Democracies Don’t Start Wars. But Democrats Do

By Philip Giraldi, Ph.D.
Source: Strategic Culture

It may have been President Bill Clinton who once justified his wrecking of the Balkans by observing that liberal interventionism to bring about regime change is a good thing because “Democracies don’t start wars with other democracies.” Or it might have been George W. Bush talking about Iraq or even Barack Obama justifying his destruction of Libya or his interventions relating to Syria and Ukraine. The principle is the same when the world’s only superpower decides to throw its weight around.

The idea that pluralistic democracies are somehow less inclined to go to war has in fact been around for a couple of hundred years and was first elaborated by Immanuel Kant in an essay entitled “Perpetual Peace” that was published in 1795. Kant may have been engaging in some tongue in cheek as the French relatively liberal republic, the “Directory,” was at that time preparing to invade Italy to spread the revolution. The presumption that “democracies” are somehow more pacific than other forms of government is based on the principle that it is in theory more difficult to convince an entire nation of the desirability of initiating armed conflict compared to what happens in a monarchy where only one man or woman has to be persuaded.

The American Revolution, which preceded Kant, was clearly not fought on the principle that kings are prone to start wars while republics are not, and, indeed, the “republican” United States has nearly always been engaged in what most observers would consider to be wars throughout its history. And a review of the history of the European wars of the past two hundred years suggests that it is also overly simple to suggest that democracies eschew fighting each other. There are, after all, many different kinds of governments, most with constitutions, many of which are quite politically liberal even if they are headed by a monarch or oligarchy. They have found themselves on different sides in the conflicts that have troubled Europe since the time of Napoleon.

And wars are often popular, witness the lines of enthusiastic young men lining up to enlist when the Triple Entente took on the Germans and Austrians to begin the First World War. So, war might be less likely among established democracies, but it should be conceded that the same national interests that drive a dictatorship can equally impact on a more pluralistic form of government, particularly if the media “the territory of lies” is in on the game. One recalls how the Hearst newspaper chain created the false narrative that resulted in the U.S.’s first great overseas imperial venture, the Spanish-American War. More recently, the mainstream media in the United States has supported the disastrous invasion of Iraq, the destabilization of Syria, and the regime change in Ukraine, Afghanistan and Libya.

So now we Americans have the ultimate liberal democratic regime about to resume power, possibly with a majority in both houses of Congress to back up the presidency. But something is missing in that the campaigning Democrats never talked about a peace dividend, and now that they are returning the airwaves are notable for Senators like Mark Warner asking if the alleged Russian hacking of U.S. computers is an “act of war?” Senator Dick Durbin has no doubts on the issue, having declared it “virtually a declaration of war.” And Joe Biden appears to be on board, considering punishment for Moscow. Are we about to experience Russiagate all over? In fact, belligerency is not unique to Donald Trump and Mike Pompeo.  War is in the air, and large majority of the Democratic Party recently voted for the pork-bloated National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), endorsing a policy of U.S. global military dominance for the foreseeable future. If you are an American who would like to see national health insurance, a large majority among Democrats, forget about it!

But more to the point, the Democrats have a worse track record than do the Republicans when it comes to starting unnecessary wars. Donald Trump made the point of denouncing “stupid wars” when he was running for office and has returned to that theme also in the past several weeks, though he did little enough to practice what he preached until it was too late and too little. Clinton notoriously intervened in the Balkans and bombed a pharmaceuticals factory in Sudan and a cluster of tents in Afghanistan to draw attention away from his affair with Monica Lewinsky. His secretary of State Madeleine Albright thought the death of 500,000 Iraqi children due to U.S. sanctions was “worth it.” Barack Obama tried to destroy Syria, interfered in Ukraine and succeeded in turning Libya into an ungovernable mess while compiling a “kill list” and assassinating U.S. citizens overseas using drones.

If you want to go back farther, Woodrow Wilson involved the U.S. in World War One while Franklin D. Roosevelt connived at America’s entry into the Second World War. FDR’s successor Harry Truman dropped two atomic bombs on civilian targets in Japan, killing as many as 200,000. Japan was preparing to surrender, which was known to the White House and Pentagon, making the first use of nuclear weapons completely unnecessary and one might call it a “war crime.” Truman also got involved in Korea and John F. Kennedy started the intervention in Vietnam, though there are indications that he was planning to withdraw from it when he was killed. The only Democratic president who failed to start one or more wars was the much-denigrated Jimmy Carter.

So, it is Joe Biden’s turn at the wheel. One has to question the philosophy of government that he brings with him as he has never found a war that he didn’t support and several of his cabinet choices are undeniably hardliners on what they refer to as national security. The lobbies are also putting pressure on Biden to do the “right thing,” which for them is to continue an interventionist foreign policy. The Israeli connected Foundation for the Defense Democracies (FDD) has not surprisingly issued a collection of essays that carries the title “Defending Forward: Securing America by Projecting Military Power Abroad.” If one had to bet at this point “defending forward” will be what the Biden Administration is all about. And oh, by the way, as democracies don’t go to war with democracies, it will only be the designated bad guys who will be on the receiving end of America’s military might.Or at least that is how the tale will be told.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

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

President Assad Slaughtered Neoliberalism’s Four Sacred Cows

 By Andrew Korybko

Source

Syrian President Assad just slaughtered neoliberalism’s four sacred cows of gay marriage, radical secularism, marijuana legalization, and gender theory in a short video of his latest speech that recently went viral on social media where he condemned these examples of “total moral degeneracy” that he very passionately believes “target our humanity”.

The “Great Social/Civilizational Reset”

The increasingly sharp contrast between the West’s extreme neoliberal social values and most of the rest of the world’s embrace of conservative traditionalism was brought to the fore of global attention after October’s terrorist beheading of a French schoolteacher for sharing satirical cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad. The author published an analysis at the time asking “Is A ‘Great Social/Civilizational Reset Upon Us?”, which predicted that each value system’s proponents will become more vocal in the future but that this doesn’t necessarily imply that the fearmongered “Clash of Civilizations” scenario is inevitable. Rather, what’s likely to unfold is that each side more proudly reasserts their identity as time goes on, defending that which they hold dearest against what they regard as the threat represented by the other system. This is precisely what recently happened after a short video of Syrian President Assad’s latest speech went viral on social media where he slaughtered the four sacred cows of neoliberalism.

Syrian Girl Made The Syrian Leader Go Viral

Mimi Al Laham, also known as Syrian Girl on Twitter, translated the most important part into English. Her work was then shared by Infowars as part of their article titled “Bashar Al-Assad: Neoliberalism is Based on ‘Total Moral Degeneracy’”, which in turn brought it to the attention of countless people across the world. President Assad is known for his solid support of secularism in the face of fundamentalist religious threats to his country’s society, yet casual observers would have been mistaken if they assumed that this means that he’s sympathetic to neoliberalism. The reality couldn’t be more different since the Syrian leader showed that it’s possible to be a secular anti-liberal unlike what many people might have naively thought. Some of his own supporters abroad might even be a bit surprised by what he said since they probably didn’t expect him to group gay marriage, radical secularism, marijuana legalization, and gender theory together as examples of “total moral degeneracy” which he very passionately believes “target our humanity.”

Slaughtering The Four Sacred Cows

For the reader’s convenience, the author is sharing Syrian Girl’s translation of President Assad’s speech below:

“Neoliberalism is based on promoting a total moral degeneracy and separating individuals from any principles or values and affiliations and beliefs in order to reach this moral degeneracy. Neoliberalism promoted gay marriage. They started in the 1970s and now gay marriage is legal. And now they have children but it’s different from adopting because how can they have children?

Neoliberalism promoted that a child does not choose his own religion and this is against the child’s freedom of expression. A child is born without any religion and later choose his own religion when he’s grown up. This is against human nature. Ever since human made their own idols and Gods, a child would instinctively belong to his family’s religion. They contradict humanity itself.

It has recently promoted that marijuana is not harmful and now it’s sold in shops legally. They started claiming that drugs are not harmful, and later they will find something more harmful. Now in some places you can buy marijuana-flavored bread. This is neoliberalism. It (neoliberalism) now claims that a child is born and does not have a gender, that the child chooses later to be a male or a female. Very strange indeed!

So what do we understand from this? Neoliberalism targets our humanity, and by doing so, it collides with religions because religions serve humanity while neoliberalism separates individuals from their values.”

From the above, there’s no doubt that President Assad slaughtered all four of neoliberalism’s sacred cows.

Reviewing President Assad’s Principled Views

Gay marriage, as he noted, has been pushed by neoliberals onto society for nearly the past half-century, after which it finally succeeded to such a wild extent that sex change surgeries can now even lead to so-called “male pregnancies”. According to President Assad, the radical neoliberal ideology of forcibly secularizing children “contradicts humanity itself”. Legalizing drugs, and especially Western society’s normalization of marijuana, is harmful in his eyes, and he also regards gender theory as “very strange indeed”. Taken together, it can unambiguously be said that President Assad sees little difference between “impregnating” sex-changed males, forcing children to accept secularism despite their parents’ wishes, eating a marijuana “brownie”, and convincing children that gender is a choice. These are all similar expressions of neoliberalism’s “moral degeneracy” and “targeting of humanity”, hence why they’re equally condemned. All four of these are like a cancer eating Western society from within, something that he wants to avoid having happen in Syria.

The Syrian Model Stands To Inspire The World

President Assad’s very principled defense of traditional values despite his vehement support for secularism challenges the assumption that the only ones who support the former are religious fundamentalists. As proven by none other than himself and his millions of supporters across the world, it’s entirely possible to simultaneously support secularism and traditional values while being strongly against both neoliberalism and religious fundamentalism. It’s not an either-or choice like those who want to provoke a so-called “Clash of Civilizations” dishonestly try to make everyone think. The world is so complex that not every society neatly falls into one or the other category as Syria shows. For this reason, the Syrian model might eventually be replicated by other countries that are striving to strike a balance between those two social extremes. In hindsight, the nearly decade-long Hybrid War of Terror that was launched against his country in 2011 might have even been partially predicated on erasing Syria’s unique social system from the face of the earth in order to prevent that.

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!

Who is Destroying Lebanon and Why?

 December 27, 2020

By Thierry Meyssan
Source: Voltaire Network

Within a few months, Lebanon, often misrepresented as “the only Arab democratic state” or even as the “Switzerland of the Middle East,” has collapsed. Successively, popular demonstrations against the political class (October 2019), a banking crisis (November 2019), a health crisis (July 2020), an explosion at the port of Beirut (August 2020) caused a sudden disappearance of the middle classes and a general decline in living standards of around 200%.

From the Lebanese point of view, this horror would be due to the catastrophic management of the country by the political class, whose leaders would be corrupted except for the leader of the religious community to which the person being questioned belongs. This absurd prejudice reveals an intolerant population and masks the reality.

Since the Ottoman occupation [1], especially since independence in 1942, and even more so since the civil war (1975-90), the Lebanese population has not formed a nation [2], but an aggregate of confessional communities. The Constitution and the Taif Accords allocate all political functions and henceforth all public jobs, not according to the capacities of citizens, but according to community quotas. Each community has chosen its leaders, usually former civil warlords, who have been recognized by the international community. They managed in their own name the subsidies that the former colonial powers offered for their community. They have taken a huge amount of royalties, which they have long since transferred abroad, but they have also distributed very large sums of money to maintain their “clientele” in the image of the ancient Roman senators. It is therefore perfectly stupid to accuse them today of corruption when they have been celebrated for decades for the same work.

This system was maintained by the United States and the European Union. Thus the President of the Bank of Lebanon, Riad Salame, was celebrated as the best money manager in the Western world before being accused of hiding a hundred million dollars in personal accounts in the United Kingdom. Or, the European Union’s High Representative, Federica Mogherini, claimed to be helping Lebanon solve its waste crisis while helping the two former prime ministers, Saad Hariri and Najib Mikati, to embezzle a hundred million dollars of this sum. [3]

Only the Lebanese, who have been kept in a state of political unconsciousness for eighty years and still have not understood what they experienced during the civil war, do not realize this.

How can we fail to notice that the collapse of Lebanon follows those of Yemen, Syria, Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan? How can we fail to notice that in 2001, US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and his advisor, Admiral Arthur Cebrowski, advocated adapting the mission of the US armed forces to emerging financial capitalism? According to them, it was necessary to destroy all the state structures of all the states of the “Broader Middle East” so that no one – enemy or friend – could prevent the exploitation of the region by US multinationals.

If we admit that this “Endless War” (sic), proclaimed by President George W. Bush, is indeed going on, we must note that the destruction of the state structures of Lebanon was achieved at a lower cost.

However, given the effectiveness of the Lebanese resistance, it was necessary to achieve this objective by non-military means that escaped the vigilance of Hezbollah. Everything had already been decided in April 2019, as attested by the US response to the Lebanese delegation visiting the US State Department [4].

Four coalition powers, the United States, the United Kingdom, Israel and France, played a decisive role in this plan.

• The Pentagon set the objective: to destroy Lebanon and exploit the gas and oil fields (plan of Ambassador Frederic C. Hof).
• Whitehall set out the method [5]: manipulate the post-Civil War generation in order to liberate the current system without replacing it. Its propaganda specialists thus organized the so-called “October Revolution” which, contrary to what was sometimes believed, was not at all spontaneous. [6]
• Israel destroyed the economy thanks to its control of all telephone communications (except Hezbollah’s private network) and its presence in the world banking system. It provoked the banking rout by convincing South American drug cartels that had placed their assets in Lebanon to brutally withdraw them. It deprived the country of its economic lung, the port, by bombarding it with a new weapon. [7]
• France, for its part, proposed to privatize everything that could be privatized and put Saad Hariri back on stage to carry it out. It has applied itself to pouring out fine words while marginalizing Hezbollah [8].

Ultimately, the next twenty years should be devoted to plundering the country, especially its hydrocarbons, while the Lebanese will continue to blame scapegoats and ignore their real enemies. Already, the Israeli port of Haifa has partially replaced that of Beirut. Eventually, the country itself should be divided and the part south of the Litani River attached to Israel. [9]

It should be kept in mind, however, that the USA-UK-Israel-France coalition is not composed of equal states, but is commanded exclusively by the United States. In Libya, the USA alone pocketed the oil pact. Despite the promises made to them, their allies got only crumbs. The same scenario can be repeated in Lebanon. None of their allies could profit from their common crime.

Notes:

[1] Les Libanais ne reconnaissent pas l’Empire ottoman comme une puissance coloniale, ce qu’elle était pourtant. NdA.

[2] Par définition, le Liban n’étant pas une nation ne peut être ni une démocratie, ni une république. NdA.

[3] “EU funds embezzled by Mogherini, Hariri and Mikati”, Voltaire Network, 24 January 2020.

[4] « L’administration Trump contre le Liban », Réseau Voltaire, 2 mai 2019.

[5] Une fuite de documents officiels britannique atteste de ce rôle. Lire Complete infiltrating Lebanon (65,11 Mo). Les résultats ambitionnés ont manifestement été tenus : les Libanais souffrent tellement qu’ils ne voient plus ni l’origine de leurs problèmes, ni les solutions à portée de main, cf. “Taking Lebanon’s Pulse after the Beirut Explosion”, Michael Robbins, Arab barometer, December 15, 2020.

[6] « Les Libanais, prisonniers de leur Constitution », par Thierry Meyssan, Réseau Voltaire, 21 octobre 2019.

[7] “Israel playing with Lebanese people’s nerves”, Voltaire Network, 30 September 2020.

[8] “President Macron’s bad play in Lebanon”, by Thierry Meyssan, Translation Roger Lagassé, Voltaire Network, 29 September 2020.

[9] “Towards a partition of Lebanon?”, Voltaire Network, 8 October 2020.

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!

‘Fruits of Peace’: Beitar Will Remain a Bastion of Israeli Racism

 December 26, 2020

Beitar Jerusalem is well known for its anti-Arab, anti-Muslim bias and for its violent, racist supporters. (Photo: File)

By Issam Khalidi

Just recently Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Nahyan, a member of the UAE royal family, has pledged to invest 300 million shekels, or about $90 million, into the Beitar (Jerusalem) club over the next decade.

It wouldn’t be a big surprise if Al Khalifa invested in a club other than Beitar. This deal even made many Israelis surprised. The question that comes to mind here is why did Bin Nahyan choose to invest in this club? Does he intend to win the sympathy and favor of the most extremists in the Israeli society, or to fit the club’s deflection and adjust its racial behavior?

Indeed, it is merely a trading deal without looking into its political and moral dimensions. Also, as Rina Bassist mentioned in Al-Monitor “Not only was the deal a most tangible and direct result of the normalization agreement between the two countries, but it also confronted Beitar fans with a new, almost unimaginable reality.”

It is an illusion to think that Bin Khalifa and others are interested in purchasing historical documents that were stolen from Palestinian homes, libraries and institutions as a result of the Nakba (i.e., catastrophe) of 1948, or restoring homes and landmarks that were abandoned by their residents who became refugees in neighboring countries.

Bin Khalifa said that his investment represents “the fruits of peace and brotherhood between the two countries and this step will further bring people together through sports.”

Of course, sport is soft power and a great tool for peace, brotherhood, and friendship that could bring people together. However, in order to bring Palestinians and Israelis together through sports few things are required. The most important of which is ending the Israeli occupation. Friendly meetings and tournaments cannot be undertaken under repression, land confiscation, checkpoints, apartheid wall, blockades, arrests, and killings. Rather, under an independent Palestinian state and equal rights for Palestinians.

Israel is the only beneficiary of this deal, as it is the beneficiary of all its normalization agreements with other countries, and other peace agreements signed with Egypt, Jordan, and PLO. This club and its fans cannot be tamed, because the epidemic of racism is so rampant, its roots are so deep in the Israeli society that it cannot be eradicated. Today, it is not surprising to see that a new Israeli generation is born with genes of racism.

Despite the club’s apparent enthusiasm over the deal, many of Beitar’s fans remain upset at this shocking buyout. Fans have reportedly spray-painted offensive and racist graffiti on the walls of the stadium as a sign of their disappointment and anger.

Beitar is considered one of the clubs in the Israeli First Division Football League, known for its hardline stances against Arab and Palestinians, and there is no Arab player among its ranks. Fans of “Beitar Jerusalem” are historically considered hostile to Muslims and Arabs, especially the notorious far-right fan group “La Familia” known for its songs against the Prophet Muhammad. In 2016, nineteen members of the group were charged with attempted murder, including supporters of rival squads.

In October, the Arab member in the Knesset, Ayman Odeh, requested the removal of a racist song by the “La Familia” group that insulted the Prophet Muhammad that was published on “YouTube”. The site later removed the video from its platform.

This football club in specific has never had any Arab player on its ranks. Two Palestinian citizens of Israel who play on Israeli teams describe the racism and violence they are subjected to by Beitar fans. Alaa Abu Saleh, who plays for Bnei Sakhnin, says “It’s like war.”

In June 2019, the club refrained from joining the Nigerian player, Muhammad Ali, because of his name, or changing his name, as a condition for accepting his play with the team.

Beitar team relies on its popularity on the people of eastern sects who usually live-in poor neighborhoods and are known for their hatred of Arabs, and most of them belong to the religious parties and the Likud party.

Beitar was founded by the revisionist Jabotinsky in 1926 emerged as a movement opposed to the workers’ Histadrut in Palestine, and the members wore brown shirts as part of the movement’s fascist coloration. As for those who split from the Haganah in 1930 and established (Etzel) and (Lehi), they were members of Beitar. Its members became involved in terrorist acts in Palestine in the 1930s. Haganah, Palmach, and Vaad Leumi these terrorist organizations played a pivotal role in the establishment of the State of Israel.

The club has been trying to change its image in recent years, and in 2017 it received an award from President Reuven Rivlin for its efforts in combating racism and significantly reducing the number of anti-Arab and Muslim chants in its matches. However, racism in Israel isn’t going away, it’s getting worse and has been spurred long ago by Zionism, which is a racist ideology.

The Jewish Holocaust survivor, historian, author, and a former president of the Israeli League for Human and Civil Rights, Israel Shahak wrote on the racism of Zionism and the State of Israel (1975):

“It is my considered opinion that the State of Israel is a racist state in the full meaning of this term: In this state, people are discriminated against, in the most permanent and legal way and in the most important areas of life, only because of their origin. This racist discrimination began in Zionism and is carried out today mainly in cooperation with the institutions of the Zionist movement.”

– Issam Khalidi is an independent scholar, the author of History of Sports in Palestine 1900-1948 (in Arabic), One Hundred Years of Football in Palestine (in Arabic and English), co-edited Soccer in the Middle East, as well as articles and essays on the subject of sports included at http://www.hpalestinesports.net. He contributed this article to The Palestine Chronicle.

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!

Sayyed Nasrallah Vows Punishment for Every Crime: Hezbollah’s Guided Missiles More than Doubled

 

By Zeinab Abdallah

Beirut – Hezbollah Secretary General His Eminence Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah appeared on al-Mayadeen TV with Ghassan Bin Jeddo in a special episode named ‘Dialogue of the Year’. The four-hour long interview touched upon almost all regional issues that happened this year, although the pivotal segment was about martyr General Qassem Soleimani and Hajj Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis less than a week ahead of their first martyrdom anniversary.

Starting with the possible options that would take place during US President Donald Trump’s few days in office, Sayyed Nasrallah indicated that there is not accurate information that Trump or the ‘Israeli’ enemy will take an action. “There are just certain analyses,” His Eminence noted, adding that everybody is anticipating and expecting what Trump might do in the coming days.

“The Axis of Resistance is dealing cautiously, accurately and attentively so that no post of this axis would be lured towards any confrontation that suits the enemies’ timing, but when the enemy creates massive media noise, this means that it won’t do anything, and that it is rather waging a psychological warfare,” Sayyed Nasrallah stressed noting that “this doesn’t mean that we mustn’t remain cautious.”

Regarding the news about a possible ‘Israeli’ landing that has taken place along Lebanon’s Jiyeh coastline, the Hezbollah leader made clear that the party’s information doesn’t provide that any ‘Israeli’ landing has taken place as it was reported in media.”

Saudi attempts to assassinate Sayyed Nasrallah

Moving to the issue of assassination, the crime by which a US drone killed the Islamic Revolution Guard’s Quds Force Commander, and Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Units’ Second-in-command, Sayyed Nasrallah explained that many sides have warned him about plots to target him especially after the martyrdom of Hajj Qassem Soleimani. “This is something normal and well known,” His Eminence commented.

“I’ve been warned about assassinating me ahead of the US Presidential Elections, and that any targeting might be ‘Israeli’ or American,” the resistance leader explained, going further to uncover that targeting Hezbollah leaders is an American-‘Israeli’-Saudi goal: “I have information that Saudi Arabia has been stirring to assassinate me since the beginning of its war on Yemen, and private sources have informed me that Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad Bin Salman requested my assassination in person during his first visit to Washington and his first meeting with Trump.”

Sayyed Nasrallah cited the same sources as saying that Saudi Arabia took it upon itself that in case a war erupts after his assassination, it was ready to pay all the financial costs for this war.

“The Americans have agreed on a Saudi request to assassinate me, and that ‘Israel’ would execute this assassination. Saudi Arabia doesn’t act rationally, it has been acting maliciously especially in the recent years,” His Eminence went on to say, then he accused the US, ‘Israel’, and Saudi Arabia of partnership in the crime of assassinating leaders Soleimani and al-Muhandis.

“The crime of assassinating Hajj Qassem was a clear one, uncovered, and similar to the assassination of Sayyed Abbas al-Moussawi.”

Soleimani, the Sayyed’s own self

When talking about martyr Soleimani, Sayyed Nasrallah couldn’t have enough listing his manners and characteristics. He described the martyr as a very special person on the level of ethics. He also referred to him as a charismatic person who had the ability to influence all those who had to know him.

“On the military level, martyr Soleimani was a strategic and tactical leader at the same time,” His Eminence noted.

Describing the time that preceded the martyrdom, Sayyed Nasrallah said that he was very worried about him and he has warned him repeatedly.

“I miss Hajj Qassem very much… We have worked together and faced challenges together. I used to feel that Hajj Qassem and I were one person.”

Hajj Abu Mahdi, the main partner in Iraq’s victories

When talking about martyr Hajj Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, Sayyed Nasrallah recommended that his identity should be more defined to the people, referring to him as a great person.

“Hajj Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis is very much like Hajj Qassem, and this is why they met in the battlefield, and Allah has concluded their lives with this martyrdom.”

His Eminence explained that Hajj Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis was suggested to assume [governmental] responsibilities in Iraq, but he preferred to work in the battlefield.

“Martyr Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis was a main partner in making the two victories against Daesh [the Arabic acronym for terrorist ‘ISIS/ISIL’ group] and the US occupation of Iraq,” Sayyed Nasrallah went on to say.

“He was one of the leaders of the Axis of Resistance that surpasses Iraq and reaches all regional causes.”

Hajj Qassem, the transnational resistance commander

When tackling the issue of the US presence in Iraq, Sayyed Nasrallah underscored that the Americans have left Iraq by force, humiliated and defeated thanks to the strikes of the resistance.

“The Americans fled Iraq under fire because they begged martyr Soleimani to stop the Iraqi resistance operations against them.”

As for Palestine, the Sayyed added that martyr Soleimani developed ties with all Palestinian resistance factions: “There were not any redlines for martyr Soleimani on the level of supporting Palestinian resistance factions,” uncovering that the ‘Kornet’ missiles reached the Palestinian resistance in Gaza thanks to martyr Soleimani.

“The efforts made by Hajj Qassem Soleimani and the Quds Force in supporting the Palestinian resistance factions were ongoing behind the scenes.”

Additionally, the resistance leader uncovered that the Russian-made ‘Kornet’ missiles Hezbollah used in the July 2006 war were purchased by Syria from Russia, and then Hezbollah took them.

Additionally, Sayyed Nasrallah made clear that Syrian President Bashar Assad agreed that the ‘Kornet’ missiles purchased by Damascus from Moscow reach ‘Hamas’ and the ‘Islamic Jihad’ resistance movements in Gaza.

Sayyed Nasrallah hailed martyr Soleimani and his team’s dedication to present all what could be offered to Palestine on all levels. His Eminence also praised Assad’s willingness to support the Palestinian resistance.

Normalization only took the masks off

On the level of Arab normalization with the ‘Israeli’ enemy, Sayyed Nasrallah noted that it is something that didn’t surprise him, adding that this is because most of the Arab regimes were only telling the Palestinians mere lies.

“We view the normalization deals from the perspective that masks have been taken off, and that those Arab regimes’ submissive realities appeared clearly.”

Iran is just a pretext the Arab regimes use to justify their normalization deals because they find the Palestinian cause as a burden for them, Sayyed Nasrallah added, stressing that there isn’t any reason that justifies the abandoning of Palestine.

Sayyed Nasrallah also lamented Morocco’s Justice and Development Party’s stance which he considered was more painful and more dangerous than that of the regimes’ normalization with ‘Israel’.

The ever-growing Axis of Resistance

In terms of power and numbers, the resistance leader emphasized that the might of the Axis of Resistance has multiplied many more times than its level several years ago, stressing that the most important thing is having a strong will.

“We are an axis in a state of legitimate self-defense, to defend our countries, sanctities, peoples, wealth. The Axis of Resistance has made major and great achievements,” His Eminence underscored.

“Without any exaggeration, the Axis of Resistance is stronger than any time before. The Axis was able to contain the strike of Hajj Qassem Soleimani’s martyrdom although it was very hard,” Sayyed Nasrallah pointed out.

Regarding the Ain al-Assad strike, Sayyed Nasrallah referred to it as an important response that shows how a leadership of a state in the world deals a blow to the United States: “The Ain al-Assad strike was a historical slap because the equation in confronting the Americans is not about killing, and Washington thought that by assassinating leaders it would put an end to the Axis of Resistance, while in fact this axis is not based upon a person by himself.”

His Eminence then vowed that punishing the killers of martyrs Soleimani and al-Muhandis is a goal for every honorable person, warning those who ordered and executed that they will be punished wherever they were.

“What the world should learn is that the blood of the leaders won’t be in vain, and the killers of Hajj Qassem and Abu Mahdi must be punished sooner or later,” Sayyed Nasrallah said.

His Eminence praised the joint drills held between the Palestinian resistance factions in Gaza as a very important step and a development that shows their strength and frightens the enemy at the same time.

Martyr Soleimani’s role in Iraq

Sayyed Nasrallah explained that martyr Soleimani’s appearance in media started with the battles against Daesh in Iraq, adding that it was not an intended issue.

“Hajj Qassem Soleimani didn’t seek being mentioned in a news, being in the spotlight or even hailed by anybody, and his relationship with the religious leadership in Iraq was good, especially on the level of main issues.”

Explaining that the vast majority of military operations against the US occupation in Iraq was carried out by the resistance factions, Sayyed Nasrallah said that groups of young Iraqis started the armed resistance against the US troops in Iraq without a political cover.

“Arab satellite channels refused to broadcast the videos that document the Iraqi resistance operations against the American occupation. Meanwhile, resistance in Iraq received real support from al-Quds Force and Hajj Qassem Soleimani.”

Sayyed Nasrallah contrasted al-Qaeda’s 4800 suicide attacks that were carried out against civilians on Iraqi soil, showing the difference when it came to the Iraqi resistance operations that were precisely meant to pressure the occupation and were very keen and accurate to avoid harming any civilian.

That’s why, Sayyed Nasrallah explained, the US Army threatened Hajj Qassem and al-Quds Force to strike their posts in Iran if they continued to support the Iraqi resistance: “The US Army then sent a message to Hajj Qassem to help them withdraw from Iraq without being hit by fire.”

Hadn’t been to the Iraqi resistance, Sayyed Nasrallah said that the US embassy would have been in control of Iraq.

However, Donald Trump keeps his troops in Iraq and Syria to steal their resources and oil, the Hezbollah leader added.

Forecasting the scheme against Syria

Sayyed Nasrallah narrated how martyr Soleimani was concerned about the American attempts to ride the tide of the peoples’ uprisings to target some regimes after America allowed toppling its man in Egypt, President Hosni Mubarak.

“Martyr Soleimani was the first to forecast the risks heading to Syria under the pretext of the ‘Arab Spring’, because the country supports the resistance.”

And while the parties that really backed, funded, and led opposition the groups in Syria rushed for an armed confrontation, Iran contacted opposition groups in accordance with President Assad to reach a political solution, but all of them insisted that we are not in a state of political solution and there won’t be negotiations with the regime, which they predicted will collapse within days, Sayyed Nasrallah went on to say.

“There was a very big international and regional decision in the war on Syria to prevent any political solution for the Syrian crisis.”

Foreign forces supported the Syrian opposition as they believed that the regime would be toppled within two months. They wanted to weaken the regime in Syria and in need of making a settlement with ‘Israel’ and recognize it, the Hezbollah leader recalled.

“We had only two options, either to surrender and let the region collapse, or to resist; and we chose resistance,” Sayyed Nasrallah said, hailing Syria’s independence of decision, braveness of leadership, and neither submitting to the enemies nor to the allies.

“Syria was not only targeted for supporting Palestine and the resistance, but also to be occupied and to allow stealing its oil and gas.”

President Assad’s decision to remain steadfast was the main motivator for his allies in supporting Damascus and engaging in the confrontation next to him.

“Assad didn’t leave Damascus at all over the course of the battles, and in the most difficult times of the war he was strong and solid,” Sayyed Nasrallah added.

Soleimani in Moscow

On the level of the Russian military intervention in Syria, Sayyed Nasrallah labelled it as very influential.

His Eminence recalled that Russian President Vladimir Putin was hesitant in the beginning of the war to enter Syria; then Hajj Qassem went to Moscow and explained, with maps, the field situation. At the time, Putin told Hajj Qassem that he was convinced with entering Syria.

“With his charismatic persona, strong logic, and strategic explanation, Hajj Qassem contributed to convincing Putin with entering Syria based on logic and facts.”

Soleimani in the July 2006 War

About memories from the July 2006 war, Sayyed Nasrallah recalled how martyr Soleimani didn’t leave the Southern Suburb of Beirut [Dahiyeh] but for 48 hours to submit his report on the situation and contact the brothers in Syria and Iran.

“All of the ‘Israeli’ aerial bombing during the July 2006 war couldn’t stop the logistic support from reaching the resistance in Lebanon,” His Eminence added.

After the end of the war, martyr Soleimani played a role and shouldered the responsibility of following the project of sheltering the displaced people. “The one who formed the Iranian Committee to Reconstruct Lebanon was Hajj Qassem and martyr Engineer Hossam Khoshnavis.”

Sayyed Nasrallah lamented that he could never forget that there are sides within the Lebanese political authorities who were planning to keep people homeless for the longest possible period of time after the July 2006 war to incite them against the resistance.

Commenting on martyr Soleimani’s successor, Hajj Esmail Ghaani, Sayyed Nasrallah said that he used to meet him repeatedly when he was Hajj Qassem’s deputy: “He was informed with all files. And Hajj Qassem used to say that Hajj Ghaani is to succeed him.”

The void ‘Israeli’ threats

In a strong and confident comment about the Lebanese resistance group, Sayyed Nasrallah underscored that Hezbollah is at it is: “Its strength, morale, and will are the same, or even much powerful.”

All the threats you hear from the enemy are because it knows that we will retaliate for its killing of our martyr in Syria. We are keeping our promise to respond to the ‘Israeli’ enemy’s killing of martyr Ali Mohsen, His Eminence made clear.

“The major alertness of the resistance was on all levels and in front of the ‘Israelis’’ sight. The ‘Israeli’ drones’ movement in the air is very confused as it anticipates the resistance’s response. The ‘Israeli’ knows that we have used the appropriate weapon towards its drones without making this public.”

The Hezbollah leader further announced that the precision-guided missiles owned by the resistance have doubled from the number it had a year ago.

“The resistance today is in a very good condition, and at the best of its capabilities. We believe in the future and trust that we are approaching victory.

The concerned party is the ‘Israeli’ and not the resistance especially as Trump is leaving and Washington might return to the nuclear deal with Iran.

A certain level of Hezbollah’s aerial defense has been exposed to the enemy, but whether there are higher levels or not is a matter that we don’t reveal, Sayyed Nasrallah said, noting that “we are keen to keep the ‘Israeli’ unaware of a lot about what the resistance has.”

“There are many issues that the ‘Israeli’ knows nothing about.”

Our Axis is on the top and it is ‘Israel’ which is in trouble, His Eminence underscored, adding that the resistance’s decision is to carry out an appropriate response that strengthens its deterrence; this won’t be achieved without targeting the enemy’s soldiers, he said.

“We don’t need a demonstrative action along the border that targets dummies. We want an actual response.”

Lebanon’s maritime borders, Gov’t issue

In a question about Lebanon’s indirect negotiations with the ‘Israeli’ regime regarding the demarcation of the maritime borders, Sayyed Nasrallah was confident to say that the negotiations under the current US administration will reach a dead end.

“Our right to prevent any ‘Israeli’ stealing of our waters is natural, and our ability to do this is non-negotiable,” His Eminence underscored.

Elsewhere in the interview, Sayyed Nasrallah said there is a positive atmosphere and cooperation between the Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri and Hezbollah.

However, he noted that there is a problem of trust that delays the formation of a Lebanese government, which is mainly between President Michel Aoun and the PM-designate.

The environment embracing resistance

On the level of discussing the resistance’s weapon within its own people, Sayyed Nasrallah said that the people of South Lebanon don’t see resistance as a burden, they rather view it as their shield.

“We support the threatened and targeted environment of resistance which is paying prices for this support, His Eminence said in reference to the sanctions targeting the entire country, “We try and we seek to present aid to the Lebanese people and to our environment with all possible means.”

Sayyed Nasrallah noted, however, that the problem in Lebanon is a problem of choices, and the evidence is that nobody dared to head eastward to find economic solutions.

“There is a misevaluation in linking solving some issues for some countries with the foreign factor.”

From this point, Sayyed Nasrallah went on to explain that Iran is a great regional power and a main axis in the region but it doesn’t negotiate instead of any of its allies in the region.

Iran, a non-interventionist superpower

“Iran doesn’t buy, sell, or negotiate with the Americans instead of the peoples of the region,” the resistance leader noted, adding that the Islamic Republic of Iran informed the Europeans that it is not concerned with negotiating on behalf of the Yemenis or others.

“Washington insisted to negotiate the Iraqi issue with Tehran; Iran, however, insisted that the Iraqis be present and that the negotiations be held in public.”

The Hezbollah-Hamas relations

Hezbollah leader said that he met with Palestinian resistance movement, Hamas, brother Ismail Haniyeh several times during his last visit to Lebanon and discussed with him different regional issues that included bilateral relations and the relations with Syria.

“Relations between Hamas and Syria must be rearranged; there is a positive atmosphere even if it takes time. Logically, I believe that Hamas is tending to rearrange its ties with Damascus,” Sayyed Nasrallah said, noting that he talked with Haniyeh that Hamas should help in redirecting tendencies in the region, which include the Islah [Reform] Party’s fighting in Yemen against the Ansarullah movement.

Sayyed Nasrallah also greeted the Palestinians of the 1948 lands whom he described as “our brother and our people, and they are the ones who mostly desire the liberation of Palestine from the river to the sea.”

“In any future war, the minds and hearts of the Palestinians of the 1948 lands will be with us.”

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!

FM: Zionists’ Interests in the Red Sea will be Legitimate Targets to Yemeni Forces

 

News – Yemen: An official source at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs commented on what was stated by the spokesman of the Zionist army, in which he said that “the Zionists are monitoring the situation in Yemen.”

The source told the Yemen news agency, Saba, that “the Zionist entity should bother with monitoring its own situation in the occupied territory, Palestine, rather than threatening the Islamic region in the Middle East with a lightning war.”

The source added, “The Zionist entity has no business whit the situation in Yemen,” warning that “any reckless action of the Zionist entity in the region would spark a comprehensive war, and Israel would be the first to lose.”

He pointed out that the Israeli enemy seeks to fabricate excuses for hostile actions and movements through which it tries to cover up its continuous aggression against the Palestinian people.

The source added, “if the Zionist entity makes any reckless move or action that affects Yemen, then any interests of this entity or its partners in the Red Sea will be a legitimate target.”

Related Articles

• Yemen’s STC separatists join unity government against Houthis
• Superpowers Worrying of Yemeni Air Defense Capabilities
• Sana’a to Target Aggression Countries’ Ports as Siege Continues 

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!