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.
طرح كلام رئيس الحكومة نجيب ميقاتي عن توصيف عبور قوافل المازوت الإيراني الذي استورده حزب الله وجلبه عبر الحدود السورية من دون الخضوع للإجراءات الحكومية، بالانتهاك للسيادة اللبنانية، سؤالاً عن مفهوم السيادة في قضية القوافل وعبورها، من الزاوية القانونية، وفقاً لمعايير القانون الدولي، لأنه ثمة ما هو معلوم من الزاوية السياسية بأن المقاومة لم تمتنع عن الالتزام بالخضوع للإجراءات الحكومية عبر الحدود، بل إن الحكومة هي التي فضلت عدم الانخراط في أي صلة بالقوافل تلافياً لإثارة أي التباس يوحي بشراكتها تفادياً لتعرضها للعقوبات الأميركية، كما هو معلوم أن كلام الرئيس ميقاتي عن انتهاك السيادة هو مقصد سياسي للقول إن الحكومة لم تكن على صلة، طلباً لذات الهدف، أي تفادي العقوبات الأميركية، ما يستدعي فحص ومعاينة المصطلح والتحقق من مدى ملاءمته للحالة التي نتحدث عنها توصيفاً واستنتاجاً.
–
السؤال الأول الذي يطرحه الموضوع هو طالما أننا لا نتحدث عن عقوبات دولية تحظر المتاجرة مع إيران أو عبر سورية، فما هو التوصيف القانوني للعقوبات الأميركية في حالة لبنان، والجواب نجده في معاهدة لاهاي التي تتحدث عن مفهوم الاحتلال، بصفته تعبيراً يتجاوز مجرد الوجود العسكري الأجنبي الذي لا يصبح احتلالاً إلا بمقدار ما يفرض مشيئته على الأرض التي توصف محتلة بذات نسبة سيطرة المشيئة الأجنبية على إجراءاتها وتدخلها في تغيير وجهة ممارسة السيادة عليها، فيصير السؤال هو، لو لم تكن هناك عقوبات أميركية، هل كان لدى الحكومة اللبنانية مشكلة في أن تتعامل بصورة سيادية مع القوافل، وهل أن الذي استولى على الصلاحيات السيادية للدولة وحل مكانها هو الأميركي الذي استولى على سلطة السماح والمنع أم المقاومة التي كانت جاهزة للخضوع للإجراءات الحكومية، وهل أن الحكومة لديها قرار سيادي يحظر الاستيراد من إيران وعبر سورية خرقته المقاومة، أم أن المقاومة خرقت قواعد الاستيلاء الأميركي على هذا البعد من القرار السيادي للحكومة؟
–
عندما نوصف السيطرة الأميركية على القرار السيادي للدولة، بالاحتلال لأنه يتولى ممارسة سلطة على أرض ليست أرضه ويفرض عليها تشريعات ليست نابعة من السلطات السيادية الشرعية، يصير السؤال القانوني هل أن الحكومة بمؤسساتها السيادية قامت بما يلزم لردع هذا الاحتلال وتحرير بلادها منه، أم أنها خضعت أو تغاضت أو استسلمت أو أعلنت عجزها، وفي كل هذه الحالات التي لحظها القانون الدولي هل يصبح الاحتلال شرعياً، ويصبح التسليم بمشيئة الاحتلال قانونياً، والجواب قاطع بالنفي في كل المداولات والمناقشات الخاصة بحالة الاحتلال التي ينتهي البحث فيها باعتبار المقاومة التي تنظمها الشعوب بوجه الاحتلال لإسقاط مشيئته هي الرد القانوني المشروع والسيادي.
–
المقاومة المسلحة هي الجواب عندما يكون الاحتلال الذي يفرض المشيئة عسكرياً، وكسر المشيئة بذاتها بالتمرد على مندرجاتها كدعوة الشعب لرفض دفع الضرائب لسلطات الاحتلال هو نوع من المقاومة المشروعة، وفي حالة الاستيلاء الأميركي على السلطة السيادية للدولة في تحديد شروط المتاجرة والعبور، يكون كسر هذه المشيئة مقاومة مشروعة لا تقبل الاجتهاد، يزيده مشروعية تلكؤ الحكومة أو استسلامها أو تغاضيها أو عجزها أو خضوعها، بما يجعل التخلي الحكومي عن ممارسة الحق السيادي وارتضاء استيلاء الأجنبي عليه إطلاقاً لحق المقاومة المشروع باسترداد هذا الحق وفرض ممارسته من الشعب الذي تمثله المقاومة، كما في حال المقاومة العسكرية للاحتلال بالقوة العسكرية.
–
وفقاً للمفهوم القانوني للسيادة، الذي ينتهك هو صاحب العقوبات الذي نصب نفسه صاحب المشيئة في فرض القوانين بدلاً من السلطات الوطنية المحلية، ليصير قوة احتلال وفقاً للتعريف القانوني، وليست المقاومة التي تمردت على الإجراءات التي فرضها الاستيلاء على القرار السيادي للدولة وتلكؤ الدولة في مواجهة هذا الاستيلاء وخضوعها للمشيئة الأجنبية، بل إن المقاومة تصبح قانونياً الممثل الشرعي للشعب في ممارسة السيادة في إسقاط الاحتلال بصفته مشيئة أجنبية تفرض تشريعاتها على الأرض الوطنية للدولة من خارج الممارسات السيادية لمؤسسات الدولة وتشريعاتها.
The relationship between Iran and Saudi Arabia has always been eye-catching for regional observers.
For decades observers have seen the Middle East through the prism of a Saudi-Iranian cold war. During the eight-year Iran-Iraq war, Gulf States particularly Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, lent more than $37bn to Saddam Hussein’s war effort.
According to a report by The Economist, this binary view of a “proxy war” has outlived its usefulness—because the Saudis lost. They failed to build a deep well of support in other Arab countries, settling for ineffective chequebook diplomacy with fickle politicians and warlords. Iran is undeniably the strongest foreign actor in Lebanon, Syria and Iraq.
The Saudis still fight a rearguard action in Yemen, but their six-year war against the Yemeni Ansarullah revolutionaries, has been all in vain. Diplomats from the Gulf curtly describe several Arab states as “outside the Arab fold”, The Economist report explained.
It was a victory for Iran, not to mention, for the Axis of Resistance – which according to many includes resistance factions in Lebanon, Syria, Iran and Yemen.
Lebanon, a small Middle Eastern country, has been an important outlet to Mediterranean for many Arab countries, notably Saudi Arabia. It is also home to the Lebanese resistance movement Hezbollah.
In the past year, the country has been plagued with a suffocating economic crisis. Life in Lebanon is defined by petrol queues, lengthy blackouts and growing hunger. Lebanon’s bankruptcy stems from decades of misrule by the political class.
Hezbollah, founded in the 1980s, resisted the “Israeli” entity for its occupation of south Lebanon. Many Lebanese, regardless of sect or political persuasion, saw this as a legitimate struggle. The group’s popularity soared after the “Israeli” withdrawal in 2000, and stayed high even after war with the entity in 2006, which began with the capture of two “Israeli” soldiers. Arabs of all stripes cheered it for giving the “Israeli” entity a bloody nose, a feat no Arab state had managed in decades.
The Lebanese Resistance movement has not only protected Lebanon militarily, but it has attended to the medical and social needs of the all Lebanese.
Today, with the worsening of the economic situation in Lebanon, Hezbollah and its allies promoted the notion of a resistance economy in Lebanon. In April, Hezbollah trumpeted the Sajjad card, a ration-card scheme named after the 4th Shia Imam Ali ibn Hussein Zein al-Abidin [AS] that offers discounts to participants.
However, the indignities that define life in Lebanon have not spared anyone. Pharmacy shelves are bare: expats visiting for the summer stuff their suitcases with medicines, not only prescription pills but even basics like paracetamol that are unavailable in the country. Petrol stations, if not closed, have hours-long queues that snake for blocks.
The situation has been getting even worse no thanks to the Western siege, which Hezbollah Secretary General His Eminence Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah has repeated in various speeches.
To the West, the “Israelis” and the locals, Sayyed Nasrallah offers more than empty words. In a televised speech during the 2006 “Israeli” aggression on Lebanon, the Resistance Leader told his viewers to look out to sea. Moments later a missile slammed into an “Israeli” destroyer off the coast, damaging the vessel and killing four sailors.
Sayyed Nasrallah supported peaceful anti-government demonstrations in 2019 and endorsed economic and political reform. However, His Eminence cautioned protesters from being infiltrated by a fifth column on the payroll of foreign embassies.
As for the economic crisis, Sayyed Nasrallah urged the Lebanese to bypass the Western siege and look east to Asian powers such as China, which stand ready to pour billions into Arab economies despite howls of outrage from the Americans.
Hezbollah remains the “Israeli” entity’s strongest Arab foe. Generals in Tel Aviv acknowledge that another war with the group would be painful. Aside from a few brief border skirmishes, however, it has not fought the entity in 15 years.
The Resistance Leader at various occasions reiterated the unconditioned Iranian support to the Hezbollah, Lebanon and the Lebanese. Most recently, His Eminence thanked Iran for its willingness to aid Lebanon with its oil and gas crisis. Sayyed Nasrallah further welcomed UNCONDITIONED aid from any country provided that it would ask nothing in return from Lebanon.
The first Iranian ship carrying fuel sailed last Thursday. It has been followed by a second ship days after… more ships are expected to come.
“A second ship will set sail in the next few days, and it will be followed by others,” Sayyed Nasrallah said. “We will continue this process as long as Lebanon needs it,” His Eminence said. “The aim is to help all Lebanese, [not just] Hezbollah supporters or the Shia.”
إنه الرجل الذي سيحمل راية الجمهورية الثوريّة الثانية بكل ثقة وثبات.
لم يسمع بالفقر في المواعظ المنبريّة، بل عاشه ولمسه منذ الصغر.
عاش يتيماً بعد أن فقد أباه وهو في سن الخامسة. لم تكن عائلته تتمكّن من شراء كيلو رز دفعة واحدة ولا كيلو كامل من اللحم، بل كانوا يشترون من ذلك بمقدار ما يصلهم من رزق.
أمه أرسلته مبكراً الى البازار ليعمل فيه عاملاً بسيطاً يبيع سجادات الصلاة ليساعدها وأهله في تحصيل معاشهم اليومي.
أمه لا تزال تعيش في بيت تحت المتوسط في إحدى نواحي مشهد الفقيرة وترفض الانتقال لطهران العاصمة.
هذا هو الرئيس الإيراني الجديد، المنبعث من بين جمهور الناس، وليس من طبقة الأشراف التي تستمتع بالسلطة منذ النطفة…
لذلك عندما يقول رئيسي إنه سيشكل حكومة ثورية مناهضة للفساد كما ورد في أول تصريحاته بعد فوزه بالرئاسة، فهو صادق وجادّ وسيفعل ذلك بالتأكيد.
رئيسي ليس «محافظاً» كما يوصف في وسائل الاعلام، بل هو أصلاً لا ينتمي لأيّ من الأجنحة السياسية في البلاد.
انه من جنس الشهيد رجائي والشهيد بهشتي والشهيد قاسم سليماني…
إنه من جنس الفقراء، من الناس الذين يمشون في الأسواق ويأكلون الطعام…
دعوني أحاول أن ألخص لكم ماذا يعني تسلم السيد إبراهيم «رئيس الساداتي» الحكومة في إيران، بلغة متفاوتة، كما أراها ـ من وجهة نظري ـ المنتمية إلى عالم ما فوق الميول والاتجاهات السياسية الإيرانية:
فأن يتسلّم السيد رئيسي السلطة التنفيذية في البلاد يعني ذلك ما يلي بلغة الناس:
أولاً ـ إنه سيحبط مشروع إسقاط النظام بالجمهور. وهو الأمر الذي فعله في يوم الانتخاب والذي سيسقطه يومياً في أدائه العملي، كما سيطيح بمقولة الفصل بين الدولة والدين او بين السياسة والدين أو بين رجل الحكم ورجل الدين التي لطالما حاولوا فرضها على إيران، مرة والى الأبد…
لقد حاول الأجانب جهدهم منذ أول الثورة ان يقولوا للشعب الإيراني أنّ رجال الدين يجب ان يذهبوا الى المساجد ويتركوا الحكم للأفندية، ومن ثم تصاعدت المؤامرة وتشعّبت لتقول للأمة الإيرانية بأنّ هؤلاء (أيّ رجال الدين) لا يفقهون بعلوم العصر، ولا بالتعامل مع الدنيا، وأخيراً باتهامهم بأنهم يريدون مصادرة كلّ أشكال الديمقراطية الحديثة وعلوم الحداثة لصالح «الحكومة الإسلامية» المعادية للحريات وحقوق الإنسان والمرأة، فإذا برئيسي وعلى نهج رئيسه وقائده وقائد الثورة والأمة الإسلامية يفاجئهم بحرص مضاعف لا نظير له على كلّ هذه الأمور واعتبارها جزءاً أساسياً من مشروعية النظام، لا مفهوم للجمهورية الإسلامية ولا معنى لها ولا تستقيم من دون الجمهور وصناديق الاقتراع التي حرصوا على احترامها لمدة أربعة عقود متتالية حتى وسط حروب مدمرة للمدن والبلدات، وأن يظهر لهم رئيسي وزوجته جميلة علم الهدى متعلمين ومتبحّربن بالعلوم الحديثة أكثر من سائر المرشحين، بل وأعمق من مرشحين في ديمقراطيات عريقة بينها لندن وباريس وواشنطن.
ثانياً ـ إنه سيحبط مشروع فرض النظام السياسي والاقتصادي النيوليبرالي على إيران. أيّ انه سيعمل ليل نهار على مكافحة الفساد والرشوة ونظام البنوك الروتشيلدية، ويقارع مقولة «أنّ الغرب وحده بيده مفتاح الازدهار والتنمية السياسية والاقتصادية» للبلدان النامية والصاعدة ويطيح بها في الداخل الإيراني بنظرية ومشروع الاقتصاد المقاوم الذي يعتمد الدورة الاقتصادية الإنتاجية الداخلية أولاً، ومن ثم التوجه شرقاً والخروج على هيمنة الدولار الأميركي من خلال إقامة تعاون استراتيجي عميق مع الصين وروسيا وكلّ بلدان العالم المناهضة للاحادية الأميركية.
ثالثاً ـ سيحبط بحزم مشروع فرض «أوسلو» نوويّ على إيران الذي كانوا يعدّونه ويعملون عليه بقوة منذ أيام أوباما ولا يزالون.
وما فرضوه على إيران من شروط حتى الآن لم يكن سوى مقدّمة وتمهيد (من وجهة النظر الغربية) لفرض شروط إضافية تتعلق بفرض محدوديات على المنظومة الصاروخية الإيرانية، وإخراج إيران من المعادلة الإقليميّة من خلال فرض شروط ضرورة تخليها عن حركات التحرّر العربية والاسلامية لا سيما في فلسطين ولبنان وسورية واليمن والعراق.
سيكون رئيسي حازماً كما يريد الإمام الخامنئي، في تعامله مع ما يُسمّى بـ المجتمع الدولي الانتهازي والمنافق، ولن يسمح له لا باستنزاف الديبلوماسية الإيرانية في مفاوضات لا طائل من ورائها، ولا بعزله وحشره في زاوية إما القبول بشروط «أوسلويّة» أو الصدام، بل انتهاج نظرية حليفه الثوري سعيد جليلي الذي ربما تسلّم الخارجية الإيرانية والتي تقضي بإنهاك المفاوض الغربي وجعله هو مَن يلهث وراء المفاوض الإيراني كما فعل به جليلي يوم كان رئيساً لمجلس الأمن القومي في حكومة نجاد.
تذكروا انّ الإمام السيد علي الخامنئي لطالما كرّر بعض الثوابت في هذا السياق ستكون بمثابة قناديل مضيئة لرئيسي في هذا المضمار وهي:
1 ـ إذا أراد الغرب تمزيق الاتفاق فنحن سنحرقه.
2 ـ إذا تطلّبت حاجاتنا ومصالحنا التخصيب بنسبة 90 بالمئة فسنخصّب ولن نفاوض أحداً.
3 ـ نستطيع ان نطوّر صواريخنا إلى مديات 5 آلاف لكننا فعلاً لا نقوم بذلك الآن، وعندما نريد سنفعل ولن نفاوض أحداً.
4 ـ إحباط مفعول العقوبات أهم من إنجاز رفعها.
وبالتالي في زمن رئيسي أظننا لم نعد بحاجة لأمنية عودة واشنطن الى الاتفاق ولا لرفع العقوبات عنا…
تذكروا أنّ السيد رئيسي في مناظراته الانتخابية أعلن بوضوح:
أنه مع المفاوضات حول النووي ولكن بشروط القائد التسعة (الخطوط الحمر المشهورة)، وانّ هذا لن تتمكّن منه إلا حكومة قوية وحازمة.
لقد تخطّت إيران المنعطف التاريخي الداخلي على طريق دخول الجمهورية الثورية الثانية، بقي تحدّي المنعطف التاريخي الدولي وهو الذي ستتخطاه مع مجموع قوى محور المقاومة، باذن الله.
وعليه نستطيع أن نلخص ربما بلغة أكثر قرباً للغة الناس أقول:
السيد ابراهيم رئيسي «الحزب اللهي»، سيتخذ سياسة ثورية حازمة متحركة واضحة شفافة تريد التعامل مع الدنيا بعقل منفتح نعم، وغير منعزلة عن العالم نعم، ولكن ايضاً ليست هجينة ومتردّدة و»رجل بالبور ورجل بالفلاحة» على طريقة:
«هذا قبر سيدنا حجر بن عدي رضوان الله عليه قتله سيدنا معاوية رضوان الله عليه»!
لا أبداً، هذه السياسة ستنتهي وإلى الأبد، وستتمّ تسمية الأشياء بأسمائها، ما يثلج صدر الثوريين الداخليين ومن محور المقاومة.
Iran’s president-elect will ‘Look East’ while seeking to exit ‘strategic patience’ when dealing with the US
By Pepe Escobar posted with permission and first posted at AsiaTimes
In his first press conference as President-Elect with 62% of the votes, Ebrahim Raeisi, facing a forest of microphones, came out swinging and leaving nothing to the imagination.
On the JCPOA, or Iran nuclear deal, the dossier that completely obsesses the West, Raeisi was clear:
– the US must immediately return to the JCPOA that Washington unilaterally violated, and lift all sanctions.
– The JCPOA negotiations in Vienna will proceed, but they do not condition anything in terms of Iran’s future.
– The Iranian ballistic missile program is absolutely non-negotiable in the framework of the JCPOA, and will not be curbed.
Asked by a Russian journalist whether he would meet President Biden if a deal was struck in Vienna and all sanctions lifted – a major “if” – Raeisi’s answer was a straight “No”.
It’s crucial to stress that Raeisi, in principle, favors the restoration of the JCPOA as its was signed in 2015 – following the guidelines of Leader Ayatollah Khamenei. But if the Vienna charade goes on forever and the Americans keep insisting on rewriting the deal towards other areas of Iranian national security, that’s a definitive red line.
Raeisi acknowledged the immense internal challenges he faces, in terms of putting the Iranian economy back on track, getting rid of the neoliberal drive of outgoing Team Rouhani, and fighting widespread corruption. The fact that election turnout was only 48.7%, compared to the average 70% in the prior three presidential contests will make it even more difficult.
Yet in foreign policy Iran’s path ahead is unmistakable, centered on the “Look East” strategy, which means closer cooperation with China and Russia, with Iran developing as a key node of Eurasian integration or, according to the Russian vision, the Greater Eurasia Partnership.
As Professor Mohammad Marandi of the University of Tehran told me “there’s going to be a tilt eastward and to the Global South. Iran will improve relations with China and Russia, also because of US pressure and sanctions. President-elect Raeisi will be better positioned to strengthen these ties than the outgoing administration.”
Marandi added, “Iran won’t intentionally hurt the nuclear deal if the Americans – and the Europeans – move towards full implementation. The Iranians will reciprocate. Neighbors and regional countries will also be a priority. So Iran will no longer be waiting for the West.”
Marandi also made a quite nuanced distinction that the current policy was “a major mistake” by Team Rouhani, yet “not the fault of Dr. Zarif or the Foreign Ministry, but the government as a whole.” That implies the Rouhani administration placed all its bets on the JCPOA and was completely unprepared for Trump’s “maximum pressure” offensive, which de facto decimated the reformist-minded Iranian middle class.
In a nutshell: in the Raeisi era, exit “strategic patience” when dealing with the US. Enter “active deterrence”.
A key node of BRI and EAEU
Raeisi was met by those who control the “international community” narrative with proverbially derisive and/or demonizing epithets: loyal to the “repressive machinery” of the Islamic Republic, “hardliner”, a violator of human rights, mass executioner, anti-Western fanatic, or simply “killer”. Amnesty International even called for him to be investigated as perpetrator of crimes against humanity.
Facts are more prosaic. Raeisi, born in Mashhad, has a PhD in jurisprudence and fundamentals of Islamic law and a further jurisprudence degree from the Qom seminary. His previous positions include member of the Assembly of Experts and chief of the Judiciary.
He may not have been exposed to the Western way of life, but he’s not “anti-Western” – as he believes Iran must interact with all nations. Yet foreign policy must follow Khamenei’s guidelines, which are very clear. Without understanding Khamenei’s worldview, any analysis of Iranian complexities is an idle sport. For essential background, please refer to my Asia Times e-book Persian Miniatures.
It all starts with Ayatollah Khomeini’s founding concept of an Islamic Republic, which was indeed influenced by Plato’s Republic as well as Muslim political philosopher al-Farabi’s Virtuous City (also Plato-influenced).
On the 40th anniversary of the Islamic Revolution, Khamenei updated his concept of foreign policy, as part of a clear map for the future. This is absolutely required reading to understand what Iran is all about. An excellent analysis by Mansoureh Tajik emphasizes the ways the system strives for balance and justice. Khamenei could not be more straightforward when he writes,
“Today, the challenge for the US is Iran’s presence at the borders surrounding the Zionist regime and dismantling the illegitimate influence and presence of America from West Asia, Islamic Republic’s defense of Palestinian fighters at the heart of the occupied territories, and defense of holy flag of Hizbullah and the Resistance in the entire region. If in those days, the West’s problem was preventing Iran from buying even the most primitive forms of arms for its defense, today, its challenge is to prevent the Iranian arms, military equipment, and drones reaching Hizbullah and the Resistance everywhere in the region. If in those days, America imagined it can overcome the Islamic System and the Iranian nation with the help of a few self-selling Iranian traitors, today, it is finding itself in need of a large coalition of tens of hostile yet impotent governments to fight Iran. Yet, it fails.”
In terms of Big Power politics, Iran’s “Look East” policy was devised by Khamenei – who fully vetted the $400 billion-worth Iran-China comprehensive strategic partnership, which is directly linked to the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), and also supports Iran joining the Russia-led Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU).
So it’s Iran as a key Eurasian connectivity hub that is going to shape its geopolitical and geoeconomic future. And not the West, as Marandi stressed.
China will be investing in Iranian banking, telecom, ports, railways, public health and information technology – not to mention striking bilateral deals in weapons development and intel sharing.
On the Russian front, the impetus will come from the development of the International North-South Transportation Corridor (INSTC), which directly competes with an East to West overland corridor that can be hit anytime with extra-territorial American sanctions.
Iran has already struck an interim free trade agreement with the EAEU, active since October 2019. A full-fledged deal – with Iran as a full member – may be struck in the first few months of the Raeisi era, with important consequences for trade from the South Caucasus to wider Southwest Asia and even Southeast Asia: Vietnam and Singapore already have free trade zones with the EAEU.
The American rhetoric about Iran’s “isolation” does not fool anyone in Southwest Asia – as the developing interaction with China-Russia attests. Add to it Moscow’s reading of the “mood for deepening dialogue and developing contacts in the defense sphere”.
So this is what the Raeisi era is leading to: a more solid union of Iranian Shi’ism, socialism with Chinese characteristics and the Greater Eurasia Partnership. And it doesn’t hurt that state of the art Russian military technology is quietly surveying the evolving chessboard.
For anybody wanting peace, it is important to understand the logic of those who want war. What I propose to do today is to list all the reasons why the US is waging war not only on Russia, but also on Europe. This time again I will use a bulletpoint list (in no special order)
The Empire and Russia have been at war for years now, at least since 2013; until now, this war was 80% informational, about 15% economic and only about 5% kinetic. Yet from its initiation, it was an existential war for both sides and it still is. At the end of it all, only one party will remain standing, the other one will have collapsed and profoundly changed. The above ratios are now about to change.
Needless to say, the Woke and LGTBQ+ freaks (which are all over the “Biden” admin) all hate Russia for being (in their very mistaken opinion) both “White”, “Christian” and “Conservative” (only the latter is mostly true).
So far, all the efforts of Obama, Trump and Biden have yielded exactly *zero* results. Or, better, it did produce results, but not the ones it was supposed to achieve: Russia increased her sovereignty and economic independence, the Russia people rallied around Putin, and the Russian political scene became even more anti-western than before. The US plan against Russia failed, true, but the Russian people (and politicians) all understood that the attempt was to destroy Russia as a country, a nation and a civilization.
After decades of incompetent and corrupt “leadership” by all administrations, the US is in terrible shape by pretty much any relevant metric. You could say that the “imperial pie” which the US and the EU share has shrunk that, in turn, means that the US has to seize a bigger chunk of it. Hence the US opposition to NS2 which does not threaten the 3B+PU nations, but threatens to make the EU more competitive (cheaper energy) than the US (more expensive energy). Hence, NS2 must be stopped at all costs (“Biden” just appointed a “special envoy” to kill NS2: Amos Hochstein).
Up until now, the EU (mostly Germany) were able to resist the US pressure, but with a large scale shooting war in the Ukraine, NS2 will be instantly cancelled, this will be a political triumph for the US Neocons.
The Nazi Banderastan created by the US Dems (shame on you if you ever voted for Obama or “Biden”!) has become a black hole by any relevant metric and should a war break out, this will affect the EU far more than the USA, hence this is yet another chance for Uncle Shmuel to grab a bigger piece of the “western imperial pie”.
Next, even if the Russian forces stay behind the current line of contact, any overt Russian intervention in the Ukraine will result in an immediate war hysteria in the West, securing the total domination of the US (via NATO) of the entire European continent.
Also, if the Ukronazi Banderastan is ever allowed to join NATO (in whatever form), then NATO will have to deal with the largely anti-NATO population of the eastern Ukraine. It is therefore objectively in the interests of the USA and NATO to simply get rid of the Donbass and incorporate in NATO only the pro-Nazi parts of the Ukraine while blaming “break-up” and “invasion” on Russia. The only part of the Ukraine which the US/NATO really wanted was, of course, Crimea (an ancient Anglo fantasy!). Putin made sure this will never happen and now this pipe dream will never become reality.
The political scene in Europe is undergoing a deep crisis: some countries risk falling apart (UK, Spain), all of them are hit hard by the pandemic, riots are taking place everywhere (even in “peaceful” Switzerland! in St Gallen cops shot rubber bullets at protesters) which, frankly, threatens the long term future of the EU (which itself is an instrument of US domination of Europe). Triggering a war will completely change this landscape just like the 9/11 false flag changed the political landscape in the USA.
And then there is NATO itself, a fantastically ineffective organization in military terms, but an extremely effective one politically. Since 1991, this organization had lost any purpose, a new war in the Ukraine will give it a (entirely fake) purpose for decades to come, thereby keeping Europe a US colony (which, of course, the “new Europeans” want, but of the “old Europeans” – no so much).
The fact that NS2 is something like 95% completed is a slap in the face of Uncle Shmuel and the “Biden” administration will want to show these pesky Europeans “who is boss”. Since triggering a war will immediately stop NS2, it will punish the Europeans not only by denying them cheap energy, but also by the billions of dollars they already wasted on this project, and the more billions they will have to pay Russia in the future.
The Ukraine cannot enter NATO, at least officially, until all its border issues are resolved. That is the official propaganda line. But what if Russia intervenes in the Donbass, then I would not put it past the Poles to move a number of battalions to the Lvov and Ivano-Frankovsk regions and that will de facto place the western Ukraine under Polish control and, thereby under NATO control and thereby US control. And no need for any votes of referendums – it will all happen while the world will watch in horror the war in the Donbass.
I could go on, but I think the point is clear: for the “Biden” administration, the upcoming war will be a dream come true, a way of killing many birds with one stone and, most importantly, a way to really hurt Russia (that will be true in spite of the fact that Russia will easily prevail militarily against any imaginable combination of forces in the eastern Ukraine.
Of course, all of the above is predicated on the deeply mistaken belief by US politicians that Russia is weak and the US invulnerable. Remember, while US politicians are long on chutzpah and narcissistic and messianic self-worship, they ain’t too knowledgeable about history (or anything pertaining to Zone B).
The bottom line is this: Uncle Shmuel is preparing a continental 9/11 PSYOP operation. Even worse is that I don’t see what/who/how anybody could stop it.
The U.S. will ignore the message from Anchorage. It is already testing China over Taiwan, and is preparing an escalation in Ukraine, to test Russia.
Sun Tzu’s The Art of War (c. 500 BCE) advises that: “To secure ourselves against defeat lies in our own hands; yet the opportunity of defeating the enemy is provided by the enemy himself … Therefore the clever combatant imposes his will; and does not allow the enemy’s will to be imposed on him”. This is the essence of the Chinese resistance economy – a strategy which has been fully unveiled in the wake of the Anchorage talks; talks that silenced any lingering thoughts in Beijing that America might somehow find some modus vivendi with Beijing in its headlong pursuit of primacy over China.
Although earlier there had been tantalising glimpses of déshabillé, the full reveal to China’s tough stance and rhetoric has only been permitted now – post-Anchorage – and the talks’ confirmation that the U.S. intends to block China’s ascent.
If it is assumed that this ‘resistance’ initiative constitutes some tit-for-tat ‘jab’ at Washington – through sinking Biden’s Iran ambitions, as revenge for America loudly crying ‘war crimes’ (‘genocide’ in Xingjian) – then we miss wholly its full import. The scope of the Iran pact by far transcends trade and investment, as one commentator in the Chinese state media made plain: “As it stands, this deal (the Iran pact) will totally upend the prevailing geopolitical landscape in the West Asian region that has for so long been subject to U.S. hegemony”.
So here is the essence to ‘a clever combatant moving to impose his will’ – there is no need for China or Russia or Iran to go to war to do this; they just implement ‘it’. They can do ‘it’ – quite simply. They don’t need a revolution to do it, because they have no vested interest in fighting America.
What is ‘it’? It is not just a trade and investment pact with Tehran; neither is it simply allies helping each other. The ‘resistance’ lies precisely with the way they’re trying to help each other. It is a mode of economic development. It represents the notion that any rent-yielding resource – banking, land, natural resources and natural infrastructure monopolies – should be in the public domain to provide basic needs to everybody – freely.
The alternative way simply is to privatise these ‘public goods’ (as in the West), where they are provided at a financialized maximum cost – including interest rates, dividends, management fees, and corporate manipulations for financial gain.
‘It’ is then a truly different economic approach. To give one example: New York’s Second Avenue Subway extension cost $6 billion, or $2 billion per mile – the most expensive urban mass transit ever built. The average cost of underground subway lines outside the U.S. is $350 million a mile, or a sixth of New York’s cost.
How does this ‘it’ change everything? Well, just imagine for a moment: the biggest element in anyone’s budget today is housing at 40%, which simply reflects high house prices, based on a debt-fuelled market. Instead, imagine that proportion at 10% (as in China). Suppose too, you have low-cost public education. Well then, you are rid of education-led debt, and its interest cost. Suppose you have public healthcare, and low priced transport infrastructure. Then you would have the capacity to spend – It becomes a low-cost economy, and consequently it would grow.
Another example: The cost of hiring R&D staff in China is a third to half the comparable cost in the U.S., so China’s tech spend is closer to $1 trillion a year (in terms of purchasing power parity), whereas the U.S. spends just 0.6% of GDP, or about $130 billion, on federal R&D.
At one level therefore, this ‘it’ is a strategic challenge to the western eco-system. In one corner, the debt-driven, hyper-financialised, yet stagnant economies of Europe and the EU – in which strategic direction and economic ‘winners and losers’ are set by the Big Oligarchs, and in which the 60% struggle, and 0.1% thrive. And, in the far corner, a very mixed economy in which the Party sets a strategic course for state enterprises, whilst others are encouraged to innovate, and to be entrepreneurial in the mould of a state-directed economy (albeit, with Taoist and Confucian characteristics).
Socialism versus capitalism? No, it is a long time since the U.S. was a capitalist economy; it’s hardly even a market economy today. It has become, more and more, a rentier economy since leaving the gold standard (in 1971). This forced U.S. exit from the ‘gold window’ facilitated the U.S. via the resultant global demand for U.S. debt instruments, (Treasury bonds), to finance itself for free (from out of the entire world’s economic surplus). The Washington Consensus ensured additionally that the inflows of dollars to Wall Street from around the globe would never be subject capital controls, nor would states be able to create their own currency, but would have to borrow in dollars from the World Bank and the IMF.
And that essentially meant borrowing from the Pentagon and the State Department in U.S. dollars, who ultimately were the system ‘enforcers’, as Professor Hudson notes. The shift in the U.S. financial system to being an entity that that prioritises ‘real’ assets, such as mortgages and real estate that offer a certain ‘rent’, rather than to invest directly in speculative business ventures, also means that debt jubilees are verboten. (The Greeks can recount the experience of what that entails, in grim detail).
The point is that – at the economic plane – the U.S., hyper-financialised sphere is fast shrinking, as China, Russia and much of the ‘World Island’ turn to trading in their own currencies (and do not buy U.S. Treasuries). In a ‘war’ of economic systems, America therefore starts on the back foot.
Halford Mackinder argued a century ago that control of the ‘Heartland’, which stretched from the Volga to the Yangtze, would control the ‘World Island’, which was his term for all Europe, Asia and Africa. Over a century later, Mackinder’s theory resonates as the two leading nations behind the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) transform this into a system of inter-relations from one Eurasian end to another. It is not so new, of course. It is simply the revival of the ancient trade-based economy of the Eurasian heartland, which finally was collapsed in the 17th century.
Alastair Macleod notes that commentators usually fail to understand ‘why’ this flourishing in West Asia is happening: “It is not due to military superiority, but down to simple economics. While the U.S. economy suffers a post-lockdown inflationary outcome and an existential crisis for the dollar – China’s economy will boom on the back of increasing domestic consumption … and increasing exports, the consequence of America’s stimulation of consumer demand and a soaring budget deficit”.
There, explicitly said, is Sun Tzu’s point! “Opportunity of defeating the enemy is provided by the enemy himself”. There is in Washington (and to an extent in Europe too), a faction entertaining a pathological emotional desire for war with Russia, largely stemming from a conviction that the Tzars (and later Stalin), were anti-Semitic. Their emotion is one of hatred and anger, yet it is they who largely are responsible for bringing Russia and China together. This, and America’s proclivity to sanction the world, has given China and Russia their opportunity.
The underlying point however, is that – even for the EU – the Rimland periphery is less important than Mackinder’s World Island. There was a time when British and then American primacy outweighed its importance – but this may no longer be true. What is actualising here is the greatest challenge yet mounted to American economic power and technological supremacy.
Yet this economic Realpolitik is but half the story to China and Russia’s launch of a ‘global resistance economy’. It has a parallel geo-political frame, too.
It is to this latter aspect, most probably, that the Chinese official referred when he said that the Iran deal would “totally upend the prevailing geopolitical landscape in the West Asian region that has for so long been subject to U.S. hegemony”. Note that he did not say that it would upend Iran’s relations with U.S. or Europe – he said the whole region. He implied too, that China’s initiatives would free West Asia from American hegemony. How so?
“The Middle East was a highland of brilliant civilizations in human history. Yet, due to protracted conflicts and turmoil in the more recent history, the region descended into a security lowland … For the region to emerge from chaos and enjoy stability, it must break free from the shadows of big-power geopolitical rivalry, and independently explore development paths suited to its regional realities. It must stay impervious to external pressure and interference, and follow an inclusive and reconciliatory approach to build a security architecture that accommodates the legitimate concerns of all sides … Against this backdrop, China wishes to propose a five-point initiative on achieving security and stability in the Middle East:
“Firstly, advocating mutual respect … Both sides should uphold the international norm of non-interference in others’ internal affairs … it is particularly important for China and Arab states to stand together against slandering, defamation, interference and pressurizing in the name of human rights … [the EU should take note]
“Second, upholding equity and justice, opposing unilateralism, and defending international justice … China will encourage the Security Council to fully deliberate on the question of Palestine to reaffirm the two-state solution … We should uphold the UN-centred international system, as well as the international order underpinned by international law – and jointly promote a new type of international relations. We should share governance experience … and oppose arrogance and prejudice.
“Third, achieving non-proliferation … Parties need to … discuss and formulate the roadmap and timeframe for the United States and Iran to resume compliance with the JCPOA. The pressing task is for the U.S. to take substantive measures to lift its unilateral sanctions on Iran, and long-arm jurisdiction on third parties, and for Iran to resume reciprocal compliance with its nuclear commitments. At the same time, the international community should support efforts by regional countries in establishing a Middle East zone free of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction.
“Fourth, jointly fostering collective security … We propose holding in China a multilateral dialogue conference for regional security in the Gulf (Persian Gulf) …
“And fifthly, accelerating development cooperation …”.
Well, China has spectacularly made its entrance in the Middle East, and is challenging the U.S. with a resistance agenda. FM Wang, when he met with Ali Larijani, special adviser to the Supreme Leader Khamenei, framed it all in a single sentence: “Iran decides independently on its relations with other countries, and is not like some countries that change their position with one phone call”. This single comment encapsulates the new ‘wolf warrior’ ethos: states should stick with their autonomy and sovereignty. China is advocating a sovereigntist multilateralism to shake off “the western yoke”.
Wang did not confine this political message to Iran. He had just said the same in Saudi Arabia, before arriving in Tehran. It was well received in Riyadh. In economic development terms, China earlier had linked Turkey and Pakistan into the ‘corridor’ plan – and now Iran.
How will the U.S. react? It will ignore the message from Anchorage. It will likely press on. It is already testing China over Taiwan, and is preparing an escalation in Ukraine, to test Russia.
For the EU, the Chinese entry into global politics is more problematic. It was trying to leverage its own ‘strategic autonomy’ by erecting European values as the gateway to inclusion into its market and trade partnership. China effectively is telling the world to reject any such hegemonic imposition of alien values and rights.
The EU is stranded in the midst. Unlike the U.S., it is precluded from printing the money with which to resurrect its virus-blighted economy. It desperately needs trade and investment. Its biggest trading partner, and its tech well-spring, however, has just told the EU (as the U.S.), to give up on its moralising discourse. At the same time, Europe’s ‘security partner’ has just demanded the opposite – that the EU strengthens it. What’s to be done? Sit back, and watch … (with fingers crossed that no one does something extremely stupid).
بعد أن باتت مكشوفة خطة أميركا التي تستهدف لبنان عدواناً عليه من أجل الإطاحة بمكتسباته التي حققها بصموده ومقاومته التي حرّرت الأرض في الجنوب وأقامت توازن الردع الاستراتيجي مع العدو الإسرائيلي ووفرت الحماية الفاعلة لثرواته الطبيعية من ماء ونفط، بعد أن اتضحت معالم تلك الخطة باعتبارها تقوم على سلسلة من حلقات تبدأ بالحصار والتجويع وتمرّ بالفتنة والاقتتال الداخلي وتنتهي بعدوان إسرائيلي يشترط لتنفيذه النجاح في المراحل السابقة أي فرض التجويع ونشر الفتن والاقتياد إلى الحرب الأهلية.
بعد كل هذا أضحى الدفاع عن لبنان ومنع العدوان الإسرائيلي عليه وقبله منع الفتنة والاقتتال فيه، يبدأ بمنع التجويع، وباتت مسألة تحقيق ما يحتاجه الناس من أجل معيشتهم من سلع وخدمات، واجباً وطنياً يندرج في إطار تحقيق الأمن والسلامة العامة، باعتبار أنّ الأمن الغذائي والأمن المعيشي هو في الأصل فرع من فروع الأمن العام أما مع وجود خطة عدوان خارجي تستند إلى هذا العنصر وتتوسّل الإخلال بالأمن الغذائي للنيل من لبنان، فقد بات تحقيق الأمن. هذا يشكل وجهاً من وجوه الدفاع.
وبهذا يجب ان تفهم دعوة الأمين العام لحزب الله لممارسة المقاومة الاقتصادية عبر تحويل التهديد بالجوع والعوز والفاقة، إلى فرصة يستغلها لبنان يحول من خلالها اقتصاده من اقتصاد ريعي واهن يقوم على الخدمات إلى اقتصاد قوي متماسك يقوم على الإنتاج، اقتصاد تكون عماده الزراعة والصناعة التي يتحكم بمسارها اللبناني ذو الخبرة والكفاءة والقادر على استغلال أرضه في الزراعة وأمواله وكفاءاته في الصناعة استغلالاً يمكنه من تحويل وجهة توفير السلع واستبدال المصادر الخارجية لها التي تهدر الأموال الصعبة إلى مصادر داخلية تحقق له اكتفاء ذاتياً يبقي العملة الصعبة في الداخل في مرحلة أولى ثم يتطور إلى التصدير ليصبح مصدراً لتدفق الأموال من الخارج بما يعيد شيئاً من التوازن للميزان التجاري الذي تفاقم اختلاله منذ العام 1992 تاريخ الاعتماد حصراً على الاقتصاد الريعيّ وتدمير الصناعة والزراعة في لبنان بعيداً عن الاقتصاد الإنتاجي.
علينا أن ندرك أننا في حرب حقيقية الآن وان المواجهة فيها ليست بين تجار يتنافسون على ربح مادي من أسعار سلع وخدمات يوفرونها. فالمسألة ليست تنافساً واحتكاراً يمارسه تاجر بل هي حرب بكل معنى الكلمة تقوم على مبدأ أطلقه الغرب منذ ثلاثة قرون قال فيه إن “مالك الرزق يكون مالكاً للعنق ومن تحكم بلقمة عيشك أخضعك بسهولة”، مبدأ اتجهت أميركا إلى العمل به وبشراسة بعد ان عجزت في المواجهة في الميدان رغم تقلبها في مختلف صيغ المواجهة واستراتيجيتها من قوة صلبة إلى قوة ناعمة إلى قوة مركبة ذكية. بعد كل هذا قررت أميركا الحرب الاقتصادية او الإرهاب الاقتصادي تمارسه على لبنان عامة وتدّعي بأنها تستهدف به حزب الله فقط وهو ادّعاء كاذب طبعا، وبعد أن بلغت المواجهة بين المحور الاستعماري الذي تقوده أميركا ومحور المقاومة الذي ينتظم فيه حزب الله أوجها في لبنان وطالت لقمة المواطن وكل مفاصل حياته ومعيشته وباتت محطة ممهدة للعدوان الخارجي على لبنان، عدوان يستهدف حقوقه في الأرض والبحر وسيادته في الأجواء، فإن مواجهة عدوان أميركا ورفض الاستسلام لها باتت تشكل واجباً وطنياً يندرج في سياق الدفاع عن الوطن دفاعاً يهدف إلى التحرر الاقتصادي من الهيمنة الأميركية، تحرراً لا يقل أهمية عن تحرير الأرض والإرادة.
والتحرر الاقتصادي المطلوب هذا هو الذي يستلزم المقاومة الاقتصادية التي يجب أن يلتزم بها كل مواطن قادر على عمل ما في سياقها، مقاومة لا تقتصر على مسألة تحويل الإنتاج من ريعي إلى إنتاجي والسير في طريق تحقيق الاكتفاء الذاتي من السلع الاستهلاكيّة والخدمات التي يحتاجها الفرد والجماعة، بل مقاومة تشمل التفلت من القبضة الأميركية في اختيار الشركاء في العملية الاقتصادية والخروج من حالة يكون فيها رضا أميركا شرطاً للتعامل الاقتصادي مع الخارج إلى وضع تكون فيه “مصلحة لبنان هي المحرك لإقامة أي علاقة مع الخارج” وفي حال انتقل لبنان من الأولى إلى الثانية أي انتقل من رضا أميركا إلى مصلحة لبنان، سيجد أميركا تتراجع كثيراً عن ممارستها الوحشية للإرهاب الاقتصادي ضده… وعلى لبنان أن يملك شجاعة القرار وشجاعة المواجهة في التنفيذ وسيجد أن الأمور أهون بكثير مما كان يُتوقّع أو يُظنّ.
وإضافة إلى التحوّل في طبيعة الاقتصاد، والتحوّل في اختيار الأسواق الخارجية، هناك شرط ثالث لنجاح المقاومة الاقتصادية، وهو شرط داخلي إداري مالي ذاتي، يتمثل بالإصلاح الإداري والمالي وبمراجعة النظم الإدارية والمالية القائمة في لبنان والقيمين عليها، والانتقال من التصوّر القائم اليوم لدى غالبية الموظفين في لبنان ومن كل الفئات والأسلاك، تصور يتمثل بالقول بأن “الوظيفة العامة هي ملكية واستثمار” ملكية للطائفة واستثمار بيد مَن يتولاها، والانتقال إلى المفهوم الوطني لها واعتبار “الوظيفة العامة خدمة وطنية عامة” والموظف عامل مأجور لدى لشعب وليس جلاداً يتحكم بأموال الشعب وأعصاب أفراده.
إنها شروط ثلاثة يفترض توفرها لنجاح المقاومة الاقتصادية بالشكل الذي يعول عليه لإنقاذ لبنان وحمايته وجوداً ودوراً، شروط يجب أن تكون ماثلة في ذهن كل مَن يحاول وضع استراتيجية دفاعية للبنان، فالدفاع لا يتوقف عند تحرير الأرض ودرء الخطر الناري عليها بل يشمل كل التدابير التي تستهدف حماية الأرض ومَن عليها في وجوده وحقوقه ومستلزمات عيشه وكرامته وسيادته. وبهذا نجعل الخطر الذي يشكله العدوان الأميركي على لبنان الآن والذي يُنذر بأسوأ العواقب نجعله فرصة يصنع فيها اللبناني حبال النجاة وجسور العبور من دوائر الخطر على المصير إلى مواقع الطمأنينة للمواطن والوطن…
Nouvelles du front ukrainien, par Thierry Meyssan
-
Les États-Unis et la Russie veulent conclure la paix le plus vite possible
en Ukraine. Le problème n'est pas où l'on croit : il semble que les
straussiens ...
The man bankrupting America
-
“Go F*** Yourself, Scott: A Full Background Check on The Man Bankrupting
America, Human Skin Tag, Scott Bessent.“ (Blundell).In the same week,
different US...
Occult Utopia Of Jewish Golden Age
-
Occult Utopia Of Jewish Golden Age September 6 2026
___________________________________ More Vids! +BN Vids Archive! HERE!
________________________________...
And You Remain Impossible to Erase
-
There you are, the inspiring Imam, forever present in the conscience of the
honorable and the hearts of the loyal.
Father Dave Smith, Pray For (Mufti) Dr. Hassoun
-
Abducted by the terrorist regime in Syria in 2025, Sheikh Hassoun has been
sentenced to life in prison I spoke with Father Dave Smith, an Australian
Anglic...
Report on Beth Israel vigil 08-15-26
-
*Charlie Kirk and JFK*
John F. Kennedy was assassinated under questionable circumstances on
November 22, 1963, and Charlie Kirk fell on September 10 of la...
On The Road To International Anarchy
-
ON THE ROAD TO INTERNATIONAL ANARCHY— An Analysis (14 August 2026) by
Lawrence Davidson Part I — The Turn Toward […]
-
Hello all,
It is with great sadness that I share with you the passing of our beloved
sister, Mother, and Grandmother, the individual that you all knew ...
Best Horror Podcast
-
Best Horror Podcast Introduction: Horror podcasts […]
The post Best Horror Podcast appeared first on Copper Shock Horror Podcast.
Ikhras Endorses Muntadhar Al-Zaidi
-
“Oh parties of banditry and sectarianism and corruption, we have come and
our goal is to destroy you.” Ikhras formally endorses Muntadhar al-Zaidi,
Iraqi j...
Prince Charles: Foreign Jews behind bloodshed in ME
-
In May, 2017, British Crown Prince Charles declined an invitation from
Zionist entity’s president Reuven Rivlin‘s to attend the 100th anniversary
of the no...
Palestinian Women – One for All, All for One
-
Honouring All Palestinian Women by Honouring Three: Hanin Zoabi, Ahed
Tamimi, Samah Sabawi Vacy Vlazna “Palestinian women have always stood side
by side ...
US’s Saudi Oil Deal from Win-Win to Mega-Lose
-
By F. William Engdahl Who would’ve thought it would come to this? Certainly
not the Obama Administration, and their brilliant geo-political think-tank
neo-...
-
*Mordechai Vanunu wins human rights prize of Brazilian Press Association *
* http://www.alternativenews.org/english/index.php/features/updates/7038-mordechai...
Abdul Aziz Rantissi:
"My ultimate wish, my God, is to attain martyrdom,"...God granted him his wish on April 17, 2004, at the hands of Israeli assassins.
