Erdogan’s Long-Coming Reality Check:

February 14, 2020

by Ghassan Kadi for The Saker Blog

It is hard to say if Erdogan is running out of choices, friends, time, or all of the above; and his stands on various issues and the contradictions he ploughs through are making his situation increasingly untenable.

For the benefit of readers who haven’t heard this before; Erdogan is juggling being a Turkish Muslim reformer who parades under the photos of Turkish secular anti-Muslim nation-builder Mustafa Kemal; an EU-aspiring member and also an aspiring global Sunni leader; an ally of Israel as well as Hamas; an Islamist who is also at odds with the Wahhabi Islamists; a nationalist Turk who wants to curb Kurdish aspirations not only in Syria and Iraq but also in Turkey; a Sunni leader who wants to restore the Sultanate and Caliphate and the fundamentalist Sunni version of anti-Shiite Islam but is also a friend of Shiite Iran; a NATO member with a special relationship with America, and a special friend and ally of Russia.

Ironically, despite all the contradictions and conflicts of interest, he has thus far managed to get away with wearing not only all those hats, but also turbans and fezzes in between. Clearly however, this maneuvering cannot last forever and, sooner or later, he is going to end up painted into a tight corner. I certainly would like to believe that he is already in this space.

Erdogan however believes that he has a mandate from God. Following his November 2015 election win, in an article titled “Erdogan the Trojan Horse of Terror” (https://thesaker.is/erdogan-the-trojan-horse-of-terror/), I wrote: “With this win, Erdogan felt invincible. For an Islamist, and this is what Erdogan is, feeling invincible takes on a whole new meaning.

This is a simplistic translation of a Quranic verse: “If God is by your side, no one can defeat you” (Quran 3:160).

Erdogan believes he is invincible because he believes that he is on a mission and that God is by his side. If he had any reason to doubt this divine role he believes he has, the November election results put that doubt to rest.”

Ironically, Erdogan is able to comprehend the contradictions of others. Whilst America for example does not give two hoots about the Syrian Kurds and is only using some vulnerable leaders to dig a wedge between the Syrian Government and the Syrian Kurdish population, Erdogan has most vehemently stated to both the Obama and Trump administrations that America cannot be an ally of Turkey and the Kurds at the same time.

Yet, this same Erdogan justifies for himself the supplying of Idlib terrorists with state-of-the-art weaponry to attack not only Syrian Army units with, but also the Russian Hmeimim Air Base. The Russians have thus far thwarted countless attempted drone attacks on the base, and if Turkey did not directly supply the weapons, it definitely facilitated their transport.

Remember that the Idlib area that is controlled by Tahrir al-Sham (formerly known as Al-Nusra) lies between the Syrian-Army controlled area and the Turkish border. It has an open highway to Turkey where all arms and fighters move freely from Turkey into Syria.

And even though Erdogan has signed an agreement with Russia to end the terrorist presence in Idlib, according to veteran Palestinian journalist Abdul Bari Atwan, he does not want to understand why Russia is fed up with him and his antics and why President Putin is refusing to meet with him. In his article written in Raialyoum https://www.raialyoum.com/index.php/لماذا-يرفض-بوتين-لقاء-قمة-مع-اردوغان-لح/, Atwan argues that the Russians refuse Erdogan’s call for a new disengagement negotiation meeting and that Turkey must adhere to the existing Sochi agreement; which it has broken on several occasions by Erdogan.

Atwan adds that:

Firstly: “the Turkish gamble and reliance on Syrian opposition and the Free Syria Army in particular have failed because those forces abandoned their positions and the Syrian Army entered the towns of Khan Sheikhoun and Maarra Al-Numan unopposed without suffering a single casualty

Secondly: The 12 Turkish surveillance posts that were established in the Idlib district have turned into a liability because seven of them are under siege by the Syrian Army with a hundred Turkish soldiers trapped in each and can easily be destroyed by the Syrian Army in case Turkey launches a major offensive against Syria.

Thirdly: Russian support to the Syrian Army has reached an unprecedented level after the Russians shot down two drones launched by Tahrir Al-Sham yesterday” (ie the 10^th of February 2020).

In addition, according to Atwan, “Erdogan missed a golden opportunity when he refused the (recent) Iranian initiative proposed to him by Iranian FM, Zarif, to find a political resolution for the impasse with Syria, and this was perhaps the last opportunity to reach a diplomatic resolution before a direct open confrontation with Syria”

In a Financial Times article titled “Testing Times for Erdogan and Putin” https://www.ft.com/content/cbe31640-4726-11ea-aeb3-955839e06441, the author is a tad short of saying that the relationship between Erdogan and Putin is irreconcilable. According to him, “If Turkey’s president Recep Tayyip Erdogan was looking for a way to convey his anger at Russia over the death of eight of his country’s troops in Syria, a visit to Ukraine provided the perfect opportunity.

At a guard of honour at the presidential palace in Kyiv on Monday, Mr Erdogan shouted “Glory to Ukraine”, a nationalist slogan deeply associated with anti-Russia sentiment and the country’s fight for independence after the collapse of the Soviet Union.

His carefully chosen words — to an army battling Russia-backed separatists in eastern Ukraine — were a clear rebuke to President Vladimir Putin”.

In all of this, what Erdogan needs more than anything, is a long-coming reality check, and it seems more forthcoming than ever.

He may believe that he is a president for life who deserves the purportedly one thousand room palace he built for himself. He may hope to rebuild the Ottoman Empire and resurrect the Caliphate. He may imagine that, having been able to build up the Turkish economy to a level that has earnt a position in the G20, he has become the leader of a super power; but he has not. Turkey is at best a regional power, but it is only powerful if it has more powerful friends and allies to back it up. For as long as Turkey has to literally beg the Russians and/or the Americans to buy state-of-the-art weapons to defend itself with, then it is not in a position that allows it to stand on its own feet; not in the manner that Erdogan wishes it to stand. He should take heed and look at history. Mehmet Al-Fatih built his own guns to breakdown the defence walls of Constantinople. Even though the engineer who built them was from the Balkans, but they were Mehmet’s guns and they were the biggest in the world at the time.

I am not advocating that Erdogan should build his own nuclear arsenal, fighter jets and defence and attack missiles. In the ideal world, no one should. But to add to his list of contradictions, if Erdogan wants to wear the Turban of the Sultan, huff and puff at Russia, he cannot be riding Don Quixote’s donkey at the same time.

And if he thinks that he can now make a U-turn and be the loyal NATO leader and dump Russia, he will find himself again facing the same impasse he had with the Americans over the Kurdish issue. Furthermore, what will this do to his trade deals with Russia and his gas supplies?

And if Erdogan also thinks that America would come forward to save him in Idlib, one would have to remember that the illegal American presence in North East Syria is hundreds of kilometres away from Idlib and separated by the Russian-backed Syrian Army. Why would America, even Trump’s America, risk a confrontation with Russia to save his hide?

Erdogan has thus far evaded Karma because he has been hedging his bets in all directions, working up his enemies and allies against each other. But unless one is powerful enough to stand on his own feet when he needs to, then such a strategy in the long run can only leave one with no friends, a long list of enemies and a hoard of untrusting onlookers.

Above all, what do Turkish people want from the Turkish presence in Syria? Turkey hasn’t been at war for a whole century. The leader that once promised “zero problems” with neighbours is digging in his heels and seems determined to engage in an all-out war with Syria. The average Turkish citizen may ask why and to what end?

Erdogan has hopefully finally wedged himself into a corner that he cannot weasel his way out of without losing face. He will either have to bolster his military presence in Syria and fight the Syrian Army and Russia, or back off. If he takes the former option, he will not find any international supporters, and possibly the support of his own people will become questionable. But if the psychopathic, megalomaniac feels that he has to retreat, he will be scrambling for a face-saving exit, and the options are running out.

Russia was prepared to put the deliberate Turkish downing of the Su-24 in November 2015 behind and move forward. A lifeline was given to Erdogan back then, based on the promises he made and the later agreements he signed. But time proved that he was only looking for buying time, and that window with Russia is up.

Body bags have already been sent to Turkey and there are unconfirmed figures of how many Turkish soldiers have been killed defending Al-Nusra fighters. What is pertinent here is that, in the event of an all-out war with Syria, Syrians will be fighting an existential battle, aided by Russia and regional allies. Turkey however, will be fighting a different type of existential battle; one for Erdogan, not for Turkey itself.

Turkey has no reason for having a military presence and fight in Syria. It is only Erdogan’s ego and dreams that do.

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 Syrian Russian Turksih Idlib Stand-Of – Erdogan’s Last Stand?

February 06, 2020

by Ghassan Kadi for The Saker Blog

Even though the Syrian Army, with the aid of its international friends and allies, especially Russia, has been able to score many victories and liberate most of Syria’s major cities from the control of terrorist groups, the fight is far from over.

Before the situation in the American-controlled North-East is addressed, the Western regions, including Idlib and its surrounds must be put back fully under the legitimate government control.

As a matter of fact, politically speaking, the situation now is perhaps more complex to deal with than nine years ago when the “War on Syria” took form. Almost exactly nine years ago, the enemies of Syria combined efforts to launch a joint attack. United only by their hatred for Syria, they had diverse agendas, but they combined efforts in order to capitalize on each other’s strengths. The Wahhabi version of Islamists, headed by Saudi Arabia, joined hands with the Muslim Brotherhood version headed by Turkey and financed by Qatar, and they all joined hands with NATO, Israel and Lebanese ultra-right militia among other vendetta groups, for the single purpose of deposing President Assad and replacing the legitimate secular Syrian Government with one that is sectarian and pliable to the will of the Western roadmap.

They failed.

They failed in achieving their combined objectives and some of the armies they created, such as Jaysh Al-Islam, headed by former Syrian Army officer Zahran Alloush, ceased to exist. Alloush was killed in a Syrian Army attack in December 2015, but the casualties also included conspirators who were sidelined and lost their careers; the most prominent of which is Prince Bandar Bin Sultan, who was perhaps the single biggest architect of the attack on Syria.

The tides began to turn in favour of Syria after the Syrian Army scored its huge victory in the Battle of Qusayr in mid-2013. This was a decisive battle that basically disabled the terrorists from linking the Damascus province with their northern supply lines. Without this victory, in retrospect, it would be arguable if Syria would have been able to earn much support from Russia; if any at all. Syria had to show a fighting spirit, resolve, determination and respect for her to reach such an echelon. After all, Russia does not only by tradition honour and respect those who stand up with dignity against all odds, but on the geopolitical scene, and after decades of being sidelined by the Western bloc, any Russian global move had to be fully and thoroughly assessed before any venture was to be undertaken.

It was crucial for Russia therefore, and for President Putin in particular, to ensure that the presence of Russian troops in Syria had very high chances of success.

The fragmentation of Syria’s enemies began to take form before Russian action in the skies and on the soil of Syria. The Saudi’s first and biggest disappointment was when the USA refused to level Damascus to the ground after Prince Bandar orchestrated the alleged Ghouta chemical attack in September 2013. That was Bandar’s last draw after the loss of Al-Qusayr and his attempts to blackmail Putin by threatening him to unleash Islamists in Chechnya.

From that point in time onwards, the Saudi role in the “War on Syria” dwindled and came to an end with the demise of Alloush. But as the tensions between Qatar and Saudi Arabia emerged in 2017, Qatar remained “represented” via its ally Turkey.

Erdogan was initially determined to victoriously pray at the Omayyad Mosque in Damascus early in the piece. But he is still determined to get a bite of the cherry, a consolation prize, despite all the setbacks that his former camp has endured.

After Turkey downed the Russian Su-24 in November 2015, the relationship between Turkey and Russia reached its nadir. But the pragmatist Erdogan soon apologized to Putin and eventually reached an agreement about how to deal with the deadlock situation in Idlib.

But Erdogan is not coming clean about his commitment to what became to be known as the Sochi Agreement. https://thedefensepost.com/2019/10/22/russia-turkey-syria-mou/.

Erdogan defiantly continues to wear the hat of a fully-fledged NATO member, a close friend and ally of Russia, the leader of the nation that is desirous to enter the EU, an Islamist who wants to rebuild the Ottoman Empire, and a nationalist who is willing and able to deal with Kurdish issue. What he does not see is that whilst those antics gain him popularity amongst sympathetic Muslim supporters, on the international scene, he is increasingly making a mockery out of himself.

His clear-to-see contradictions seem mind-boggling, but to the pragmatic Erdogan who is trying as hard as he can to be Sultan, his mind is fixated on Islamism and nationalism, and he is performing as if he has found himself a Fatwa that permits him to dance to the tunes of the devil to reach his ultimate objectives.

Among other things, to Putin, Erdogan portrays himself as Russia’s friend who is reconsidering his alliance with the US and even wants to buy Russian S-400 defence missile systems. To America, he remains as a NATO member and an American ally who wants to buy America’s latest state-of the-art F-35 fighter jets. On one hand, he makes verbal attacks against Israel, but continues to opt to have strong diplomatic ties with that state. He pledges support for the Palestinian cause but offers no evidence to put his words into action.

If Erdogan truly deserves any recognition and respect at all, it would have to be for his ability to meander his way through and survive amongst all the contradictions that he has deliberately and systemically implanted along his path.

He could be running out of options; at least in Syria, but this doesn’t stop him from making yet more contradictory statements within a few days of each other. By the end of January 2020 he threatened to take a new offensive in Syria over the Russian-backed Syrian Army offensive in Idlib. https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/202001311078189883-erdogan-threatens-new-offensive-in-syria—report/ A few days later, he made a U-turn and declared that he will not allow the situation in Idlib to sour his relationship with Russia. https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/202002041078225599-turkey-will-not-escalate-tensions-with-russia-over-syrias-idlib—erdogan/?fbclid=IwAR1X6tQuRrWsX5iQ3kJCJaxFoR11cnfJpj–VlYhuUu9ZXLK6OQal0kiHaw But in between the two statements which are only four days apart, the Syrian Army has shelled Turkish positions and purportedly killed six Turkish soldiers and injured about a dozen. Whilst such an unprecedented incident should have sent Erdogan firing up as one would expect, according to Palestinian veteran journalist, Abdul Bari Atwan, this wasn’t to happen this time.

In a translation-worthy article, Russia and Syria have decided to take action in Idlib and they are no longer waiting for Erdogan to abide by his promises and agreements.

Atwan’s article’s title translates as: “What does the Syrian shelling of Turkish troops in Sarakob and the killing of six Turkish soldiers signify? And, what is the Russian message to Erdogan? And, did the Russians and the Turks tear up the Sochi Agreement? And, who will emerge as a winner in the bone-crushing battle in Idlib?”

According to Atwan’s analysis, the Syrian shelling of Turkish positions signaled the end of the line of joint Russian-Syrian patience with Erdogan’s lack of commitment to the Sochi Agreement. Atwan argues that opinion polls within Turkey indicate that Erdogan does not have the support of escalating in Syria and neither that of sending troops to Libya for that matter.

Did Atwan see the end of the line of Erdogan’s lies and contradictions this time? I personally hope he did. I must admit that in my previous analysis I have predicted several times that Erdogan had made his final and detrimental mistake . Somehow he always manages to slither out of the hole he was in and keep going.

Has he made his final and lethal mistake or is he going to relent and let Syria be?
Time will tell.

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 Palestinian Political Scene is in a State of Paralysis: “The People Reject Normalization with Israel”

An Interview with Abdel Bari Atwan

By Abdel Bari Atwan and Mohsen Abdelmoumen

Global Research, April 01, 2019

American Herald Tribune 18 March 2019

Mohsen Abdelmoumen: What is your analysis of the situation in the occupied Palestinian territories and in Gaza?

Abdel Bari Atwan: The Palestinian political scene is in a state of paralysis, which is a direct consequence of the disastrous Oslo process. Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) is not in good health, so the stage is now set for the post-Abu Mazen period. But nobody has a roadmap for where to go. Abu Mazen is the last of the founding fathers, and his departure will cause the Fateh movement to fragment and lose influence, as happened to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) after the death of George Habash. So chaos and confusion prevail. I wouldn’t be surprised if people in the West Bank and Gaza Strip draw inspiration from the demonstrations in Sudan and Algeria.

MA: What about the Palestinians’ right of return to their lands stolen since 1948 and the deal of the century that removes the Palestinian right of return? Has the deal of the century been abandoned or is it still valid?

ABA: The ‘Deal of the Century’ cannot be pulled off. The murder of Jamal Khashoggi consigned it to an early death, as it plunged the deal’s broker into crisis. No Palestinian could accept it anyway. The Palestinian Revolution began in the refugee camps. It was all about the right of return. To abandon it would be to abandon the Palestinian cause. That right and others cannot be bought off with promises of investment or improved economic conditions, as the deal proposes. Palestine is not Northern Ireland.

MA: How do you explain that at the moment when in Europe and in the USA, we see rising a great critical movement of Israel, like the BDS which advocate different forms of boycott, Arab countries are normalizing their relations with the Zionist and criminal entity of Israel?

ABA: These moves towards normalization are not too worrying, as they are confined to the governments and do not extend to the peoples.The peoples reject normalization with Israel, as the cases of Jordan and Egypt show. It’s the same in every other Arab country. Israel is alarmed by BDS and how it may develop in future. This explains its frenetic efforts to brand all criticism and opposition anywhere in the world as anti-Semitic: it fears to become a pariah state and the only way it can avoid that is to criminalize and close down exposure and discussion of its behavior.

MA: What is your reading of the Warsaw conference of February 13 and 14, when we saw the alliance between Arab countries such as Saudi Arabia, the Emirates, Bahrain, etc. and the Zionist and criminal entity Israel against Iran?

ABA: The Warsaw Conference was a one-man show, starring Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. It was staged for his benefit, but I believe it was a failure. Its original purpose was to launch a new US-led alliance — a so-called ‘Arab Nato’ — that would act as the spearhead of an international coalition against Iran and include Israel as a member, probably informally at first. But the Gulf States that the US is trying to turn into allies of Israel are not representative of the Arab world as a whole. They account for less than 5% of the Arab population, and their own peoples overwhelmingly reject normalization with Israel. In recent years these states have been able to play a dominant role in the Arab world due to their oil wealth and their manipulation of political Islam. But political Islam has been changing in nature, and the importance of oil in the global energy picture has been declining, so their ‘golden age’ is drawing to a close.

MA: How did we get to the fact that some Arab countries come to betray and sell themselves to the Zionist and criminal entity of Israel?

The Political Vulnerability and Impunity of the Israel Lobby. The Intellectual Advocates of “Greater Israel”

ABA: It’s not new, and mainly it’s a matter of perceived self-preservation. Regimes see the goodwill of the US as vital, and Israel as the key to the US’ heart. They talk about a shared interest in confronting Iran but that shouldn’t be taken at face value. Israel talks up the Iranian threat as a way of trying to sideline the Palestinian cause, and the Gulf States do the same to bolster the rule of their regimes. This also entails the poisonous fuelling of Sunni-Shii sectarianism.

MA: I did an investigation a few years ago about the activities of the Israeli lobby in Congo. What is your reading of Israel’s strategic redeployment in Africa?

ABA: Africa is currently an arena of rivalry for influence and competing interests involving many countries – the US, China, Turkey, Israel, Russia, and others. Israel does not have much to offer Africa, other than political influence in Washington. It is eager to establish a presence and exert influence on the periphery of important Arab countries like Libya, Algeria, Morocco, and Egypt.These countries are all in a weakened state at present and preoccupied with internal problems. But they will eventually recover and their governments will awaken. Sub-Saharan Africa is their natural hinterland and they cannot be prized apart in the long term.

MA: The people of Yemen is experiencing a criminal war waged by Saudi Arabia and its allies in total silence. How do you explain this silence of the international community and the media?

ABA: The West turned a blind eye to the Yemen war when it was launched four years ago because of Saudi influence and interests. It gave Saudi Arabia a chance to resolve the conflict in its favor. But neither Saudi Arabia nor the West appreciated the nature of Yemen or its people into account. They should have heeded the advice of the kingdom’s founder, King Abdelaziz, who ordered his sons Faisal and Saud to withdraw when they tried to invade the country. The latest war on Yemen has had a catastrophic effect, but in military terms, it has been a failure. The international silence is now beginning to be broken, and I hope that continues.

MA: What is your reading of events happening in Venezuela? Do you think that the United States will come to a direct military intervention?

ABA: What is happening in Venezuela is a US-sponsored coup attempt and I believe it will fail.

MA: There is no longer any mention of the Khashoggi case, which showed the true face of the Saudi regime and raised a worldwide outcry. How do you explain that?

ABA: The Khashoggi case is closely linked to Trump’s fate. Trump’s opponents in the US seized on it as a stick with which to beat him, due to his close association with the current Saudi leadership. That’s why there was such an outcry over the killing, however horrific, on an individual, but no similar reaction to Saudi actions that caused thousands of deaths such as the war on Yemen (until recently) and the proxy intervention in Syria. It should not be any surprise, however, that US and Western interests ultimately prevailed over human rights concerns, in this case like so many others. The Israel Lobby has also played a part in suppressing the outcry.  But the affair will have a longer-term impact. It laid bare Saudi Arabia’s high-handedness and dominance in the region.

MA: How do you analyze the events taking place in Algeria against the fifth term of Bouteflika?

ABA: The protests were not so much against Bouteflika as against the ruling elite that was using him as a front and was too divided to agree on a replacement for him, long after he should have been allowed to retire. The powers-that-be made three mistaken assumptions: first, that the fifth term could be pushed through; second, that Algerians would rather have stability than democracy; and third, that the terrifying memory of the bloody decade of the 1990s would deter demonstrations or protests, for fear of repeating what happened in Syria or Libya. They seemed to think, perhaps based on Syria’s experience, that concessions are a slippery slope and not compromising pays off in the longer term. But now they have had to give at least the appearance of backing down due to the strength of popular feeling. The question now is what comes next: a measure of genuine but controlled reform as in Morocco or an Egyptian-style scenario where the army runs things behind a facade of pro-forma elections?

MA: Intelligence reports indicate a redeployment of Daesh to Libya. Can we end the terrorism of Daesh and Al Qaeda without really fighting the ideological matrix of these groups? Is it enough defeating these groups militarily?

ABA: Daesh is finished above ground in the Arab world. But it will continue to exist underground because the conditions that incubated still exist. In my view, the challenge is not so much to fight the ideology as to address those conditions. The ideology, or at least its adoption or acceptance in some places and by some people, is a product of these ‘failed-state’ conditions and the marginalization they cause. In many cases – Libya, Iraq, Syria, Yemen – they are a consequence, in whole or in part, of direct or indirect Western military intervention. Putting an end to these interventions would be a step to tackling the problem.

MA: Are we not witnessing the continuation of the Cold War between the US administration on one side and Russia and China on the other? How do you explain the need for the United States to have an enemy?

ABA: The US can’t sleep unless it has an enemy. It has become an obsession, though creating or talking up external enemies has always been a means of advancing the interests of domestic power elites.But the picture is changing. America is no longer rules the world in matters of war and peace. Its real power is not its military might but the US Dollar. Its abuse of its financial and commercial power has become so extensive that an international alliance is taking shape to deprive it of this weapon.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Abdel Bari Atwan is a Palestinian journalist born in 1950 in Deir al-Balah, a Palestinian refugee camp in the Gaza Strip. He lived in a family of 11 children. After graduating from primary school in the refugee camp, he continued his studies in Jordan. He then studied journalism at Cairo University. After working for many Arab newspapers, he ran until 2013 al-Quds al-Arabi, a newspaper he founded in London in 1989 with other Palestinian expatriates. Today, he is the editor-in-chief of Rai al-Youm, an Arab world digital news and opinion website. He lives and works in London.

Mohsen Abdelmoumen is an independent Algerian journalist. He wrote in several Algerian newspapers such as Alger Républicain and in different sites of the alternative press.

All images in this article are from American Herald Tribune

The original source of this article is American Herald Tribune

Copyright © Abdel Bari Atwan and Mohsen Abdelmoumen, American Herald Tribune, 2019

Related Videos

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 Palestinian people’s principal problem is their own leadership

Abbas at the UN

September 27, 2018

By Abdel Bari Atwan

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas’ address to the UN General Assembly was disappointing. It repeated the same phrases used in his last eight speeches. Nothing new at all. The same appeals for international sympathy. Even the wording of his complaints about Israel’s failure to respect agreements was unchanged. And his declaration that the US is not an honest broker but biased towards Israel we have heard a million times before.

So it was neither strange nor surprising that the chamber was almost empty of delegates and delegation heads, and that the warm applause came mostly from the Palestinian delegation.

US President Donald Trump will not heed Abbas’ demands that he rescind his recognition of Jerusalem as capital of Israel. Nor will East Jerusalem be capital of a Palestinian state, because there will be no Palestinian state at all. Not according to the US’ ‘Deal of the Century’, which has rapidly begun entering the implementation stage – with US support, the collusion of some Arabs, and Palestinian security coordination.

***

The US and Israel will not fret about Abbas’ threats regarding their non-compliance with the agreements signed with them. Nor will that arouse the sympathy of UN member-sates. So long as he continues talking Mother Theresa-like about peace, renouncing violence, and joining the fight against terrorism in any part of the world – as he affirmed in his speech – nobody will listen to him or take him seriously.

It was regrettable that the Palestinian president used the UN podium to discuss the agreements he signed with the Hamas movement and threaten not to abide by them. That is the only one of his threats he will actually carry out: to cut off what remains of the Palestinian Authority (PA)’s aid to the Gaza Strip. This amounts to around $90 million in electricity subsidies and salaries, the vast majority of which go to members of Fateh, the PA’s party. Is this the place to make such threats? Does the world benefit from hearing them?

The international community will not thank Abbas for promising not to resort to violence or revert to ‘terrorism” i.e. legitimate resistance to occupation. How could such thanks be forthcoming from UN delegates when so many of their countries gained their freedom through resistance, not by imploring and lamenting the loss of their rights at international forums.

Abbas has been saying for the past ten years or so that peaceful popular resistance is the only option. We ask:

Where is this resistance? Why do the PA’s security forces repress all political activists and throw them in jail, or inform on them to the occupation authorities to facilitate their arrest?  Enough lies and deception, please. Respect your people’s intelligence, and their martyrs and prisoners.

***

We ask President Abbas:

Why did the US administration cut off all aid to schools, hospitals, PA institutions and UNRWA, while increasing its aid to the Palestinian security forces, at a time when he announced a boycott of any meeting or dialogue with the US? What good did this boycott do in this case?

The fault does not lie with UN, the US, or Israel. It lies with President Abbas, his leadership and administration, his Authority, his security coordination, and his speechwriters and cheerleaders.

When Palestinian leaders chose the course of resistance and sacrifice, the US and Israel and the West in its entirety sought to meet and negotiate with them, recognized them, and feared them.

This farce needs to be ended at once, and the actors stripped of their masks. It has gone too far, and the Palestinian people, both in the homeland and the diaspora, must not remain silent about this situation.

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!

Is there any forthcoming American – Israeli war? هل هناك حربٌ أميركية «إسرائيلية» مقبلة؟

Is there any forthcoming American – Israeli war?

نوفمبر 2, 2017

Written by Nasser Kandil,

The political “salons” and the media analyses abounded with presenting a hypothesis of a new US- Israeli war, they varied between the hypotheses of a war against Hezbollah or against Syria or a full war that affects Iran  with them, as they varied in estimating their types between air strikes or ground invasion or both of them, but they depended on the same introductions that are summarized by two issues: First, the unprecedented media and political escalation at the highest US and Israeli levels against the forces of the resistance and governments of its axis , including the foreshadowing of war. Second, the size of the losses which will affect America and Israel if they surrender to accept the facts resulting from the developments drawn by the confrontation in Syria in particular, in addition to the growing force of Hezbollah, the development of Iranian status , and the rise of the Russian role, and thus starting from the impossibility of this surrender, it can be said that the war is an inevitable option according to the conclusion of the owners of this hypothesis which many writers and analysts from those who support the forces of the resistance and its axis talked about, the clearest of which was the writing published by a colleague and a friend  Mr.Abdul Bari Atwan the editor-in-chief of ” Rai Al Youm” newspaper.

At the beginning of his article Mr. Atwan said “Is the third war on Lebanon at its preparation phase? When will it burst out? And why does Trump commemorate the killing of “the Marines” in Beirut suddenly after 34 years? Will Hezbollah be replaced “the Islamic State” on the list of the war on terrorism after the collapse of the latter? Search for Ivanka and his husband Kouchner. At the end, he wrote “Observe the American-Israeli scenario and its expected applications on Lebanon…. It is the war, and who says else, does not know the modern US history, and is not convinced yet that Trump is more entrenched in the Israeli schemes than his former counterpart George W. Bush… the coming  days will prove that”.

Surely the discussion of the war hypotheses neither stem from the details of the circulated scenarios, since this is a detail,  nor from the estimation of the degree of the obsession of the US President Donald Trump with the Israeli interest aspirations and which are the most extreme in America, since this is indisputable, nor from the size of the historic blow and the unbearable loss which will affect America if the matters are left as they are, since this is clear, nor from the content of the recent US-Israeli escalation campaign,  and the degree of its expression of anger and indignation about what is going on, nor from the size and the victories of the Russian-Iranian-Syrian axis where Hezbollah is at its center and the size of what will result from the growing force of Hezbollah regionally in general and according to Israeli in particular. Simply the issue is to answer the question; Do America and Israel have what enable them to wage a war from which they get out in better conditions than what they are today?

Here it is not necessary to answer according to our estimates, because maybe we will be accused with exaggeration in reading the sources of power or by answering that America and Israel have already waged wars that depended on a grave error in considerations. The analysis which is certain is through what is proved by the US and Saudi behaviors and facts and which express the actual real estimation of the decision-makers in Washington and Tel Aviv and the conditions and circumstances for taking such a decision..

Did the estimations and the facts which make the war-decision change from how they were in 2013? when the US fleets came to the Mediterranean and withdrew from continuing the war-decision due to the threat of confrontation, just accepted to cover this retreat with the political solution of the Syrian chemical weapons as a moral formal compensation that the Americans know that it is valueless in making the real balances of powers which the war alone would have changed it if the calculations have allowed waging it.

Some people may answer that the matter is related to the difference between the rational administration of the former President Barack Obama and the reckless extremist leadership of the administration of the current President Donald Trump despite the differences which oppose the war-decision now more than in 2013, where neither Russians were here, nor Iran has got a lucrative deal about its nuclear file, nor Saudi Arabia has got involved in the war of Yemen, nor Turkey has become practically out of the alliance, nor the Syrian country and its army have reached and recaptured Aleppo towards Deir Al Zour. Despite all of that it is necessary to check the intentions of Trump-Netanyahu stage. This is clear in the only serious red line drawn by Trump and his administration; to prevent the connection of the forces of the axis of the resistance across the Syrian-Iraqi borders, but this red line has been violated repeatedly by the Popular Crowd, the Syrian and the Iraqi armies, and the men of the resistance along one hundred kilometers at least. Instead of going to war, Trump stripped the armed groups affiliated to him of their weapons to avoid slipping into the war.

The real scrutiny of balances as read by Washington and Tel Aviv is shown by the dealing with the  golden opportunity of war that was lost before their eyes, because they refused to get involved in it, it is through what was represented by the announcement of the secession of the Iraqi Kurdistan. It is not debatable what Masoud Al-Barazani represents for each of Washington and Tel Aviv, or what the Iraqi Kurdistan represents as a location and a status in the geography and demography and as an advanced basis for the American- Israeli project to divide hostile entities or which are difficult to control, where the unity of Iran, Syria, Turkey, and Iraq will fall by the knockout, so this will lead to the birth of an entity that includes the Kurds of the four countries that reaches to the Mediterranean and will pave the way for the disintegration of the four entities, There will be fighting popular force that will compensate the human deficit in the alliance of American and Israel and who is with them, under a sectarian title. This popular force can be joined by those who can be indulged from Syria, Iraq, Turkey, and Lebanon with the Saudi cooperation, thus there will be a military base for America and Tel Aviv on the borders of Iran that host their aircraft, eavesdropping devices, and the People’s Mujahedin of Iran (PMOI), and everyone who wants to sabotage Iran from the inside.

In addition to the inability to bear the consequences of the war-decision, the question that needs to be answered is how did Kurdistan get lost? And how did the accumulation of ten years get lost too, and who will dare after now to call again for the secession among the Kurds? Did Al-Barazani make this step without a bet on the American-Israeli support?, and did he retreat and withdraw from Kirkuk just because the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan has withdrawn its elements from it, or because he got information about what has happened in Al Soleimaniya and the offer of the last quarter by the General Qassem Soleimani, and after he made a call with the General Herbert McMaster, and received an answer that we will support you through a statement?

Today Al-Barazani leaves the rule, after the dream of the secession turned into a nightmare for the Kurds, because Al-Barazani is aware that he was defeated in the war and everything is over, he waged the last US- Israeli wars, because the one who did not wage the war under the title of the Kurdish secession and “the right of the people in self-determination” and has all the golden opportunities which give hopes of making balances or even to achieve victory will not wage it while everything indicates to loss and failure.

Translated by Lina Shehadeh,

هل هناك حربٌ أميركية «إسرائيلية» مقبلة؟

أكتوبر 30, 2017

ناصر قنديل

حفلت الصالونات السياسية والتحليلات الإعلامية بطرح فرضية الإعداد لحرب أميركية «إسرائيلية» جديدة، وتفاوتت بين فرضيات حرب على حزب الله أو عليه وعلى سورية أو حرب شاملة تطال معهما إيران. كما تفاوتت في تقدير نوعيتها بين الضربات الجوية أو الغزو البري أو كليهما، لكنها اعتمدت على مقدّمات واحدة تختصرها مسألتان، التصعيد الإعلامي والسياسي غير المسبوق على قوى المقاومة وحكومات محورها، على أعلى المستويات الأميركية و«الإسرائيلية»، ومن ضمنها التبشير بالحرب، والثانية حجم الخسائر التي ستُمنى بها أميركا و«إسرائيل» إذا استسلمت لقبول الوقائع الناجمة عن التطورات التي يسجلها مسار المواجهة في سورية خصوصاً، وتعاظم قوة حزب الله، وتنامي مكانة إيران، وصعود الدور الروسي. وبالتالي الانطلاق من استحالة هذا الاستسلام، يصير القول بالحرب خياراً حتمياً، حسب استنتاج أصحاب هذه الفرضية، التي تحدّث عنها كثيرون من كتّاب ومحللين يؤيدون قوى المقاومة ومحورها، كان أوضحهم كتابة ما نشره الزميل والصديق الأستاذ عبد الباري عطوان رئيس تحرير «رأي اليوم».

يقول الأستاذ عطوان، في مطلع مقالته،

«هل الحَرب الثّالثة» على لبنان في طَوْر الإعداد؟ ومتى سَتنفجر؟ ولماذا يَحتفل ترامب بذِكرى مَقتل «المارينز» في بيروت فجأةً بعد 34 عاماً؟ وهل سَيضع «حزب الله» مكان «الدولة الإسلاميّة» على قائمة الحَرب على الإرهاب بعد انهيار الأخيرة؟ فَتّش عن إيفانكا وزَوجها كوشنر».

ثم يقول في ختامها،

«راقبوا السيناريو الأميركي الإسرائيلي، وتطبيقاته المُتوقّعة في لبنان.. إنّها الحَرب.. ومَن يَقول غير ذلك لا يَعرف التّاريخ الأميركي الحديث، ولم يَقتنع بعد بأنّ ترامب أكثر ارتماءً في حُضن المُخطّطات الإسرائيليّة من نَظيره السّابق جورج دبليو بوش.. والأيام بيننا».

بالتأكيد لا تنطلق مناقشة فرضيات الحرب من تفاصيل السيناريوات المتداولة الترجيح بينها، فهذا تفصيل. ولا من تقييم درجة ارتماء الرئيس الأميركي دونالد ترامب في أحضان المصالح والتطلعات «الإسرائيلية» والأشدّ تطرفاً في أميركا نفسها، فهذا تحصيل حاصل. ولا من حجم الصفعة التاريخية والخسارة التي لا تُحتمل اللتين ستصيبان أميركا إذا تركت الأمور على حالها، فهذا واضح وجلي. ولا من مضمون حملة التصعيد الأميركية «الإسرائيلية» الأخيرة وحجم تعبيرها عن الغيظ والحنق مما يجري، ومن حجم ونوع انتصارات المحور الروسي الإيراني السوري والذي يقع حزب الله في قلبه، وحجم ما يترتب على تعاظم قوة حزب الله إقليمياً بصورة عامة، وعلى «إسرائيل» بصورة خاصة، فهذا يقوله أصحاب الأمر أنفسهم.

القضية ببساطة هي الإجابة عن سؤال: هل تملك أميركا و«إسرائيل» ما يقول بأنهما قادرتان على خوض حرب تخرجان منها أفضل حالاً مما هما عليه اليوم؟

ليس المطلوب هنا الجواب أيضاً حسب تقديراتنا نحن، والتي قد تتهم بالمبالغة في قراءة مصادر القوة، أو التي قد يُجاب عليها بالقول إنّ أميركا و«إسرائيل» سبق وخاضتا حروباً مبنية على خطأ جسيم في الحسابات. فالتحليل الذي يقطع الشك باليقين هو ما تقوله التصرفات والوقائع الأميركية «الإسرائيلية» نفسها، والتي تعبّر في حركتها عن التقدير الفعلي والحقيقي لصنّاع القرار في واشنطن وتل أبيب، لمدى امتلاك شروط وظروف اتخاذ قرار حرب.

هل تغيّرت الحسابات والوقائع التي تصنع قرار الحرب، عما كانت عليه عام 2013، عندما جاءت الأساطيل الأميركية إلى المتوسط وأحجمت عن مواصلة قرار الحرب بسبب مخاطر المواجهة، وارتضت لتغطية التراجع عن قرار الحرب بالحلّ السياسي للسلاح الكيميائي السوري، تعويضاً معنوياً شكلياً يعترف الأميركيون أنه بلا قيمة في صناعة موازين القوى الحقيقية، التي كانت الحرب وحدها ستغيّرها، لو كانت الحسابات تتيح خوضها؟

قد يُجيب البعض هنا بالقول إنّ الأمر يتصل بالفارق بين إدارة الرئيس السابق باراك أوباما العقلانية والقيادة المتهوّرة والمتطرفة لإدارة الرئيس الحالي دونالد ترامب، رغم الفوارق التي تعاكس قرار الحرب أكثر منذ عام 2013، حيث لم يكن الروس قد صاروا هنا، ولا إيران حازت اتفاقاً مربحاً حول ملفها النووي، ولا السعودية تورّطت بحرب اليمن، ولا تركيا صارت عملياً خارج الحلف، ولا الدولة السورية وجيشها في ما هم عليه الآن من استرداد حلب وصولاً لدير الزور. ورغم ذلك لا بدّ من تفحّص عزائم مرحلة ترامب نتنياهو، والمثال أمامنا في الخط الأحمر الجدّي الوحيد الذي رسمه ترامب وإدارته، وهو منع تواصل قوى محور المقاومة عبر الحدود السورية العراقية، وداسه الحشد الشعبي والجيش السوري والجيش العراقي ورجال المقاومة مراراً، وعلى طول مئة كيلومتر على الأقلّ، وبدلاً من أن يذهب ترامب للحرب، جرّد جماعاته المسلحة التابعة له من سلاحها تفادياً لمخاطر الانزلاق للحرب.

التفحّص الحقيقي للموازين، كما تقرأها واشنطن وتل أبيب يظهره التعامل مع فرصة ذهبية للحرب مرّت امام أعينهم. وها هي تضيع أمام أعينهم أيضاً، لأنهم رفضوا التورّط فيها، وهي ما مثله إعلان الانفصال في كردستان العراق، ولا يوجد مَن يناقش في حجم ما يمثل مسعود البرزاني لكلّ من واشنطن وتل أبيب، ولا في حجم ما تمثل كردستان العراق من مكان ومكانة في الجغرافيا والديمغرافيا السكانية، تتيح كقاعدة متقدّمة للمشروع الأميركي «الإسرائيلي» التأسيس لتقسيم كيانات معادية أو يصعب ضبطها، فتسقط وحدة إيران وسورية وتركيا والعراق بضربة واحدة، وينطلق مسار ولادة كيان يضمّ أكراد الدول الأربع يصل للبحر المتوسط ويفتح باب تفكك الكيانات الأربعة، ويبني قوة شعبية مقاتلة تعوّض العجز البشري في حلف أميركا و«إسرائيل» ومَن معهما، وتحت عنوان مذهبي يلتحق به مَن يمكن زجّهم بالتعاون السعودي في كلّ من سورية والعراق وتركيا ولبنان، وتنشأ قاعدة عسكرية لأميركا و«إسرائيل» على حدود إيران، تستضيف طائراتهما وأجهزة التنصّت، و«مجاهدي خلق»، وكلّ من يريد التخريب داخل إيران.

السؤال الذي يحتاج لجواب، غير العجز عن تحمّل تبعات قرار الحرب، هو كيف ضاعت كردستان، وضاع معها تراكم عمره عشرات السنوات؟ ومن سيجرؤ بعد الآن على الدعوة مجدّداً للانفصال بين الأكراد؟ وهل قام البرزاني بخطوته بلا رهان على دعم أميركي «إسرائيلي»؟ وهل تراجع وانسحب من كركوك، فقط لأنّ الاتحاد الوطني الكردستاني سحب عناصره منها، أم لأنه أدرك عندما جاءته المعلومات عما جرى في السليمانية، وعرض الربع الأخير من الساعة على لسان الجنرال قاسم سليماني، وأجرى اتصاله بالجنرال هربرت ماكماستر، فجاءه الجواب سندعمكم بتصريح؟

اليوم يغادر البرزاني الحكم ومعه تحوّل حلم الانفصال إلى كابوس للأكراد، لأنّ البرزاني يدرك أنه هُزم في الحرب وانتهى الأمر، وأنه خاض آخر الحروب الأميركية «الإسرائيلية»، لأنّ مَن لم يخض الحرب تحت عنوان الانفصال الكردي، و«حق الشعوب في تقرير المصير» ولديه كلّ الفرص الذهبية التي تمنح آمالاً بإقامة التوازن إن لم يكن بتحقيق النصر، والتي لا تتوفر في أيّ عنوان آخر، فلن يخوضها حيث كلّ شيء يقول بالخسارة والفشل.

Related Videos

Related Articles

• ضغوط الميدان والداخل على المقاومة
• أربيل يرثها آل البرزاني: كذب مسعود… ولو صدق!
• مع هجرة ترامب إلى «الهادئ» هل تقامر «القطط» «الإسرائيلية» بحرب متدحرجة؟
• حربُ أميركا الجديدة في سورية… لا رصاص فيها! 
• بين تقدّم الجيش السوري نحو البوكمال وإعلان أميركا الاستعداد لمهاجمتها بالبشمركة

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!

عن الفريسة السوريّة التي “تَهاوشت” على صَيْدِها السعوديّة وقطر ونَجت بجِلْدِها

عبد الباري عطوان

مُقابلات الشيخ حمد بن جاسم آل ثاني، رئيس وزراء، وزير خارجيّة قطر السابق، تُثير الاهتمام، وتَجذب الكَثير من المُشاهدين والقُرّاء، سواء كانوا من المُواطنين العاديين، أو من كِبار المَسؤولين، لأن الرّجل يتحدّث ببساطةٍ وجراءةٍ وعفويّة، ويَكشف في كُل مرّة عن العَديد من المَعلومات والوَقائع، على غير عادة المَسؤولين العَرب.

في مُقابلته الأخيرة التي خصّ بها تلفزيون دولة قطر الرّسمي، (وليس قناة “الجزيرة” التي قال أنّه كان أحد مُؤسّسيها ويَندم على ذلك)، خاضَ الشيخ بن جاسم في مَواضيع عديدة، لشَرح مَوقف بلاده، من أبرزها المَوضوع السوري، في مُحاولة لتبرئة قطر من بَعض جوانب خِلافها مع السعوديّة (الشقيقة الكُبرى)، وعِتابها على انقلابها على المَوقف القطري، بعد تنسيقٍ وتحالف تامين بين الجانبين، ولكن هذا العِتاب لم يَجد آذانًا صاغية، كما أن التطوّرات المُتلاحقة في سورية هذهِ الأيّام، تأتي في غير مَصلحة الطّرفين، والدّوحة على وَجه الخُصوص.

الشيخ حمد بن جاسم كَشف أنّه التقى العاهل السعودي الراحل الملك عبد الله بن عبد العزيز في الرياض، وأبلغه بوجود خُطّة قطريّة بالتنسيق مع القوّات الأمريكيّة وتركيا بالتدخّل في سورية في بداية الأزمة، وأن الملك عبد الله باركَ هذهِ الخُطوة وأعطاه الضوء الأخضر، وقال “نحن معكم، أنتم سيروا في هذا الموضوع ونحن نُنسّق، ولكن فلتبقوا أنتم مُستلمين المَوضوع″، ثم “تهاوشنا” على الفَريسة “فضَاعت مِنّا”.

***

والأهم من ذلك أن الشيخ بن جاسم اعترف أن الجميع تورّط في سورية، إلى درجةِ دَعم جبهة النصرة، وبتنسيقٍ كامل مع القوّات الأمريكيّة (وكالة المُخابرات المركزيّة)، التي كانت تُشرف على توزيع كُل شيء (المال والسّلاح)، وعندما أصبحت النصرة غير مَقبولة (جَرى وضعها على قائمة الإرهاب) توقّف الدّعم لها.

لا نَعرف رد السّلطات السعوديّة على هذهِ المَعلومات، مِثلما لا نَعرف ما إذا كانت وغيرها ممّا وَرد في المُقابلة، قد خفّف من حِدّة الخِلاف مع قطر، وقَرّب بين البلدين، ولكن ما نَعرفه أن هذا الكَشْف نَزلَ بردًا وسلامًا على قلب الحُكومة السوريّة ومُؤيّديها الذين دَعموها طِوال السّنوات الماضية، وما يُؤكّد وجهة نَظرها التي تبنّتها مُنذ بداية الأزمة، وتُؤكّد أن هُناك مُؤامرة خارجيّة بزعامة الولايات المتحدة لتغيير النّظام في دمشق خِدمةً لمَشروع التّفتيت والتّقسيم.
سورية كانت “فريسةً” فِعلاً، تَقاتل على “جِلدها” الصياديون من أكثر من ستين دولة، انضموا تحت منظومة “أصدقاء سورية” بزعامة أمريكا، وكان دَور السعوديّة وقطر مَحصورًا في التّمويل والتّسليح، أمّا دُول عربيّة أُخرى فلَم يَزد عن دَور “المُحلّل”، أو شاهِد الزّور.

“التّهاوش” لم يَكن سبب فرار “الفريسة” من الشّباك السعوديّة القطريّة، وإن كان، فإنّه سبب هامشي، وليَعذرنا الأشقاء السوريين على تِكرار استخدام توصيف “الفَريسة” غير المُحبّب، فناقل الكُفر ليس بكافر، أمّا الأسباب الأساسيّة فهي صُمود النّظام، وعدم انهيار مُؤسّساته، أبرزها المُؤسّستان الأمنيّة والعَسكريّة، ووجود حاضنةٍ شعبيّةٍ، كَبُرت أو صَغُرت، كانت تلتف حَولهما وقيادتهما في دمشق، حتى في أصعب الأوقات وأكثرها حراجةً، وفي ظِل ضَخ إعلامي استخدمت فيه إمبراطوريّات ومُؤسّسات عُظمى تَملُك ميزانيات بالمِليارات، وتَغييبٍ كاملٍ للإعلام السّوري (جَرى حَظْره وحَذفه من الأقمار الصناعيّة العربيّة، وعرب سات تحديدًا بقرارٍ من الجامعة العربيّة، ووزراء إعلامها)، رغم أن هُناك مآخذ كثيرة على هذا الإعلام وحِرفيّته.

الشيخ حمد بن جاسم أعاد الكَثيرين إلى الوَراء سَبع سنوات، وبالتّحديد عندما ذَهب إلى دمشق حاملاً عرضًا بـ 15 مليار دولار كدُفعةٍ أولى مَشروطةٍ بابتعاد سورية عن إيران، وانضمامها إلى “مِحور الاعتدال” العربي، ومن سُخريات القَدر أن المملكة العربيّة السعوديّة التي أطاحت بدولة قطر من مِقعد القيادة في المَلف السوري، وأرجعتها إلى المَقاعد الخلفيّة، مِثلما اشتكى الشيخ بن جاسم في مُقابلة أُخرى أكثر تشويقًا مع صحيفة “الفايننشال تايمز″، باتت أقرب إلى روسيا، وبالتّالي سورية بطريقةٍ غير مُباشرة، وباتت تَقبل ببقاء الرئيس بشار الأسد في الحُكم، وتتطلّع إلى حلٍّ سِلمي للأزمة، أمّا دولة قطر فتُواجه حِصارًا من أبرز أسبابه قُربها وعَلاقاتها الوثيقة مع إيران.
كَثيرون أخطأوا في حَق سورية، وكثيرون يتهيأون لارتكاب خطايا أكبر تُجاه المِنطقة بالتّحالف مع أمريكا وإسرائيل، ضِد مِحور المُقاومة، وإذا كانوا قد نَجوا بأقل الخسائر من الأخطاء الأولى، وفي حَق سورية وليبيا والعِراق خُصوصًا، ولو مُؤقّتًا، فلا نَعتقد أن الحال سيكون نَفسه في المرّة الثانية.

***

سوريا تتعافى هذهِ الأيام وبشكلٍ مُتسارع، وتتقاطر البِعثات الدبلوماسيّة على عاصمتها، وكذلك وفود رجال الأعمال الذين يَبحثون عن المال والاستثمار في ظِل قُرب مَعركة إعادة الإعمار، ويكفي الإشارة إلى أن السيد سعد الحريري، رئيس وزراء لبنان، ورجل السعوديّة فيه، والذي كان من أبرز المُعارضين للقيادة السوريّة، ولم يُبقِ كلمةً مُشينة وإلا وجّهها لها ورئيسها، السيد الحريري وَقّع اليوم مَرسومًا بتعيين سفير لبنان جديد في دمشق، وها هو وفد برلماني أُردني كبير يستعد لشدِّ الرّحال إلى العاصمة السوريّة، بعد آخر تونسي، و”المَسبحة كَرّت”، مِثلما يقول المَثل الشّامي.
العلاقة التحالفيّة “الاستراتيجيّة” بين قطر وإيران، وبين قطر وتركيا، وإن كانت الأخيرة بدرجةٍ أقل، هي من أسباب تَوتّر العلاقات بين السعوديّة ومِحورها ودولة قطر، إلى جانب أسباب أُخرى، وأمام قطر خياران، إمّا أن تَقطع هذهِ العَلاقة كُليًّا وتَنضم إلى السّرب السّعودي، ولكن في المَقاعد الخلفيّة، أو أن تَستمر الأزمة وتَتصاعد وتَخترق خُطوطًا قانية الاحمرار.

تَفسيرات وتَوضيحات و”مُرونات” الشيخ بن جاسم تَظل مَحدودة التّأثير في نَفْس الجار السّعودي، ومِن الصّعب أن تَستميل قَلبه “المُتحجّر”، لأنّها تتحدّث عن الماضي، ولا تَقترب من مَطالب المُستقبل، وسواء كانت مَقبولةً أو مرفوضةً، ومن يَحكم السعوديّة اليوم غير الذي كان يَحكمها طِوال السّنوات الخَمسين الماضية، ولا بُد أن الشيخ بن جاسم، الذي نَعترف له بالذّكاء، يُدرك هذهِ الحَقيقة جيّدًا.
رأي اليوم

Related Videos

Related Articles

• الميادين | بن جاسم: لا ثأر مع الأسد و”تهاوشنا” على سوريا بتفويض سعودي
• اعترافات حمد بن جاسم.. عندما «تتهاوَش» الضِباع
• حمد بن جاسم يكشف سر الأزمة مع قطر ويفضح أخطاء ارتكبت في سوريا!
• الكشف عن تفاصيل محاولة انقلاب في قطر (فيديو)

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!