Wednesday, 18 October 2017

Many people in the West claim to oppose racism but easily accept israel’s race-based system of ethnic cleansing

Zionism from the Diaspora: infinity.0

By Eve Mykytyn | October 16, 2107
I have noticed a distinct shift in the focus of the Zionist narrative in the US. For the last forty years or so, Israel has been sold to Americans as a necessary palliative for the Jewish people following the total destruction of the Holocaust. Now, the primary argument advanced is that the Jewish people have been a people tied to the land on which their state is located for a mythically uninterrupted period of time variously described as between 2,000 and 4,000 years.
Tom Segev reports in his book, The Seventh Million, that Holocaust refugees were looked down upon when they arrived in Israel. In the United States the holocaust didn’t become a major part of the Zionist dialogue until the 1970s and  we are now suffused with memorials (wikipedia lists 63) to a tragedy that occurred on another continent. While there are certainly groups that commemorate the Irish Famine, the Armenian Genocide and other such tragedies, no tragedy receives the kind of attention that the Holocaust has garnered. Our own complicity in genocide receives relatively scant attention. This is despite the estimated two to four million Africans who died while being transported to be forced into slavery and the multiple genocidal wars with native peoples.
But while the magnificent horrors of the Holocaust have been infinitely portrayed  and the movies and books continue to flow, the focus of the narrative has shifted back to a variant to that employed by Zionism’s founders. The basic tenets are that the Jews have ties to the land of Israel that are stronger and somehow more legitimate than that of the Palestinians.
The Palestinians are first scorned for not using that term for themselves until their land was ‘cleansed’ of their presence. This was of course, common everywhere before the rise of nationalism. Before emancipation, Jews themselves identified as a religion and not as a nation. Certainly they were not Israelis before they established Israel. As Shlomo Sand has explored in The Invention of the Jewish People, Jews went through a process of inventing themselves as a nation, and that definition was probably a necessary precursor to ‘finding’ themselves a country. (Maybe as a result of this, Jews now have a unique identity. They are not one race, not all of them are religious and not all claim a right to Palestinian land. As Gilad Atzmon has explored it is the tripart nature of that identity, i.e., religion, race and politics that leave you criticized as racist or anti Semitic if you criticize the politics of Israel.)
But whatever the facts of who called themselves what, the concept that the Palestinians by not calling themselves Palestinians should not be entitled to the land they lived on makes no real sense. Why would my self-proclaimed identity affect my ability to own land? I can own land in California without thinking of myself as a Californian. In fact, some Israelis own land in the US and I presume that they expect the US to make sure they retain their rights as owners.
The next step of this fantastic narrative is that the Palestinians gave up the land by leaving it at some point during the establishment of the state of Israel. By this narrative, the Palestinians gave up all rights to the land either by becoming refugees fleeing from ethnic cleansing and the destruction of their towns or by fighting to keep their land. This is tortured reasoning, but I guess that the idea is that if you don’t submit willingly to your own destruction and somehow survive, then you lose your property and assets.
I don’t know why the primary thrust of the myth has altered but I have a guess. In its initial stages, Israel needed citizens. Nationalism and blood privilege are attractive concepts. Then it seems for a long period Israel was more interested in donations, political capital and investment. As long as Jews supported Israel, Israel did not need them to move there. That has changed. With the full support of President Trump and the tacit support of most of western Europe’s leaders, Israel has been expanding by increasing its so-called settler movement of occupation, approving 12,000 new units in 2017 up from about 3000 in 2016. Netanyahu has announced he will annex the settlements, effectively increasing the size of the State of Israel. Instead of a Nakba there has been an endless stream of mini-Nakbas, just small enough to fall under the indulgent radar of the press.
Israel’s free ‘birthright’ (the name itself proclaims blood privilege) program promotional videos now emphasize coming home to young people who are citizens of other countries. It could be that Israel is working to neutralize the population advantage of the Palestinians.
It is clear that in the new narrative, citizenship is biologically and not geographically determined. It seems odd that so many in the West who claim to oppose racism, so easily accept a race-based system of ethnic cleansing.
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!

“Trump’s New Strategy on Iran Embraces “israel-First”, “Saudi-Second” and “America-Last” Perspective” is locked Trump’s New Strategy on Iran Embraces “israel-First”, “Saudi-Second” and “America-Last” Perspective

By Philip Giraldi | American Herald Tribune | October 16, 2017
Trump speaking at AIPAC 036b2
President Donald Trump’s move to decertify the Iranian nuclear Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), entered into a little over two years ago, was applauded by Israel, Saudi Arabia and a couple of Persian Gulf States, but by no one else. Quite the contrary, as the European and Asian co-signatories on the agreement, having failed to dissuade Trump, have clearly indicated that they will continue to abide by it. Also, the decision to kick the can down the road by giving Congress 60 days to increase pressure on Tehran in an attempt to include other issues beyond nuclear development like its ballistic missile program and labeling the country’s Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist group are likely to create confusion as Washington is unable to communicate directly with Iran. That uncertainty could possibly lead to a fraught-with-danger Iranian decision to withdraw completely from the agreement.
The Trump speech could reasonably be described as embracing an “Israel-First” and “Saudi-Second” perspective that might plausibly suggest that it was actually drafted by their respective foreign ministries. Contrary to Trump’s campaign pledges, it might also be characterized as an “America-Last” speech, since it actually encourages nuclear proliferation while rendering it even more difficult for anyone to respect the agreements entered into by the United States government.
Fred Kaplan sums up the speech’s fundamental dishonesty with considerable clarity by observing that   “It flagrantly misrepresents what the deal was meant to do, the extent of Iran’s compliance, and the need for corrective measures. If he gets his way, he will blow up one of the most striking diplomatic triumphs of recent years, aggravate tensions in the Middle East, make it even harder to settle the North Korean crisis peacefully, and make it all but impossible for allies and adversaries to trust anything the United States says for as long as Trump is in office.”
Former senior CIA analyst Paul Pillar has also dissected the untruths and false analogies that made up the bulk of the Trump speech. In short, Pillar argues that the president is using faulty analysis to end a program that is working and that employs unprecedented intrusive inspections to guarantee that Iran can make no progress towards having a nuclear weapon for at least eight more years and quite likely for even longer. Against that, Iran could well end its cooperation and, out of fear of U.S. attack, might well turn towards possession of a nuclear arsenal to guarantee its own survival. Pillar calls ending JCPOA now because Iran just might develop a weapon after it expires in 2025 as “committing suicide because of fear of death.”
In a second highly partisan international action last week, the United States led a march out the door of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization due to its alleged “bias against Israel.” UNESCO had enraged Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu by declaring that the Old City of Hebron and the associated Cave of the Patriarchs on the West Bank is an endangered Palestinian world cultural heritage site. A few hundred Israeli settlers live in Hebron, guarded by the Israeli Army, amidst 200,000 Palestinians who, according to The Guardian, “have long lived under harsh restrictions in the city, which is one of the starkest symbols of the Israeli occupation.” The U.S. is also threatening to pull out of the U.N.’s Human Rights Council “to protect Israel.”
Taken together, the two decisions made by the White House indicate a shift in the foreign policy team advising the president. One must now acknowledge that America’s United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley, apparently operating in collusion with former UN Ambassador John Bolton, has become the most influential foreign policy voice whispering in the president’s ear, quite possibly because she is saying exactly what he wants to hear in terms of simplistic but rarely reality based responses to complex situations. That Haley, an inexperienced and instinctively aggressive ideologue who is closely aligned to Israeli thinking, should occupy such a position with an equally ignorant president ought to concern anyone who seeks to avoid a major conflagration with either Iran and North Korea, or even with both. Haley is also no friend of Russia, having once crudely advised Moscow to “choose to side with the civilized world.”
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Joseph Dunford and Secretary of Defense James Mattis, apparently joined by National Security Council chair H.R. McMaster, urged renewal of the Iran certification based on the fact that Tehran was compliant but were overruled. Even Israel’s former National Security Adviser Uzi Arad had publicly urgedboth the White House and Congress not to reject the JCPOA. The emergence of Haley advised by Bolton is a shift to the right in an administration that is already leaning towards the military option as its preferred diplomatic tool, also suggesting somewhat ominously that neoconservative foreign policy is again dominant in Washington.
Other commentators including Eli Clifton, have observed that Trump might well have been heavily influenced by major Republican donors including Paul Singer, Bernard Marcus and Sheldon Adelson to step up the pressure on Iran. Adelson has, in fact, called for unilaterally “nuking” the Iranians. Marcus has said that “I think that Iran is the devil.”
The real objective of the Trump White House is not to “fix” the Iran deal, which would be impossible both because Iran and the other signatories would not agree to it and because there is nothing that needs repair. As Paul Pillar and Fred Kaplan note, it is working. The real objective is to blow up the agreement completely as it is an impediment to going to war and bringing about regime change in Tehran by force. That is what Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Senators like John McCain, Lindsey Graham and Tom Cotton have been intent on doing and they have hardly been shy about expressing themselves. The choice is therefore quite simple. Do we Americans, 60% of whom support keeping the arrangement, want to maintain an inspection regime that deprives Iran of the ability to develop a nuclear weapon for the foreseeable future or do we want to go back to square one without any restrictions on what Tehran will choose to do. It would seem to me that the clear right choice is to stay the course.
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!

Does Trump dare to withdraw from the nuclear understanding? هل يجرؤ ترامب على الانسحاب من التفاهم النووي؟

Does Trump dare to withdraw from the nuclear understanding?

أكتوبر 17, 2017
Written by Nasser Kandil,

هل يجرؤ ترامب على الانسحاب من التفاهم النووي؟

Many people avoid answering this question lest the developments do not reflect their expectations, or make them lose some of the credibility and confidence which they accumulated among the readers and observers, especially in the light of the escalating positions which  are launched by the US President Donald Trump towards Iran and the understanding on its nuclear file, foreshadowing of the end of the era of this understanding which he perseveres in  describing it with the worst understanding, while many do not consider it far that Trump may do such a step putting the international and the regional relations in front of what he called as the forthcoming storm, many people considered it far  that Iran has the intention and the ability for escalating strong reactions, whether Trump abolishes the agreement or imposes sanctions on the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, putting the Iranian threats within the context of the psychological warfare.
It is certain that Trump will not dare to announce the abolishment of the agreement because first his powers do not include such of that announcement, what he has is to ask the Congress to revoke the law of ratification of the agreement if he wants to withdraw from it, but the results will be subjected to balances where neither Trump not his dividing team can control. Despite this power which does include the abolishment, it puts Trump in withdrawing position from the agreement beholding the Congress the responsibility. Trump will not use it but he will search for a maneuver that will show him upset from the agreement without getting involved in the call to withdraw from it, this will be through restricting to what is stated by the law of ratifying the agreement by the Congress, such as asking for an annual report from the administration that shows the degree of Iran’s compliance with the agreement. He said that Iran is restricting with the literal obligations which were stated by the agreement, but it does not apply its essence. Trump does not withdraw from the agreement, but he withdraws his confidence in the ability of the agreement to prevent Iran from possessing nuclear weapons, calling the Congress to discuss the ways in order to improve the agreement and to achieve more guarantees. This means getting involved in discussions that last for sixty days, where the Congress will give recommendations to Trump’s administration that will include calls as the seeking with the partners in the agreement as Russia, China, France, Britain, Germany, the United Nations, the International Atomic Energy Agency, and the European Union to formulate more effective understandings to oblige Iran to commit to new obligations, along with going in for separated sanctions system that does not violate the nuclear understanding system, but it pursuits what is called by Washington as the Iranian missile program and what is being discussed by Trump and his team under the title of the interventions of Iran in the region and accusing it with destabilizing the allied regimes of Washington, where Hezbollah will get the main share of sanctions.
Will Trump dare to impose sanctions on the Revolutionary Guard as an organization, after he was allocated them to the Corps of Jerusalem within the Revolutionary Guard?
Trump will not dare to do so; he will choose instead the missile system in the Guard as what he did with the Corps of Jerusalem. He will avoid the challenge of Iran by putting its threats which were issued by the highest governmental and military levels towards the Supreme Leader of the Republic, as in the case of the nuclear understanding and the escape from losing of Europe and the International Atomic Energy Agency through  finding the solution which does not lead to major confrontation, and which preserves the tension and the pressure paper for Trump under the ceiling of small confrontations within a big negotiation, because the decisions concerning the relationship with Iran are decisions issued by the US country not by the sidelines of the President’s movement. The US country which evaded from the major confrontation entitled the prevention of Hezbollah from being present in Syria especially on the Southern and eastern borders, and after seeing that its red lines were violated it knows that the opportunities of a confrontation entitled Hezbollah is greater than the opportunities of a confrontation entitled the Iranian nuclear program, the halting from  the least due to the weakness ensures the inability to proceed towards the most by the illusion of ability
To those who are possessed by the power of America we say: let’s wait and see. Tomorrow is another day
The position of Trump is similar to the positions of the two heads of Kurdistan and Catalonia regions by the calling to hold referendum on the secession then to replace the announcement of the independence with the call for dialogue. These wrong considerations involve their owners, with the difference that Trump lives his presidency as a TV commentator rather than a decision-maker.
Translated by Lina Shehadeh,

هل يجرؤ ترامب على الانسحاب من التفاهم النووي؟


أكتوبر 11, 2017

ناصر قنديلهل يجرؤ ترامب على الانسحاب من التفاهم النووي؟– يتفادى الكثيرون الخوض في الإجابة عن هذا السؤال كي لا تأتي التطورات عكس توقعاتهم، ويخسرون بعضاً من المصداقية والثقة التي راكموها لدى قراء ومتابعين، خصوصاً في ظلّ المواقف التصعيدية التي يطلقها الرئيس الأميركي دونالد ترامب تجاه إيران والتفاهم حول ملفها النووي، مبشّراً بنهاية عهد هذا التفاهم الذي دأب على وصفه بالأسوأ. وفيما لا يستبعد كثيرون أن يقدم ترامب على هذه الخطوة واضعاً العلاقات الدولية والإقليمية أمام ما أسماه بالعاصفة المقبلة، يستبعد كثيرون أن يكون لدى إيران النية والقدرة على ردود قوية تصعيدية، سواء إذا أقدم ترامب على إلغاء الاتفاق أو على وضع عقوبات على الحرس الثوري الإيراني، واضعين التهديدات الإيرانية في دائرة عضّ الأصابع والحرب النفسية.

– الأكيد أنّ ترامب لن يجرؤ على الإعلان عن إلغاء الاتفاق أولاً، لأنّ صلاحيته لا تطال هذا الإعلان، وما يملكه هو الطلب للكونغرس إبطال قانون التصديق على الاتفاقية إذا أراد الانسحاب منها. وهذا يخضع بالنتيجة لتوازنات لا يتحكم بها ترامب وفريقه المنقسم حول الموقف أصلاً، ورغم هذه الصلاحية التي تقع دون مستوى الإلغاء، لكنها تضع ترامب في موضع المنسحب من الاتفاق ملقياً المسؤولية على الكونغرس، فترامب لن يستعملها، بل سيبحث عن مناورة تظهره كغاضب من الاتفاق من دون التورّط بالدعوة للانسحاب منه، وذلك عبر التقيّد بحدود ما ينصّ عليه قانون تصديق الكونغرس على الاتفاق، من طلب تقرير سنوي من الإدارة يشير إلى درجة تقيّد إيران بموجباتها بالاتفاق، فيقول إنّ إيران تتقيّد بالموجبات الحرفية التي نصّ عليها الاتفاق لكنها لا تطبّق روحيته، وهو لا ينسحب من الاتفاق بل يسحب ثقته بقدرة الاتفاق على منع إيران من امتلاك سلاح نووي، داعياً الكونغرس لمناقشة سبل تحسين الاتفاقية وتحقيق المزيد من الضمانات. وهذا يعني الدخول في مناقشات تمتدّ لمدة ستين يوماً يخرج بحصيلتها الكونغرس بتوصيات لإدارة ترامب، ستتضمّن دعوات من نوع السعي مع الشركاء في الاتفاق وهم الدول الخمس، روسيا والصين وفرنسا وبريطانيا وألمانيا، والأمم المتحدة والوكالة الدولية للطاقة الذرية والاتحاد الأوروبي، لصياغة تفاهمات أشدّ قوّة وقدرة على إلزام إيران بموجبات جديدة، وبالتوازي السير بنظام عقوبات منفصل لا يخرق منظومة التفاهم النووي، لكنه يلاحق ما تسمّيه واشنطن البرنامج الصاروخي الإيراني، وما يتحدّث عنه ترامب وفريقه تحت عنوان تدخلات إيران في المنطقة، واتهامها بالتسبّب بزعزعة استقرار أنظمة حليفة لواشنطن، وسيحظى حزب الله هنا بالحصة الرئيسة من العقوبات.

– هل سيجرؤ ترامب على الذهاب لعقوبات على الحرس الثوري كمؤسسة بعينها، بعدما كان قد خصّصها لفيلق القدس ضمن الحرس الثوري؟

– لن يجرؤ ترامب على ذلك، بل سيختار منظومة الصواريخ في الحرس، أسوة بما فعله مع فيلق القدس، ويتفادى تحدّي إيران بوضع تهديداتها التي صدرت عن أعلى المستويات الحكومية والعسكرية وصولاً للمرشد الأعلى للجمهورية، كما في حال التفاهم النووي والتهرّب من خسارة أوروبا والوكالة الدولية للطاقة النووية، بإيجاد الالتفاف المناسب الذي لا يؤدّي لإشعال المواجهة الكبرى، ويحفظ لترامب أوراق التوتر والضغط واللعب بها، تحت سقف مواجهات صغيرة ضمن التفاوض الكبير، لأنّ القرارات على مسرح العلاقة مع إيران هي قرارات بحجم الدولة الأميركية وليست من هوامش حركة الرئيس. والدولة الأميركية التي تهرّبت من مواجهة كبرى عنوانها منع حزب الله من الوجود في سورية، خصوصاً على الحدود الجنوبية والشرقية، وهي ترى خطوطها الحمراء تداس، تعلم أنّ فرص مواجهة عنوانها حزب الله أكبر من فرص مواجهة عنوانها الملف النووي الإيراني، والإحجام عن الأقلّ بسبب الضعف يؤكد عدم الإقدام على الأكثر بوهم القدرة، فمن لا يستطيع الأقلّ لا يستطيع الأكثر.

– للموهومين بالقوة الأميركية نقول فلننتظر ونرَ، ومَنْ يعِش يرَ، وإن غداً لناظره قريب!

– كم يشبه موقف ترامب موقف رئيسَيْ إقليمي كردستان وكتالونيا، بالدعوة للاستفتاء على الانفصال ثم استبدال إعلان الاستقلال بالدعوة للحوار، هي الحسابات الخاطئة تورّط أصحابها، مع فارق أنّ ترامب يعيش رئاسته كمعلّق تلفزيوني لا كصانع قرار.

Related Videos

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

Tuesday, 17 October 2017

’Israel’ and the ’Days of Great Anxiety’

“For the first time in its history, “Israel” today needs US military bases on the occupied land of Palestine”

“Today, “Israel” is no longer able to make a decision on its own. And disillusioned are those who believe that the enemy’s government or its military and security institutions are capable of making a war decision in the region without a direct US approval, coverage and input.”

17-10-2017 | 08:31
On the eve of the establishment of the “Israeli” entity, and in the decades that followed, we, the Arabs, have placed ourselves in the position of moral responsibility to deny, confirm or declare a decisive position on the massacres committed by the West against the Jews before and during the Second World War. It is a position no one assigned to us, and it is neither our specialty nor our direct responsibility.
Israel
This submission is due to the fact that the “Israeli” entity is going through the most dangerous stage in its history today. Putting aside numerical calculations or data based on theoretical elements, “Israel” has practically entered the stage of transitioning from the time of the “eternal state” to the time of the fallen state. Since an operation of this magnitude requires huge efforts and larger wars, the enemy, before the West, will resort to the narrative of Jewish grievances once again.
Therefore, for the first and last time, we will have the duty to answer a question about any possible solution to the Jewish issue in our country, in connection with the decision to remove the “Israeli” entity. In order not to hold ourselves responsible for what some may see as injustice against the Jews living in “Israel” when their present state is gone, it is worthwhile to return to an easy, simple and clear position: The colonial West, whether with a Crusader, religious, or an oppressive totalitarian background is first and foremost responsible for what happened to the Jews in Europe as it is also responsible for finding a solution to the crisis of the Jews who will leave Palestine. Meanwhile, our responsibility is to create an orderly framework for a state in which the people of the land living are Palestinians and who can remain among their current inhabitants, after choosing a new regime for the rule of the State of Palestine, which is not missing any inch of its land or a letter of its name.
Is this delirium as the sons of the defeated current say?
Let’s let them be. There will remain with us, or in the world, those who would provide them with the fuel of life despite their defeat. Some of them no longer want an end to “Israel” anymore. Therefore, there is no use for them and their hallucinations. There is no point in discussing with the necessity of the great sacrifices that will be made to restore Palestine, as long as they see in it just suicide!
Today, “Israel” is living “the days of great anxiety” because of the erosion of its offensive and defensive capabilities, not only militarily, but also politically. For the first time in its history, “Israel” today needs US military bases on the occupied land of Palestineand American protection bases tens or hundreds of kilometers from its northern and southern borders. It also needs, without any concern, a direct US military presence to protect it from the enemies. Above all, the entity is in need, not for peace agreements that can no longer be justified, but for cooperation that provides it with the political umbrella to gain access to the Arab mind. After the role of Turkey, Egypt, Jordan and Morocco in protecting “Israel’s” right to exist collapsed, it is now seeking a direct partnership with the kingdom of oppression and backwardness in the Arabian Peninsula – the last empire of its kind similar to it in the Arab world – to give it an “Islamic pardon” to help it not survive but to use the Arabs to confront its adversaries led by Iran.
“Israel’s” difficult situation is not only the result of the growing strength of its adversaries, but also stems from the fact that it no longer has moral superiority, even to its own citizens, after its long wars turned its army into a group of murderers who were forced to carry out more brutal killings so that the survival of the state would insured. But each time they come out from their maneuvers with serious flaws, making the probability of defeat in any future war equal to the probability of victory. The social structure was also weakened because the people of this state know, as the mainstay of its army, that things are no longer like before, and that all maneuvers of the last ten years focused on defense and not offense. Even major military drills were aimed at “keeping danger away” and not finishing it off. All this is enough to accumulate in the “Israeli” consciousness one defeat after another.
Today, “Israel” is no longer able to make a decision on its own. And disillusioned are those who believe that the enemy’s government or its military and security institutions are capable of making a war decision in the region without a direct US approval, coverage and input. Therefore, the leaders of the enemy are constantly working to convince the US administration that striking the enemies of “Israel”, today and not tomorrow, is equally in the interest of the US. “Israel” may find the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia the only party in the world that shares this concern, after those madmen put themselves in “Israeli” shoes.
All these concerns are what dominated the events of the past months and weeks, including continuous military preparations that allows the enemy to wage a major war in the north and the south as well as to convince the Americans to launch a political and economic war against “Israel’s” opponents in the region, urging countries such as Saudi Arabia to take greater steps towards this confrontation. In the mind of the enemy, an American intervention would severely hinder its opponents’ front; and a Saudi participation would make the next war against a group of pro-Persian Arabs from an “opposing” political or religious doctrine a “consensus” that the West and “Israel” believe Saudi Arabia can speak for.
So that people do not get confused, what was aforementioned does not mean that there are military buildups on the border with Syria and Lebanon. But there is a special political decision leading to offensive readiness. This is accompanied by an increase in intelligence activity in Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Iraq, and even Iran, in order to ensure a clear and realistic picture of the enemies; which is something the United States follows up on with decisions made by its administrations and the actions of US forces on the ground in Syria and Iraq. It is also an atmosphere, which falls in line with US efforts – in cooperation with Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates – to complete a spiral step that ends with the declaration of a Palestinian state, but one without meaning, with no final borders, no independent authority, no free outlets, and no right of return for those who wish to live under it.
Today, we and the enemy, walk on a knife’s edge. Among us are those who fear confrontation, believing that the enemy alone is better, let alone if it is supported by America and Saudi Arabia. And among them are those who want to take us to a futile debate about the preference of this or that option to restore rights. But there are those among us, too, those who live in this land and do not waste a minute but work with all their strength, experience and knowledge to prepare for a moment when cries arise; screams of illegitimate children of an illegitimate entity, which was once, called “Israel.”
Source: Al-Akhbar Newspaper, Translated by website team

إسرائيل و«أيام القلق العظيم»


ابراهيم الأمين

عشية قيام الكيان الاسرائيلي، وفي العقود التي تلت، وضَعْنا، نحن العرب، أنفسنا في موقع المسؤولية الأخلاقية حيال نفي أو تأكيد أو إعلان موقف حاسم من المجازر التي ارتكبها الغرب في حق اليهود قبل الحرب العالمية الثانية وأثناءها. وهو موقع لم يكلّفنا به أحد، وليس من اختصاصنا، فضلاً عن أنه ليس من مسؤوليتنا المباشرة.

هذا التقديم سببه أن كيان العدو يعيش، اليوم، المرحلة الأكثر خطورةً في تاريخه. وفي معزل عن حسابات رقمية، أو معطيات تستند الى عناصر نظرية، فإن إسرائيل دخلت، فعلياً، مرحلة الانتقال من زمن «الدولة الأبدية» الى زمن الدولة الساقطة حكماً. ولأن عملية بهذا الحجم تتطلّب جهوداً ضخمة، وحروباً أضخم، فإن العدو، قبل الغرب، سيلجأ الى سردية المظلومية اليهودية مرة جديدة. وبالتالي سنكون، لمرة أولى وأخيرة، أمام واجب الإجابة عن سؤال حول أيّ حل ممكن للمسألة اليهودية في بلادنا، ربطاً بقرار إزالة الكيان الاسرائيلي؟ وحتى لا نحمّل أنفسنا، من الآن، مسؤولية ما قد يراه البعض ظلماً بحق اليهود القاطنين في إسرائيل، عندما تزول دولتهم القائمة اليوم، من المجدي العودة الى موقف سهل وبسيط وواضح: إن الغرب الاستعماري، سواء بخلفية صليبية أو دينية أو بخلفية قمعية شمولية، مسؤول أولاً وأخيراً عمّا حلّ باليهود في أوروبا، وهو مسؤول أيضاً عن إيجاد حلّ لأزمة اليهود الذين سيغادرون فلسطين. أما مسؤوليتنا، نحن، فهي خلق الإطار المنظّم لدولة يعيش فيها أهل الارض من الفلسطينيين، ومن يمكن أن يبقى من سكانها الحاليين، بعد اختيار نظام جديد لحكم دولة فلسطين غير الناقصة لأي شبر من أرضها أو حرف من اسمها.

هل هذا هذيان كما يقول أبناء تيار الهزيمة؟

لندَع هؤلاء وشأنهم. سيظل بيننا، أو في العالم، من يمدّهم بوقود الحياة مهزومين. وبعضهم لم يعد يريد نهاية لإسرائيل أصلاً. وبالتالي، لا طائل منهم ومن هلوساتهم، ولا فائدة من مناقشتهم في ضرورة التضحيات الكبيرة التي ستبذل لاسترداد فلسطين، ما داموا يرون في ذلك مجرّد انتحار!

إسرائيل تعيش اليوم «أيام القلق العظيم»، بسبب تآكل قدراتها الهجومية والدفاعية، ليس عسكرياً فقط، بل سياسياً أيضاً. للمرة الأولى، في تاريخها، باتت إسرائيل اليوم في حاجة إلى قواعد عسكرية أميركية على الارض المغتصبة في فلسطين، والى قواعد حماية أميركية على بعد عشرات أو مئات الكيلومترات من حدودها الشمالية والجنوبية، كما باتت تحتاج، من دون أي تشاوف، الى الوجود العسكري الاميركي المباشر لحمايتها من الاعداء. وفوق كل ذلك، بات الكيان في حاجة، ليس الى اتفاقات سلام معه لم يعد بالإمكان تبريرها، بل إلى تعاون يمنحه المظلة السياسية للنفاذ الى العقل العربي. وبعد تراجع أدوار تركيا ومصر والاردن والمغرب في حماية «حق إسرائيل في الوجود»، تسعى اليوم الى شراكة مباشرة مع مملكة القهر والتخلف في الجزيرة العربية، آخر الامبراطوريات الشبيهة بها في بلادنا، علّها تمنحها «صفحاً إسلامياً» يساعدها ليس على البقاء، بل على استخدام العرب مباشرة لمواجهة خصومها الذين تقودهم إيران.
وضع إسرائيل الصعب ليس ناتجاً من تعاظم قوة خصومها فحسب، بل لكونها لم تعد تملك تفوّقاً أخلاقياً، حتى بالنسبة إلى مواطنيها أنفسهم، بعدما حوّلت حروبها الطويلة جيشها الى مجموعة من القتلة، وصار هؤلاء ملزمين بالقيام بأعمال قتل أكثر وحشية حتى يستقيم بقاء الدولة. ورغم كل ذلك، يخرجون كل مرة من مناوراتهم بثُغَر خطيرة، تجعل احتمال الهزيمة في أي حرب مقبلة يوازي احتمال الفوز. كذلك أصاب الوهن البنية الاجتماعية للكيان، لأن أبناء هذه الدولة يعرفون، كونهم عماد جيشها، أن الأمور لم تعد كما في السابق، وأن كل مناورات السنوات العشر الاخيرة استهدفت الدفاع وليس الهجوم، وأنه حتى المناورات على عمليات عسكرية كبرى كان هدفها «إبعاد الخطر» وليس الإجهاز عليه. وكل ذلك يكفي ليتراكم في الوعي الاسرائيلي هزيمة تجرّ هزيمة.

اليوم، لم تعد إسرائيل قادرة على اتخاذ قرار بمفردها. وواهم من يعتقد أن حكومة العدو، أو مؤسساتها العسكرية والأمنية، قادرة على اتخاذ قرار بحرب في الإقليم ما لم تكن هناك موافقة وتغطية ومساهمة أميركية مباشرة. لذلك، يعمل قادة العدو، من دون توقف، على إقناع الادارة الاميركية بأن ضرب أعداء إسرائيل، اليوم وليس غداً، فيه مصلحة أميركية مساوية تماماً لمصلحتهم. وربما تجد إسرائيل في مملكة آل سعود الطرف الوحيد في العالم الذي يشاركها هذا الهاجس، بعدما وضع هؤلاء المجانين أنفسهم في الموقع الاسرائيلي.

كل هذا القلق هو ما يتحكم في مجريات الأحداث في الأشهر والاسابيع الماضية، من الاستعدادات المتواصلة لجاهزية عسكرية تتيح للعدو خوض حرب واسعة في الشمال والجنوب، ولإقناع الاميركيين بمباشرة حرب سياسية واقتصادية ضد خصوم إسرائيل في المنطقة، ولحضّ دول مثل السعودية على السير في خطوات أكبر نحو هذه المواجهة. وفي ذهن العدو أن تدخلاً أميركياً سيعيق جبهة خصومها بقوة، وأن مشاركة سعودية ستجعل الحرب المقبلة قائمة مع فئة من العرب الموالين للفرس، من مذهب سياسي أو ديني «مخالف» لـ«إجماع» يعتقد الغرب وإسرائيل أن بمقدور السعودية التحدث باسمه.

حتى لا يقع الناس في بلبلة، لا يعني ما تقدم أن هناك حشوداً عسكرية جرارة على الحدود مع سوريا ولبنان، لكنّ هناك قراراً سياسياً خاصاً يقود الى الى جاهزية هجومية. ويترافق ذلك مع تعزيز النشاط الاستخباراتي في سوريا ولبنان وفلسطين والعراق، وحتى إيران، بغية ضمان صورة واضحة عن واقع الأعداء، وهو أمر تواكبه الولايات المتحدة بما يصدر عن إدارتها من قرارات، وبما تقوم به القوات الاميركية على الارض في سوريا والعراق، كما أنه مناخ يتزاحم مع المساعي الاميركية، بالتعاون مع السعودية ومصر والامارات، لإنجاز خطوة بهلوانية تنتهي بالاعلان عن دولة فلسطينية، لكن من دون معنى، حيث لا حدود نهائية لها، ولا سلطة مستقلة ولا منافذ حرة، ولا حق لعودة من يرغب من الفلسطينيين العيش في ظلها.

اليوم، نسير، نحن والعدو، على حدّ السكين. بيننا من يخاف المواجهة معتقداً أن العدو أقدر وحده، فكيف إذا كانت أميركا والسعودية معه. وبيننا من يريد أخذنا الى النقاش العقيم حول أفضلية هذا الخيار أو ذاك لاستعادة الحقوق. لكن بيننا، أيضاً، من يعيش في هذه الارض، ولا يهدر دقيقة من وقته، بل يعمل بكل ما أوتي من قوة وخبرة وعلم للاستعداد للحظة إذا ارتفع فيها الصراخ، أن يكون حكماً صراخ الهاربين من أبناء غير شرعيين، لكيان غير شرعي كان يدعى… إسرائيل


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!

Hundreds of Jewish Settlers (terrorists) Riot In Old City Jerusalem

Hundreds of Settlers Riot In Old City Jerusalem

IMEMC News & Agencies | October 16, 2017

16 Oct 7:25 AM
A Palestinian shop owner was hospitalized after hundreds of extremist Israeli settlers rioted in the Jerusalem’s Old City, an eyewitness told mass media.
Approximately 400 extremist Jewish-Israeli settlers marched through the Old City from Al-Buraq Wall of Al-Aqsa Mosque towards the Damascus Gate, an eyewitness said, according to Days of Palestine.
While they were walking, the extremists were shouting, beating the doors of houses and shops, throwing rocks and smashing car windows.
As they approached Damascus Gate, they stormed an open shop and attacked the shop’s Palestinian owner, who was taken to Hadassah University Hospital to be treated for his wounds.
Later on, about 20 Israeli police officers arrived at the scene and escorted the rioters out of the Old City.
However, no arrests were made. Police issued a statement, on Thursday morning, saying that there had been a fight between two groups of youth.
Police confirmed that an investigation had been opened into the incident, and that damage had been caused to a shop and a number of motor vehicles.
Louis Zorba, a resident in the area, spoke to Haaretz saying: “I heard shouts and banging on the houses, but we are used to it because it happens every time there is a Jewish holiday.”
“I told the officers that if it were Palestinians who were rioting, they would have sent for reinforcements, and probably shot tear gas and stun grenades.”
NGO Ir Amim said: “This is not the first time that the police have not done their job to protect the Palestinian residents of East Jerusalem.”
The NGO accused the police of attempting to hide the nature of the attack when it described it in as a fight between groups of youths, and not as an attack on Palestinians and their property.
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!

كركوك وانتحار البرزاني

كركوك وانتحار البرزاني

ناصر قنديل

أكتوبر 17, 2017

– عندما هدّد داعش كركوك وصار على أبوابها هبّت واشنطنلتعلنها خطاً أحمر، وتركت البشمركة تتموضع فيها وفي حقول نفطها، وكما سعت قبل أيام لنقل الوحدات الكردية إلى حقول نفط دير الزور وترك الرقة لتنظيم داعش، منعاً لاقتراب الجيش السوري، عادت فنقلت وحدات داعش إلى هناك للهدف نفسه، وها هي ترفع الصوت عالياً لقيام الجيش العراقي بدخول كركوك وحقول نفطها.

– عندما أعلن مسعود البرزاني الاستعجال بالاستفتاء على انفصال كردستان، كان واضحاً أن الأمر لا صلة له بسبب يتعلق بحق تقرير المصير الذي انتظر شهوراً لنهاية داعش وانعقاد حوار عراقي شامل لرسم خريطة المستقبل، وقد انتظر عشرات السنين. فالاستعجال هو لاستباق نهاية داعش وفرض أمر واقع يتصل بالاحتفاظ بكركوك التي تمّت السيطرة الكردية عليها تحت غطاء إبعاد داعش عنها. كما كان واضحاً أن نتيجة الاستفتاء الكردي ستكون سلبية إذا كانت كردستان من دون كركوك. كما كان واضحاً أكثر أن الاستفتاء الذي قد تخضع شرعية إجرائه في المحافظات الكردية الثلاث لكثير من الاجتهادات والنقاشات، إلا أن إجراءه من طرف واحد في كركوك هو غير شرعي وباطل، ومشروط بتوافق وإشراف الحكومة المركزية في بغداد، طالما كركوك مصنفة كمحافظة متنازع عليها، وبالتالي يصير واضحاً أنه بقدر ما النيات المبطنة للاستفتاء تقوم على السطو على كركوك، فإظهار حسن النية يبدأ بإعادة كركوك للسيادة العراقية وإلغاء نتائج الاستفتاء فيها، والرفض في هذه الحال يعني قرار حرب.

– جاءت مواقف العراق وسورية وتركيا وإيران تقول لقادة إقليم كردستان إنها تأخذ شعبها للانتحار بالعناد الذي تبديه بالسطو على كركوك. وكانت قيادات كردية عاقلة ومعتدلة لا يُستهان بوزنها، وعلى رأسها الاتحاد الوطني الكردستاني، حزب الرئيس الراحل جلال الطالباني، تدعو لاستثناء كركوك من الاستفتاء وربط مستقبلها بالتوافق العراقي، وتسريع تسليمها للحكومة المركزية في بغداد، وصار التوافق العراقي الإيراني التركي السوري أن يجد نقطة لقاء مع هذه القيادة الكردية عنوانها، إلغاء نتائج الاستفتاء في كركوك، وإعادة كركوك إلى حضن الدولة العراقية كمدخل لحوار هادئ ينهي القضايا العالقة ومن ضمنها يبحث مصير الاستفتاء.

– حمل الجنرال قاسم سليماني الصورة كاملة لقيادة البرزاني، داعياً لتلقف الفرصة قبل الدخول في مرحلة يصعب معها العودة إلى الوراء، فكان الردّ باستجلاب عناصر حزب العمال الكردستاني إلى كركوك، عشية انتهاء المهلة ليل الأحد الإثنين. وبدأت العملية التي استعد لها الجيش العراقي ووحدات الحشد الشعبي.واتخذت فصائل البشمركة في كركوك موقفاً إيجابياً، وهي في غالبها تتبع لحزب الطالباني، ومثلها العاصمة الكردية الثانية في السليمانية التي تسعى لتوافق مع دول الجوار ومع الحكومة المركزية في بغداد، بخلاف أربيل وزعيمها البرزاني، ما جنّب العراق والمنطقة حرباً أهلية تجتمع فيها حكومات العرب وإيران وتركيا بوجه الأكراد، لتنقذ الحكمة الطالبانية المنطقة من الخطة «الإسرائيلية» الهادفة لحروب تقوم على اصطفافات عرقية صافية. كما حدث عندما أحبطت حلب ودمشق حلم الحرب المذهبية في سورية.

– ما جرى في كركوك سيشكل نقطة تحوّل في مصير المنطقة. فهو من جهة يقول للأكراد في سورية والعراق أن الأميركيين والسعوديين و»الإسرائيليين» الذين يشجّعونهم على التصعيد نحو الانفصال لن يقدموا لهم شيئاً ساعة الصفر. ويقول للعرب والإيرانيين والأتراك، إن المواجهة سياسية وليست عرقية ولا قومية، وإن القيادة الحكيمة للسليمانية شريك في إعادة صياغة العلاقة بين مكوّنات شعوب المنطقة بطريقة تقوم على الاحترام المبتادل للخصوصيات، والعيش السلمي الواحد، وإحباط مشاريع الفتن والحروب الأهلية.

– البرزاني ينتحر بعدما لعب ورقة حظه الأخيرة، بكامل الرصيد الكردي والإقليمي والدولي، وفقاً لمعادلة «يا قاتل يا مقتول»، وها هو يخرج مقتولاً، من دون أن ينجح بدفع المنطقة للاقتتال. فالمعادلة المطروحة اليوم أمام الأكراد كردية كردية وليست بين الاستقلال والتبعية، فقد منحوا مشروع البرزاني تفويضاً مفتوحاً للسير بدولة الانفصال وفشل بتوفير المقوّمات وتجمّد عند الخطوة الأولى وثبت خطأ حساباته وتحالفاته، ليكون الخيار المقابل الداعي للتعقل والذي يمثله تيار الطالباني بين الأكراد خشبة الخلاص الكردية بعقلانية وروح المسؤولية التي أبداها تجاه مستقبل ناسه وعلاقات الأكراد بجيرانهم، الذين عاشوا معهم آلاف السنين التي مضت وسيعيشون معهم آلاف السنين التي ستأتي.

Related Videos





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

Israel was founded on theft, theft of land, housing, mineral resources & even olive harvests


Photo of settlers stealing olives on Oct. 15

LAST YEAR Palestinian farmers accuse Israeli settlers of stealing harvest from 400 Olive Trees
BETHLEHEM (Ma’an) — Israeli settlers on Sunday stole olive pickings from dozens of trees belonging to Palestinian farmers from the occupied West Bank districts of Ramallah and Nablus.Ghassan Daghlas, an official who monitors settlements activity in the northern West Bank, told Ma’an that dozens of Israeli settlers raided Palestinian lands in Ramallah and Nablus under protection of armed Israeli forces, and stole olives from dozens of Palestinian trees.

 Daghlas told Ma’an that Israeli settlers stole the pickings of more than 65 olive trees in the Nablus-area village of al-Sawiyeh and the Ramallah-area village of al-Janiyeh.
Meanwhile, NGO Rabbis For Human Rights (RHR) released a statement saying that the settlers, from the illegal Zayit Raanan outpost, were arrested by Israeli security forces “following the swift intervention of the head of the field department of Rabbis for Human Rights, Zakaria Sadah, who informed the security forces.”In another incident, also on Sunday, Palestinian farmers from the Nablus-area village of Qaryut were attacked by settlers. RHR said that Israeli security forces arrived at the scene and apprehended the assailants. “It is a relatively unusual day where the security forces manage to arrest extremist Israeli lawbreakers in two incidents against West Bank Palestinians,” RHR said, adding that “violations against Palestinian farmers are not properly addressed by the Israeli security and/or law enforcement authorities.”

“The arrests on October 15th demonstrate that the Israeli security forces do indeed should they want to – have the capacity to act against hate crimes,” the statement concluded.
A spokesperson for COGAT, the agency responsible for enforcing the Israeli government’s policies in the occupied Palestinian territory, told Ma’an they were looking into the reports.
  The Palestinian government has no jurisdiction over Israelis in the West Bank, and violent acts carried out by Israeli settlers often occur in the presence of Israeli military forces who rarely act to protect Palestinian residents.

The majority of settler attacks committed against Palestinians are met with impunity, with Israelis rarely facing consequences for such attacks.

Only 1.9 percent of complaints submitted by Palestinians against Israeli settler attacks result in a conviction, while 95.6 percent of investigations of damage to olive trees are closed due to failures of Israeli police, according to the Israeli human rights group Yesh Din.

Yesh Din, along with Israeli rights group B’Tselem, have previously condemned Israeli authorities for failing to protect Palestinians from settlers violence or investigate attacks, particularly during olive harvest season, when incidents of attacks on harvesters and their olive groves have been a near daily occurrence in past years.

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!

Lebanon President Pushes P5 Ambassadors to Swiftly Handle Refugee Crisis to Ward Off Undesirable Ramifications

October 16, 2017
Lebanese President Michel Aoun
The Lebanese President, General Michel Aoun, on Monday briefed his visitors on Lebanon’s position vis-a-vis the simmering Syrian refugee crisis.
The President met at Baabda Palace with the ambassadors of the United Nations Security Council’s permanent members, in presence of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates Minister, Gebran Bassil.
Aoun sounded the alarm on the grave repercussions of the Syrian refugee crisis on the political, economic, and security levels, warning that this could affect the Lebanese workforce since the unemployment rate is on the rise.
The President also urged the P5 Ambassadors to swiftly handle the refugee crisis in a bid to thwart undesirable ramifications. He also requested of the international organizations that assist refugees “not to intimidate,” those who wish to return to Syria “for as long as their return is voluntary”.
“Lebanon’s security is as important as the Syrian refugees’ security,” Aoun Said.
“We seek the safe return of those who have fled because of the Syrian conflict,” the president added.
He went on to thank the Ambassadors for their visit after they discussed with him their countries’ point of view with regard to this matter.
Aoun finally handed the ambassadors letters to the Presidents of their respective countries, to the United Nations Secretary-General, and to the head of the European Union.
“Providing appropriate conditions for the safe return of Syrian refugees to their country is a must, especially to the stable areas that can be reached, or areas of low tension, without being linked to a political solution.”
The meeting took place at 11:30 a.m. in presence of the ambassadors of Russia, China, France, the United States, and Britain, and was also attended by Deputy UN Secretary-General in Lebanon, Philippe Lazarini, European Union Ambassador to Lebanon Christina Lassen, and Arab League Representative, Ambassador Abdel Rahman Solh.
Source: NNA

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!