورية التي دعمتها الصين وروسيا . ماذا فعلت روسيا والصين في المواجهة مع الغرب؟ بدأت روسيا بتطوير انتاجها من الغاز وأيضا تجارتها واشترت حقول الغاز في دول رابطة الدول المستقلة مما حرم الامريكي من امكانية النفوذ الى الحدود الروسية طرح الايراني على اذربيجان مشروعا مشتركا هو نقل الغاز عبر اراضي ايران ثم نقله الى سوريا عبر العراق ، كانت تلك المشاريع تشكل صدمة للأوربيين الذين عرفوا ان مصيرهم اصبح محتوما بيد الروس ،وأما الجانب الصيني فقد دعم التوجه الكوري بضرورة رفع العقوبات عن كوريا واعتراف امريكا بحدود كوريا وإلغاء حالة الحرب . كان الجانب الصيني يراقب بحذر ردود الفعل الامريكي الذي كان يحاول المستحيل كي يعيق التقدم الاقتصادي الصيني .وفعلا تبين بعد محادثات 1992 وحتى 2007 بان الامريكي هو يراوغ فقط لكسب الوقت . استغل الجانب الكوري اهتمام الصين بأمنها القومي وزاد من تطويره لقواه وفعلا استطاعت كوريا ان تفجر القنبلة النووية وحاولت امريكا التغطية على ذلك لكن الكوريين اعادوا التجربة ثانية وأيضا طوروا مقدرتهم على نقل هذه الاسلحة. سوريا وتغيير العالم: اثناء الحرب على سوريا كان الامريكي يحاول جاهدا عدم خلق نقاط توتر جديدة كي يبقى مكرسا كل جهوده لأسقاط سوريا وكان ذلك من صالح الايرانيين والكوريين ، الذين استطاعوا العمل بحرية اكبر ودون معوقات تذكر . طور الكوريون اسلحتهم وكذلك الايرانيون واما الروس فقد اعطوا السوريون كل مايحتاجون للانتصار من عتاد ومعلومات . استطاعت سوريا الصمود ثم الانتصار وبات من المستحيل تحقيق النصر على السوريين وانتقلت القيادة في سوريا من الصمود الى التصدي والهجوم على معاقل العدو من عصابات ومرتزقة . هنا جاء الايعاز الصيني للكوريين بان الوقت قد حان لحرب كسر العظم مع امريكا .اعلنت كوريا حالة الحرب مع اعلان خطة امريكا عبر "القمة العربية" بإنشاء حكومة منفى تطلب التدخل العسكري لاحقا. كان اعلان الحرب من كوريا بمثابة الضربة القاضية للامريكي وقد فهم اللعبة . الحليف البديل اسرائيل ..في الشرق الاوسط يقابله حليف نووي في شرق اسيا يهدد امريكا بكل مدنها ومصانعها. ما هو الحل الروسي الصيني وفق هذه المعطيات؟ • ترى الصين بان من حق الكوريين ان يتوحدوا عبر استفتاء تشرف عليه وكالات محايدة تشارك فيها روسيا والصين . • ترى الصين ان التوتر في المنطقة منشأه دول مارقة كقطر وإسرائيل . • تعتبر روسيا ان حل الدولتين وعودة الجولان الى سوريا وإعادة الفلسطينيين الى بلادهم كفيل بنزع التوتر. • تعتبر الصين ان دولة تايوان هي اراضي صينية يجب ان تعود الى الصين . • تعتبر روسيا ان ايران دولة اقليمية كبرى ولها نفوذها الذي لا يستطيع احد انكاره وان من حقها تخصيب اليورانيوم للصناعة السلمية. • ترى الصين ان دولا كدول الخليج تملك مخزون نفطي هائل يجب ان لا تبقى بيد افراد ويجب ان تحكم هذه الدول انظمة ديموقراطية وليس اسر حاكمة مرتبطة بامريكا. هذه بعض الطروحات وهي ان تحققت تعنى ان مرحلة امريكا العالمية الى زوال فخروج امريكا من منطقة الشرق الاوسط هو بكل بساطة وقوع هذه المنطقة وأوروبا تحت النفوذ الروسي وأيضا خروج امريكا من كوريا الجنوبية وتايوان هو سيطرة الصين على شرق وجنوب اسيا . ماذا يعني عدم القبول . ان كوريا الشمالية تهدد امريكا وهذا التهديد سيزداد يوما بعد يوم ويصبح مشابها لتهديد حزب الله لإسرائيل الذي حولها من دولة تبحث عن السيطرة الى دولة تبحث عن القبة الحديدية لتحمي سكانها. في الشرق الاوسط هزمت امريكا بكل وضوح ففي سوريا بدأت الامكانيات لإسقاط النظام مستحيلة وأموال امريكا وحلفاؤها لا يمكنها ان تسقطه وبالتالي بدأت الاموال تنفذ وبدأ الجيش العربي السوري يزداد قوة وكل يوم يمر يضعف حلفاء امريكا ويزداد الشعب والجيش السوري قوة ،وأما الحليف الروسي فهو يزداد تشددا ولم يعد يكتفي بالطلب من امريكا بالضغط على حلفائها بل قرر هو اخذ زمام المبادرة والإعلان انه سيمنع بالقوة توريد السلاح والمسلحين وسيفرض عقوبات على الدول التي تتدخل بالشأن السوري ،وهذا ما جعل الاوروبي ينسحب بسرعة ويعلن عدم موافقته على دعم الائتلاف وأيضا على توريد السلاح. ا علان الحرب الامريكية على سوريا قد يكون خيارا امريكا للتخلص من التصعيد الكوري ولكن ما خبأه حلفاء سوريا كان مخيفا ، فقد سربت بعض الصحف الامريكية ان هناك اتفاق سري سوري كوري ايراني على عدم السماح لأمريكا بالتفرد بأي من الفرقاء وإعلان الحرب على احدهم يعني الحرب على الجميع وهذا يعني ان امريكا اذا تدخلت في سوريا تكون قد اشعلت ثلاث حروب دفعة واحدة منها حرب مباشرة عليها من قبل كوريا وحرب على قواعدها وأذنابها في الخليج وإسرائيل وحرب على القوات التي ستحارب سوريا. هذه هي الخارطة العالمية الان وشيئا فشيئا يتضح الانتصار العالمي على الارهاب والظلم ورأس الحربه التي تكسرت عليها احقاد وكراهية الاستعمار هي سوريا الشامخة العزيزة .

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!