Saturday, 6 April 2019


Image result for elliott abrams
(Photo Credit: Elliott Abrams, a Zionist katsa neo-con slug has been tasked with overthrowing the legitimate president of Venezuela. This “ojete chingado” was convicted of lying to Congress back in the days of the Iran-Contra scandal and should have had his career terminated but for the fact that he is the kind of rodent loved by Washington’s neo-con cabal of murdering Zionist sociopaths.
People are finally realizing that the situation in Venezuela is the same as that of Syria in 2011.  It is becoming increasingly clear that die-hard, entrenched Zionist neo-cons in Washington will not give up on their insane crusade to make the Zionist Apartheid State both unassailable and durable.  Maduro has taken our advice, evidently, and is studying the Syrian model closely.  The Russians, who are committed to Maduro’s survival, are also giving him advice based on the rich records they have of the war in Syria and their own involvement.  They have told him to stay put and control the streets.
In Syria, the so-called “peaceful” demonstrations were not enough to oust the sitting government in Damascus.   Dr. Assad stayed put.  The street demonstrations in both Der’ah and Homs transmogrified into a full-blown insurrection complete with Islamist fanatics, foreign mercenaries and, even direct assistance from NATO countries.  Some of you might remember the “Shpionshiffe” Merkel sent to the coastline of Turkey in order to monitor the movements of the SAA to help the terrorists to destabilize Syria.
I don’t believe the U.S. will follow that program for several reasons.  The first is that Gulf nations which had the ability to fund the arrival of tens of thousands of mercenaries to fight alongside the Syrian terrorists are no longer on speaking terms and are unlikely to try their hand again at regime change.  Both Saudi Arabia and Qatar are at odds with one another over terrorism support and relations with Iran.  The scenario in Venezuela is distant in both geography and politics.  If Elliott Abrams thinks he’s going to get a repeat of the disastrous intervention in Venezuela, he is in for a tough awakening.
Add to this the prospect of another insurrection against a sitting president when that president has the support of the Russian Federation.  Again, Abrams would be foolish not to consider again the disgraceful failure of the U.S. under Obama to effectuate a clean ouster of Dr. Assad.  It would be even more ignominious for the U.S. to fail in a country located well within the borders of the Monroe Doctrine, like Venezuela.
We must also remember that most Latin American countries are loath to invite the U.S. to invade a nation in South America.  Memories of the tragic death of Salvador Allende in Chile, with the blood-stained hands of the United States all too visible, remain a formidable disincentive for any Latin American president, even Bolsinaro, to contemplate accommodation with Washington.  Other incidents of Yanqui involvement include Cuba, Mexico and Nicaragua.  The U.S. simply cannot afford another debacle in its own backyard.  Supporting the CONTRAS was egregious enough in Nicaragua,  what with the surreptitious Iranian deal-making that brought the U.S. into international disrepute;  imagine the fallout if the U.S. were to engage the services of something like FARC to help topple President Maduro.  But, FARC is in the Maduro camp.  There is no Saudi Arabia or Qatar to finance the arrival of religious fanatics from the four corners of the world to help to unseat the legitimate president of Venezuela.  Elliott Abrams is looking into Nietsche’s darkest abyss.  And it’s staring back at him.
Maduro is clearly feeling better.  His Constituent Assembly has ordered Guaido’s immunity removed on the recommendation of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.  It is obvious the upstart Yanque stooge is going to be arrested finally for treason.  The U.S. has repeatedly warned Maduro that arresting Guaido would cross a red line.  Abrams has said it.  So has Bolton.  And so have Pence and Pompeo.  Yet, it appears the Americans have talked themselves, once again, into a corner.  With all sanctions imposed on Venezuela, what is there left for Washington to do?  Invasion?  Surgical strikes on infrastructure?  They did all that in Syria and where did that get them?  In Libya, the Americans nihilistically bombed the country into pure devastation, destroying the nation with the highest standard of living in all Africa.  Hillary Clinton, shrieked with joy after telling the world that Qaddafi was dead.  And now, the Yanquis, and their miserable frog and limey allies are trying to pick up the pieces of one of history’s most reprehensible acts of political gluttony.  The U.S. cannot afford another disaster like that.  Or can it?
Oh, Europe will be aghast at the arrest of Guaido.  The Europeans will pontificate and self-congratulate themselves for their own civility.  They will tsk-tsk at Mr. Maduro, who, just like Dr. Assad, will blow his nose at the mentally corrupt hypocrites, like Macron, May and Merkel, all of them, descendants of the European barbarians who colonized the world with their toxic philosophies of greed and rapine – the same doctrines which led to the infamous creation of that metastatic, cancerous tumor known to my readers as the Zionist Entity.
Maduro stands with the Palestinian people.  That should be reason enough for well-meaning countries to stand up and fight to keep him in power.
Note to readers:  Until the Russians sell the S-400 to Turkey and Turkey begins to receive and deploy the systems, little will happen in Syria.  There is simply a scarcity of news.  .

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 the Blog!

تحية للجيش الجزائري

أبريل 3, 2019

ناصر قنديل

– في خصوصية تصعب مقارنتها بحالات أخرى لبلاد عربية شهدت حراكاً تحت عنوان التغيير السياسي فشلت محاولات أخذها نحو الفوضى السياسية والأمنية لعب الجيش الجزائري دور صمام الأمان وضابط الإيقاع وبيضة القبان، دون أن يقوم بتولي السلطة مباشرة ودون أن يكون سنداً للسلطة بوجه الحراك الشعبي المنطلق من تعب وإنهاك التمديد والتجديد للرئيس عبد العزيز بوتفليقة لولاية خامسة وهو في حال صحية تصعب معها عليه ممارسة السلطة، ودون أن يستقيل من المسؤولية القيادية تاركاً لتوازن الشارع واللاعبين المستترين الداخليين والخارجيين التحكم بمسار الأحداث.

– نجح الجيش الجزائري بالتدخل وفقاً لمنطق الجرعات التنشيطية لفرض استجابة الرئيس بوتفليقة ومساعديه والفريق المساند لبقائه والمستفيد من هذا البقاء، لسقوف وطنية للحراك الشعبي، عنوانها حفظ المكانة الوطنية للرئيس بوتفليقة، وقطع الطريق على الحاشية الفاسدة والمستفيدة من استغلال التمديد والتجديد لولايته الرئاسية لفرض هيمنتها على المشهد الجزائري، كما نجح بربط الحراك الشعبي بعناوين مفتوحة على سلوك الطرق الدستورية للتغيير، رغم محاولات بعض المعارضة وقادتها دفع الحراك نحو شعارات عبثية من نوع الدعوة لرحيل النظام والرئيس بلا بدائل دستورية تلتزم الانتقال السلمي للسلطة، فقطع الطريق على الفوضى التي تبدأ سياسيّة وسرعان ما تتحوّل وتنتهي فوضى أمنيّة تفتح الباب لمشاريع التفتيت والتقسيم وحضور العصبيات وطغيانها على الحال الوطنية.

– رفض الجيش الوقوع في إغراء وضع اليد على السلطة، وما كان سيرتبه ذلك من جعله هدفاً مباشراً لمواجهة تحاول تحريك الشارع بوجهه، كما كان مرسوماً لو تبنى الدفاع الأعمى عن موقف المحيطين بالرئيس، فشكل ترفعه وتميّزه معاً ضماناً لبقائه معصوماً بنظر الشارع عن الخطيئة التي تبعده عن صفة الوطنية ومكانة الشرف التي يتبوأها في الوجدان العام للجزائريين، فمكّنه ذلك من حماية الوحدة الوطنية كواحدة من الثوابت، ومن تحصين فكرة الدولة ومؤسساتها الدستورية بوجه خطر الانحلال الذي يحضر بقوة في مثل هذه الحالات، ونجح بتشكيل عمود فقري لعمل أمني كبير حمى المتظاهرين وحفظ سلميّة الحراك، وسيطر على كل التحرّكات الجارية تحت الطاولة لفرض مشاريع أمنية تراهن على تعميم الفوضى.

– الجزائر كدولة عربية مفصلية بحجمها واقتصادها وتاريخها، تقع تحت عين الكثيرين من المتربّصين بثرواتها، وموقعها الاستراتيجي، وقد وفّر الفساد وتكلّس النظام السياسي فيها فرصة ذهبية لمخططات هؤلاء المتربصين، سواء في الداخل أو من الخارج، وقد ساهم دور الجيش الجزائري مع خبرة الفئات الشعبية والنخب التي وقفت في قلب الحراك من موقع وطني وفي لتاريخ الجزائر وموقعها بوجه المشاريع الأجنبية، ووفي لتاريخ تضحيات الجزائر بوجه مشاريع الحرب الأهلية، في تفادي تكرار مشاهد شهدتها البلدان التي عرفت النماذج السوداء للربيع العربي، قدمت تأكيداً إضافياً على الدور المحوري للجيوش الوطنية في حماية المسارات الدستورية، وحفظ الثوابت الوطنية، وصيانة الوحدة الوطنية وفرض حتمية سلوك طريق التحوّلات السلمية على الحياة السياسية.

– في ثلاث مراحل تاريخية لعبت الجزائر دور النموذج، فكانت الجزائر التي قدّمت المدرسة المثالية المتقدّمة لمناهضة الاستعمار، وكانت الجزائر أول مَن أحبط في التسعينيات مشاريع الفوضى الأهلية قبل نماذج الربيع العربي الجديدة، وها هي اليوم الجزائر تتقدّم مسار الانتقال السلمي والدستوري في ظل حراك شعبي مليوني لثورة بيضاء يحميها الجيش ويمنع الاستيلاء عليها وتوظيفها في مشاريع داخلية وخارجية مشبوهة، ويفرض كضابط إيقاع وبيضة قبان سقفاً يُبقي للسياسة والتغيير مرادفاً هو المصلحة الوطنية العليا.

Related Videos
Related Articles

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 the Blog!

Friday, 5 April 2019

The Brink-a film review by Eve Mykytyn

April 04, 2019  /  Gilad Atzmon
Introduction by GA: Steve Bannon is probably the most unpopular character as far as progressives and liberals are concerned. People who like to see themselves at the Left side of the political spectrum  regard Bannon as a vile hateful character as well as a rabid antisemite. Yet, symptomatically or even tragically, those who detest Bannon shy away from tackling his populist mantra. This is rather concerning considering the fact that Bannon has proven to be a shrewd political tactician and even a kingmaker. It is probably Bannon who carries the prime responsibility for Trump’s successful presidential campaign. Those who are fearful of Bannon revert to name-calling: they slalom in between his ideas with the hope that no one notices. They do their best to avoid anything that may evoke thinking or resemble reasoning.  It is not a secret that those who currently claim to advocate social justice are apparently too fearful to engage with substance but they fail to do so in the name of social justice.  
 In the following film review Eve Myktyn tells us about Alison Klayman’s The Brink.  Mykytyn went to the film hoping to learn more about Bannon but it seems she left the cinema knowing more about Klayman’s phobia of the man. If those who call themselves progressives want to sustain relevance, sooner or later they will have to engage in a proper intellectual exchange as name calling, misquoting and crude editing tactics do not do justice to social justice. 
A film review by Eve Mykytyn
Steve Bannon may well be, as he is often called,  the ‘architect of evil.’  But Alison Klayman’s mystifying documentary, The Brink, which sets out to “[use] Bannon’s own words and behaviors to reveal his hypocrisy and expose the danger he poses to liberal democracy”  fails to show Bannon as hypocritical or dangerous.
The film’s opens begins with Bannon talking about a journey he made to World War II’s concentration camps. He notes that the Birkenau concentration camp was built using the finest of German engineering and wonders how ordinary Germans could get together and plan such a site. Perhaps Klayman felt that she couldn’t cut this otherwise disconnected scene because it showed Bannon to be an anti Semite, although he was simply musing about how a concentration camp came to be built. Is any question about any aspect of the Holocaust verboten? Apparently so, The Forward  interprets Bannon’s remarks as: “rhapsodiz[ing] about the precise engineering of one of the most evil thing humans have ever created, the Birkenau extermination camp.”
Instead, of engaging with Bannon’s avowedly nationalist politics, much of the film is devoted to a fly-on-the-wall view of Bannon’s daily routine. Bannon eats and drinks (a combination of  Red Bull and a disgusting mess of green ‘diet’ juice), speaks at rallies, poses for photos, meets with nationalist leaders in Europe, touts his propaganda movie, and texts and talks endlessly on the phone: so much film time is devoted to the quotidian aspects of Bannon’s life that the shrewd and divisive political operative is reduced to boring.
Klayman attempts to score a point by asking Bannon where he is, so that she can report that he is on an airfield for private planes. Is Bannon’s not particularly luxurious private plane, filled with his allies and journalists really relevant to the larger debate?
The film follows Bannon to Toronto where he appears for a formal debate with David From on the proposition that the “future of western politics is populist, not liberal.”  This is finally the real debate. Is it ‘country first’ or do we have a responsibility to all without regard to borders? The debate can be found here (the first 10 minutes of chatter can be skipped): the exchange between two articulate men whose views are antithetical to each other is well worth the time. Tellingly, The Brink does not show the debate, instead we see the effects that Bannon’s presence evokes. The protests outside the debate are portrayed as huge and scary, inside Bannon gently confronts hecklers, whose poor behavior he comically attributes to an ‘ex-wife.’  That’s it. The Brink apparently feels no need to counter Bannon’s views or even better, simply show From’s effective dissent.

When the film does allow Bannon to articulate his thesis, it is in a brief scene in which Bannon is speaking to a rally. In it, Bannon states that the benefits of citizenship should be distributed only to citizens, without regard to race, religion or sexual preference.  This is the core of the populist nationalist movement that helped elect Donald Trump and has scored victories in Britain, France, Belgium and Sweden.  Bannon’s current project is to knit together like-minded counter globalists from Europe and the United States.
The Brink’s opposition to nationalist populism is left to Guardian reporter Paul Lewis who accuses Bannon of using “anti-Semitic tropes,” then interrupts Bannon’s denial. Bannon insists that there’s nothing nefarious about using the term “globalist” or criticizing George Soros for the NGOs he funds. Vogue claims Bannon uses the term globalist “with a wink and a nod…as a stand-in for Jews.”  Bannon’s movement isopposed to globalism. Is there a non anti Semitic way to oppose globalism?
Just  in case anyone failed to understand the intended message, the film ends with a stirring homage to the current crop of new representatives with the background picture of Washington, DC lit in rainbow hues. Apparently, a diverse group of new congressmen and women is a refutation of Bannon and what he stands for, too bad that The Brink fails to explain why that may be so.
My battle for truth and freedom involves some expensive legal services. I hope that you will consider committing to a monthly donation in whatever amount you can give. Regular contributions will enable me to avoid being pushed against a wall and to stay on top of the endless harassment by Zionist operators attempting to silence me.

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 the Blog!

The corporate press is correct that Tarrant and Breivik follow the practices of the anti-Islam xenophobic movement on the rise in Europe, North America and now Oceania, but the key element they deliberately avoid mentioning is their strong collective affinity for the state of Israel.

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 the Blog!

The IN-US Plot Against The RF-PK Partnership Got Facebook To Ban Pakistani Pages

By Andrew Korybko
Facebook’s decision to ban 103 Pakistani pages earlier this week might have been done in order to comply with India’s new domestic legislation prohibiting “unlawful” content on social media such as the “inconvenient” information that would have presumably been shared on those pages debunking the country’s Bollywood-like lies about the latest conflict and raising awareness about India’s state-sponsored terrorism in Kashmir, but the move also suggests a broader American-influenced infowar motivation to advance the bizarre theory recently  put forth by an Indian academic alleging that Russia and Pakistan are now brothers-in-arms waging Hybrid Wars across the world.
Business & Politics
All of Pakistan and the world at large is wondering what really led to Facebook’s unexpected decision to ban 103 Pakistani pages earlier this week for what the company alleged was so-called “coordinated inauthentic behavior”, with it initially appearing likely that this was done in order to suppress the information networks most critical of Indian Prime Minister Modi on their platform ahead of the onset of that country’s general elections next week. That very likely played a part in the timing behind Facebook’s decision, which wouldn’t be surprising because the tech company has a vested interest in supporting the incumbent leader in its largest market, or at least wouldn’t want to get on his bad side and therefore felt compelled to do his government a “favor” upon possible request.
It therefore might not even be that Facebook “deviously” decided to play a partisan role in this process but that it didn’t believe it had a choice if it wanted to continue expanding its presence in the country, though it obviously needed to concoct a so-called “probable cause” in order to do so, ergo the unverified claims about “coordinated inauthentic behavior”. Even so, it’s a murky business speculating about backdoor deals between Facebook and various governments, which is why it’s pertinent to raise awareness about the “legal” basis upon which India could have very likely made their request to get some of the platform’s most popular Pakistani pages taken down, and that’s the country’s recent promulgation of a controversial piece of legislation prohibiting “unlawful” content on social media.
Censoring Social Media
Reuters specifically mentioned in its report about this back in January that it includes any material that affects the “sovereignty and integrity of India”, which is vague catch-all designation that could have easily been applied to the material that those banned Pakistani pages presumably shared debunking India’s Bollywood-like lies about the latest conflict and raising awareness about its state-sponsored terrorism in Kashmir. Even something as simple as sharing the Pakistani map that includes the territory of Gilgit-Baltistan as part of Pakistan and not India like New Delhi claims it is per its maximalist approach to the Kashmir conflict could have been enough to violate that law, like I wrote at the time in my piece about how “Social Media Might Ban The Pakistani Map At India’s Behest”.
Considering that Facebook has self-interested reasons in staying on the good side of the authorities in its largest market, there’s a certain logic to why it might have banned those 103 Pakistani pages if India claimed that they broke its domestic law and might have been engaged in “coordinated inauthentic behavior” as part of an alleged perception management operation conducted by its neighbor. That would certainly be enough of a “plausible” reason for Facebook to take action against those pages and give it a “legitimate” excuse to hide behind in protecting its future profits in that market by doing New Delhi’s bidding. It’s likely that this was the case, but a further analysis needs to be conducted about the way in which most of the Mainstream Media reported on this decision.
The “Gerasimov Of South Asia”
Reuters, which usually sets the tone that most other Mainstream Media outlets follow, reported in its original piece breaking this news that Pakistan’s Inter-Service Public Relations (ISPR), the media wing of the Pakistan Armed Forces, was somehow or another supposedly connected to the 103 banned pages. They also curiously included a sentence asserting that “The military’s spokesman has often mentioned the term ‘fifth generation warfare’ during press conferences, referring to an unconventional battlefield that includes the dissemination and countering of information on social media”. This was clearly a dog whistle of innuendo implying that the ISPR was waging “fifth generation warfare” on Facebook through those pages, which in turn triggered Indian media to run with that narrative and call ISPR spokesman Asif Ghafoor the “Gerasimov of South Asia”.
That’s not incidental either, since Ghafoor and Russian General Chief of Staff are both being deliberately misportrayed as practitioners of “fifth generation warfare” despite both of them merely warning about the said tactics that their adversaries are using against them and never saying anything about their own country’s capabilities in this field or intention to “fight fire with fire” like has been falsely alleged. In fact, the false comparisons might go even further because there’s a high likelihood that Pakistan’s ISPR will be compared to Russia’s “Internet Research Agency” (IRA) as India copies a page out of the US’ infowar playbook to pin the blame for “fifth generation warfare” on its hated enemy just like America did with Russia in order to distract from its own employment of these technologies.
The Indo-American Plot Against The Russian-Pakistani Partnership
My professional prediction as a Hybrid War expert (officially recognized as such by the NATO Defense College in two papers that they published citing my 2015 bookon the topic) isn’t without precedent, however, since I wrote an analysis earlier this week about how “A Leading Indian Academic Just Alleged A Far-Fetched Russian-Pakistani Plot” strangely suggesting that the two countries are brothers-in-arms waging Hybrid Wars across the world. In hindsight, that weaponized narrative actually appears to have inspired the aforementioned piece about Ghafoor being the “Gerasimov of South Asia” and therefore laid the basis for the first-ever joint Indo-American infowar against the Russian-Pakistani Strategic Partnership out of fear that the Great Power convergence of the Afro-Eurasian “balancer” and the global pivot state is a game-changing development that’s bound to geostrategically reshape the Eastern Hemisphere.
Pakistan, and not the Indian “rogue state”, is the focal point of Russia’s “Return to South Asia” because of the “balancing” benefits that Moscow expects to derive from Islamabad vis-à-vis Beijing and New Delhi, albeit for different reasons but in pursuit of the same end of stabilizing hemispheric affairs. While this is welcomed by China, it’s regarded by India and its new American patron as a threat to their grand strategic interests, which is why they’re doing everything that they can to thwart it through their combined infowar means of manufacturing fake news about a supposed Russian-Pakistani global Hybrid War plot against them both. Due to New Delhi, “Russia’s ‘Deep State’ Divisions Over South Asia Are Spilling Over Into The Public”, but it’s also clumsily making many mistakes such as when “India’s Ambassador To Russia Lied About Rejecting International Mediation”.
Concluding Thoughts
Reflecting on the insight that was revealed in this analysis, the case can strongly be made that Facebook banned 103 Pakistani pages based on fabricated claims by India alleging that the targets were engaged in “coordinated inauthentic behavior” as part of a “fifth generation warfare plot” and possibly in violation of the country’s recently passed legislation banning “unlawful” content such as what could have been presumed to have been shared on those pages about the latest conflict and Kashmir. Facebook, not wanting to jeopardize its growing presence in its largest market anywhere in the world, promptly complied with the request, which then created a news event that was subsequently spun by the Mainstream Media to propagate the US-influenced weaponized narrative about a Russian-Pakistani global Hybrid War conspiracy.
The US and India have clearly joined forces in a plot to thwart the Russian-Pakistani Strategic Partnership, afraid as they are about the game-changing implications that the increasingly close cooperation between the Afro-Eurasian “balancer” and the global pivot state is poised to have on the outcome of the New Cold War. The most visible manifestation of this is the coordinated infowar being waged by these two unipolar allies against their multipolar targets, which largely relies on the dramatic buzzwords of Hybrid War and “fifth generation warfare” as unmistakable dog whistles to signal to their surrogates to add on to this storyline with each subsequent article until an entirely artificial reality is constructed in the Mainstream Media which serves the purpose of justifying the US & India’s further preplanned joint measures against Russia & Pakistan.

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 the Blog!

President Assad to Arreaza: Venezuela Crisis Similar to What Happened in Syria

The Syrian President Bashar al-Assad on Thursday received Venezuelan Foreign Minister Jorge Arreaza and the accompanying delegation.
President al-Assad was briefed on the latest developments taking place in Venezuela by Minister Arreaza, as he expressed confidence that Venezuela will overcome the crisis that it is currently facing and restore the state of stability soon enough.
President al-Assad pointed out that the policies adopted by some western states, on top of which, the USA towards what is going on in Venezuela in terms of their blatant interference in the Latin state’s affairs and their imposing economic siege and sanctions on it have become an approach they adopt with all states that do not agree with their policies.
The President said that what is going on in Venezuela is similar to what happened in Syria and that aims at imposing hegemony on states and controlling their independent decision, which undermines the international law and contradicts the most important principles of the UN Charter i.e. the respect of states’ sovereignty and right of self-determination.
For his part, Arreaza thanked President al-Assad for his supportive stance to Venezuela with regards to overcoming its current crisis and stressed that the tools and steps used by the states, which are enemies of Venezuela, are similar to those used in Syria for igniting war in it, adding that what has happened to his country is an episode of a series of the US continuous attempts for decades to control the Venezuela’s independent decision and the Venezuelan people’s resources.
Source: SANA
Related Videos
Related News

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 the Blog!

اسطنبول وأنقرة تهزمان «العثمانية» الجديدة

أبريل 3, 2019

د. وفيق إبراهيم
الطموحات العثمانية الاخوانية للرئيس التركي رجب طيب اردوغان في مرحلة اهتزاز عميق، لم يسقط بضربة انتخابية قاضية حتى الآن، لكنه تلقى لكمة لها طابع مستقبلي أصابت جانبي وجهه: العثماني والاخواني الإسلاموي.

فالقراءة الدقيقة لنتائج الانتخابات البلدية في تركيا تكشف بوضوح عن صراع متفاقم بين تيارين كبيرين: الأول قومي تاريخي ديني والثاني يجسد تركيا «الأوروبية» المتأثرة بالاقتصاد والتقسيم الطبقي.

ما هو واضح ولا يمكن نكرانه هو أن حزب العدالة والتنمية الذي يترأسه اردوغان حاز على 51 في المئة من أصوات المقترعين متحالفاً مع حزب الحركة القومية بما مجموعه 9,23 مليون صوت.

فيما نال منافسه الحزب الجمهوري المتحالف مع حزب «الجيد» 4,17 مليون صوت مقابل 10,82 ملايين لأحزاب اخرى.

ما تجب قراءته في هذه النتائج ليس التفوق الواضح في الأصوات فقط، فمن الضروري ربطها بمكانة حزب العدالة والتنمية الذي يحكم تركيا منذ 15 عاماً متواصلاً مسيطراً على 95 في المئة من وسائل الإعلام المتنوّع وقوة الجيش التركي مليون جندي والأمن الداخلي والمخابرات، والإدارات، بالإضافة الى 300 ألف معتقل زجّ بهم اردوغان في السجون بذريعة تأييدهم «للداعية» فتح الله غولن الموجود حالياً في الولايات المتحدة الأميركية، ويتندر الأتراك في هذا الصدد أن اردوغان اعتقل كل المواطنين باستثناء زوجته «أمينة».

لقد بدا واضحاً أن اردوغان صاحب مشروع تاريخي عثماني وقومي تركي واخواني إسلامي باعتبار ان حزبه العدالة والتنمية ينتمي الى فدرالية «الاخوان» في العالمين العربي والإسلامي ويديرها سورية، العراق، مصر، تونس، اليمن، ليبيا، السودان، الجزائر… هذا ما دفعه الى التحالف مع حزب الحركة القومية الذي يجب ان يتناقض «ايديولوجيا» مع الاممية الإسلامية الاخوانية بما يكشف الاصرار الاردوغاني على أممية إسلامية بزعامة عثمانية حصرية يقودها سلطان البر والخافقين الرجب الاردوغاني.

لذلك كان من الطبيعي أن يولي الرئيس التركي الجانب المؤدي الى تظهير عثمانية في التحشيد الداخلي التاريخي والتحرك السياسي والعسكري والديني في المدى العربي والإسلامي المجاور.

فتجسّد هذا الجانب في أدوار تركيا في سورية والعراق لأنهما البلدان المجاوران مباشرة مستعملاً فيهما التحريض الطائفي سنة وشيعة ومسيحيين وعلويين ودعم تنظيمات الإرهاب والاخوان، والاحتلال العسكري المباشر لقسم من أراضيهما.

أما في مصر فحاول بواسطة الاخوان فيها السيطرة على الدولة، وكذلك في اليمن الإصلاح وليبيا وتونس والسودان، اجتاحت تركيا عسكرياً بعض انحاء البلدان المتاخمة لها وبواسطة الاخوان مجمل الدول الأخرى وصولاً الى الصومال وتشاد ونيجيريا.

إن تناقض المشروع الاردوغاني مع المشروع الأميركي الأوروبي الإسرائيلي استولد له عداء خليجياً وحذراً سياسياً واقتصادياً حال دون انتسابها للاتحاد الأوروبي وصولاً الى فرض عقوبات اميركية استهدفت بعض قطاعاتها.

يتبين ان المشروع القومي المختبئ خلف أبعاد دينية وعثمانية تسبب لتركيا تقلصاً في المديين الأوروبي والأميركي الى جانب كثير من الإنفاق التركي على تمويل حركات الاخوان المسلمين والتحركات العسكرية في العالم العربي الإسلامي. وهذا استتبع ضموراً في الواردات انسحب على حركة الإنفاق في الداخل التركي فأصيبت كل الطبقات التركية بتراجع.

واذا كانت الفئات الريفية المنتمية الى أسفل السُلم الطبقي والعمال في المدن تستجيب كحالها في معظم دول العالم للتحشيد الوطني والقومي والديني وتتحمل المصاعب الاقتصادية، فإن الطبقة الوسطى التركية المشابهة لمثيلاتها الأوروبية تمتاز بقدرتها على تجاوز أساليب التحشيد العثماني والقراءة المتعمقة للتراجع الاقتصادي. هذا بالإضافة الى تقليدها للنموذج الأوروبي على المستوى الحياتي الاجتماعي، وبالتالي السياسي وهذا جلي في الفوارق السياسية والايديولوجية بين حزبي العدالة والتنمية والحركة القومية المتحالفين على أساس الجمع بين التاريخ العثماني والقومية التركية، مقابل حزبي الجمهوري والجيد العاكسين لتركيا من الستينيات حتى مطلع القرن الحادي والعشرين أي الدافعين نحو نظام جمهوري مدني قاعدة الانقسام فيه هي الطبقات الاجتماعية وليس المشروع الديني القومي.

ألا تعكس هذه القراءة نتائج الانتخابات الأخيرة في تركيا؟

وإلا كيف يُمكن تفسير نجاح الحزبين الجمهوري والجيد في مدينتي اسطنبول والعاصمة انقرة، حيث الغلبة فيهما للطبقة الوسطى مقابل استئثار حزب العدالة الاخواني في الأرياف والبلدات الصغيرة، التي يقيم فيها قرويو تركيا وريفيوها؟

هناك نقطة إضافية تتعلق بالفارق بالإمكانات المادية والرسمية بين حزب اردوغان الذي يسيطر على كل مصادر التحشيد في الدولة والأمن والإعلام فيما لا تمتلك القوى الحزبية المنافسة أي إمكانات تأثير رسمية او حتى خاصة وإعلامية.

يتبين بالنتيجة ان خسارة اردوغان للمدن، اكثر من رسالة رفض لمشروعه العثماني الاخواني وإشعار مسبق بانتصار المستقبل التركي على التاريخ العثماني البائد.

فهل يذهب اردوغان نحو التخفيف من حركته الخارجية والتركيز على الداخل التركي؟

يبدو أنه تأخّر ومن المعتقد أن أي استدارة جديدة لن تكسبه المدن التي كشفته بعد عقد ونصف من حكمه وقد تطرده من الأرياف التي أصبحت معتادة على التحشيد، أما لجهة الاخوان المسلمين فهؤلاء ذاهبون نحو عودة سريعة الى عالم الظلام والاختباء في دهاليز التاريخ.

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 the Blog!