Uprooted Palestinians are at the heart of the conflict in the M.E Palestinians uprooted by force of arms. Yet faced immense difficulties have survived, kept alive their history and culture, passed keys of family homes in occupied Palestine from one generation to the next.
In this talk Richard Forer and Gilad Atzmon engage in a lively back and forth discussion about identity politics, truth and truthfulness in the context of Israel and Palestine.
Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah on Friday called on the Israelis to return back to their homelands, adding that if they insist on occupying Palestine, a great war will erupt and liberate all the occupied Palestinian territories.
Delivering a speech during the crowded ceremony held by Hezbollah in the Lebanese southern town of Maroun al-Ras on Al-Quds International Day, Sayyed Nasrallah stressed that Hezbollah has a clear-cut belied that Palestine will be completely liberated and that Al-Quds shrines will be regained by its local.
“We all will pray in Al-Quds on the Day of the Great War.”
Sayyed Nasrallah started his speech by referring to the religious aspects of Imam Khomeini’s announcement of Al-Quds International Day to be marked on the last Friday of the Holy Month of Ramadan every year, stressing that his eminence wanted let its cause persist in the conscience of the Umma.
Sayyed Nasrallah pointed out that Al-Quds International Day is an occasion for the Umma solidarity with Al-Quds because it is the essence and the symbol of the 70-year conflict and of because of the recent US moves against the holy city (referring to the US decision o recognize Al-Quds as the capital of the Zionist entity and transfer the embassy to it after it had been in Tel Aviv).
“The most dangerous is what has been unveiled recently about the Century’s Deal which aims at eradicating the Palestinian cause and giving up Al-Quds and the sanctities to the usurping entity.”
Sayyed Nasrallah added that Hezbollah chose the border town of Maroun Al-Ras because of its geographical location near the occupied Palestinian territories and its symbolic memory of challenge and victory achieved by the Islamic Resistance fighters against the Israeli enemy in 2006 war.
Hezbollah Secretary General said that Al-Quds Day is being marked more vigorously in the holy city itself where the worshippers performed the prayers of the last Friday in the Holy Month of Ramadan, in Gaza where the fasting protesters gather under the striking sun on its border to clash with the Zionist occupation soldiers, and in various Arab and Islamic cities, including Tehran, Sanaa and others, to announce their support to the Palestinian cause.
After the US recognition of Al-Quds as the capital of the Zionist entity, there is a challenge to prevent the world countries (especially the Arab and the Islamic ones) from supporting the American decision, according to Sayyed Nasrallah who added that “we have considerable capacities to reach this target.”
Sayyed Nasrallah emphasized that the Palestinian locals in Al-Quds also have to encounter the demographic challenge imposed by the Zionist enemy that is attempting to cause major demographic alterations in the occupied Al-Quds by the Zionists who resort to constructing large numbers of settler houses in order to change the identity of the city.
The Resistance leader added that the Palestinians further must confront the Zionist threats and moves against Al-Aqsa Mosque, stressing that the locals have a major and vital role in this concern.
The Arabs, Muslims and Christians, must preserve their houses, stores and all their means of existence to defeat the Zionist challenges, according to Sayyed Nasrallah who underscored that the Arabs in Al-Quds are confronting the Zionists on behalf of the entire Umma.
Sayyed Nasrallah said that all the Umma must financially help the Palestinians in the occupied Al-Quds in order to enable them to face the Zionist challenges, noting that some treacherous Arab businessmen are purchasing Palestinian houses in the occupied Al-Quds and selling them to the Zionists.
Sayyed Nasrallah pointed out that the Saudi and a number of other countries are presenting a religious theory on the Israelis right to control Al-Quds, adding that they falsify and distort the meaning of the Holy Coranic verses in order to protect their thrones by surrendering to the US orders, recognizing the Zionist entity and eradicating the Palestinian cause.
The US President Donald Trump acknowledged that some Arab regimes will immediately fall if they lose the American protection’ consequently, they will follow all the US instructions, including supporting the Zionist entity, according to Sayyed Nasrallah who added that the enemies are betting on changing the priorities and interests of the new generations.
“However, the facts which show that the most of Gaza martyrs are young indicate that the new generations will preserve the Palestinian cause as a priority.”
Sayyed Nasrallah added that the Palestinian people will never give up Al-Quds and the sanctities to the enemy, adding that all their factions are exposed to heavy pressures, yet that their steadfastness is basic in frustrating the Century’s Deal.
Sayyed Nasrallah stressed that all the countries which bow to the US will do not allow their citizens to publicly advocate the Palestinian cause and Al-Quds, adding that they arrest anyone who even tries to do that.
Hezbollah leader highlighted the case of the Yemenis who marked Al-Quds Day in support of the Palestinian cause, despite the Saudi-led war against their impoverished country, stressing that this proves they are pure Arabs, unlike some regimes in the region.
Sayyed Nasrallah also stressed that the Islamic Republic of Iran would not have faced all the US pressures and paid that heavy prices, if it had not been supporting the Palestinian resistance against the Israeli occupation.
“Never bet on the Iranians choices because they have sacrificed hundreds of thousands of martyrs for the sake of the Islamic regime which defends the Palestinian cause,” Sayyed Nasrallah addressed the enemies.
Sayyed Nasrallah also highlighted the Iraqi strategic change, referring to the rallies held to mark Al-Quds International Day and stressing that the Iraqi stance have always supported the Palestinian cause.
The axis of resistance in Syria has been able to liberate the largest part of the cities from the terrorist group, according to Sayyed Nasrallah who called on the Israelis to acknowledge their defeat in that country.
“They wanted to dethrone President Bashar Assad. However, now they just aim to eradicate the role of Hezbollah and Iran in Syria.”
On Hezbollah role in Syria, Sayyed Nasrallah stressed that the Resistance group intervened militarily to defeat the takfiri terror groups upon the Syrian government’s request, adding that whole world can never force the part to withdraw troops from Syria.
“Hezbollah may withdraw troops from Syria only at the request of the Syrian government.”
Every year, the International Quds Day is celebrated on the last Friday of the Islamic holy month of Ramadan. Millions of people across the world throng the streets to mark this day designated by the late founder of the Islamic Republic Imam Khomeini.
This year, Quds Day has become a larger rallying cry as it comes after months of mass protests in Gaza which were met with deadly force against unarmed protesters. More than 120 Palestinian protesters were martyred.
– لأيام متتالية يتحدث النائب اللواء جميل السيد من منصة الشهود في المحكمة الدولية التي أنشئت لاستكمال مهمة من اغتالوا الرئيس رفيق الحريري بتوجيه الاتهام لكل من سورية والمقاومة. والواضح من متابعة الشهادة وما يُدلي به اللواء السيد وكيفية تفاعل المحكمة وأركانها مع شهادته أنه قد نجح بصورة لا لبس فيها في توظيف هذه المنصّة بقوة الحقائق التي يُدلي بها مقابل كمية الأكاذيب التي جرى التفوّه بها من هذه المنصة نفسها على ألسنة شهود الخمسة نجوم الذين استُجلبوا إليها لمنح المصداقية لكميات الكذب المبرمج الذي فقد مصداقيته مع سقوط شهود الزور، الذين طبعوا مرحلة لجنة التحقيق الدولية، بمثل ما طبعت شهادات السياسيين اللبنانيين مرحلة عمل المحكمة، ولأن هؤلاء السياسيين يعرفون أنّ جميل السيد يعرف، وأنّه يعرف أنّهم يعرفون، وأنّهم يعرفون أنّه يعرف أنّهم يعرفون، فلن يجرؤ أحد منهم على مساجلته بدقة ما قال أو بصدقه أو بكونه الحقيقة التي يملك السيد الكثير مما يقوله لتأييده لو تجرأ أيّ من هؤلاء على الطعن بواقعة واحدة مما قال.
– جوهر ما ترتكز عليه إفادة اللواء السيد هو تقديم صورة مغايرة لعلاقة الرئيس رفيق الحريري بكل من سورية وحزب الله عشية اغتياله على خلفية ما ترتب على صدور القرار الأممي 1559 الذي دعا للانسحاب السوري من لبنان ونزع سلاح المقاومة. والصورة التي رسمت من منصة المحكمة وقرارها الاتهامي محورها، أن سورية وحزب الله كانا مع حلفائهما على ضفة مواجهة القرار الأممي الذي كان الحريري عراباً له، وأنه قتل في قلب هذه المعركة، على خط تماس اسمه قانون الانتخابات والانتخابات النيابية التي صُمّمت لإسقاطه وتحجيمه. فجاء السيد ليقول العكس تماماً أن الحريري كان في قلب جبهة سورية وحلفائها، رغم خلافه مع الرئيس إميل لحود، ورغم علاقاته القوية بالغرب الذي وقف وراء القرار 1559.
– من موقعي كواحد من قلائل واكبوا عن قرب تفاصيل تلك المرحلة، ولم ينجُ من الاتهام بالشراكة في اغتيال الرئيس الحريري، في اليوم ذاته لتوقيف اللواء السيد ورفاقه الثلاثة في 30 آب 2005، ومداهمة منزلي وإعلاني مشتبهاً به خامساً في مؤتمر صحافي مشترك للرئيس فؤاد السنيورة ورئيس لجنة التحقيق الدولية ديتليف ميليس، سأورد بعضاً مما قلته للجنة الدولية التي قابلت محققيها في ذلك اليوم نفسه، عندما تحدّيْت اللجنة في مؤتمر صحافي عقدته على الحدود اللبنانية السورية، عائداً من دمشق لقناعتي أن مداهمة منزلي وإعلاني مشتبهاً به في الاغتيال يهدفان لبقائي فيها تمهيداً لملاحقتها، وفقاً للفصل السابع بتهمة إيواء مطلوبين للتحقيق.
– في الإفادة التي امتدت لإثنتي عشرة ساعة متصلة من الخامسة بعد الظهر إلى الخامسة صباحاً، تحوّلت من مشتبه به إلى شاهد، بعدما نصح أصدقاء اللجنة من يقف وراءها بالتراجع عن اتهامي لأن قرار مجيئي من دمشق إلى بيروت وتحدّي اللجنة أكسبني براءتي أمام الرأي العام، ومواصلة الاتهام ستُضعف مصداقية اللجنة وصدقية اتهاماتها الأخرى. أطلعت اللجنة على وقائع لقائي الأخير بالرئيس رفيق الحريري في الرابع من شباط 2005 بناء على طلبه، لمناقشة ما قال إنها أمور وطنية يعتقد بأنني لن أتاخر عن تلبية دعوته، مضيفاً بعرف أنك زعلان من الكلام عن ودائع سورية بس أنت ما بتوقف عند قصص صغيرة قدام القصص الكبيرة ، فلبّيت دعوته صبيحة السبت 4 شباط رغم الفتور الذي ساد علاقتنا بعد الذي نُقل عن لسانه، ولمدة ساعتين تناقشنا وانتهينا بشبه اتفاق. تحدّيت اللجنة أن تسترجع تسجيلات ذلك اللقاء في منزل الرئيس الحريري والذي شارك في دقائق منه اللواء وسام الحسن الذي كان في صلب عمل اللجنة تلك الأيام، طالباً أخذ إفادته حول صحة ما أقول، ومقارنة كلامي عن وقائع هذه الجلسة بما تقوله التسجيلات.
– كان محور كلام الرئيس الحريري طلب تفسير التناقض الصارخ بين موقفي المعلَن في كل منبر عن رفض مشروع قانون الانتخابات النيابية الذي يقوم على القضاء ويتبنّاه الرئيس لحود والوزير سليمان فرنجية كوزير للداخلية، وبين ما قيل للرئيس الحريري أنه مشروع الرئيس السوري بشار الأسد لتحجيمه، ليدخل في الموضوع، الذي من أجله اللقاء. فقلت للرئيس الحريري الجواب بسيط. وهو أنني أرسلت بطلب موقف الرئيس الأسد مما يُشاع عن القانون، وأبديت رأيي بهذا المشروع. وكان الجواب أن الرئيس الأسد على الحياد، طالما حلفاء سورية منقسمون حول القانون. فالرئيس لحود والوزير فرنجية يريدانه والرئيس نبيه بري وحزب الله يعارضانه، والجواب هو أن لا إحراج لسورية في أن يختار أيّ من أصدقائها أو حلفائها أحد الخيارين، لتكون دهشة الرئيس الحريري مضيفاً، إذن أنا فايت بالحيط ، بافتراض معركة مع سورية والرئيس الأسد حول القانون. ويُضيف هل من فرصة برأيك لترميم جبهة حلفاء سورية حول موقف موحّد، وأجيب بالتأكيد.
– في تلك الجلسة قرّر الحريري أن يبادر للتذكير بموقفه الرافض للقرار 1559 عبر نشر كلام منسوب إليه في الصفحة الأولى من جريدة السفير ليوم السبت 5 شباط تحت عنوان صغناه معاً الـ 1559 يُقسِم اللبنانيين والطائف يوحّدهم ، وتوافقنا على قيامه بمناقشة تفصيلية لصيغ قانون الانتخاب مع السيد حسن نصرالله، الذي كان خيار الرئيس الحريري أن يتابع معه، وقمت بعد هذه الجلسة بنقل ما دار فيها للرئيس بري والسيد نصرالله وأرسلت مضمونَها للرئيس الأسد وتلقيتُ تشجيعاً وتأييداً للمتابعة، فيما أبلغني السيد نصرالله أنّه سيتابع عبر القنوات القائمة مع الرئيس الحريري هذا الطلب، وبعد أيام جرى اغتيال الرئيس الحريري، وكشف السيد نصرالله بعدها علناً عن لقاء جمعهما، وعن ترتيبات للقاء يجمع الرئيس الحريري بالرئيس الأسد.
– تستحق إفادة اللواء السيد التقدير لقيمتها السياسية الهامة في منح الرواية الحقيقية لكون اغتيال الرئيس الحريري محاولة اغتيال لسورية وللمقاومة، وتوظيفاً لدماء الرئيس الحريري في تطبيق القرار 1559 الذي رفض منح مكانته وزعامته لتنفيذه، فصار دمه أهمّ من حياته، حتى لدى صديق شخصي له كالرئيس الفرنسي جاك شيراك، وصار لسان حال حلفائه بعد اغتياله، ليس مهماً مَن قام بالاغتيال، المهم أنه بات ممكناً توظيف حرارة الاغتيال للانتقام من الخصوم، ومَن يُجنّد شهود زور أو يصمت على تجنيدهم، لا يمكن أن تكون الحقيقة هدفاً له.
– قال لهم جميل السيد استحوا… أم أن اللي استحوا ماتوا؟ .
Millions of people across Iran and other countries are gathering for the International Quds Day rallies in a show of support and solidarity with the Palestinians and condemn the Zionist decades-long occupation of Palestine.
In Tehran and other Iranian cities and towns, people are participating in the annual event which falls on the last Friday of the Muslim fasting month of Ramadan.
Similar events are planned to take place in London and Toronto as well as in 800 cities worldwide, which usually see people chanting anti-“Israeli” slogans and burning the occupying regime’s flags.
Relatively, organizers in Toronto said the theme of the rally is to push for “justice, peace and love” and countering Islamophobia and racism as well as opposing the “Zionism and “Israeli” war crimes”.
Near the “Israeli” fence separating Gaza from the occupied territories, Palestinians are expected to throng the site which has become the scene of bloodshed in recent weeks.
The International Quds Day is a legacy of the late founder of the Islamic Republic Imam Khomeini, who designated the day in solidarity with the Palestinians.
This year, Quds Day has become a larger rallying cry as it comes after months of mass protests in Gaza which proved “Israel’s” inability to stop the Palestinians despite widespread use of deadly force against unarmed protesters.
Since late March, over 120 Palestinian protesters were martyred and thousands more wounded by Zionist forces, mainly sharpshooters. The “Israeli” military has come under intense international criticism for permitting its forces to open fire on unarmed protesters in Gaza.
Inward investment into Saudi Arabia collapsed last year, according to newly published data from the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), raising serious questions about the prospects for the economic reform agenda being pursued by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS).
According to the latest UNCTAD World Investment Report, published on June 7, foreign direct investment (FDI) into Saudi Arabia last year amounted to just $1.4 billion, down from $7.5bn the year before and as much as $12.2bn in 2012.
The precipitous fall means the country was outranked by far smaller economies in terms of its ability to attract international investment last year, with the likes of Oman and Jordan overtaking it in 2017, with inward FDI of $1.9bn and $1.7bn respectively.
The situation is equally stark when one looks at the amount of investment coming to Saudi Arabia compared to the rest of the surrounding West Asia region. While the kingdom accounted for around a quarter of total regional FDI between 2012 and 2016, last year it attracted just 5.6% of the regional total.
While the Saudi economy has been losing out, others have been gaining a bigger piece of the pie. The UAE has seen its share of regional FDI more than double over the past six years, from 19% in 2012 to 41% in 2017.
And even Qatar – which has been the subject of an economic boycott by Bahrain, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the UAE since June last year – managed to increase its FDI take in 2017, attracting $986m compared to $774m a year earlier.
UNCTAD attributed the fall in investment into Saudi Arabia to significant divestments and negative intra-company loans by foreign multinationals. As an example, it pointed to the UK/Dutch Shell Group which sold its 50% stake in the Sadaf petrochemicals venture to its partner Saudi Basic Industries Corporation (Sabic) for $820m in August.
However, the report also notes that FDI to Saudi Arabia has been contracting since the global financial crisis in 2008/09. And although there has been a similar pattern across the region – inflows to West Asia have fallen in most years since hitting a peak of $85bn in 2008 – the performance of Saudi Arabia last year is still appreciably worse than any other economy in the immediate neighborhood. It is also far worse than the global picture – worldwide FDI inflows were down 23% last year to $1.43 trillion.
The results will be worrying for policymakers in Riyadh, where Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman has made a point of trying to attract international investors to the country to help fund an ambitious economic reform program. That has encompassed plans for new cities, the opening up of the tourism and leisure markets, and loosening the restrictions on foreign ownership of companies listed on the Saudi Stock Exchange (Tadawul).
At the heart of all these plans is a need to convince international investors to put money into the country. Riyadh hosted a Future Investment Initiative conference last year which attracted some high-profile names, such as Larry Fink of BlackRock and venture capitalist Peter Thiel, and a second conference is scheduled for October this year. MBS has also travelled extensively across the US and Europe to drum up interest in his plans.
However, the authoritarian tendencies of the Saudi regime have at times undermined the confidence of potential and actual investors alike. Episodes such as the arrest and detention of scores of high-profile businessmen in November last year and the more recent arrest of activists who had campaigned to allow women to drive have raised questions about the rule of law in the country and the security of investments.
– السؤال الذي يحمله العنوان لا يفيد في الجواب عليه الانطلاق من الرغبات، وتطويع الوقائع لقراءتها بعين تخدم استنتاجاً مسبقاً، يريده المتابع إن كان خصماً للسياسات الأميركية ومواجهاً لها تأكيداً لضعف أميركا، ويريده مؤيدو أميركا وحلفاؤها تعبيراً عن قوّتها. فهذا النوع من القراءة هدّام بل مدمّر، لأنه يبني أوهاماً سرعان ما تُبنى عليها سياسات مغامرة، فيقع خصوم أميركا في مواجهات مبنية على قراءة الضعف ويصطدمون بجدران القوّة، أو يخاطر حلفاؤها بالبناء على قوّتها خيارات سرعان ما يظهر أنها انتحارية، عندما يرونها تنكفئ وتتراجع وتتركهم لمصيرهم وحدهم.
– في السياسات الأميركية ما يحمل الشيء ونقيضه في الإجابة عن السؤال حول القوة والضعف. فأميركا التي تصعّد على إيران وروسيا والصين وأوروبا بخطوات مالية قاسية بين العقوبات والإجراءات الضريبية، تبدو كلاعب منفرد على الساحة الدولية لا يأبه بالآخرين، وينظر إليهم كمجرد عناصر في اللوحة التي يتحكّم بألوانها وتشكيلاتها. وأميركا التي تتهرّب من المواجهة في أزمة وحرب رصدت للفوز بهما في سورية كلّ رصيدها وتحالفاتها، هي الدولة العظمى التي تشيخ وتدرك أكلاف المواجهات مع قوى فتية صاعدة مستعدّة للتضحية لإثبات مساحتها الخاصة على المسرح الدولي. وأميركا التي تنسحب من التفاهم النووي مع إيران، هي أميركا القوية، لكن أميركا التي لا تملك بديلاً للتفاهم ولا تستطيع جلب أوروبا للشراكة في تدمير هذا التفاهم، هي أميركا الضعيفة. وأميركا التي تذهب للتفاوض مع كوريا الشمالية هي أميركا الضعيفة، بينما أميركا التي تهدّد بحال فشل التفاوض ليست أميركا القوية، لأنها أظهرت بقوة خشيتها من تدمير قنوات التفاوض. وهكذا هي أميركا التي تعترف بالقدس عاصمة لكيان الاحتلال تبدو بمظهر القوي، لكنها في الواقع تنهي فرص التفاوض والتسويات في الملف الفلسطيني الذي يشكل قلب أزمات المنطقة وحروبها، ويشكل انفجاره مخاطرة غير محسوبة العواقب، في ظلّ انسداد خيارات الحرب أمام أميركا و«إسرائيل».
– حال «إسرائيل» يفضح سرّ أميركا بصورة أكثر وضوحاً، فالانسحاب الأميركي من التفاهم النووي الإيراني، كما الاعتراف الأميركي بالقدس عاصمة لكيان الاحتلال، يُفترض أن يكونا فرصة لتشنّ «إسرائيل» حروب الحسم التي كانت تتوعّد بخوضها وتزعم أنّ واشنطن هي مَن يلجمها عن خوضها. وها هي «إسرائيل» تتعامل مع الملف النووي الإيراني بنشاط دبلوماسي لرئيس حكومتها عنوانه التحريض لفرض العقوبات على إيران، بدلاً من التمهيد للحرب عليها. وهي ذاتها تتقبّل عودة انتشار الجيش السوري على حدود الجولان بعد رهان على تدمير هذا الجيش لسبع سنوات، تفادياً لمجرد مشهد يتمركز فيه الإيرانيون وحزب الله على خط الحدود، رغم علمها بأنّ حدود هذا التمركز الفعلية هي حيث يتمركز الجيش السوري عملياً بحكم طبيعة التحالف الذي يجمع مثلث سورية وإيران والمقاومة. وعلى الضفاف الفلسطينية تواصل حكومة الاحتلال مواجهتها العبثية التي تذهب بالوضع في الأراضي المحتلة نحو المجهول، ولا تملك استراتيجية خروج، وفقاً للدرس الذي يفترض أنها تعلّمته من حرب تموز 2006، وقد فشلت في ابتكار شريك فلسطيني في صفقة القرن، رغم كسبها دعماً عربياً استثنائياً لتصفية القضية الفلسطينية.
– تُظهر الحالة الإسرائيلية الضعف الأميركي عن خوض الحروب، بقدر ما تظهر العجز الإسرائيلي الأشدّ حضوراً، لكنها لا تختصر المشهد الأميركي الذي يلجأ على الطريقة الإسرائيلية إلى الجدران والاحتماء بها، لكن الجدران الأميركية فعّالة رغم أنها جدران افتراضية، مبنية من ورق، لكنه ورق الدولارات، وورق الرسوم والعقوبات والقرارات المالية، بينما الجدران الإسرائيلية وهمية وهشّة رغم كونها جدران إسمنتية تظهر فضيحتها الحال على الحدود مع لبنان، حيث يتوقف بناء الجدار الهادف للحدّ من مخاطر المقاومة، بانتظار إذن سماح لبناني يتوقف على ترسيم الحدود والمصالح النفطية للبنان، يعرف الإسرائيليون أنّ للمقاومة كلمة فاصلة فيه.
– يصير المشهد أشدّ وضوحاً عندما يظهر أنّ أميركا قوية حيث تحتمي وراء جدارها المالي، وضعيفة عندما تخرج للنزال والمواجهة في الساحات التقليدية، ويظهر أشدّ وضوحاً أنّ معركة العقوبات ضدّ إيران وكوريا، تشكل الاختبار الأهمّ لقدرة جدران الحماية الأميركية على الصمود عندما تواجه خصماً قادراً على التأقلم مع العقوبات والحصار، وتغيب عنها البدائل إذا انكسر الجدار فتتعمّد إبقاء ثقوب فيه منعاً لانهياره بقوة اندفاع المياه من وراء السدّ. وهو ما يفسّر الدورين الأوروبي في ملف إيران النووي، والصيني في ملف كوريا الشمالية.
The topic of Russian actions in Syria still continues to fascinate and create a great deal of polemics. This makes senses – the issue is exceedingly important on many levels, including pragmatic and moral ones, and today I want to stick strictly to the pragmatic level and set aside, just for a while, moral/ethical/spiritual considerations. Furthermore, I will also pretend, for argument’s sake, that the Kremlin is acting in unison, that there are no Atlantic Integrationists in the Russian government, no 5th column in the Kremlin and that there is no Zionist lobby exerting a great deal of influence in Russia. I will deal with these issues in the future as there is no doubt in my mind that time and events will prove how unfounded and politically-motivated these denials are in reality. But for the purpose of this analysis, we can pretend that all is well in the Kremlin and assume that Russia is fully sovereign and freely protecting her national interests.
So what do we know about what is going on in Syria?
I submit that it is obvious that Russia and Israel have made some kind of deal. That there is an understanding of some kind is admitted by both sides, but there is also clearly more happening here which is not spelled out in full. The Israelis, as always, are bragging about their total victory and posting articles like this one: “In Syria, Putin and Netanyahu Were on the Same Side All Along” with the subheading reading “Putin is ready to ditch Iran to keep Israel happy and save Assad’s victory“. Really?
The chaotic world of contradictory declarations and statements
Let’s look at that thesis from a purely logical point of view. First, what were the Israeli goals initially? As I have explained it elsewhere, initially the Israelis had the following goals:
Bring down a strong secular Arab state along with its political structure, armed forces, and security services.
Create total chaos and horror in Syria justifying the creation of a “security zone” by Israel not only in the Golan but further north.
Trigger a civil war in Lebanon by unleashing the Takfiri crazies against Hezbollah.
Let the Takfiris and Hezbollah bleed each other to death, then create a “security zone”, but this time in Lebanon.
Prevent the creation of a Shia axis Iran-Iraq-Syria-Lebanon.
Break up Syria along ethnic and religious lines.
Create a Kurdistan which could then be used against Turkey, Syria, Iraq, and Iran.
Make it possible for Israel to become the uncontested power broker in the Middle-East and force the KSA, Qatar, Oman, Kuwait and all others to have to go to Israel for any gas or oil pipeline project.
Gradually isolate, threaten, subvert and eventually attack Iran with a wide regional coalition of forces.
Eliminate all centers of Shia power in the Middle-East.
Now let’s stop right here and ask a very simple question: if Putin and Netanyahu were on the same side all along, what should Putin have done to aid the Israelis? I submit that the obvious and indisputable answer is: absolutely nothing. By the time the Russian initiated their (very limited but also very effective) intervention in Syria those plans were well under way towards full realization!
The undeniable truth is that Putin foiled the initial Israel plan for Syria.
In fact, Hezbollah and Iran had already intervened in Syria and were desperately “plugging holes” in a collapsing Syrian front. So, if anything, Putin has to be the one to be credited for forcing the Israelis to give up on their “plan A” and go to plan “B” which I described here and which can be summarized as follows:
Step one, use your propaganda machine and infiltrated agents to re-start the myth about an Iranian military nuclear program. (…) If Trump says that the JCPOA is a terrible deal, then this is so. Hey, we are living in the “post-Skripal” and “post-Douma” era – if some Anglo (or Jewish) leaders say “highly likely” then it behooves everybody to show instant “solidarity” lest they are accused of “anti-Semitism” or “fringe conspiracy theories” (you know the drill). So step one is the re-ignition ex nihilo of the Iranian military nuclear program canard. Step two is to declare that Israel is “existentially threatened” and (…) and let the dumb Americans fight the Iranians.
As I have explained it in great detail here, Russia does not have any moral obligation to protect anybody anywhere, not in the Middle-East and most definitely not Syria and/or Iran. I have also explained in great detail here why Putin also has a lot of pragmatic internal reasons for not getting Russia involved in a major war in the Middle-East.
Finally, as I have explained here, the Israelis are clearly baiting Iran by striking Iranian (or, more accurately, Iranian-linked or Iranian-supported) targets in Syria. They hope that Iran’s patience will come to an end and that the Iranians will retaliate with enough firepower to justify not only an attack on (relatively low value) Iranian-linked targets in Syria but on Iran proper, thus leading to a guaranteed Iranian retaliation on Israel and The Big Prize: a massive US attack on Iran.
Now let’s look at Russian actions once again. If Putin was “on the same side with Netanyahu all along”, he would be helping the Israelis do what they are doing, that is baiting the Iranians, right? But what did Putin really do?
It all began with a statement by Foreign Minister Lavrov who declared that all foreign forces must leave Syria. It is my understanding that no direct quote exists from Lavrov’s initial statement, only interpreted paraphrases. Lavrov also made some clarifying comments later, like this one. But let’s not get bogged down in trying to decide which was an off-the-cuff comment and which one was “official”, but let us begin by noticing this: even before Lavrov’s comment on “all foreign forces” the same Lavrov also said that “all US forces must leave Syria after the defeat of the terrorist forces“. May I also remind everybody here that Israel has been illegally occupying the Syrian Golan for years and that the IDF exactly fits into the definition of “foreign force in Syria”? It gets better, according to the Syrians and, frankly according to common sense and international law, the Syrians say that all foreign forces must leave Syria except those legally requested to stay by the Syrian government. So when the Russians say that all foreign forces including Iranians (assuming Lavrov really said that) must leave Syria they have absolutely no legal or other authority to impose that, short of a UNSC Resolution endorsing that demand. Considering that the Israelis and the USA don’t give a damn about international law or the UNSC, we might even see a day when such a resolution is passed, enforced on the Iranians only, and ignored by the Israelis. The trick here is that in reality there are rather few Iranian “forces” in Syria. There are many more “advisors” (which would not be considered a “force”) and many more pro-Iranian forces which are not really “Iranian” at all. There is also Hezbollah, but Hezbollah is not going anywhere, and they are Lebanese, not Iranian anyway. No doubt the Israelis would claim that Hezbollah is an “Iranian force” but that is basically nonsense. And just to add to the confusion, the Russians are now being cute and saying: “of course, the withdrawal of all non-Syrian forces must be carried out on a mutual basis, this should be a two-way street“. I suggest that we can stop listing all the possible paraphrases and interpretations and agree that the Russians have created a holy (or unholy) mess with their statements. In fact, I would even submit that, what appears to be a holy (or unholy) mess, is a very deliberate and crafty ambiguity.
According to numerous Russian sources, all this rhetoric is about the southern part of Syria and the line of contact (it ain’t a border legally speaking) between Syria and Israel. The deals seem to be this: the pro-Iranian forces and Hezbollah get out of the south, and in exchange, the Israelis let the Syrians, backed by Russian airpower and “advisors” regain control of southern Syria but without any attempts to push the Israelis out of the Golan which they illegally occupy. Needless to say, the Syrians are also insisting that as part of the deal, the US forces in southern Syria must pack and leave. But, frankly, unless the US plans to have tiny (and useless) US enclaves inside Syrian controlled territory I don’t see the point of them staying. Not only that, but the Jordanians seem to be part of this deal too. And here is the best part: there is some pretty good evidence that Hezbollah and Iran also are part of the deal. And, guess what? So are the Turks.
This sure looks like some kind of major regional deal has been hammered out by the Russians. And if that is really the case, then that would also explain the tense denials in Israel and Iran, followed by more confirmations (also here) And, just to make things even more confused, we now have Stoltenberg (of all people!) saying that NATO would not assist Israel in case of an Iranian attack which, considering that the NATO Secretary General has no power, that NATO is about 80%+ made up of the USA and that the US now has permanent a “tripwire” force inside Israel and could claim to be under attack, is utter nonsense, but still amusing to note as “adding to the chaos”.
If all this looks to you like evidence for the thesis that “Putin and Netanyahu were on the same side all along”, then I wonder what it would take to convince you otherwise because to me this looks like one of three things:
some kind of major regional deal has been made or
some kind of major regional deal is in the process of being hammered out or
some kind of major regional deal has been made but nobody trusts anybody else and everybody wants to make that deal better for itself
and, of course, everybody wants to save face by either denying it all or declaring victory, especially the AngloZionists.
So let’s ask the key question: is there any evidence at all that Putin and/or Assad is/are “ditching Iran”?
Away from the realm of declarations and statements and back to the world
Let’s begin with a simple question: What does Iran want above all else?
I submit that the overwhelming number one priority of Iran is to avoid a massive US attack on Iran.
Not because of a non-existing Iranian nuclear program threatening Israel, but because Iran offers a most successful, and therefore dangerously competing, alternative civilizational model to both the AngloZionist Empire and the Saudi-Wahabi version of Islam. Furthermore, unlike (alas!) Russia, Iran dares to openly commit the “crime of crimes”, that is, to publicly denounce Israel as a genocidal, racist state whose policies are an affront to all of civilized mankind. Finally, Iran (again unlike Russia, alas!) is a truly sovereign state which has successfully dealt with its 5th columnists and which is not in the iron claws of IMF/WB/WTO/etc types (I wrote about that last week so I won’t repeat it here).
I also submit that Iran also has as a top priority to support all the oppressed people of the Middle-East. Resisting oppression and injustice is a Quranic imperative and I believe that in its Iranian interpretation this also extends to non-Shia Sunnis and even Christians and Jews, but since I know that this will trigger all sorts of angry accusations of being naive (or even a Shia propagandist) I will concede that helping the oppressed Shia in the region is probably more important to the Iranian leaders than helping all the other oppressed. In secular terms, this means that Iran will try to protect and assist the Shia in Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon and I see absolutely nothing wrong with that at all. In fact, considering the amazing mercy shown by Hezbollah to the SLA in southern Lebanon in 2000, and the fact that currently, the Syrian security forces are acting with utmost restraint in the parts of Syria which have accepted the Russian deal (this even has some Russian analysts outright worried) I think that Iranian-backed forces liberating Syria from Daesh are the best thing which anybody could hope for.
Furthermore, the truth is that for all its other faults, the Ba’athist regime in Syria was tolerant of minorities and that Hezbollah has always been protective of absolutely all the Lebanese people regardless of confession or ethnicity (others might disagree with me, but having studied Hezbollah and Iran for several decades now I come to the conclusion that they, unlike most other political actors, are actually truthful when they state their intentions).
So who is the biggest threat to the Shia and, I would argue, to all the people of the Middle-East? The Takfiris of Daesh of course.
And what do all the variants of the possible “big regional deal” have in common? The elimination of Daesh & Co. from Syria.
So how is that against the Iranian interests?!
It isn’t, of course.
The truth is that I see absolutely no evidence at all for “Putin and Netanyahu working together all along”. What I do see is that some kind of deal is being worked out between numerous parties in which everybody is probably trying hard to cheat everybody else, Realpolitik at its worst and most cynical – yes. But hardly a betrayal of Iran by Russia.
What everybody seems to be doing is what blacksmith Vakula did in Gogol’s Christmas Story “The Night Before Christmas“: to trick the devil. In Russia, the devil is known as “лукавый” which does not just mean “evil” but also sly/wily/deceitful/wickedly clever. To try to trick the devil is a very, very dangerous and difficult task and I also find it morally very questionable. But in keeping up with our modern value-neutral “realistic” Zeitgeist, we can also debunk the “Putin betrays Iran” on purely cynical and “pragmatic” reasons with no need to appeal to any higher values at all.
For those who have not seen it yet, I highly recommend this (English subtitled) video of Ruslan Ostashko discussing what Israel can, or cannot, offer Russia and Putin:
Ostashko is absolutely right. The truth is that Israel, unlike Iran, has very little to offer Putin or Russia. This does not mean that Israel does not have influence over the Kremlin, it most definitely does, but that influence is all “stick”, no “carrot” (which is one of the conceptual flaws in the position of those who deny the existence of a Zionist 5th column in Russia – they are denying the existence of the “stick” while producing no “carrot” thus making Russian policies appear both contradictory and unexplainable: hence a need for all sorts of mental contortions to try to explain them).
But Israel’s “stick”, while undeniably big, is dwarfed by Iran’s “carrot”: not only immense resources and billions of Dollars/Rubles/Rials/Euros to be made in energy and weapons and also many sectors of the economy. There is also the fact that Iran is truly the number one regional power in the entire Middle-East: maybe not big enough to impose its will on all others, but definitely big enough to bring down any major plan or policy it does not approve of. Furthermore, now that the international sanctions against Iran have been officially lifted (the USA’s reneging on its signature notwithstanding), Iran can join and become an influential member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (along with, possibly, other Middle-Eastern countries). All this makes the Iranian “carrot” very attractive to Russia. There is also a conceptual Iranian “stick”: if Israel gets its way and Iran is massively and viciously attacked by the AngloZionist Empire, and either chaos or a severe crisis result, what would be the impact on Russia and her allies? And, while I don’t think for a second that this is possible, let’s say the Empire puts a pro-AngloZionist regime in power in Tehran and overthrows the Islamic Republic – what would that do to the Russian national security? It would be an absolute nightmare, wouldn’t it?
Look at the relationship between Russia and Turkey before the coup attempt against Erdogan. Surely that relationship was much worse than the relationship currently enjoyed between the Islamic Republic and Russia, right? And yet, when the US attempted to topple Erdogan, what did Russia do? Russia gave Erdogan her fullest support and even, according to some rumors, physical protection during a few key hours. If Russia sided with Erdogan against the Empire, why would Russia not side with the Islamic Republic, even if we consider only arguments of Russian self-interest?
For an excellent Iranian analysis of the Russia-Iran alliance, check out this article by Aram Mirzaei.
Conclusion
The simple truth is that regardless of declarations and political statements, China, Russia, Iran, Syria and Hezbollah are all dependent on each other and cannot afford to truly betray anybody lest the Empire take them out one by one. To use Franklin’s expression – they all must hang (i.e. stand) together or most assuredly they will all “hang separately”? That does not mean that they all love each other, or always share the same goals? They might also play against each other to some degree, and even try to get some sweet deal “on the side” with the AngloZionists (remember, Assad used to torture for the CIA!), but the facts on the ground and the correlation of forces in the Middle-East will limit the scope of such “mini-betrayals”, at least for the foreseeable future.
True, there is the Saudi factor to take into account. Unlike the Israelis, the Saudis are offering a lot of “carrot”. But the Saudis are way too arrogant, they are already messing with Russian interests not only in Syria, but also in Qatar, and their brand of Islam is truly a mortal danger for Russia. Right now the Atlantic Integrationists and Eurasian Sovereignists have achieved somewhat of an equilibrium in the Kramlin. The former is trying to split the EU from the USA and make lots of money, while the latter are left in charge of national security issues, especially towards the South, but this equilibrium is inherently unstable and would be immediately threatened by any meaningful AngloZionist attack. So yes, there is a Zionist Lobby in Russia and yes, it does act as a 5th column, but not, most emphatically no, it is not strong enough to completely disregard the financial interests of the Russian business elites or, even less so, fundamental Russian national security interests. That is the one of biggest difference between the USA and Russia: Russia, while only partially sovereign, is far from being an Israeli protectorate or colony. And as long as Russia retains her even partial sovereignty she will not “ditch” Iran, regardless of Israeli whining and threats.
My personal evaluation is that Putin is playing a very complex and potentially dangerous game. He is trying to trick not one, but many “devils”, all at the same time. Furthermore, if the US Americans have been недоговороспособны (“not agreement capable”) already since Obama, Trump and his Neocon masters have made that even worse. As for the Israelis, they would make Satan himself look honest and are ideologically incapable of honesty (or even decency). Frankly, I don’t trust Erdogan one bit and I don’t think that the Russians will ever trust him either. Call me naive, but I think that Assad has been changed by this war and even if he did, indeed, collaborate with the CIA in the past, I think that he will be a pretty good ally for Russia in the future. As for Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and Hassan Nasrallah, I see them both as men of honor who will uphold any alliance they formally enter into(informal understandings and temporary mutual interests are a different deal). I also see them as brilliant and wise geostrategists: they fully realize that Iran and Hezbollah *need* Russia to survive. So Putin’s policy, while dangerous, is not doomed to failure at all: he is trying to save Syria from the AngloZionsts while avoiding a regional war. Time is on his side as Trump’s erratic (and that is putting it mildly) policies (or, really, lack thereof) are inflicting tremendous damage on the Empire on a daily basis (see Dmitri Orlov’s excellent analysis here).
I honestly don’t know if Putin’s dangerous strategy will work or not. I don’t think anybody else does either (except ignorant cheerleaders, of course). But I do know that even if the sight of Bibi Netanyahu in Moscow with a Saint George ribbon was nauseating to my conscience, this absolutely does not indicate that Netanyahu and Putin are working together or that Russia is “ditching Iran”. As always, the Israelis feel almighty and brazenly display their arrogance. Let them. Just remember the inevitable outcome from that kind of Zionist hubris in the past and wait for the inevitable “oy vey!“.
Finally, there is the single most important fact: the AngloZionist Empire and Russia remain at war, and have been so for at least four years or more. That war is still about 80% informational, 15% economic and 5% kinetic, but it this is a very real war nonetheless, and it is escalating. As long as Russia will retain even partial sovereignty and as long as she will offer an alternative civilizational model, even an imperfect one, she will remain an existential threat to the Empire and the Empire will remain an existential threat for the entire Russian civilizational realm. While hugely important to Israel, the entire Iranian issue is just a sideshow to the transnational leaders of the Empire who see Russia and China as the real main competitors, especially when joined in a symbiotic relationship as they are today. Hence the crises in the Ukraine and on the Korean Peninsula, hence the constants warnings of a possible full-scale nuclear war (see Eric Zuesse latest article here or Paul Craig Roberts numerous article on his website; also check out Dan Glazebrook’s excellent analysis of Trump’s attempt to repeat the “Rambouillet ruse” in Korea here). Even if Putin succeeds in moving the EU closer to Russia and away from a (clearly insane) USA, and even if he succeeds in preventing the AngloZionists from directly attacking Iran, this will only further convince the AngloZionist leaders of the Empire that he, Putin, and Russia, are the ultimate evil which must be eliminated. Those who hope for some kind of modus vivendi between the Empire and Russia are kidding themselves, because the very nature of the Empiremakes this impossible. Besides, as Orlov correctly pointed it out – the Empire’s hegemony is collapsing, fast. The Empire’s propaganda machine denies and obfuscates this, and those who believe it don’t see it – but the leaders of the Empire all understand this, hence the escalation on all fronts we have seen since the Neocons re-took power in the White House. If the Neocons continue on their current course, and I don’t see any indication whatsoever that they are reconsidering it, then the question is only when/where this will lead to a full-scale war first. Your guess is as good as mine.
