16 May 2012, Cham Press شام برس http://www.champress.net (Syria)
mail@champress.net
QUNEITRA– The Israeli occupation authorities in the occupied Syrian Golan started constructing the first Zionist settlement five Km to the west of Quneitra city right after a month of the beginning of June aggression of 1967.
Moshe Dayan, the Israeli War Minister in the late 60s of the last century, is the one who came up with the idea of constructing settlements in the occupied Golan, saying " We are going to consolidate a new settlement reality on Golan territories which can not be changed in the future."
Dayan's remarks came after displacing 153 thousand Golan people in the aggression of 1967, as most of the 37 Israeli settlements are spread in the middle and southern parts of Golan.
Mohammad al-Mahameed, a researcher in the affairs of the occupied Syrian Golan from the occupied al-Bteiha area, said the Israeli authorities concentrate on the middle and southern sectors of Golan for building the settlements since the northern part is a rough and mountainous area and not suitable for agriculture.
He clarified that the occupation authorities and the Israeli settlers invest 80,000 dunums in agriculture and 450,000 dunums in pastures, which annually need 30 million cubic meters of water supplied from Tabaria Lake in the southern sector of the occupied Golan.
He noted that more than 20, 000 Zionist settlers benefit from these seized areas where they plant different kinds of fruitful trees and build ranches and barns that include 6,000 cows and 20,000 sheep.
The Syrian librated prisoner Atta Farhat from the occupied village of Baqatha pointed out to the Zionist gang's intentions behind building settlements in Golan in the course of fulfilling the dream of the Torah state and controlling Golan water sources and natural resources after displacing the original inhabitants, particularly after the Knesset's unjust decision to annex the Golan to the artificial entity.
Hassan Fakher-Eddin from the occupied Majdal Shams village pointed out to the Israeli criminal acts including destroying the occupied Syrian villages and deporting the people by force in an attempt to change the features of the villages and eliminate the trace of the Arabs from them.
Popular Commission for Liberation of Golan: Israeli Decision on Oil Exploration in Golan Violates International Decisions
In another context, the Popular Commission for the Liberation of the Occupied Syrian Golan stressed that the Israeli entity's decision on exploring oil and gas in the Golan is considered a flagrant violation of the international conventions and human rights in the occupied Arab territories.
The commission said in a statement on Wednesday that this decision comes in the framework of desperate attempts to exploit the current events in the region and the international silence on the Israeli violations that are aimed at changing the demographic situation in the occupied Arab lands, contrary to the international decisions which prevent changing the nature of occupied regions or the use of their natural resources, that are considered the property of the original inhabitants.
It highlighted the Zionist practices and violations in the occupied Syrian Golan, including the burial of nuclear waste, burning cultivated lands, providing farmers with harmful agricultural drugs, seizing vast areas for military purposes, stealing the Golan water and maltreating the Golan prisoners, in addition to the increasing danger of mines which claimed the lives of many and left several others maimed.
Mostrando postagens com marcador Golan. Mostrar todas as postagens
Mostrando postagens com marcador Golan. Mostrar todas as postagens
quinta-feira, 17 de maio de 2012
segunda-feira, 14 de maio de 2012
Zionist entity steals oil from occupied Syrian Golan
13 May 2012, Cham Press شام برس http://www.champress.net (Syria)
mail@champress.net
Damascus – The Zionist entity has decided to resume oil exploration operations in the occupied Syrian Golan. This act is a violation of the international law and conventions as the UN Security Council has repeatedly stressed through dozens of resolutions that all measures taken by Israel in the occupied Syrian Golan are null and void.
The Israeli daily Yedioth Ahronoth revealed a decision taken by the Israeli Energy Minister, Uzi Landau, and secretly approved by the Zionist Cabinet to resume oil exploration in the occupied Syrian Golan after about 20 years from halting it.
The decision highlights the Zionist entity's disregard for the international law and the international consensus that it must abide by the international legitimacy, particularly the Security Council No. 497 which considers Israel's decision to impose its laws and jurisdiction on the Syrian Golan as null and void.
The Newspaper said that Landau's extremist right-wing ideas have contributed to taking such decision which aims at increasing oil production, while several Arab regimes are providing Israel with large amounts of oil and gas.
mail@champress.net
Damascus – The Zionist entity has decided to resume oil exploration operations in the occupied Syrian Golan. This act is a violation of the international law and conventions as the UN Security Council has repeatedly stressed through dozens of resolutions that all measures taken by Israel in the occupied Syrian Golan are null and void.
The Israeli daily Yedioth Ahronoth revealed a decision taken by the Israeli Energy Minister, Uzi Landau, and secretly approved by the Zionist Cabinet to resume oil exploration in the occupied Syrian Golan after about 20 years from halting it.
The decision highlights the Zionist entity's disregard for the international law and the international consensus that it must abide by the international legitimacy, particularly the Security Council No. 497 which considers Israel's decision to impose its laws and jurisdiction on the Syrian Golan as null and void.
The Newspaper said that Landau's extremist right-wing ideas have contributed to taking such decision which aims at increasing oil production, while several Arab regimes are providing Israel with large amounts of oil and gas.
MK Khenin: New national-unity government wanted to marginalized Arab population
12 May 2012, The Israeli Communist Party המפלגה הקומוניסטית הישראלית (Israel)
info@maki.org.il
A number of prominent Israeli politicians and hundreds of activists from various organizations attended a left-wing conference organized by Peace Now on Friday. The event, deemed the Israeli Left Conference, took place in central Tel Aviv. Participants discussed Israel's new Netanyahu-Mofaz unity government, as well as a number of issues on the Israeli Left's agenda, including the left's response to Israel's social protests and the possible demise of the two-state solution.
Lawmakers in attendance included Dov Khenin (Hadash) Amir Peretz and Daniel Ben-Simon of Labor, Zehava Gal-On, Ilan Gilon and Nitzan Horowitz of Meretz, Nino Abesadze, Shlomo Molla and Doron Avital of Kadima.
Speaking at a panel on how to defeat Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the October 2013 elections, former Education Minister Yuli Tamir (Labor Party) said that, with the new unity government, “For the first time, we will know the true face of the right." "Today Netanyahu has the power to do whatever he wants to do. If he does not get things done, we will get to the elections from the clearest standpoint on what it is that the right wants to do, and what it doesn’t want to do," she said. The real problem, Tamir added, is not how to defeat Netanyahu, but how to stay relevant. "[The Labor Party leader] Yacimovich, and also Mofaz and Lapid are all competing in a race over who will get to hug [Netanyahu] first," she said, adding, “We have no order of priorities as the left.”
MK Dov Khenin (Hadash) said that Israel's left should adopt tactics and strategies based on principles. He said that the Netanyahu coalition wanted to take Arab MKs and Arab-Palestinian population in Israel out of the political gam. "The left cannot make significant gains in the 2013 elections without creating a bloc with Arab population." he said.
According to the Khenin the main reason for the recent political move is the increasing fear of Netanyahu and the ministers of the right wing government of the mass social protests. "The Left must be the option for the hundreds of thousands of Jews and Arabs who have, over the last few years, become active in campaigns for democracy, peace, and social justice, and who participated in the mass struggles and protests," said Khenin.
In the beginning of June we will mark 45 years of the occupation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, the Gaza Strip, and the Syrian Golan. Khenin call for a mass demonstration with the demanding of putting an end to the occupation, with the main message: there is no social justice without a just peace; there is no just peace without an independent Palestinian state. It was decided that the demonstration will be in Tel Aviv, on Saturday, June 2nd, and that Hadash and CPI will work towards the participation of many parties, movements, organization and people in this demonstration.
Meanwhile, Labor MK Daniel Ben-Simon said that a change of government was in Israel’s future. "I believe that the right-wing administration is coming to an end." He said that, since 1977, "There has been a global wave that is taking down regime after regime, we saw the latest change in France," he said. Today’s Likud party has no chance of gaining meaningful public support, he said, because is it represents the right-wing settlers in Beit El and Migron. If Israel sees a voter turnout of at least 80 percent in the 2013 elections, the left will win, Ben-Simon said. Nitzan Horowitz said that, in order to beat Netanyahu, the left must not run away from the difficult issues. "Bibi does not run away from them," he said.
info@maki.org.il
A number of prominent Israeli politicians and hundreds of activists from various organizations attended a left-wing conference organized by Peace Now on Friday. The event, deemed the Israeli Left Conference, took place in central Tel Aviv. Participants discussed Israel's new Netanyahu-Mofaz unity government, as well as a number of issues on the Israeli Left's agenda, including the left's response to Israel's social protests and the possible demise of the two-state solution.
Lawmakers in attendance included Dov Khenin (Hadash) Amir Peretz and Daniel Ben-Simon of Labor, Zehava Gal-On, Ilan Gilon and Nitzan Horowitz of Meretz, Nino Abesadze, Shlomo Molla and Doron Avital of Kadima.
Speaking at a panel on how to defeat Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the October 2013 elections, former Education Minister Yuli Tamir (Labor Party) said that, with the new unity government, “For the first time, we will know the true face of the right." "Today Netanyahu has the power to do whatever he wants to do. If he does not get things done, we will get to the elections from the clearest standpoint on what it is that the right wants to do, and what it doesn’t want to do," she said. The real problem, Tamir added, is not how to defeat Netanyahu, but how to stay relevant. "[The Labor Party leader] Yacimovich, and also Mofaz and Lapid are all competing in a race over who will get to hug [Netanyahu] first," she said, adding, “We have no order of priorities as the left.”
MK Dov Khenin (Hadash) said that Israel's left should adopt tactics and strategies based on principles. He said that the Netanyahu coalition wanted to take Arab MKs and Arab-Palestinian population in Israel out of the political gam. "The left cannot make significant gains in the 2013 elections without creating a bloc with Arab population." he said.
According to the Khenin the main reason for the recent political move is the increasing fear of Netanyahu and the ministers of the right wing government of the mass social protests. "The Left must be the option for the hundreds of thousands of Jews and Arabs who have, over the last few years, become active in campaigns for democracy, peace, and social justice, and who participated in the mass struggles and protests," said Khenin.
In the beginning of June we will mark 45 years of the occupation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, the Gaza Strip, and the Syrian Golan. Khenin call for a mass demonstration with the demanding of putting an end to the occupation, with the main message: there is no social justice without a just peace; there is no just peace without an independent Palestinian state. It was decided that the demonstration will be in Tel Aviv, on Saturday, June 2nd, and that Hadash and CPI will work towards the participation of many parties, movements, organization and people in this demonstration.
Meanwhile, Labor MK Daniel Ben-Simon said that a change of government was in Israel’s future. "I believe that the right-wing administration is coming to an end." He said that, since 1977, "There has been a global wave that is taking down regime after regime, we saw the latest change in France," he said. Today’s Likud party has no chance of gaining meaningful public support, he said, because is it represents the right-wing settlers in Beit El and Migron. If Israel sees a voter turnout of at least 80 percent in the 2013 elections, the left will win, Ben-Simon said. Nitzan Horowitz said that, in order to beat Netanyahu, the left must not run away from the difficult issues. "Bibi does not run away from them," he said.
sexta-feira, 13 de abril de 2012
ART OF RESISTANCE – A COMMENT ON GÜNTER GRASS
April 5, 2012, Gilad Atzmon http://www.gilad.co.uk (UK)
By Gilad Atzmon
http://www.deliberation.info
Outrage in Germany, Nobel Laureate Günter Grass has, once again told the truth about Israel being the greatest threat to world peace.
Günter Grass, Germany’s most famous living author and the 1999 recipient of the Nobel Prize in Literature, sparked outrage in Germany on Wednesday with the publication of a poem, “What must be said”, in which he sharply criticizes Israel’s offensive approach towards Iran.
Once again, it is the artist rather than the politician, who tells the truth as it is. Once again it is the Artist rather than the academic who speaks out.
"Why did I wait until now at this advanced age and with the last bit of ink to say: The nuclear power Israel is endangering a world peace that is already fragile?” Wrote Grass.
In the poem, published by Germany’s Süddeutsche Zeitung newspaper and other European dailies on Wednesday, Grass also calls for an "unhindered and permanent monitoring of Israel’s nuclear potential and Iran’s nuclear facility through an international entity that the government of both countries would approve.”
Israel and some German Jewish prominent voices were quick to react. The Israeli Embassy in Berlin issued a statement offering its own version of ‘What must be said.’
"What must be said is that it is a European tradition to accuse the Jews before the Passover festival of ritual murder,” the statements reads.
Pretty outrageous, don’t you think? In the open Israel together with its supportive Jewish lobbies (AIPAC, AJC) are pushing for a new global conflict. Yet, shamelessly the embassy defies criticism tossing in the air the old blood libel. The appropriate timely question here is why Israel and AIPAC are pushing for a world war and a potential nuclear conflict just before Passover? Can they just wait for another Yom Kippur (atonement day)?
The Israeli Embassy continues,"in the past, it was Christian children whose blood the Jews allegedly used to make their unleavened bread, but today it is the Iranian people that the Jewish state allegedly wants to annihilate.”
Isn’t it really the case? Every military expert suggests that Israeli pre-emptive attack on Iran could escalate into a nuclear conflict. If anything Grass tries like others, including your truly, to prevent Israel from celebrating its lethal symptoms once again.
The Israeli embassy noticed though that "Israel is the only state in the world whose right to exist is openly doubted.”
Correct, and so it should be. Israel is a racist, expansionist state, it doesn’t have room amongst nations.
The Central Council of Jews in Germany also called the poem an “aggressive pamphlet of agitation.”. I wonder, is it really aggressive to try and restrain an aggressor?
The German newspaper Die Welt, which apparently obtained an advance copy of Grass’ poem, published a response by rabid Zionist Henryk Broder, the country’s most prominent Jewish writer. “Grass always had a problem with Jews, but it has never articulated it as clearly as he has in this poem.” Broder said “Grass has always had a tendency toward megalomania, but this time he is completely nuts.” I would expect Germany’s leading Jewish writer to come with something slightly more astute.
Border however may be correct when he notes that Grass is "haunted by guilt and shame and also driven by the desire to settle history, he is now attempting to disarm the ’cause of the recognizable threat.’”
Wednesday’s poem is not the first time Grass has come out with critical views of Israel. In a 2001 interview with SPIEGEL ONLINE, he offered his own solution for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
"Israel doesn’t just need to clear out of the occupied areas,” he said at the time. “The appropriation of Palestinian territory and its Israeli settlements are also a criminal activity. That not only needs to be stopped — it also needs to be reversed. Otherwise there will be no peace.”
Broder contends that such a statement is “no less than a demand for Israel to not just cede Nablus and Hebron, but also Tel Aviv and Haifa. ” he continues, “Grass does not differentiated between the ‘occupied areas’ of 1948 and 1967.” Needless to say that from an ethical perspective Grass is correct-there is no difference between 1948 and 1967. The Jewish State located itself on historic Palestine on the expense of the Palestinian people. I guess that Grass understood already in 2001 that the Jews only State must be transformed into a ‘State of its Citizens’. Israel should embrace the true notion of peace, universalism and inclusiveness. But I guess that we shouldn’t hold our breath for it is not going to happen soon.
Gilad Atzmon’s New Book: The Wandering Who? A Study Of Jewish Identity Politics Amazon.com or Amazon.co.uk.
By Gilad Atzmon
http://www.deliberation.info
Outrage in Germany, Nobel Laureate Günter Grass has, once again told the truth about Israel being the greatest threat to world peace.
Günter Grass, Germany’s most famous living author and the 1999 recipient of the Nobel Prize in Literature, sparked outrage in Germany on Wednesday with the publication of a poem, “What must be said”, in which he sharply criticizes Israel’s offensive approach towards Iran.
Once again, it is the artist rather than the politician, who tells the truth as it is. Once again it is the Artist rather than the academic who speaks out.
"Why did I wait until now at this advanced age and with the last bit of ink to say: The nuclear power Israel is endangering a world peace that is already fragile?” Wrote Grass.
In the poem, published by Germany’s Süddeutsche Zeitung newspaper and other European dailies on Wednesday, Grass also calls for an "unhindered and permanent monitoring of Israel’s nuclear potential and Iran’s nuclear facility through an international entity that the government of both countries would approve.”
Israel and some German Jewish prominent voices were quick to react. The Israeli Embassy in Berlin issued a statement offering its own version of ‘What must be said.’
"What must be said is that it is a European tradition to accuse the Jews before the Passover festival of ritual murder,” the statements reads.
Pretty outrageous, don’t you think? In the open Israel together with its supportive Jewish lobbies (AIPAC, AJC) are pushing for a new global conflict. Yet, shamelessly the embassy defies criticism tossing in the air the old blood libel. The appropriate timely question here is why Israel and AIPAC are pushing for a world war and a potential nuclear conflict just before Passover? Can they just wait for another Yom Kippur (atonement day)?
The Israeli Embassy continues,"in the past, it was Christian children whose blood the Jews allegedly used to make their unleavened bread, but today it is the Iranian people that the Jewish state allegedly wants to annihilate.”
Isn’t it really the case? Every military expert suggests that Israeli pre-emptive attack on Iran could escalate into a nuclear conflict. If anything Grass tries like others, including your truly, to prevent Israel from celebrating its lethal symptoms once again.
The Israeli embassy noticed though that "Israel is the only state in the world whose right to exist is openly doubted.”
Correct, and so it should be. Israel is a racist, expansionist state, it doesn’t have room amongst nations.
The Central Council of Jews in Germany also called the poem an “aggressive pamphlet of agitation.”. I wonder, is it really aggressive to try and restrain an aggressor?
The German newspaper Die Welt, which apparently obtained an advance copy of Grass’ poem, published a response by rabid Zionist Henryk Broder, the country’s most prominent Jewish writer. “Grass always had a problem with Jews, but it has never articulated it as clearly as he has in this poem.” Broder said “Grass has always had a tendency toward megalomania, but this time he is completely nuts.” I would expect Germany’s leading Jewish writer to come with something slightly more astute.
Border however may be correct when he notes that Grass is "haunted by guilt and shame and also driven by the desire to settle history, he is now attempting to disarm the ’cause of the recognizable threat.’”
Wednesday’s poem is not the first time Grass has come out with critical views of Israel. In a 2001 interview with SPIEGEL ONLINE, he offered his own solution for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
"Israel doesn’t just need to clear out of the occupied areas,” he said at the time. “The appropriation of Palestinian territory and its Israeli settlements are also a criminal activity. That not only needs to be stopped — it also needs to be reversed. Otherwise there will be no peace.”
Broder contends that such a statement is “no less than a demand for Israel to not just cede Nablus and Hebron, but also Tel Aviv and Haifa. ” he continues, “Grass does not differentiated between the ‘occupied areas’ of 1948 and 1967.” Needless to say that from an ethical perspective Grass is correct-there is no difference between 1948 and 1967. The Jewish State located itself on historic Palestine on the expense of the Palestinian people. I guess that Grass understood already in 2001 that the Jews only State must be transformed into a ‘State of its Citizens’. Israel should embrace the true notion of peace, universalism and inclusiveness. But I guess that we shouldn’t hold our breath for it is not going to happen soon.
Gilad Atzmon’s New Book: The Wandering Who? A Study Of Jewish Identity Politics Amazon.com or Amazon.co.uk.
quinta-feira, 12 de abril de 2012
Sidki al-Maqt, Syria's oldest prisoner, among world's 13 oldest prisoners
10 April 2012, Cham Press شام برس http://www.champress.net (Syria)
mail@champress.net
QUNEITRA– Syrian Prisoner Sidki Suleiman al-Maqt, from the occupied Town of Majdal Shams in the occupied Syrian Golan, is the oldest Syrian prisoner and one of the 13 oldest prisoners in the world.
Al-Maqt has been in the Israeli prisons for more than 26 years. By October 24th, al-Maqt will have finished his 27th year in prison.
Father of prisoner al-Maqt, Sheikh Suleiman al-Maqt expressed pride in the sacrifices made by the family and the people of Golan, adding that al-Maqt family members have spent more than 60 years in the Israeli prisons since the 1970s.
He added that Sidki al-Maqt is one of the Golan citizens who practiced their legitimate right in resisting the occupation.
"We are proud that Sidki, along with martyr Sitan al-Wali, martyr Hayel Abu Zaid, Assem al-Wali, Medhat al-Saleh, Ayman Abu Jabal and Bishr Abu Jabal refused the verdicts of the Zionist court in 1985 and started chanting the Syrian national anthem in the court. Even when the court's guards started hitting them badly, they continued chanting the anthem." He added.
Liberated prisoner Bishr al-Maqt, Sidki's brother, pointed out to the procedures in the Israeli prisons, adding that the Israeli practices are flagrant violation of the prisoners' rights.
Sidki al-Maqt, 45 years old, was one of the founders of the secret resistance in Golan, he was arrested in 1985 and sentenced to 27 years in prison by the Israeli court-martial.
mail@champress.net
QUNEITRA– Syrian Prisoner Sidki Suleiman al-Maqt, from the occupied Town of Majdal Shams in the occupied Syrian Golan, is the oldest Syrian prisoner and one of the 13 oldest prisoners in the world.
Al-Maqt has been in the Israeli prisons for more than 26 years. By October 24th, al-Maqt will have finished his 27th year in prison.
Father of prisoner al-Maqt, Sheikh Suleiman al-Maqt expressed pride in the sacrifices made by the family and the people of Golan, adding that al-Maqt family members have spent more than 60 years in the Israeli prisons since the 1970s.
He added that Sidki al-Maqt is one of the Golan citizens who practiced their legitimate right in resisting the occupation.
"We are proud that Sidki, along with martyr Sitan al-Wali, martyr Hayel Abu Zaid, Assem al-Wali, Medhat al-Saleh, Ayman Abu Jabal and Bishr Abu Jabal refused the verdicts of the Zionist court in 1985 and started chanting the Syrian national anthem in the court. Even when the court's guards started hitting them badly, they continued chanting the anthem." He added.
Liberated prisoner Bishr al-Maqt, Sidki's brother, pointed out to the procedures in the Israeli prisons, adding that the Israeli practices are flagrant violation of the prisoners' rights.
Sidki al-Maqt, 45 years old, was one of the founders of the secret resistance in Golan, he was arrested in 1985 and sentenced to 27 years in prison by the Israeli court-martial.
Scholars of the Levant Conference Calls for Confronting Zionist Practices to Judaize Jerusalem, Expresses Support to Syria
11 April 2012, Syrian Arab News Agency (SANA) الوكالة العربية السورية للأنباء
DAMASCUS, (SANA) – The Scholars of the Levant Conference to Support al-Quds on Tuseday called upon the Arab and Islamic figures to confront the serious Zionist practices to judaize Jerusalem and destroy al-Aqsa Mosque, calling upon Arab and Islamic media to expose these practices.
Concluding the activities of the conference, the participants stressed that the Arab and international silence towards what is taking place in Jerusalem is a participation in this crime.
The participants underscored rejection of terrorism and the need for differentiation between it and the legitimate resistance, calling for exposing the Zionist crimes against the Palestinian people.
They called upon the scholars in the Arab and Islamic nations to revive the culture of resistance among their people in order to defend rights and the holy sacred places, in addition to devoting religious discourse to support resistance in Palestine, South of Lebanon and the occupied Syrian Golan.
The final statement stressed the importance of unity and rejection of sedition, warning against the instigative calls of some satellite channels that stoke sectarian sedition to fragment the united nation and calling upon these channels to be realistic and credible serving joint issues in the interest of all sides.
The participants stressed the right of the Palestinian people to resist occupation, adding that supporting the resistance in Palestine is a legitimate and humanitarian duty.
They called on the people of the Arab and Islamic nations to be united regardless of their racial and sectarian affiliations to face attempts of spreading sedition and fragmenting the nation.
The participants expressed support to Syria's national line and efforts to preserve its territorial unity against all conspiracies which aim at undermining its security and stability.
They condemned instigative fatwas by some Muslim scholars in the Arab countries which violate the principles of Islam, adding that it was better for those scholars stress stopping the bloodshed and getting out of the crisis.
The participants denounced the terrorist sabotage acts in Syria which violates human ethics and all religions, adding that these acts will enhance the people's determination to overcome the crisis.
They rejected extremism and systemized terrorism in Syria such as operation carried out by al-Qaeda members and Takfiri groups serving interests that are hostile to Islam and Muslims.
The participants also hailed the courageous and resistant stances of Syria's people and government under the leadership of President al-Assad in support of the Palestinian cause to end the occupation and establish a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital.
Earlier, under the patronage of President Bashar al-Assad, activities of the Scholars of Levant conference to Support al-Quds (Jerusalem) started at al-Assad Library in Damascus.
The Conference is held by the Ministry of Awqaf (Religious Endowment) with the participation of scholars from Palestine, Lebanon, Jordan and Syria.
The first session of the conference started with announcing the formation of the Scholars of Levant Union and electing Dr. Mohammad Said Ramadan al-Bouti as its president.
Abbas al-Mosawi from Lebanon and Sheikh Tayssir al-Tamimi from Palestine who didn’t attend because of the practices of the Israeli occupation were elected as deputies.
The union included 60 members from Syria, 20 members from Lebanon, ten Palestinian scholars and five Jordanian scholars.
The first session is entitled 'al-Quds and al-Aqsa Mosque', it will discuss issues related to al-Quds, the role of the Islamic nation's scholars in supporting al-Quds, Syria's resistant role in defending al-Quds and the occupied Arab territories, judaization of al-Quds and the Israeli violations of al-Aqsa Mosque and the holy sites.
The second session, under the title 'The Role of Levant Scholars in this Stage', discusses the conspiracy against Syria and the dangers of extremism and provocative fatwas (Rulings made by Muftis) on the Islamic nation in addition to the role of scholars in facing the conspiracy against Syria.
Al-Bouti: Liberating al-Quds is a Holy Duty
Dr. Mohammad Said Ramadan al-Bouti on Tuesday said that liberating al-Quds (Jerusalem) is a sacred duty, adding that occupation can never transfer lands' property regardless of its duration.
In a speech during the Scholar of the Levant Conference to support al-Quds, al-Bouti added that "Every Muslim, Arab or Foreigner, and Every Arab person, Muslim or Christian, should sacrifice his life for al-Quds".
Al-Bouti highlighted that the Islamic State liberated al-Quds from the Romans, who occupied al-Quds for several centuries, and restored it to its rightful people of Muslims, Christians and Jews.
Minister of Awqaf (Religious Endowments) Mohammad Abdul-Sattar al-Sayyed said that Jerusalem had been a target along the ages for invaders and that was the main reason for unifying the Arabs when Salah al Din al Ayyubi librated it from foreigners.
" Let us make Jerusalem the direct reason for re-unifying the Arabs as we all agree on librating it," pointing out to the sublime rank of al-Aqsa Mosque and Jerusalem where the Israeli occupation is practicing ethnic cleansing against its people from Muslems and Christens.
He said that the Arabs are eager to pray in al-Aqsa Mosque and Church of the Resurrection, warning that the Israeli and the Zionist-backed media outlets are not saving any efforts to distract the Arabs from their central issue and are working in sowing sedition among them.
For his part, His Beatitude Patriarch Gregorios III Laham, Patriarch of Antioch, All the East, Alexandria and Jerusalem for the Melkite Greek Catholic said that the resurrection of Messiah is the celebration of Jerusalem and the title of the Conference is to champion Jerusalem.
He said that every human consider themselves from Jerusalem because it’s the city of all religions and it means in Christianity ' redemption and salvation', stressing that it is key for peace in the region.
Laham called the world, the Christians in particular, to campaign for supporting Jerusalem and its unique natur as a convergence for all religions.
For his part, Grand Mufti of the Republic, Dr. Ahmad Badr Eddin Hassoun, asserted that the blood of the Syrian youths who were assassinated by armed terrorist groups was supposed to be spilled in al-Quds, but the terrorists spilled it in Syria.
The Mufti condemned the Arab states' collation against Syria, adding that those states are providing money and weapons to destroy Syria.
He stressed that the Arab League is now working to weaken the unity of the Arab world which is the basis for resolving the Palestinian Cause and defending the holy places in Jerusalem.
The participants stressed Syria's role in supporting the Palestinian Cause which was reflected in the Syrian people's standing by the Palestinians and Syria's firm stance and rejection of giving up the rights of the Palestinians in restoring their lands.
The participants called upon the people of the Islamic countries and the free people to defend justice and call on the international organizations to shoulder their responsibilities in protecting the rights of the Palestinians and the sacred sites in Palestine from the Zionist crimes to desecrate the holy Al-Aqsa Mosque.
They also stressed that the scholars of the Levant should unify efforts to reunite the Arab Nation and mobilize its resources to support Jerusalem.
The participants added that the Zionism has created fictitious enemies for Arabs with the aim of drawing their attention from their real enemy which is Israel and those who support it.
English Bulletin
DAMASCUS, (SANA) – The Scholars of the Levant Conference to Support al-Quds on Tuseday called upon the Arab and Islamic figures to confront the serious Zionist practices to judaize Jerusalem and destroy al-Aqsa Mosque, calling upon Arab and Islamic media to expose these practices.
Concluding the activities of the conference, the participants stressed that the Arab and international silence towards what is taking place in Jerusalem is a participation in this crime.
The participants underscored rejection of terrorism and the need for differentiation between it and the legitimate resistance, calling for exposing the Zionist crimes against the Palestinian people.
They called upon the scholars in the Arab and Islamic nations to revive the culture of resistance among their people in order to defend rights and the holy sacred places, in addition to devoting religious discourse to support resistance in Palestine, South of Lebanon and the occupied Syrian Golan.
The final statement stressed the importance of unity and rejection of sedition, warning against the instigative calls of some satellite channels that stoke sectarian sedition to fragment the united nation and calling upon these channels to be realistic and credible serving joint issues in the interest of all sides.
The participants stressed the right of the Palestinian people to resist occupation, adding that supporting the resistance in Palestine is a legitimate and humanitarian duty.
They called on the people of the Arab and Islamic nations to be united regardless of their racial and sectarian affiliations to face attempts of spreading sedition and fragmenting the nation.
The participants expressed support to Syria's national line and efforts to preserve its territorial unity against all conspiracies which aim at undermining its security and stability.
They condemned instigative fatwas by some Muslim scholars in the Arab countries which violate the principles of Islam, adding that it was better for those scholars stress stopping the bloodshed and getting out of the crisis.
The participants denounced the terrorist sabotage acts in Syria which violates human ethics and all religions, adding that these acts will enhance the people's determination to overcome the crisis.
They rejected extremism and systemized terrorism in Syria such as operation carried out by al-Qaeda members and Takfiri groups serving interests that are hostile to Islam and Muslims.
The participants also hailed the courageous and resistant stances of Syria's people and government under the leadership of President al-Assad in support of the Palestinian cause to end the occupation and establish a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital.
Earlier, under the patronage of President Bashar al-Assad, activities of the Scholars of Levant conference to Support al-Quds (Jerusalem) started at al-Assad Library in Damascus.
The Conference is held by the Ministry of Awqaf (Religious Endowment) with the participation of scholars from Palestine, Lebanon, Jordan and Syria.
The first session of the conference started with announcing the formation of the Scholars of Levant Union and electing Dr. Mohammad Said Ramadan al-Bouti as its president.
Abbas al-Mosawi from Lebanon and Sheikh Tayssir al-Tamimi from Palestine who didn’t attend because of the practices of the Israeli occupation were elected as deputies.
The union included 60 members from Syria, 20 members from Lebanon, ten Palestinian scholars and five Jordanian scholars.
The first session is entitled 'al-Quds and al-Aqsa Mosque', it will discuss issues related to al-Quds, the role of the Islamic nation's scholars in supporting al-Quds, Syria's resistant role in defending al-Quds and the occupied Arab territories, judaization of al-Quds and the Israeli violations of al-Aqsa Mosque and the holy sites.
The second session, under the title 'The Role of Levant Scholars in this Stage', discusses the conspiracy against Syria and the dangers of extremism and provocative fatwas (Rulings made by Muftis) on the Islamic nation in addition to the role of scholars in facing the conspiracy against Syria.
Al-Bouti: Liberating al-Quds is a Holy Duty
Dr. Mohammad Said Ramadan al-Bouti on Tuesday said that liberating al-Quds (Jerusalem) is a sacred duty, adding that occupation can never transfer lands' property regardless of its duration.
In a speech during the Scholar of the Levant Conference to support al-Quds, al-Bouti added that "Every Muslim, Arab or Foreigner, and Every Arab person, Muslim or Christian, should sacrifice his life for al-Quds".
Al-Bouti highlighted that the Islamic State liberated al-Quds from the Romans, who occupied al-Quds for several centuries, and restored it to its rightful people of Muslims, Christians and Jews.
Minister of Awqaf (Religious Endowments) Mohammad Abdul-Sattar al-Sayyed said that Jerusalem had been a target along the ages for invaders and that was the main reason for unifying the Arabs when Salah al Din al Ayyubi librated it from foreigners.
" Let us make Jerusalem the direct reason for re-unifying the Arabs as we all agree on librating it," pointing out to the sublime rank of al-Aqsa Mosque and Jerusalem where the Israeli occupation is practicing ethnic cleansing against its people from Muslems and Christens.
He said that the Arabs are eager to pray in al-Aqsa Mosque and Church of the Resurrection, warning that the Israeli and the Zionist-backed media outlets are not saving any efforts to distract the Arabs from their central issue and are working in sowing sedition among them.
For his part, His Beatitude Patriarch Gregorios III Laham, Patriarch of Antioch, All the East, Alexandria and Jerusalem for the Melkite Greek Catholic said that the resurrection of Messiah is the celebration of Jerusalem and the title of the Conference is to champion Jerusalem.
He said that every human consider themselves from Jerusalem because it’s the city of all religions and it means in Christianity ' redemption and salvation', stressing that it is key for peace in the region.
Laham called the world, the Christians in particular, to campaign for supporting Jerusalem and its unique natur as a convergence for all religions.
For his part, Grand Mufti of the Republic, Dr. Ahmad Badr Eddin Hassoun, asserted that the blood of the Syrian youths who were assassinated by armed terrorist groups was supposed to be spilled in al-Quds, but the terrorists spilled it in Syria.
The Mufti condemned the Arab states' collation against Syria, adding that those states are providing money and weapons to destroy Syria.
He stressed that the Arab League is now working to weaken the unity of the Arab world which is the basis for resolving the Palestinian Cause and defending the holy places in Jerusalem.
The participants stressed Syria's role in supporting the Palestinian Cause which was reflected in the Syrian people's standing by the Palestinians and Syria's firm stance and rejection of giving up the rights of the Palestinians in restoring their lands.
The participants called upon the people of the Islamic countries and the free people to defend justice and call on the international organizations to shoulder their responsibilities in protecting the rights of the Palestinians and the sacred sites in Palestine from the Zionist crimes to desecrate the holy Al-Aqsa Mosque.
They also stressed that the scholars of the Levant should unify efforts to reunite the Arab Nation and mobilize its resources to support Jerusalem.
The participants added that the Zionism has created fictitious enemies for Arabs with the aim of drawing their attention from their real enemy which is Israel and those who support it.
English Bulletin
quarta-feira, 11 de abril de 2012
A GUERRA DOS EUA-ISRAEL AO IRÃO: O MITO DE UMA CAMPANHA LIMITADA
8 abril 2012, Resistir.info http://www.resistir.info (Portugal)
http://www.resistir.info/petras/petras_05abr12.html
por James Petras
A crescente ameaça de um ataque militar dos EUA-Israel ao Irão baseia-se em vários factores incluindo: (1) a história militar recente de ambos os países na região; (2) pronunciamentos públicos de líderes políticos estado-unidenses e israelenses; (3) ataques recentes e em curso ao Líbano e à Síria, aliados importantes do Irão; (4) ataques armados e assassínios de cientistas e responsáveis de segurança iranianos por grupos terroristas e/ou afectos sob controle dos EUA ou da Mossad; (5) o fracasso das sanções económicas e da coacção diplomática; (6) escalada de histeria e exigências extremas ao Irão para por fim ao enriquecimento de urânio de uso legal e civil; (7) “exercícios” militares provocatórios nas fronteiras do Irão e jogos de guerra destinados a intimidar e a um ensaio geral para um ataque antecipativo; (8) pressão poderosa de grupos pró guerra tanto em Washington como em Tel Aviv incluindo os principais partidos políticos israelenses e a poderosa AIPAC nos EUA; (9) e finalmente o National Defense Authorization Act de 2012 (um orwelliano decreto de emergência de Obama, de 16/Março/2012).
A propaganda de guerra estado-unidense opera ao longo de dois trilhos: (1) a mensagem dominante enfatiza a proximidade da guerra e a disposição dos EUA de utilizarem força e violência. Esta mensagem é destinada ao Irão e coincide com anúncios israelenses de preparativos de guerra. (2) O segundo trilho tem como objectivo o “público liberal” com um punhado de “académicos reconhecidos” marginais (ou progressistas Departamento de Estado) a subestimarem a ameaça de guerra e argumentarem que decisores políticos razoáveis em Tel Aviv e Washington estão conscientes de que o Irão não possui armas nucleares ou qualquer capacidade para produzi-las agora ou no futuro próximo. A finalidade deste contra-vapor liberal é confundir e minar a maioria da opinião pública, a qual opõe-se claramente a mais preparativos de guerra, e fazer descarrilar o explosivo movimento anti-guerra.
É desnecessário dizer que os pronunciamentos os instigadores de guerra “racionais” utilizam um “duplo discurso” baseado no afastamento displicente de todas as evidências históricas e empíricas em contrário. Quando os EUA e Israel falam de guerra, preparam-se para a guerra e empenham-se e provocações pré guerra – eles pretendem ir à guerra – tal como fizeram contra o Iraque em 2003. Sob as actuais condições políticas e militares internacionais um ataque ao Irão, inicialmente por Israel com apoio dos EUA, é extremamente provável, mesmo quando as condições económicas mundiais deveriam ditar em contrário e mesmo quando as consequências estratégicas negativas provavelmente repercutir-se-ão através do mundo durante as próximas décadas.
Cálculo dos EUA e Israel sobre a capacidade militar do Irão
Os decisores estratégicos americanos e israelenses não concordam sobre as consequências da retaliação do Irão contra um ataque. Pelo seu lado, líderes israelenses minimizam a capacidade militar do Irão de atacar e de prejudicar o estado judeu, o qual é a sua única consideração. Eles contam com a distância, seu escudo anti-mísseis e a protecção de forças aéreas e navais dos EUA no Golfo para cobrir seu ataque sorrateiro. Por outro lado, estrategas militares dos EUA sabem que os iranianos são capazes de infligir baixas substanciais a navios de guerra dos EUA, os quais teriam de atacar instalações costeiras iranianas a fim de apoiar ou proteger os israelenses.
A inteligência israelense é bem conhecida pela sua capacidade para organizar o assassinato de indivíduos por todo o mundo: a Mossada organizou com êxito actos terroristas além-mar contra líderes palestinos, sírios e libaneses. Por outro lado, a inteligência israelense tem um registo muito fraco quanto às suas estimativas de grandes empreendimentos militares e políticos. Eles subestimaram gravemente o apoio popular, a força militar e a capacidade organizacional do Hezbollah durante a guerra de 2006 no Líbano. Da mesma forma, a inteligência israelense entendeu mal a força e a capacidade do movimento democrático popular egípcio quando este se levantou e derrubou o aliado regional estratégico de Tel Aviv, a ditadura Mubarak. Se bem que líderes israelenses “finjam paranóia” – lançando clichés acerca de “ameaças existenciais” – eles são enganados pela sua arrogância narcisista e o seu racismo, subestimando reiteradamente a perícia técnica e o refinamento político dos seus inimigos árabes e da região islâmica. Isto é indubitavelmente verdadeiro no seu descartar displicente da capacidade do Irão para retaliar contra um planeado assalto aéreo israelense.
O governo estado-unidense agora comprometeu-se abertamente a apoiar um assalto israelense ao Irão quando ele for lançado. Mais especificamente, Washington afirma que virá “incondicionalmente” em defesa de Israel se este for “atacado”. Como pode Israel evitar ser “atacado” quando seus aviões estão a despejar bombas e mísseis sobre instalações iranianas, defesas militares e infraestruturas estratégicas? Além disso, dada a colaboração e aos sistemas de inteligência do Pentágono coordenados com as Forças de Defesa de Israel (IDF), seu papel na identificação de objectivos, rotas e aproximações de mísseis, bem como as cadeias de fornecimento de armas integradas e de munições, serão críticos para um ataque das IDF. Não há maneira de os EUA se dissociarem da guerra do estado judeu ao Irão depois de iniciado o ataque.
Os mitos da “guerra limitada”: Geografia
Washington e Tel Aviv afirmam e parecem acreditar que o seu planeado assalto ao Irão será uma “guerra limitada”, tendo como alvo objectivos limitados e perdurando apenas uns poucos dias ou semanas – sem consequências graves.
Dizem-nos que brilhantes generais de Israel identificaram todas as instalações de investigação nuclear críticas, as quais os seus ataques aéreos cirúrgicos eliminarão sem danos colaterais horríveis para a população circundante. Uma vez que o alegado programa de “armas nucleares” fosse destruído, todos os israelenses poderiam retomar as suas vidas em segurança plena sabendo que outra ameaça “existencial” fora eliminada. A noção israelense de uma guerra limitada em “tempo e espaço” é absurda e perigosa – e caracteriza a arrogância, estupidez e racismo dos seus autores.
Para se aproximarem das instalações nucleares do Irão as forças israelenses e estado-unidenses confrontar-se-ão com bases bem equipadas e defendidas, instalações de mísseis, defesas marítimas e fortificações em grande escala dirigidas pelos Guardas Revolucionários e pelas Forças Armadas do Irão. Além disso, os sistemas de defesa de mísseis que protegem as instalações nucleares estão ligados a auto-estradas, aeródromos, portos e apoiadas por infraestrutura de finalidade dupla (civil-militar), as quais incluem refinarias de petróleo e uma enorme rede de gabinetes administrativos. Por “nocaute” os alegados sítios nucleares exigirá a expansão do âmbito geográfico da guerra. A capacidade científica-tecnológica do programa nuclear civil iraniano envolve um vasto conjunto das suas instalações de investigação, incluindo universidades, laboratórios, locais de fabricação e centros de concepção. Destruir o programa nuclear civil do Irão exigiria que Israel (e portanto os EUA) atacassem muito mais do que instalações de investigação ou laboratórios ocultos sob uma montanha remota. Exigiria assaltos múltiplos e generalizados sobre alvos por todo o país, por outras palavras, uma guerra generalizada.
O líder supremo do Irão, ayatollah Ali Khamenei, declarou que o Irão retaliará com uma guerra equivalente. O Irão corresponderá à amplitude e âmbito de com um contra-ataque de resposta. “Nós os atacaremos no mesmo nível quando eles nos atacarem”. Isso significa que o Irão não limitará a sua retaliação a meramente tentar deitar abaixo bombardeiros estado-unidenses e israelenses no seu espaço aéreo ou a lançar mísseis a navios dos EUA nas suas águas mas levará a guerra a alvos equivalente em Israel e em países ocupados pelos EUA no Golfo e em torno dele. A “guerra limitada” de Israel tornar-se-á uma guerra generalizada que se estenderá por todo o Médio Oriente e ainda mais além.
A actual adoração ilusória de Israel acerca do seu elaborado sistema de defesa míssil ficará exposta quando centenas de mísseis de alto poder forem lançados de Teerão, do Sul do Líbano e bem além das Alturas de Golan.
O mito da guerra limitada: Intervalo de tempo
Peritos militares israelenses esperam confiantemente exterminar seus alvos iranianos nuns poucos dias – alguns podem pensar que num simples fim de semana – e talvez sem a perda de nem um único piloto. Eles esperam que o estado judeu venha a celebrar a sua brilhante vitória nas ruas de Tel Aviv e Washington. Estão iludidos pelo seu próprio senso de superioridade. O Irão não combateu uma guerra brutal com uma década de duração contra os invasores iraquianos abastecidos pelos EUA e os seus conselheiros militares ocidentais/israelenses só para entregar-se e submeter-se passivamente a um número limitado de ataques aéreos e com mísseis por parte de Israel. O Irão é uma sociedade jovem, bem educada e mobilizada, a qual pode utilizar milhões de reservistas de todo espectro político, étnico, de género e religioso, galvanizado em apoio a sua nação sob ataque. Numa guerra para defender a pátria todas as diferenças internas desaparecem para enfrentar o ataque não provocado israelenses-estado-unidense que ameaça toda a sua civilização – seus 5000 anos de cultura e tradições, bem como os seus avanços científicos modernos e instituições. A primeira onda de ataques dos EUA-Israel levará a uma retaliação feroz, a qual não será confinada às áreas originais do conflito, nem qualquer acto da agressão israelense acabará quando e se instalações nucleares do Irão forem destruídas e alguns dos seus cientistas, técnicos e trabalhadores qualificados forem mortos. A guerra continuará no tempo e em extensão geográfica.
Múltiplos pontos de conflito
Assim como qualquer ataque dos EUA-Israel ao Irão envolveria alvos múltiplos, os militares iranianos também terão uma pletora de alvos estratégicos facilmente acessíveis. Embora seja difícil prever onde e como o Irão retaliará, uma coisa está clara: O ataque inicial dos EUA-Israel não ficará sem resposta.
Dada a supremacia israelense-estado-unidense a longas e médias distâncias e em poder aéreo, o Irão provavelmente confiará em objectivos de curta distância. Isto incluiria as valiosas instalações militares do EUA e rotas de abastecimento em terrenos adjacentes (Iraque, Kuwait e Afeganistão) e alvos israelenses com mísseis lançados do Sul do Líbano e possivelmente da Síria. Se uns poucos misseis de longo alcance escaparem ao muito gabado “escudo anti-míssil” do estado judeu, centros populacionais israelenses podem pagar um preço pesado pela imprudência e arrogância dos seus líderes.
O contra-ataque iraniano levará a uma escalada das forças EUA-Israel, estendendo e aprofundando a sua guerra aérea e naval a todos o sistema de segurança nacional iraniano – bases militares, portos, sistemas de comunicação, postos de comando e centros administrativos do governo – muitos em cidades densamente povoadas. O Irão reagirá lançando o seu maior activo estratégico: um ataque coordenado no solo envolvendo os Guardas Revolucionários, juntamente com seus aliados entre as tropas xiitas iraquianas, contra forças dos EUA no Iraque. Ele coordenará ataques contra instalações dos EUA no Afeganistão e Paquistão com a crescente resistência armada nacionalista-islâmica.
O conflito inicial, centrado nos chamados objectivos militares estratégicos (instalações de investigação científica), generalizar-se-á rapidamente a alvos económicos ou o que os estrategas militares dos EUA e Israel chamam de alvos “duais civis-militares”. Isto incluiria campos de petróleo, auto-estradas, fábricas, redes de comunicações, estações de televisão, instalações de tratamento de água, reservatórios, centrais eléctricas e gabinetes administrativos, tais como o Ministério da Defesa e a sede da Guarda Republicana. O Irão, confrontada com a destruição iminente de toda a sua economia e infraestrutura (o que se verificou no Iraque vizinho com a invasão não provocada dos EUA em 2003), retaliaria bloqueando o Estreito de Ormuz e enviando mísseis de curto alcance na direcção dos principais campos de petróleo e refinarias dos Estados do Golfo incluindo o Kuwait e a Arábia Saudita, a meros 10 minutos de distância, paralisando o fluxo de petróleo para a Europa, Ásia e os Estados Unidos e mergulhando a economia mundial numa depressão profunda.
Não se deveria esquecer que os iranianos provavelmente estão mais conscientes do que ninguém na região da devastação total sofrida pelos iraquianos após a invasão dos EUA, a qual mergulhou aquela nação no caos total e devastou a sua infraestrutura avançada e o seu aparelho administrativo civil, para não mencionar a sistemática aniquilação da sua elite científica e técnica altamente educada. As ondas de assassínios de cientistas iranianos, académicos e engenheiros promovidas pela Mossad são apenas uma antevisão do que os israelenses têm em mente para cientistas, intelectuais e trabalhadores técnicos altamente qualificados. Os iranianos não deveriam ter ilusões acerca dos americanos e israelenses que procuram lançar o país na sombria era brutal do Afeganistão e Iraque. Eles não terão mais papel num Irão devastado do que têm os seus vizinhos no Iraque pós Saddam.
Segundo o general Mathis, que comanda todas as forças dos EUA no Médio Oriente, Golfo Pérsico e Sudeste da Ásia, “um primeiro ataque israelense provavelmente teria consequências calamitosas em toda a região e para os Estados Unidos ali” (NY Times, 19/3/12). A estimativa de “consequências calamitosas” do general Mathis apenas leva em conta as perdas militares dos EUA, provavelmente centenas de marinheiros em vasos de guerra ao alcance de mísseis de artilheiros iranianos.
Contudo, a mais ilusória e auto-enganosa avaliação do resultado e consequências de um ataque aéreo israelense ao Irão provém de líderes israelenses de topo, académicos e peritos de inteligência, que afirmam [ter] inteligência superior, defesas superiores e visão suprema (e também racista) dentro da “mente iraniana”. É típico o ministro da Defesa israelense, Barak, que se jacta de que qualquer retaliação iraniana na pior das hipóteses infligirá baixas mínimas à população israelense.
A visão “judeu-cêntrica” de reordenamento do equilíbrio de poder na região, a qual prevalece nos principais círculos israelenses, passa por alto a probabilidade de que a guerra não será decidia por ataques aéreos israelenses e defesas anti-míssil. Os mísseis do Irão não podem ser facilmente contidos, especialmente chegarem várias centenas por minuto de três direcções, Irão, Líbano, Síria e possivelmente de submarinos iranianos. Em segundo lugar, o colapso das suas importações de petróleo devastará a economia de Israel, altamente dependente da energia. Em terceiro lugar, os principais aliados de Israel, especialmente os EUA e a UE, serão gravemente tensionados quando forem arrastados para dentro da guerra de Israel e encontrarem-se a defender os estreitos de Ormuz, suas guarnições no Iraque e no Afeganistão e seus campos de petróleo e bases militares no Golfo. Tal conflito poderia incendiar as maiorias xiitas no Bahrain e nas províncias estratégicas ricas em petróleo da Arábia Saudita. A guerra generalizada terá um efeito devastador sobre o preço do petróleo e a economia mundial. Provocará a fúria de consumidores e a ira de trabalhadores por toda a parte quando fecharem fábricas e choques poderosos por todo o frágil sistema financeiro resultarem numa depressão mundial.
O patológico “complexo de superioridade” de Israel resulta em que os seus líderes racistas sistematicamente super-estimam suas próprias capacidades intelectuais, técnicas e militares, ao passo que subestimam o conhecimento, capacidade e coragem dos seus adversários regionais, islâmicos (neste caso iranianos). Eles ignoram a capacidade demonstrada do Irão para sustentar uma guerra defensiva prolongada, complexa e em muitas frentes e em recuperar-se de um assalto inicial e desenvolver armamento moderno adequado para infligir danos severos aos seus atacantes. E o Irão terá o apoio incondicional e activo da população muçulmana do mundo e talvez o apoio diplomático da Rússia e da China, que obviamente verão um ataque ao Irão como um outro ensaio geral para conter o seu poder crescente.
Conclusão
A guerra, especialmente uma guerra israelense-estado-unidense contra o Irão, está indissoluvelmente ligada ao relacionamento assimétrico EUA-Israel, o qual secundariza qualquer análise militar e política crítica nos EUA. Devido à configuração de poder sionista de Israel, a força militar dos EUA pode ser canalizada para o apoio ao impulso de Israel para a dominação regional, aos líderes israelenses e acima de tudo para os seus militares sentirem-se livres para entrarem nas mais ultrajantes aventuras militares e destrutivas, sabendo muito bem que em primeira e última instância podem confiar no apoio dos EUA com o sangue e as riquezas americanas. Mas depois de todo este grotesco servilismo a um país racista e isolado, quem resgatará os Estados Unidos? Quem impedirá o afundamento dos seus navios no Golfo e a morte e mutilação de centenas dos seus marinheiros e milhares dos seus soldados? E onde estarão os israelenses e sionistas dos EUA quando o Iraque for invadido pelas tropas de elite iranianas e seus aliados xiitas e um levantamento generalizado se verificar no Afeganistão?
Os decisores políticos egocêntricos de Israel desprezam o provável colapso do abastecimento de petróleo mundial em consequência da sua planeada guerra contra o Irão. Será que os seus agentes sionistas nos EUA percebem que, em consequência do arrastamento dos EUA para a guerra de Israel, a nação iraniana será forçada a por em chamas os campos de petróleo do Golfo Pérsico?
Quão barato tornou-se “comprar uma guerra” nos EUA? Por uns meros poucos milhões de dólares em contribuições de campanha para políticos corruptos e através da penetração deliberada de agentes “Israel-First”, académicos e políticos na maquinaria de fazer a guerra do governo estado-unidense, e através da covardia moral e auto-censura dos principais críticos, escritores e jornalistas que se recusam a nomear Israel e seus agentes como os decisores chave do nosso país na política do Médio Oriente, nós nos encaminhamos directamente rumo a uma guerra muito além de qualquer conflagração militar regional e rumo ao colapso da economia mundial e do empobrecimento brutal de centenas de milhões de pessoas de Norte a Sul, de Leste a Oeste.
05/Abril/2012
O original encontra-se em http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=30150
http://www.resistir.info/petras/petras_05abr12.html
por James Petras
A crescente ameaça de um ataque militar dos EUA-Israel ao Irão baseia-se em vários factores incluindo: (1) a história militar recente de ambos os países na região; (2) pronunciamentos públicos de líderes políticos estado-unidenses e israelenses; (3) ataques recentes e em curso ao Líbano e à Síria, aliados importantes do Irão; (4) ataques armados e assassínios de cientistas e responsáveis de segurança iranianos por grupos terroristas e/ou afectos sob controle dos EUA ou da Mossad; (5) o fracasso das sanções económicas e da coacção diplomática; (6) escalada de histeria e exigências extremas ao Irão para por fim ao enriquecimento de urânio de uso legal e civil; (7) “exercícios” militares provocatórios nas fronteiras do Irão e jogos de guerra destinados a intimidar e a um ensaio geral para um ataque antecipativo; (8) pressão poderosa de grupos pró guerra tanto em Washington como em Tel Aviv incluindo os principais partidos políticos israelenses e a poderosa AIPAC nos EUA; (9) e finalmente o National Defense Authorization Act de 2012 (um orwelliano decreto de emergência de Obama, de 16/Março/2012).
A propaganda de guerra estado-unidense opera ao longo de dois trilhos: (1) a mensagem dominante enfatiza a proximidade da guerra e a disposição dos EUA de utilizarem força e violência. Esta mensagem é destinada ao Irão e coincide com anúncios israelenses de preparativos de guerra. (2) O segundo trilho tem como objectivo o “público liberal” com um punhado de “académicos reconhecidos” marginais (ou progressistas Departamento de Estado) a subestimarem a ameaça de guerra e argumentarem que decisores políticos razoáveis em Tel Aviv e Washington estão conscientes de que o Irão não possui armas nucleares ou qualquer capacidade para produzi-las agora ou no futuro próximo. A finalidade deste contra-vapor liberal é confundir e minar a maioria da opinião pública, a qual opõe-se claramente a mais preparativos de guerra, e fazer descarrilar o explosivo movimento anti-guerra.
É desnecessário dizer que os pronunciamentos os instigadores de guerra “racionais” utilizam um “duplo discurso” baseado no afastamento displicente de todas as evidências históricas e empíricas em contrário. Quando os EUA e Israel falam de guerra, preparam-se para a guerra e empenham-se e provocações pré guerra – eles pretendem ir à guerra – tal como fizeram contra o Iraque em 2003. Sob as actuais condições políticas e militares internacionais um ataque ao Irão, inicialmente por Israel com apoio dos EUA, é extremamente provável, mesmo quando as condições económicas mundiais deveriam ditar em contrário e mesmo quando as consequências estratégicas negativas provavelmente repercutir-se-ão através do mundo durante as próximas décadas.
Cálculo dos EUA e Israel sobre a capacidade militar do Irão
Os decisores estratégicos americanos e israelenses não concordam sobre as consequências da retaliação do Irão contra um ataque. Pelo seu lado, líderes israelenses minimizam a capacidade militar do Irão de atacar e de prejudicar o estado judeu, o qual é a sua única consideração. Eles contam com a distância, seu escudo anti-mísseis e a protecção de forças aéreas e navais dos EUA no Golfo para cobrir seu ataque sorrateiro. Por outro lado, estrategas militares dos EUA sabem que os iranianos são capazes de infligir baixas substanciais a navios de guerra dos EUA, os quais teriam de atacar instalações costeiras iranianas a fim de apoiar ou proteger os israelenses.
A inteligência israelense é bem conhecida pela sua capacidade para organizar o assassinato de indivíduos por todo o mundo: a Mossada organizou com êxito actos terroristas além-mar contra líderes palestinos, sírios e libaneses. Por outro lado, a inteligência israelense tem um registo muito fraco quanto às suas estimativas de grandes empreendimentos militares e políticos. Eles subestimaram gravemente o apoio popular, a força militar e a capacidade organizacional do Hezbollah durante a guerra de 2006 no Líbano. Da mesma forma, a inteligência israelense entendeu mal a força e a capacidade do movimento democrático popular egípcio quando este se levantou e derrubou o aliado regional estratégico de Tel Aviv, a ditadura Mubarak. Se bem que líderes israelenses “finjam paranóia” – lançando clichés acerca de “ameaças existenciais” – eles são enganados pela sua arrogância narcisista e o seu racismo, subestimando reiteradamente a perícia técnica e o refinamento político dos seus inimigos árabes e da região islâmica. Isto é indubitavelmente verdadeiro no seu descartar displicente da capacidade do Irão para retaliar contra um planeado assalto aéreo israelense.
O governo estado-unidense agora comprometeu-se abertamente a apoiar um assalto israelense ao Irão quando ele for lançado. Mais especificamente, Washington afirma que virá “incondicionalmente” em defesa de Israel se este for “atacado”. Como pode Israel evitar ser “atacado” quando seus aviões estão a despejar bombas e mísseis sobre instalações iranianas, defesas militares e infraestruturas estratégicas? Além disso, dada a colaboração e aos sistemas de inteligência do Pentágono coordenados com as Forças de Defesa de Israel (IDF), seu papel na identificação de objectivos, rotas e aproximações de mísseis, bem como as cadeias de fornecimento de armas integradas e de munições, serão críticos para um ataque das IDF. Não há maneira de os EUA se dissociarem da guerra do estado judeu ao Irão depois de iniciado o ataque.
Os mitos da “guerra limitada”: Geografia
Washington e Tel Aviv afirmam e parecem acreditar que o seu planeado assalto ao Irão será uma “guerra limitada”, tendo como alvo objectivos limitados e perdurando apenas uns poucos dias ou semanas – sem consequências graves.
Dizem-nos que brilhantes generais de Israel identificaram todas as instalações de investigação nuclear críticas, as quais os seus ataques aéreos cirúrgicos eliminarão sem danos colaterais horríveis para a população circundante. Uma vez que o alegado programa de “armas nucleares” fosse destruído, todos os israelenses poderiam retomar as suas vidas em segurança plena sabendo que outra ameaça “existencial” fora eliminada. A noção israelense de uma guerra limitada em “tempo e espaço” é absurda e perigosa – e caracteriza a arrogância, estupidez e racismo dos seus autores.
Para se aproximarem das instalações nucleares do Irão as forças israelenses e estado-unidenses confrontar-se-ão com bases bem equipadas e defendidas, instalações de mísseis, defesas marítimas e fortificações em grande escala dirigidas pelos Guardas Revolucionários e pelas Forças Armadas do Irão. Além disso, os sistemas de defesa de mísseis que protegem as instalações nucleares estão ligados a auto-estradas, aeródromos, portos e apoiadas por infraestrutura de finalidade dupla (civil-militar), as quais incluem refinarias de petróleo e uma enorme rede de gabinetes administrativos. Por “nocaute” os alegados sítios nucleares exigirá a expansão do âmbito geográfico da guerra. A capacidade científica-tecnológica do programa nuclear civil iraniano envolve um vasto conjunto das suas instalações de investigação, incluindo universidades, laboratórios, locais de fabricação e centros de concepção. Destruir o programa nuclear civil do Irão exigiria que Israel (e portanto os EUA) atacassem muito mais do que instalações de investigação ou laboratórios ocultos sob uma montanha remota. Exigiria assaltos múltiplos e generalizados sobre alvos por todo o país, por outras palavras, uma guerra generalizada.
O líder supremo do Irão, ayatollah Ali Khamenei, declarou que o Irão retaliará com uma guerra equivalente. O Irão corresponderá à amplitude e âmbito de com um contra-ataque de resposta. “Nós os atacaremos no mesmo nível quando eles nos atacarem”. Isso significa que o Irão não limitará a sua retaliação a meramente tentar deitar abaixo bombardeiros estado-unidenses e israelenses no seu espaço aéreo ou a lançar mísseis a navios dos EUA nas suas águas mas levará a guerra a alvos equivalente em Israel e em países ocupados pelos EUA no Golfo e em torno dele. A “guerra limitada” de Israel tornar-se-á uma guerra generalizada que se estenderá por todo o Médio Oriente e ainda mais além.
A actual adoração ilusória de Israel acerca do seu elaborado sistema de defesa míssil ficará exposta quando centenas de mísseis de alto poder forem lançados de Teerão, do Sul do Líbano e bem além das Alturas de Golan.
O mito da guerra limitada: Intervalo de tempo
Peritos militares israelenses esperam confiantemente exterminar seus alvos iranianos nuns poucos dias – alguns podem pensar que num simples fim de semana – e talvez sem a perda de nem um único piloto. Eles esperam que o estado judeu venha a celebrar a sua brilhante vitória nas ruas de Tel Aviv e Washington. Estão iludidos pelo seu próprio senso de superioridade. O Irão não combateu uma guerra brutal com uma década de duração contra os invasores iraquianos abastecidos pelos EUA e os seus conselheiros militares ocidentais/israelenses só para entregar-se e submeter-se passivamente a um número limitado de ataques aéreos e com mísseis por parte de Israel. O Irão é uma sociedade jovem, bem educada e mobilizada, a qual pode utilizar milhões de reservistas de todo espectro político, étnico, de género e religioso, galvanizado em apoio a sua nação sob ataque. Numa guerra para defender a pátria todas as diferenças internas desaparecem para enfrentar o ataque não provocado israelenses-estado-unidense que ameaça toda a sua civilização – seus 5000 anos de cultura e tradições, bem como os seus avanços científicos modernos e instituições. A primeira onda de ataques dos EUA-Israel levará a uma retaliação feroz, a qual não será confinada às áreas originais do conflito, nem qualquer acto da agressão israelense acabará quando e se instalações nucleares do Irão forem destruídas e alguns dos seus cientistas, técnicos e trabalhadores qualificados forem mortos. A guerra continuará no tempo e em extensão geográfica.
Múltiplos pontos de conflito
Assim como qualquer ataque dos EUA-Israel ao Irão envolveria alvos múltiplos, os militares iranianos também terão uma pletora de alvos estratégicos facilmente acessíveis. Embora seja difícil prever onde e como o Irão retaliará, uma coisa está clara: O ataque inicial dos EUA-Israel não ficará sem resposta.
Dada a supremacia israelense-estado-unidense a longas e médias distâncias e em poder aéreo, o Irão provavelmente confiará em objectivos de curta distância. Isto incluiria as valiosas instalações militares do EUA e rotas de abastecimento em terrenos adjacentes (Iraque, Kuwait e Afeganistão) e alvos israelenses com mísseis lançados do Sul do Líbano e possivelmente da Síria. Se uns poucos misseis de longo alcance escaparem ao muito gabado “escudo anti-míssil” do estado judeu, centros populacionais israelenses podem pagar um preço pesado pela imprudência e arrogância dos seus líderes.
O contra-ataque iraniano levará a uma escalada das forças EUA-Israel, estendendo e aprofundando a sua guerra aérea e naval a todos o sistema de segurança nacional iraniano – bases militares, portos, sistemas de comunicação, postos de comando e centros administrativos do governo – muitos em cidades densamente povoadas. O Irão reagirá lançando o seu maior activo estratégico: um ataque coordenado no solo envolvendo os Guardas Revolucionários, juntamente com seus aliados entre as tropas xiitas iraquianas, contra forças dos EUA no Iraque. Ele coordenará ataques contra instalações dos EUA no Afeganistão e Paquistão com a crescente resistência armada nacionalista-islâmica.
O conflito inicial, centrado nos chamados objectivos militares estratégicos (instalações de investigação científica), generalizar-se-á rapidamente a alvos económicos ou o que os estrategas militares dos EUA e Israel chamam de alvos “duais civis-militares”. Isto incluiria campos de petróleo, auto-estradas, fábricas, redes de comunicações, estações de televisão, instalações de tratamento de água, reservatórios, centrais eléctricas e gabinetes administrativos, tais como o Ministério da Defesa e a sede da Guarda Republicana. O Irão, confrontada com a destruição iminente de toda a sua economia e infraestrutura (o que se verificou no Iraque vizinho com a invasão não provocada dos EUA em 2003), retaliaria bloqueando o Estreito de Ormuz e enviando mísseis de curto alcance na direcção dos principais campos de petróleo e refinarias dos Estados do Golfo incluindo o Kuwait e a Arábia Saudita, a meros 10 minutos de distância, paralisando o fluxo de petróleo para a Europa, Ásia e os Estados Unidos e mergulhando a economia mundial numa depressão profunda.
Não se deveria esquecer que os iranianos provavelmente estão mais conscientes do que ninguém na região da devastação total sofrida pelos iraquianos após a invasão dos EUA, a qual mergulhou aquela nação no caos total e devastou a sua infraestrutura avançada e o seu aparelho administrativo civil, para não mencionar a sistemática aniquilação da sua elite científica e técnica altamente educada. As ondas de assassínios de cientistas iranianos, académicos e engenheiros promovidas pela Mossad são apenas uma antevisão do que os israelenses têm em mente para cientistas, intelectuais e trabalhadores técnicos altamente qualificados. Os iranianos não deveriam ter ilusões acerca dos americanos e israelenses que procuram lançar o país na sombria era brutal do Afeganistão e Iraque. Eles não terão mais papel num Irão devastado do que têm os seus vizinhos no Iraque pós Saddam.
Segundo o general Mathis, que comanda todas as forças dos EUA no Médio Oriente, Golfo Pérsico e Sudeste da Ásia, “um primeiro ataque israelense provavelmente teria consequências calamitosas em toda a região e para os Estados Unidos ali” (NY Times, 19/3/12). A estimativa de “consequências calamitosas” do general Mathis apenas leva em conta as perdas militares dos EUA, provavelmente centenas de marinheiros em vasos de guerra ao alcance de mísseis de artilheiros iranianos.
Contudo, a mais ilusória e auto-enganosa avaliação do resultado e consequências de um ataque aéreo israelense ao Irão provém de líderes israelenses de topo, académicos e peritos de inteligência, que afirmam [ter] inteligência superior, defesas superiores e visão suprema (e também racista) dentro da “mente iraniana”. É típico o ministro da Defesa israelense, Barak, que se jacta de que qualquer retaliação iraniana na pior das hipóteses infligirá baixas mínimas à população israelense.
A visão “judeu-cêntrica” de reordenamento do equilíbrio de poder na região, a qual prevalece nos principais círculos israelenses, passa por alto a probabilidade de que a guerra não será decidia por ataques aéreos israelenses e defesas anti-míssil. Os mísseis do Irão não podem ser facilmente contidos, especialmente chegarem várias centenas por minuto de três direcções, Irão, Líbano, Síria e possivelmente de submarinos iranianos. Em segundo lugar, o colapso das suas importações de petróleo devastará a economia de Israel, altamente dependente da energia. Em terceiro lugar, os principais aliados de Israel, especialmente os EUA e a UE, serão gravemente tensionados quando forem arrastados para dentro da guerra de Israel e encontrarem-se a defender os estreitos de Ormuz, suas guarnições no Iraque e no Afeganistão e seus campos de petróleo e bases militares no Golfo. Tal conflito poderia incendiar as maiorias xiitas no Bahrain e nas províncias estratégicas ricas em petróleo da Arábia Saudita. A guerra generalizada terá um efeito devastador sobre o preço do petróleo e a economia mundial. Provocará a fúria de consumidores e a ira de trabalhadores por toda a parte quando fecharem fábricas e choques poderosos por todo o frágil sistema financeiro resultarem numa depressão mundial.
O patológico “complexo de superioridade” de Israel resulta em que os seus líderes racistas sistematicamente super-estimam suas próprias capacidades intelectuais, técnicas e militares, ao passo que subestimam o conhecimento, capacidade e coragem dos seus adversários regionais, islâmicos (neste caso iranianos). Eles ignoram a capacidade demonstrada do Irão para sustentar uma guerra defensiva prolongada, complexa e em muitas frentes e em recuperar-se de um assalto inicial e desenvolver armamento moderno adequado para infligir danos severos aos seus atacantes. E o Irão terá o apoio incondicional e activo da população muçulmana do mundo e talvez o apoio diplomático da Rússia e da China, que obviamente verão um ataque ao Irão como um outro ensaio geral para conter o seu poder crescente.
Conclusão
A guerra, especialmente uma guerra israelense-estado-unidense contra o Irão, está indissoluvelmente ligada ao relacionamento assimétrico EUA-Israel, o qual secundariza qualquer análise militar e política crítica nos EUA. Devido à configuração de poder sionista de Israel, a força militar dos EUA pode ser canalizada para o apoio ao impulso de Israel para a dominação regional, aos líderes israelenses e acima de tudo para os seus militares sentirem-se livres para entrarem nas mais ultrajantes aventuras militares e destrutivas, sabendo muito bem que em primeira e última instância podem confiar no apoio dos EUA com o sangue e as riquezas americanas. Mas depois de todo este grotesco servilismo a um país racista e isolado, quem resgatará os Estados Unidos? Quem impedirá o afundamento dos seus navios no Golfo e a morte e mutilação de centenas dos seus marinheiros e milhares dos seus soldados? E onde estarão os israelenses e sionistas dos EUA quando o Iraque for invadido pelas tropas de elite iranianas e seus aliados xiitas e um levantamento generalizado se verificar no Afeganistão?
Os decisores políticos egocêntricos de Israel desprezam o provável colapso do abastecimento de petróleo mundial em consequência da sua planeada guerra contra o Irão. Será que os seus agentes sionistas nos EUA percebem que, em consequência do arrastamento dos EUA para a guerra de Israel, a nação iraniana será forçada a por em chamas os campos de petróleo do Golfo Pérsico?
Quão barato tornou-se “comprar uma guerra” nos EUA? Por uns meros poucos milhões de dólares em contribuições de campanha para políticos corruptos e através da penetração deliberada de agentes “Israel-First”, académicos e políticos na maquinaria de fazer a guerra do governo estado-unidense, e através da covardia moral e auto-censura dos principais críticos, escritores e jornalistas que se recusam a nomear Israel e seus agentes como os decisores chave do nosso país na política do Médio Oriente, nós nos encaminhamos directamente rumo a uma guerra muito além de qualquer conflagração militar regional e rumo ao colapso da economia mundial e do empobrecimento brutal de centenas de milhões de pessoas de Norte a Sul, de Leste a Oeste.
05/Abril/2012
O original encontra-se em http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=30150
US-ISRAEL WAR ON IRAN : THE MYTH OF LIMITED WARFARE
April 5, 2012, Global Research http://www.globalresearch.ca (Canada)
By Prof. James Petras
Introduction
The mounting threat of a US-Israeli military attack against Iran is based on several factors including: (1) the recent military history of both countries in the region, (2) public pronouncements by US and Israeli political leaders, (3) recent and on-going attacks on Lebanon and Syria, prominent allies of Iran, (4) armed attacks and assassinations of Iranian scientists and security officials by proxy and/or terrorist groups under US or Mossad control, (5) the failure of economic sanctions and diplomatic coercion, (6) escalating hysteria and extreme demands for Iran to end legal, civilian use-related uranium enrichment, (7) provocative military ‘exercises’ on Iran’s borders and war games designed for intimidation and a dress rehearsal for a preemptive attack, (8) powerful pro-war pressure groups in both Washington and Tel Aviv including the major Israeli political parties and the powerful AIPAC in the US, (9) and lastly the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act (Obama’s Orwellian Emergency Decree, March 16, 2012).
The US propaganda war operates along two tracks: (1) the dominant message emphasizes the proximity of war and the willingness of the US to use force and violence. This message is directed at Iran and coincides with Israeli announcements of war preparations. (2) The second track targets the ‘liberal public’ with a handful of marginal ‘knowledgeable academics’ (or State Department progressives) playing down the war threat and arguing that reasonable policy makers in Tel Aviv and Washington are aware that Iran does not possess nuclear weapons or any capacity to produce them now or in the near future. The purpose of this liberal backpedaling is to confuse and undermine the majority public opinion, which is clearly opposed to more war preparations, and to derail the burgeoning anti-war movement.
Needless to say the pronouncements of the ‘rational’ warmongers use a ‘double discourse’ based on the facile dismissal of all the historical and empirical evidence to the contrary. When the US and Israel talk of war, prepare for war and engage in pre-war provocations – they intend to go to war – just as they did against Iraq in 2003. Under present international political and military conditions an attack on Iran , initially by Israel with US support, is extremely likely, even as world economic conditions should dictate otherwise and even as the negative strategic consequences will most likely reverberate throughout the world for decades to come.
US and Israeli Military Calculations on Iran’s Capability
American and Israeli strategic policy makers do not agree on the consequences of Iran ’s retaliation against an attack. For their part, the Israeli leaders minimize Iran ’s military capacity to attack and damage the Jewish state, which is their only consideration. They count on their distance, their anti-missile shield and protection from US air and naval forces in the Gulf to cover their sneak attack. On the other hand, US military strategists know the Iranians are capable of inflicting substantial casualties on US warships, which would have to attack Iranian coastal installations in order to support or protect the Israelis.
Israel intelligence is best known for its capacity to organize the assassination of individuals around the world: Mossad has organized successful overseas terrorists acts against Palestinian, Syrian, and Lebanese leaders. On the other hand Israeli intelligence has a very poor track record with regard to its estimates of major military and political undertakings. They seriously underestimated the popular support, military strength and organizational capacity of Hezbollah during the 2006 war in Lebanon . Likewise, Israel intelligence misunderstood the strength and capacity of the Egyptian popular democratic movement as it rose up and overthrew Tel Aviv’s strategic regional ally, the Mubarak dictatorship. While Israeli leaders ‘feign paranoia’ – tossing clichés about ‘existential threats’– they are blinded by their narcissistic arrogance and racism, repeatedly underestimating the technical expertise and political sophistication of their Arab and regional Islamic foes. This is undoubtedly true in their facile dismissal of Iran ’s capacity to retaliate against a planned Israeli air assault.
The US government has now overtly committed itself to supporting an Israeli assault on Iran when it is launched. More specifically, Washington claims it will come to Israel ’s defense ‘unconditionally’ if it is “attacked”. How can Israel avoid being ‘attacked’ when its planes are raining bombs and missiles on Iranian installations, military defenses and support systems, not to mention Iranian cities, ports and strategic infrastructure? Moreover, given the Pentagon’s collaboration and coordinated intelligence systems with the Israel Defense Forces, its role in identifying targets, routes and incoming missiles, as well as integrated weapons and ordinance supply chains will be critical to an IDF attack. There is no way that the US can dissociate itself from the Jewish State’s war on Iran , once the attack has begun.
The Myths of ‘Limited War’: Geography
Washington and Tel Aviv claim and appear to believe that their planned assault on Iran will be a “limited war”, targeting limited objectives and lasting a few days or weeks – with no serious consequences.
We are told Israel ’s brilliant generals have identified all the critical nuclear research facilities, which their surgical air strikes will eliminate without horrific collateral damage to the surrounding population. Once the alleged ‘nuclear weapons’ program is destroyed, all Israelis can resume their lives in full security knowing that another ‘existential’ threat has been eliminated. The Israeli notion of a war, limited in ‘time and space’, is absurd and dangerous – and underlines the arrogance, stupidity and racism of its authors.
To approach Iran ’s nuclear facilities Israeli and US forces will confront well-equipped and defended bases, missile installations, maritime defenses and large-scale fortifications directed by the Revolutionary Guards and the Iranian Armed Forces. Moreover, the defense systems protecting the nuclear facilities are linked by civilian highways, airfields, ports, and backed by a dual purpose (civilian-military) infrastructure, which includes oil refineries and a huge network of administrative offices. To ‘knock out’ the alleged nuclear sites will require expanding the geographic scope of the war. The scientific-technological capacity of the Iranian civilian nuclear program involves a wide swath of its research facilities, including universities, laboratories, manufacturing sites, and design centers. To destroy Iran ’s civilian nuclear program would require Israel (and thus the US ) to attack much more than research facilities or laboratories hidden under a remote mountain. It would require multiple, widespread assaults on targets throughout the country, in other words, a generalized war.
Iran ’s Supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has stated that Iran will retaliate with a war of equivalence. Iran will match the breadth and scope of any attack with a corresponding counter-attack: ‘We will attack them at the same level as they attack us’. That means Iran will not confine its retaliation to merely trying to shoot down US and Israeli bombers in its airspace or launch missiles at offshore US warships in its waters but will take the war to equivalent targets in Israel and in US-occupied countries in and around the Gulf. Israel ’s ‘limited war’ will become a generalized war extending throughout the Middle East and beyond.
Israel ’s current delusional fetish about its elaborate missile defense system will be exposed as hundreds of high-powered missiles are launched from Teheran, Southern Lebanon and just beyond the Golan Heights .
The Myth of Limited War: Time Frame
Israeli military experts confidently expect to polish off their Iranian targets in a few days – some might think a mere weekend - and perhaps without the loss of even a single pilot. They expect the Jewish state will celebrate its brilliant victory in the streets of Tel Aviv and Washington. They are deluded by their own sense of superiority. Iran did not fight a brutal, decade-long war against the US-supplied Iraqi invaders and its western/Israeli military advisers, to just turn over and passively submit to a limited number of air and missile attacks by Israel . Iran is a young, educated mobilized society, which can draw on millions of reservists from across the political, ethnic, gender, religious spectrum, galvanized in support of their nation under attack. In a war to defend the homeland all internal differences disappear to confront the unprovoked Israeli-US attack threatening their entire civilization – its 5000-year culture and traditions, as well as its modern scientific advances and institutions. The first wave of US-Israeli attacks will lead to ferocious retaliation, which will not be confined to the original areas of conflict, nor will any such act of Israeli aggression end when and if Iran ’s nuclear research facilities are destroyed and some of its scientists, technicians and skilled workers are killed. The war will continue in time and extend geographically.
Multiple Points of Conflict
Just as any US-Israeli attack on Iran will involve multiple targets, the Iranian military will also have a plethora of easily accessible strategic targets. Though it is difficult to predict exactly where and how Iran will retaliate, one thing is clear: The initial US-Israeli strike will not go unanswered.
Given Israeli-US supremacy in long and medium range sea and air power, Iran will probably rely on short-range objectives. These would include the highly valued US military facilities and supply routes in adjoining terrain (Iraq, Kuwait and Afghanistan) and Israeli targets with missiles launched from Southern Lebanon and possibly Syria. If a few Iranian long-range missiles escape the Jewish State’s much vaunted ‘anti-missile dome’, Israeli population centers may pay a heavy price for their leaders’ recklessness and arrogance.
The Iranian counter-strike will lead to an escalation by US-Israeli forces, extending and deepening their air and sea war to the entire Iranian national security system – military bases, ports, communication systems, command posts and government administrative centers – many in densely populated cities. Iran will counter by launching its greatest strategic asset: a coordinated ground attack involving the Revolutionary Guards together with their allies among the Iraqi Shia troops, against US forces in Iraq . It will coordinate attacks against US facilities in Afghanistan and Pakistan with the growing nationalist-Islamic armed resistance.
The initial conflict, centered on so-called military objectives (scientific research facilities), will spread rapidly to economic targets, or what US and Israeli military strategists refer to as “dual civilian-military” targets. This would include oil fields, highways, factories, communications networks, television stations, water treatment facilities, reservoirs, power stations and administrative offices, such as the Defense Ministry and headquarters of the Republican Guard. Iran, faced with imminent destruction of its entire economy and infrastructure (which occurred in neighboring Iraq with the unprovoked US invasion of 2003), would retaliate by blocking the Straits of Hormuz and sending short range missiles in the direction of the principle oil fields and refineries of the Gulf States including Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, a mere 10 minute distance, crippling the flow of oil to Europe, Asia and the United States and plunging the world economy into deep depression.
It should not be forgotten that the Iranians are probably more aware than anyone in the region of the total devastation suffered by Iraqis after the US invasion, which plunged that nation into total chaos and devastated its advanced infrastructure and civilian administrative apparatus, not to mention the systematic obliteration of its highly educated scientific and technical elite. The waves of Mossad-sponsored assassinations of Iranian scientists, academics and engineers are just a foretaste of what the Israelis have in mind for Iran ’s outstanding scientists, intellectuals and highly skilled technical workers. Iranians should have no illusions about the Americans and Israelis who seek to thrust Iran into the brutal dark ages of Afghanistan and Iraq . They will have no more role in a devastated Iran than their counterparts had in post-Saddam Iraq .
According to US General Mathis, who commands all US forces in the Middle East, Persian Gulf and Southwest Asia, ‘an Israeli first strike would be likely to have dire consequences across the region and for the United States there’ (NY Times, 3/19/12). General Mathis “dire cost” estimate only takes account of the US military losses, likely several hundred sailors on warships within missile distance of Iranian gunners.
However the most delusional and self-serving assessment of the outcome and consequences of an Israeli air attack on Iran, emanates from top Israeli leaders, academics and intelligence experts, who claim superior intelligence, superior defenses and supreme (if also racist) insight into the ‘Iranian mind’. Typical is Israeli Defense Minister Barak who boasts that any Iranian retaliation will at worst inflict minimal casualties on the Israeli population.
The ‘Judeo-centric’ view of re-ordering the balance of power in the region, which is prevalent in leading Israeli war circles, overlooks the likelihood that war will not be decided by Israeli air strikes and anti-missile defenses. Iran ’s missiles cannot be easily contained, especially if they arrive several hundred a minute from three directions, Iran , Lebanon , Syria and possibly from Iranian submarines. Secondly, the collapse of its oil imports will devastate Israel ’s highly energy dependent economy. Thirdly, Israel ’s principle allies, especially the US and the EU, will be severely strained as they are dragged into Israel ’s war and find themselves defending the straits of Hormuz, their army garrisons in Iraq and Afghanistan , and their oil fields and military bases in the Gulf. Such a conflict could ignite the Shia majorities in Bahrain and in the strategic oil-rich provinces of Saudi Arabia . The generalized war will have a devastating effect on the price of oil and the world economy. It will provoke the fury of consumers and workers rage everywhere as factories close and powerful shocks throughout the fragile financial system result in a world depression.
Israel ’s pathological ‘superiority complex’ results in its racist leaders consistently overestimating their own intellectual, technical and military capabilities, while underestimating the knowledge, capacity and courage of their regional, Islamic (in this case Iranian) adversaries. They ignore Iran ’s proven capacity to sustain a prolonged, complex multi-front defensive war and to recover from an initial assault and develop appropriate modern weaponry to inflict severe damage on its attackers. And Iran will have the unconditional and active support of the world’s Muslim population, and perhaps the diplomatic backing of Russia and China , who will obviously view an attack on Iran as another dress rehearsal to contain their growing power.
Conclusion
War, especially an Israeli-US war against Iran is indissolubly linked to the asymmetrical US-Israeli relationship, which sidelines and censors any critical US military and political analysis. Because Israel’s Zionist power configuration in the US can now harness US military power in support of Israel’s drive for regional dominance, Israeli leaders and most of their military feel free to engage in the most outrageous military and destructive adventures, knowing full well that in the first and last instance they can rely on the US to support them with American blood and treasure. But after all of this grotesque servitude to a racist ,isolated country, who will rescue the United States ? Who will prevent the sinking of its ships in the Gulf and the death and maiming of hundreds of its sailors and thousands of its soldiers? And where will the Israelis and US Zionists be when Iraq is overrun by elite Iranian troops and their Iraqi Shia allies and a generalized uprising occurs in Afghanistan ?
The self-centered Israeli policy-makers overlook the likely collapse of the world oil supply as a result of their planned war against Iran. Do their Zionist agents in the US realize that as a result of dragging the US into Israel ’s war, that the Iranian nation will be forced to set the Persian Gulf oilfields ablaze?
How cheap has it become to ‘buy a war’ in the US ? For a mere few million dollars in campaign contributions to corrupt politicians, and through the deliberate penetration of Israel-First agents, academics and politicians into the war-making machinery of the US government, and through the moral cowardice and self-censorship of leading critics, writers and journalists who refuse to name Israel and its agents as the key decision makers in our country’s Mid East policy, we head directly toward a war far beyond any regional military conflagration and toward the collapse of the world economy and the brutal impoverishment of hundreds of millions of people North and South, East and West.
By Prof. James Petras
Introduction
The mounting threat of a US-Israeli military attack against Iran is based on several factors including: (1) the recent military history of both countries in the region, (2) public pronouncements by US and Israeli political leaders, (3) recent and on-going attacks on Lebanon and Syria, prominent allies of Iran, (4) armed attacks and assassinations of Iranian scientists and security officials by proxy and/or terrorist groups under US or Mossad control, (5) the failure of economic sanctions and diplomatic coercion, (6) escalating hysteria and extreme demands for Iran to end legal, civilian use-related uranium enrichment, (7) provocative military ‘exercises’ on Iran’s borders and war games designed for intimidation and a dress rehearsal for a preemptive attack, (8) powerful pro-war pressure groups in both Washington and Tel Aviv including the major Israeli political parties and the powerful AIPAC in the US, (9) and lastly the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act (Obama’s Orwellian Emergency Decree, March 16, 2012).
The US propaganda war operates along two tracks: (1) the dominant message emphasizes the proximity of war and the willingness of the US to use force and violence. This message is directed at Iran and coincides with Israeli announcements of war preparations. (2) The second track targets the ‘liberal public’ with a handful of marginal ‘knowledgeable academics’ (or State Department progressives) playing down the war threat and arguing that reasonable policy makers in Tel Aviv and Washington are aware that Iran does not possess nuclear weapons or any capacity to produce them now or in the near future. The purpose of this liberal backpedaling is to confuse and undermine the majority public opinion, which is clearly opposed to more war preparations, and to derail the burgeoning anti-war movement.
Needless to say the pronouncements of the ‘rational’ warmongers use a ‘double discourse’ based on the facile dismissal of all the historical and empirical evidence to the contrary. When the US and Israel talk of war, prepare for war and engage in pre-war provocations – they intend to go to war – just as they did against Iraq in 2003. Under present international political and military conditions an attack on Iran , initially by Israel with US support, is extremely likely, even as world economic conditions should dictate otherwise and even as the negative strategic consequences will most likely reverberate throughout the world for decades to come.
US and Israeli Military Calculations on Iran’s Capability
American and Israeli strategic policy makers do not agree on the consequences of Iran ’s retaliation against an attack. For their part, the Israeli leaders minimize Iran ’s military capacity to attack and damage the Jewish state, which is their only consideration. They count on their distance, their anti-missile shield and protection from US air and naval forces in the Gulf to cover their sneak attack. On the other hand, US military strategists know the Iranians are capable of inflicting substantial casualties on US warships, which would have to attack Iranian coastal installations in order to support or protect the Israelis.
Israel intelligence is best known for its capacity to organize the assassination of individuals around the world: Mossad has organized successful overseas terrorists acts against Palestinian, Syrian, and Lebanese leaders. On the other hand Israeli intelligence has a very poor track record with regard to its estimates of major military and political undertakings. They seriously underestimated the popular support, military strength and organizational capacity of Hezbollah during the 2006 war in Lebanon . Likewise, Israel intelligence misunderstood the strength and capacity of the Egyptian popular democratic movement as it rose up and overthrew Tel Aviv’s strategic regional ally, the Mubarak dictatorship. While Israeli leaders ‘feign paranoia’ – tossing clichés about ‘existential threats’– they are blinded by their narcissistic arrogance and racism, repeatedly underestimating the technical expertise and political sophistication of their Arab and regional Islamic foes. This is undoubtedly true in their facile dismissal of Iran ’s capacity to retaliate against a planned Israeli air assault.
The US government has now overtly committed itself to supporting an Israeli assault on Iran when it is launched. More specifically, Washington claims it will come to Israel ’s defense ‘unconditionally’ if it is “attacked”. How can Israel avoid being ‘attacked’ when its planes are raining bombs and missiles on Iranian installations, military defenses and support systems, not to mention Iranian cities, ports and strategic infrastructure? Moreover, given the Pentagon’s collaboration and coordinated intelligence systems with the Israel Defense Forces, its role in identifying targets, routes and incoming missiles, as well as integrated weapons and ordinance supply chains will be critical to an IDF attack. There is no way that the US can dissociate itself from the Jewish State’s war on Iran , once the attack has begun.
The Myths of ‘Limited War’: Geography
Washington and Tel Aviv claim and appear to believe that their planned assault on Iran will be a “limited war”, targeting limited objectives and lasting a few days or weeks – with no serious consequences.
We are told Israel ’s brilliant generals have identified all the critical nuclear research facilities, which their surgical air strikes will eliminate without horrific collateral damage to the surrounding population. Once the alleged ‘nuclear weapons’ program is destroyed, all Israelis can resume their lives in full security knowing that another ‘existential’ threat has been eliminated. The Israeli notion of a war, limited in ‘time and space’, is absurd and dangerous – and underlines the arrogance, stupidity and racism of its authors.
To approach Iran ’s nuclear facilities Israeli and US forces will confront well-equipped and defended bases, missile installations, maritime defenses and large-scale fortifications directed by the Revolutionary Guards and the Iranian Armed Forces. Moreover, the defense systems protecting the nuclear facilities are linked by civilian highways, airfields, ports, and backed by a dual purpose (civilian-military) infrastructure, which includes oil refineries and a huge network of administrative offices. To ‘knock out’ the alleged nuclear sites will require expanding the geographic scope of the war. The scientific-technological capacity of the Iranian civilian nuclear program involves a wide swath of its research facilities, including universities, laboratories, manufacturing sites, and design centers. To destroy Iran ’s civilian nuclear program would require Israel (and thus the US ) to attack much more than research facilities or laboratories hidden under a remote mountain. It would require multiple, widespread assaults on targets throughout the country, in other words, a generalized war.
Iran ’s Supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has stated that Iran will retaliate with a war of equivalence. Iran will match the breadth and scope of any attack with a corresponding counter-attack: ‘We will attack them at the same level as they attack us’. That means Iran will not confine its retaliation to merely trying to shoot down US and Israeli bombers in its airspace or launch missiles at offshore US warships in its waters but will take the war to equivalent targets in Israel and in US-occupied countries in and around the Gulf. Israel ’s ‘limited war’ will become a generalized war extending throughout the Middle East and beyond.
Israel ’s current delusional fetish about its elaborate missile defense system will be exposed as hundreds of high-powered missiles are launched from Teheran, Southern Lebanon and just beyond the Golan Heights .
The Myth of Limited War: Time Frame
Israeli military experts confidently expect to polish off their Iranian targets in a few days – some might think a mere weekend - and perhaps without the loss of even a single pilot. They expect the Jewish state will celebrate its brilliant victory in the streets of Tel Aviv and Washington. They are deluded by their own sense of superiority. Iran did not fight a brutal, decade-long war against the US-supplied Iraqi invaders and its western/Israeli military advisers, to just turn over and passively submit to a limited number of air and missile attacks by Israel . Iran is a young, educated mobilized society, which can draw on millions of reservists from across the political, ethnic, gender, religious spectrum, galvanized in support of their nation under attack. In a war to defend the homeland all internal differences disappear to confront the unprovoked Israeli-US attack threatening their entire civilization – its 5000-year culture and traditions, as well as its modern scientific advances and institutions. The first wave of US-Israeli attacks will lead to ferocious retaliation, which will not be confined to the original areas of conflict, nor will any such act of Israeli aggression end when and if Iran ’s nuclear research facilities are destroyed and some of its scientists, technicians and skilled workers are killed. The war will continue in time and extend geographically.
Multiple Points of Conflict
Just as any US-Israeli attack on Iran will involve multiple targets, the Iranian military will also have a plethora of easily accessible strategic targets. Though it is difficult to predict exactly where and how Iran will retaliate, one thing is clear: The initial US-Israeli strike will not go unanswered.
Given Israeli-US supremacy in long and medium range sea and air power, Iran will probably rely on short-range objectives. These would include the highly valued US military facilities and supply routes in adjoining terrain (Iraq, Kuwait and Afghanistan) and Israeli targets with missiles launched from Southern Lebanon and possibly Syria. If a few Iranian long-range missiles escape the Jewish State’s much vaunted ‘anti-missile dome’, Israeli population centers may pay a heavy price for their leaders’ recklessness and arrogance.
The Iranian counter-strike will lead to an escalation by US-Israeli forces, extending and deepening their air and sea war to the entire Iranian national security system – military bases, ports, communication systems, command posts and government administrative centers – many in densely populated cities. Iran will counter by launching its greatest strategic asset: a coordinated ground attack involving the Revolutionary Guards together with their allies among the Iraqi Shia troops, against US forces in Iraq . It will coordinate attacks against US facilities in Afghanistan and Pakistan with the growing nationalist-Islamic armed resistance.
The initial conflict, centered on so-called military objectives (scientific research facilities), will spread rapidly to economic targets, or what US and Israeli military strategists refer to as “dual civilian-military” targets. This would include oil fields, highways, factories, communications networks, television stations, water treatment facilities, reservoirs, power stations and administrative offices, such as the Defense Ministry and headquarters of the Republican Guard. Iran, faced with imminent destruction of its entire economy and infrastructure (which occurred in neighboring Iraq with the unprovoked US invasion of 2003), would retaliate by blocking the Straits of Hormuz and sending short range missiles in the direction of the principle oil fields and refineries of the Gulf States including Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, a mere 10 minute distance, crippling the flow of oil to Europe, Asia and the United States and plunging the world economy into deep depression.
It should not be forgotten that the Iranians are probably more aware than anyone in the region of the total devastation suffered by Iraqis after the US invasion, which plunged that nation into total chaos and devastated its advanced infrastructure and civilian administrative apparatus, not to mention the systematic obliteration of its highly educated scientific and technical elite. The waves of Mossad-sponsored assassinations of Iranian scientists, academics and engineers are just a foretaste of what the Israelis have in mind for Iran ’s outstanding scientists, intellectuals and highly skilled technical workers. Iranians should have no illusions about the Americans and Israelis who seek to thrust Iran into the brutal dark ages of Afghanistan and Iraq . They will have no more role in a devastated Iran than their counterparts had in post-Saddam Iraq .
According to US General Mathis, who commands all US forces in the Middle East, Persian Gulf and Southwest Asia, ‘an Israeli first strike would be likely to have dire consequences across the region and for the United States there’ (NY Times, 3/19/12). General Mathis “dire cost” estimate only takes account of the US military losses, likely several hundred sailors on warships within missile distance of Iranian gunners.
However the most delusional and self-serving assessment of the outcome and consequences of an Israeli air attack on Iran, emanates from top Israeli leaders, academics and intelligence experts, who claim superior intelligence, superior defenses and supreme (if also racist) insight into the ‘Iranian mind’. Typical is Israeli Defense Minister Barak who boasts that any Iranian retaliation will at worst inflict minimal casualties on the Israeli population.
The ‘Judeo-centric’ view of re-ordering the balance of power in the region, which is prevalent in leading Israeli war circles, overlooks the likelihood that war will not be decided by Israeli air strikes and anti-missile defenses. Iran ’s missiles cannot be easily contained, especially if they arrive several hundred a minute from three directions, Iran , Lebanon , Syria and possibly from Iranian submarines. Secondly, the collapse of its oil imports will devastate Israel ’s highly energy dependent economy. Thirdly, Israel ’s principle allies, especially the US and the EU, will be severely strained as they are dragged into Israel ’s war and find themselves defending the straits of Hormuz, their army garrisons in Iraq and Afghanistan , and their oil fields and military bases in the Gulf. Such a conflict could ignite the Shia majorities in Bahrain and in the strategic oil-rich provinces of Saudi Arabia . The generalized war will have a devastating effect on the price of oil and the world economy. It will provoke the fury of consumers and workers rage everywhere as factories close and powerful shocks throughout the fragile financial system result in a world depression.
Israel ’s pathological ‘superiority complex’ results in its racist leaders consistently overestimating their own intellectual, technical and military capabilities, while underestimating the knowledge, capacity and courage of their regional, Islamic (in this case Iranian) adversaries. They ignore Iran ’s proven capacity to sustain a prolonged, complex multi-front defensive war and to recover from an initial assault and develop appropriate modern weaponry to inflict severe damage on its attackers. And Iran will have the unconditional and active support of the world’s Muslim population, and perhaps the diplomatic backing of Russia and China , who will obviously view an attack on Iran as another dress rehearsal to contain their growing power.
Conclusion
War, especially an Israeli-US war against Iran is indissolubly linked to the asymmetrical US-Israeli relationship, which sidelines and censors any critical US military and political analysis. Because Israel’s Zionist power configuration in the US can now harness US military power in support of Israel’s drive for regional dominance, Israeli leaders and most of their military feel free to engage in the most outrageous military and destructive adventures, knowing full well that in the first and last instance they can rely on the US to support them with American blood and treasure. But after all of this grotesque servitude to a racist ,isolated country, who will rescue the United States ? Who will prevent the sinking of its ships in the Gulf and the death and maiming of hundreds of its sailors and thousands of its soldiers? And where will the Israelis and US Zionists be when Iraq is overrun by elite Iranian troops and their Iraqi Shia allies and a generalized uprising occurs in Afghanistan ?
The self-centered Israeli policy-makers overlook the likely collapse of the world oil supply as a result of their planned war against Iran. Do their Zionist agents in the US realize that as a result of dragging the US into Israel ’s war, that the Iranian nation will be forced to set the Persian Gulf oilfields ablaze?
How cheap has it become to ‘buy a war’ in the US ? For a mere few million dollars in campaign contributions to corrupt politicians, and through the deliberate penetration of Israel-First agents, academics and politicians into the war-making machinery of the US government, and through the moral cowardice and self-censorship of leading critics, writers and journalists who refuse to name Israel and its agents as the key decision makers in our country’s Mid East policy, we head directly toward a war far beyond any regional military conflagration and toward the collapse of the world economy and the brutal impoverishment of hundreds of millions of people North and South, East and West.
quarta-feira, 3 de agosto de 2011
ISRAELI PROTEST MOVEMENT SPARKS MASS STRIKES
3 August 2011, World Socialist Web Site http://www.wsws.org (Australia)
By Jean Shaoul
More than 100,000 Israeli municipal workers took action on Monday in a show of solidarity with the nationwide tent city protests against the exorbitant cost of housing. Local government offices were closed, streets were not cleaned and garbage was not collected.
The Union of Local Authorities in Israel and Histadrut, the general federation of trade unions, called off strikes earlier this year. This time they backed the protest in order to take control and stifle it. The Tel Aviv Municipality implemented a partial strike, opening its offices after 10 a.m., while Jerusalem did not join the strike to “avoid hurting the residents”.
In Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, teachers and supporters demonstrated, calling for better public education and a halt to a privatisation drive that has led to soaring costs and huge inequalities in access to decent schooling. They carried placards saying, “There’s private education, no social justice”.
Another protest over education costs is planned for Thursday.
Doctors have set up a tent camp outside the Prime Minister’s Office in Jerusalem and called on Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to intervene to resolve the months-long dispute between the doctors and the government.
The Nurses’ Union has announced that it will join the doctors’ struggle and is planning joint protests. Nurses walked out of four wards in the Sheba Medical Centre, Israel’s largest and richest hospital, for two hours in protest against management’s failure to employ sufficient nurses in the overflowing internal wards. “Why should tourists who come for medical treatment receive better treatment than the elderly Israeli patients on respirators”? asked Ilana Cohen, the Nurses’ Union chair. “Not hiring sufficient nurses is criminal negligence”.
In Tel Aviv, dozens of students took part in a march from the tent city on Rothschild Boulevard to government buildings, carrying bundles of hay on their backs. They cried out, “Bibi [Netanyahu] it’s over, my back is broken”.
The strikes follow the 150,000-strong demonstrations, the largest in years, last Saturday to protest the soaring cost of living. The largest rally was in Tel Aviv, but others took place in Jerusalem, Be’er Sheva, Haifa and seven other cities, including Nazareth, where Arab and Jewish workers marched together.
What started as a protest of the cost of housing has spread to undisguised anger at the dozen-or-so billionaire families that control much of Israel’s economy—including real estate, communications, journalism, retail, manufacturing, construction, banking, pension savings and energy. There were calls to halt the programme of “free market” reforms and the cuts to social budgets in health and education.
While the social budgets have been cut in Israel, this is not the case in the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, where residential construction is more than double that of Israel. As Globes, Israel’s business magazine points out, the higher construction and higher government spending on civilian public services was used to encourage Israelis to move to the Occupied Territories. It cited an OECD report that said that the number of Israelis living in the territories nearly doubled between 1997 and 2009.
As the protests have grown in size and support, they have created a major political crisis for the Netanyahu coalition government, the most right-wing in Israel’s history.
Netanyahu tried to defuse the protests with an announcement that a “special team” of ministers and experts would listen to the protest leaders and submit a plan to “alleviate Israelis’ economic burden”. He announced some minor policy changes and made vague promises of “reform”. These included the promise to build 50,000 housing units within 18 months, lower the excise tax on petrol for one month, double the home heating grant for some elderly people, and review taxes and water charges.
Netanyahu made clear that there will be no serious concessions to the social demands of the protesting workers and youth. Speaking at a special Knesset session to commemorate 71 years since the death of Zionist right-wing leader Ze’ev Jabotinsky, he insisted that there was no going back on Israel’s free-market economy.
Even his limited concessions have sparked fierce divisions within the government and the treasury. The director general of Israel’s finance ministry, Haim Shani, resigned citing “differences of opinion in fundamental issues” with the finance minister, adding that “events of the past few days have exacerbated the problems”.
Netanyahu is to replace Shani with Moshe Terry, the former chairman of the Israel Securities Authority. Terry has close links with Yitzhak Tshuva, the head of the Delek Group, one of the monopolies that are the focus of public anger.
Stanley Fischer, the governor of the Bank of Israel, expressed his surprise that Israelis had been protesting, as he believed “the economy is doing well”. He claimed that there were no magic wands to solve the high cost of living.
Protest leaders are demanding lower housing costs, lower taxes, an increase in the minimum wage to 50 percent of the average wage, free education and smaller class sizes, improved medical care, enforcement of labour laws, and similar measures. But Netanyahu has refused to meet the leaders of the tent protests. Instead he plans to pass them on to the team of ministers. While earlier, they had demanded that all discussions with Netanyahu and government representatives should be public in front of TV cameras, this has been abandoned under pressure from Ofer Eini, the Histadrut secretary general.
Eini, who made clear that the union bureaucracy opposes the protests, declared, “I will not support a movement which aims to humiliate a democratically elected prime minister and bring about his downfall. We are not in Egypt or Syria”.
Two years ago, Eini formed a political alliance with the former army chief of staff, Gaby Ashkenazi, to defend the military budget at the expense of social spending. As recent cables published by WikiLeaks show, he considers himself a key prop of Netanyahu’s right-wing coalition and supports its policies.
According to a May 6, 2009 cable, Eini met with US diplomats to assure them that his approval of the Israeli budget was a “kosher seal” that would guarantee Netanyahu the support of the Labor Party. He also demanded that Netanyahu personally negotiate with him over the budget, refusing to speak to Finance Minister Yuval Steinitz.
US diplomats concluded: “Eini, whose efforts were pivotal in bringing Labor into the government, views himself as a key power broker.”
The Histadrut trade union federation is under enormous pressure from the working class. But its aim in calling strikes remains the same: to dissipate anger while opposing a decisive political and social challenge to the government.
For its part, there is a growing danger that the Netanyahu government will resort to its usual tactic of launching a provocation against the Palestinian people or neighbouring Arab states as a diversion from the growing social unrest.
Early on Monday morning, Israeli forces killed two Palestinians in Kalandia refugee camp in the West Bank, after raiding several houses after a minor scuffle with stone-throwing Palestinians. Kalandia is policed by Palestinian Authority forces, but the Israeli military claims the right to enter it at night. A military commander complained that the Palestinian Authority forces were arresting fewer suspects because of the unity agreement between the Palestinian Authority and Hamas.
This follows a raid last week on a well-known theatre in Jenin, when Israeli forces arrested two people. Two weeks ago, they killed a 21-year-old Palestinian man in a raid on a refugee camp near the city of Nablus.
On Monday there was a brief exchange of fire between Lebanese and Israeli forces, when Lebanese soldiers opened fire after an Israeli patrol crossed the border.
Shaul Mofaz, a former Israeli Defence Force chief and legislator from the Kadima party, said that it was highly likely the military would mobilize reservists in September, in anticipation of Palestinian unrest ahead of the Palestinian Authority’s bid for statehood in the United Nations General Assembly. He told Army Radio, “September can potentially turn into a violent, painful event, with unclear results”.
By Jean Shaoul
More than 100,000 Israeli municipal workers took action on Monday in a show of solidarity with the nationwide tent city protests against the exorbitant cost of housing. Local government offices were closed, streets were not cleaned and garbage was not collected.
The Union of Local Authorities in Israel and Histadrut, the general federation of trade unions, called off strikes earlier this year. This time they backed the protest in order to take control and stifle it. The Tel Aviv Municipality implemented a partial strike, opening its offices after 10 a.m., while Jerusalem did not join the strike to “avoid hurting the residents”.
In Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, teachers and supporters demonstrated, calling for better public education and a halt to a privatisation drive that has led to soaring costs and huge inequalities in access to decent schooling. They carried placards saying, “There’s private education, no social justice”.
Another protest over education costs is planned for Thursday.
Doctors have set up a tent camp outside the Prime Minister’s Office in Jerusalem and called on Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to intervene to resolve the months-long dispute between the doctors and the government.
The Nurses’ Union has announced that it will join the doctors’ struggle and is planning joint protests. Nurses walked out of four wards in the Sheba Medical Centre, Israel’s largest and richest hospital, for two hours in protest against management’s failure to employ sufficient nurses in the overflowing internal wards. “Why should tourists who come for medical treatment receive better treatment than the elderly Israeli patients on respirators”? asked Ilana Cohen, the Nurses’ Union chair. “Not hiring sufficient nurses is criminal negligence”.
In Tel Aviv, dozens of students took part in a march from the tent city on Rothschild Boulevard to government buildings, carrying bundles of hay on their backs. They cried out, “Bibi [Netanyahu] it’s over, my back is broken”.
The strikes follow the 150,000-strong demonstrations, the largest in years, last Saturday to protest the soaring cost of living. The largest rally was in Tel Aviv, but others took place in Jerusalem, Be’er Sheva, Haifa and seven other cities, including Nazareth, where Arab and Jewish workers marched together.
What started as a protest of the cost of housing has spread to undisguised anger at the dozen-or-so billionaire families that control much of Israel’s economy—including real estate, communications, journalism, retail, manufacturing, construction, banking, pension savings and energy. There were calls to halt the programme of “free market” reforms and the cuts to social budgets in health and education.
While the social budgets have been cut in Israel, this is not the case in the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, where residential construction is more than double that of Israel. As Globes, Israel’s business magazine points out, the higher construction and higher government spending on civilian public services was used to encourage Israelis to move to the Occupied Territories. It cited an OECD report that said that the number of Israelis living in the territories nearly doubled between 1997 and 2009.
As the protests have grown in size and support, they have created a major political crisis for the Netanyahu coalition government, the most right-wing in Israel’s history.
Netanyahu tried to defuse the protests with an announcement that a “special team” of ministers and experts would listen to the protest leaders and submit a plan to “alleviate Israelis’ economic burden”. He announced some minor policy changes and made vague promises of “reform”. These included the promise to build 50,000 housing units within 18 months, lower the excise tax on petrol for one month, double the home heating grant for some elderly people, and review taxes and water charges.
Netanyahu made clear that there will be no serious concessions to the social demands of the protesting workers and youth. Speaking at a special Knesset session to commemorate 71 years since the death of Zionist right-wing leader Ze’ev Jabotinsky, he insisted that there was no going back on Israel’s free-market economy.
Even his limited concessions have sparked fierce divisions within the government and the treasury. The director general of Israel’s finance ministry, Haim Shani, resigned citing “differences of opinion in fundamental issues” with the finance minister, adding that “events of the past few days have exacerbated the problems”.
Netanyahu is to replace Shani with Moshe Terry, the former chairman of the Israel Securities Authority. Terry has close links with Yitzhak Tshuva, the head of the Delek Group, one of the monopolies that are the focus of public anger.
Stanley Fischer, the governor of the Bank of Israel, expressed his surprise that Israelis had been protesting, as he believed “the economy is doing well”. He claimed that there were no magic wands to solve the high cost of living.
Protest leaders are demanding lower housing costs, lower taxes, an increase in the minimum wage to 50 percent of the average wage, free education and smaller class sizes, improved medical care, enforcement of labour laws, and similar measures. But Netanyahu has refused to meet the leaders of the tent protests. Instead he plans to pass them on to the team of ministers. While earlier, they had demanded that all discussions with Netanyahu and government representatives should be public in front of TV cameras, this has been abandoned under pressure from Ofer Eini, the Histadrut secretary general.
Eini, who made clear that the union bureaucracy opposes the protests, declared, “I will not support a movement which aims to humiliate a democratically elected prime minister and bring about his downfall. We are not in Egypt or Syria”.
Two years ago, Eini formed a political alliance with the former army chief of staff, Gaby Ashkenazi, to defend the military budget at the expense of social spending. As recent cables published by WikiLeaks show, he considers himself a key prop of Netanyahu’s right-wing coalition and supports its policies.
According to a May 6, 2009 cable, Eini met with US diplomats to assure them that his approval of the Israeli budget was a “kosher seal” that would guarantee Netanyahu the support of the Labor Party. He also demanded that Netanyahu personally negotiate with him over the budget, refusing to speak to Finance Minister Yuval Steinitz.
US diplomats concluded: “Eini, whose efforts were pivotal in bringing Labor into the government, views himself as a key power broker.”
The Histadrut trade union federation is under enormous pressure from the working class. But its aim in calling strikes remains the same: to dissipate anger while opposing a decisive political and social challenge to the government.
For its part, there is a growing danger that the Netanyahu government will resort to its usual tactic of launching a provocation against the Palestinian people or neighbouring Arab states as a diversion from the growing social unrest.
Early on Monday morning, Israeli forces killed two Palestinians in Kalandia refugee camp in the West Bank, after raiding several houses after a minor scuffle with stone-throwing Palestinians. Kalandia is policed by Palestinian Authority forces, but the Israeli military claims the right to enter it at night. A military commander complained that the Palestinian Authority forces were arresting fewer suspects because of the unity agreement between the Palestinian Authority and Hamas.
This follows a raid last week on a well-known theatre in Jenin, when Israeli forces arrested two people. Two weeks ago, they killed a 21-year-old Palestinian man in a raid on a refugee camp near the city of Nablus.
On Monday there was a brief exchange of fire between Lebanese and Israeli forces, when Lebanese soldiers opened fire after an Israeli patrol crossed the border.
Shaul Mofaz, a former Israeli Defence Force chief and legislator from the Kadima party, said that it was highly likely the military would mobilize reservists in September, in anticipation of Palestinian unrest ahead of the Palestinian Authority’s bid for statehood in the United Nations General Assembly. He told Army Radio, “September can potentially turn into a violent, painful event, with unclear results”.
terça-feira, 21 de junho de 2011
Counting the cost of patriotism on the Golan Heights
The Other Occupation
Getting to know the Golan
14 June 2011, Jews for Justice for Palestinians http://jfjfp.com (UK)
Israel’s killing of dozens of pro-Palestinian demonstrators at the fence surrounding Majdal Shams has again catapulted the 19,000Druze and 2,000 Muslim Arabs of the Golan Heights to popular attention. Despite being as numerous as Israeli settlers, they lack equal rights and access to resources, as Arthur Neslen discovered in this feature, which was spiked by Jane’s Islamic Affairs Analyst.
Salman Fakhr al-Din winced as he pointed up at Mount Hermon. “When I was a child, I tried to climb the mountain so that I could touch the sky,” he said, “but now it is filled with mines and soldiers and if you tried you could be killed. This mountain used to be part of our lives but it has become something strange and terrible.” He still lives in its shadow, in the Druze heartland ofMajdal Shams.
Forty years after the war that slid the Golan peninsula into Israel’s hands, the territory under Salman’s feet had changed drastically. Since 1967, mines had killed 42 people and injured more than 80 in the Golan. Forty percent of the victims were children.
No figures exist for the exact locations, number or types of mines planted in the Golan, but they stretch over several kilometres. Reports by landmines NGOs note a lack of warnings and fencing around many minefields. Often they are situated near schools and houses. Residents complain that every year some are washed into their gardens and streets by rain and soil erosion.
Saleh Barah had never had any mines awareness lessons at school when, aged 13, he went to play in a yard beside his local restaurant. “I was with my friend when we saw something that looked like a brown cola bottle,” Saleh said. “I asked ‘What’s that?’ and he started to open it so I shouted ‘Give it to me!’ He threw it over and I caught it and tried to open it. A few seconds later, everything went black”.
When Saleh awoke in a Haifa hospital 20 days later, he had lost a leg, an arm beneath the elbow, and one eye. The authorities offered him no financial compensation, he said. Now 38, and a respected agricultural businessman in Majdal Shams, Saleh blamed the occupation for the mines which still littered nearby roads. “Our lives are not important to the Israelis,” he told me. “It’s the same as what happened in Lebanon.”
In a bid to raise awareness about landmines issue, Saleh refuses to wear prosthetic limbs. “I want others to know me as I am,” he said. “Also, this way when people see me, they ask ‘What happened to him?’ and they start to learn.”
But even knowledge of the risks does not outweigh the economic necessities of life. In June 2001, a 73-year-old shepherd from the village of Buq’ata was killed by a mine near Ain Al-Hamra. One of his sons had died in a mine accident there 14 years before.
Syrian Golanis complain that the authorities turn a blind eye to such phenomena because it depresses their economic development and so helps Israel’s demographic battle. After the 2006 Lebanon War, settler leaders launched a slick $250,000 advertising campaign to double the Jewish population on the Golan within a decade.
The fertile volcanic fields and valleys of the Golan provide much of Israel’s fruit and wine industry but economic competition between the two communities is intense. While Syrian Golanis are said to provide around 30 percent of Israel’s apple crop, for instance, Israeli-Jewish moshavs and kibbutzim are thought to account for 40 percent.
Shahadi Nasrallah, a local agronomist blamed unequal distribution of water resources for the differential. “One dunam (1000 sq metres) of apple trees needs about 700 cubic metres of water a season to grow” he said, “but (the Israeli water company) Mekorot only allows Arab farmers about 200 cubic metres at best, while the Jewish farmers get as much as they need. If you don’t have enough water, your apple crop will be of a lower quality, and you will probably have to harvest it before it is ripe.”
On the macro-political level, Israel’s continued presence in the Golan is intimately tied to control of the region’s water resources. The Sea of Galilee, where Christians believe that Jesus fed the masses with fish and loaves, today accounts for around a third of Israel’s drinking water. Syria controlled its north eastern shore until 1967, but today exclusive access to the freshwater source is viewed as a national security issue in Tel Aviv.
Even the use of smaller local water resources, such as Lake Ram, has proved contentious. “It has seven million cubic metres of water – which Mekorot collects – but they sell four million to the Jews and only three million to us,” Shahadi said. “We are not allowed to pump from it even though it is between our fields and we used the water all the time before 1967.” By contrast, Shahadi’s organisation, Golan for Development claimed that settlers had water from the lake pumped directly into their fields, and paid three times less for it.
Folklore in Israel has it that Syrian Golanis silently benefit from Israeli governance, but Samer Safadi disagrees. A teacher sacked for ‘security reasons’ after marrying an anti-occupation activist, Samer complained of discriminatory allocation of teaching resources, kindergartens, electricity and even garbage disposal.
“We do have more work here,” she admitted, “and politically we have greater freedom because Syria is undemocratic and a one party state. But we are absolutely ready to sacrifice these benefits to return the Golan to Syria. You cannot weigh patriotism against economics. It is the highest value a person can have.”
Such sentiments are common on the streets of Majdal Shams but a less strident tone is increasingly heard among the plateaux’s middle class. According to Shahadi Nasrallah, times changed after the Soviet Union fell. “The world became less ideological,” he said, “and people became more open to Americanisation, to visitors with coloured hair coming here, to Madonna. They started to put themselves first and instead of struggling they earned money, built houses and bought cars.”
Some believe that Israel only allowed five Druze towns to remain in the Golan in 1967 – after destroying over 100 villages and expelling more than 100,000 Arabs – because of a perceived strain of cultural pragmatism. Popular prejudices have, perhaps unfairly, held that Israel exploited this alleged quality among its own Druze population in the years after 1948.
However, pragmatism can cut both ways. Sitting in his comfortable apartment, Shahadi noted wryly: “I have calculated it many times from an economic point of view, and we would be better off in Syria. The prices there are lower and with the same fields we could live better.”
Many local people believe that demilitarisation and a change of sovereignty over the Golan’s settlements, tourist sites, farms and vineyards would create an economic powerhouse for Syria.
It would also address the most emotive issue for the Arabs of the Golan: family reunification. Women, children, and non-religious men in the Heights are forbidden to visit relatives in Syria and those who do are barred from returning.
In a scenario popularised by Eran Riklis’ 2004 film The Syrian Bride, Chazme Rosaini’s daughter Nadia has not been allowed to return to Majdal Shams since she travelled to Damascus in 1983 following her marriage to a Syrian cousin.
Chazme, a great grandmother with bright blue eyes that peep out from behind a traditional Druze head-covering, spoke with pathos about the separation. “Back in ’83, the occupation seemed so temporary and Nadia really thought it would end soon,” she said. “We had a family wedding party here and it snowed heavily the next day. We heard them walk out across the snow on their way to Quneitra and from there, the Red Cross bussed them to Damascus. Since then, we have only met twice in Jordan.”
Until the mid-1990s, even telephone calls to Syria were banned and Chazme and her daughter had to communicate by megaphone at the infamous Majdal Shams ‘shouting fence’, where families and friends once regularly gathered to bellow messages at each other. One local legend has it that some women had heart attacks while trying to make themselves understood to relatives across the wide expanse of no man’s land.
“It was messy and oppressive,” Chazme said. “But this is the ‘Nakba’ [catastrophe] of war, its misery and strangeness – to be separated from your own flesh and blood, unable to touch, see or talk to them for days on end.”
Links between the Palestinians of the West Bank and the Syrians of the Golan are strong. ‘Samir’, an activist who was imprisoned for several years after becoming involved in a Syrian information gathering cell, said he had since taken part in solidarity actions on the West Bank.
“We have a connection to the Palestinian struggle and we support them with whatever materials we can,” he told me. “We had our own Intifada in 1982 when Israel annexed the Golan Heights and tried to force us to become Israeli citizens. But this is not the West Bank and we don’t have the demography to sustain an Intifada every day. Still we will struggle until the Golan is liberated.”
In the mid-1980s, a small minority of activists in the Golan Heights turned to acts of violent resistance. Samir was not one of them and he remained optimistic that the Golan would be returned peacefully to Syria in the next decade. “It is a question of when, not if” he repeated in answer to many questions.
But with two thirds of Israelis telling pollsters they want to hang on to the Heights, and four decades of accumulated grievance bubbling like lava beneath the rocks, the future remains uncertain. When asked what might happen if hope for a peaceful solution faded, Samir frowned and looked up at the mountain. “In this case,” he said gently, “maybe people will take this other way to struggle.”
Getting to know the Golan
14 June 2011, Jews for Justice for Palestinians http://jfjfp.com (UK)
Israel’s killing of dozens of pro-Palestinian demonstrators at the fence surrounding Majdal Shams has again catapulted the 19,000Druze and 2,000 Muslim Arabs of the Golan Heights to popular attention. Despite being as numerous as Israeli settlers, they lack equal rights and access to resources, as Arthur Neslen discovered in this feature, which was spiked by Jane’s Islamic Affairs Analyst.
Salman Fakhr al-Din winced as he pointed up at Mount Hermon. “When I was a child, I tried to climb the mountain so that I could touch the sky,” he said, “but now it is filled with mines and soldiers and if you tried you could be killed. This mountain used to be part of our lives but it has become something strange and terrible.” He still lives in its shadow, in the Druze heartland ofMajdal Shams.
Forty years after the war that slid the Golan peninsula into Israel’s hands, the territory under Salman’s feet had changed drastically. Since 1967, mines had killed 42 people and injured more than 80 in the Golan. Forty percent of the victims were children.
No figures exist for the exact locations, number or types of mines planted in the Golan, but they stretch over several kilometres. Reports by landmines NGOs note a lack of warnings and fencing around many minefields. Often they are situated near schools and houses. Residents complain that every year some are washed into their gardens and streets by rain and soil erosion.
Saleh Barah had never had any mines awareness lessons at school when, aged 13, he went to play in a yard beside his local restaurant. “I was with my friend when we saw something that looked like a brown cola bottle,” Saleh said. “I asked ‘What’s that?’ and he started to open it so I shouted ‘Give it to me!’ He threw it over and I caught it and tried to open it. A few seconds later, everything went black”.
When Saleh awoke in a Haifa hospital 20 days later, he had lost a leg, an arm beneath the elbow, and one eye. The authorities offered him no financial compensation, he said. Now 38, and a respected agricultural businessman in Majdal Shams, Saleh blamed the occupation for the mines which still littered nearby roads. “Our lives are not important to the Israelis,” he told me. “It’s the same as what happened in Lebanon.”
In a bid to raise awareness about landmines issue, Saleh refuses to wear prosthetic limbs. “I want others to know me as I am,” he said. “Also, this way when people see me, they ask ‘What happened to him?’ and they start to learn.”
But even knowledge of the risks does not outweigh the economic necessities of life. In June 2001, a 73-year-old shepherd from the village of Buq’ata was killed by a mine near Ain Al-Hamra. One of his sons had died in a mine accident there 14 years before.
Syrian Golanis complain that the authorities turn a blind eye to such phenomena because it depresses their economic development and so helps Israel’s demographic battle. After the 2006 Lebanon War, settler leaders launched a slick $250,000 advertising campaign to double the Jewish population on the Golan within a decade.
The fertile volcanic fields and valleys of the Golan provide much of Israel’s fruit and wine industry but economic competition between the two communities is intense. While Syrian Golanis are said to provide around 30 percent of Israel’s apple crop, for instance, Israeli-Jewish moshavs and kibbutzim are thought to account for 40 percent.
Shahadi Nasrallah, a local agronomist blamed unequal distribution of water resources for the differential. “One dunam (1000 sq metres) of apple trees needs about 700 cubic metres of water a season to grow” he said, “but (the Israeli water company) Mekorot only allows Arab farmers about 200 cubic metres at best, while the Jewish farmers get as much as they need. If you don’t have enough water, your apple crop will be of a lower quality, and you will probably have to harvest it before it is ripe.”
On the macro-political level, Israel’s continued presence in the Golan is intimately tied to control of the region’s water resources. The Sea of Galilee, where Christians believe that Jesus fed the masses with fish and loaves, today accounts for around a third of Israel’s drinking water. Syria controlled its north eastern shore until 1967, but today exclusive access to the freshwater source is viewed as a national security issue in Tel Aviv.
Even the use of smaller local water resources, such as Lake Ram, has proved contentious. “It has seven million cubic metres of water – which Mekorot collects – but they sell four million to the Jews and only three million to us,” Shahadi said. “We are not allowed to pump from it even though it is between our fields and we used the water all the time before 1967.” By contrast, Shahadi’s organisation, Golan for Development claimed that settlers had water from the lake pumped directly into their fields, and paid three times less for it.
Folklore in Israel has it that Syrian Golanis silently benefit from Israeli governance, but Samer Safadi disagrees. A teacher sacked for ‘security reasons’ after marrying an anti-occupation activist, Samer complained of discriminatory allocation of teaching resources, kindergartens, electricity and even garbage disposal.
“We do have more work here,” she admitted, “and politically we have greater freedom because Syria is undemocratic and a one party state. But we are absolutely ready to sacrifice these benefits to return the Golan to Syria. You cannot weigh patriotism against economics. It is the highest value a person can have.”
Such sentiments are common on the streets of Majdal Shams but a less strident tone is increasingly heard among the plateaux’s middle class. According to Shahadi Nasrallah, times changed after the Soviet Union fell. “The world became less ideological,” he said, “and people became more open to Americanisation, to visitors with coloured hair coming here, to Madonna. They started to put themselves first and instead of struggling they earned money, built houses and bought cars.”
Some believe that Israel only allowed five Druze towns to remain in the Golan in 1967 – after destroying over 100 villages and expelling more than 100,000 Arabs – because of a perceived strain of cultural pragmatism. Popular prejudices have, perhaps unfairly, held that Israel exploited this alleged quality among its own Druze population in the years after 1948.
However, pragmatism can cut both ways. Sitting in his comfortable apartment, Shahadi noted wryly: “I have calculated it many times from an economic point of view, and we would be better off in Syria. The prices there are lower and with the same fields we could live better.”
Many local people believe that demilitarisation and a change of sovereignty over the Golan’s settlements, tourist sites, farms and vineyards would create an economic powerhouse for Syria.
It would also address the most emotive issue for the Arabs of the Golan: family reunification. Women, children, and non-religious men in the Heights are forbidden to visit relatives in Syria and those who do are barred from returning.
In a scenario popularised by Eran Riklis’ 2004 film The Syrian Bride, Chazme Rosaini’s daughter Nadia has not been allowed to return to Majdal Shams since she travelled to Damascus in 1983 following her marriage to a Syrian cousin.
Chazme, a great grandmother with bright blue eyes that peep out from behind a traditional Druze head-covering, spoke with pathos about the separation. “Back in ’83, the occupation seemed so temporary and Nadia really thought it would end soon,” she said. “We had a family wedding party here and it snowed heavily the next day. We heard them walk out across the snow on their way to Quneitra and from there, the Red Cross bussed them to Damascus. Since then, we have only met twice in Jordan.”
Until the mid-1990s, even telephone calls to Syria were banned and Chazme and her daughter had to communicate by megaphone at the infamous Majdal Shams ‘shouting fence’, where families and friends once regularly gathered to bellow messages at each other. One local legend has it that some women had heart attacks while trying to make themselves understood to relatives across the wide expanse of no man’s land.
“It was messy and oppressive,” Chazme said. “But this is the ‘Nakba’ [catastrophe] of war, its misery and strangeness – to be separated from your own flesh and blood, unable to touch, see or talk to them for days on end.”
Links between the Palestinians of the West Bank and the Syrians of the Golan are strong. ‘Samir’, an activist who was imprisoned for several years after becoming involved in a Syrian information gathering cell, said he had since taken part in solidarity actions on the West Bank.
“We have a connection to the Palestinian struggle and we support them with whatever materials we can,” he told me. “We had our own Intifada in 1982 when Israel annexed the Golan Heights and tried to force us to become Israeli citizens. But this is not the West Bank and we don’t have the demography to sustain an Intifada every day. Still we will struggle until the Golan is liberated.”
In the mid-1980s, a small minority of activists in the Golan Heights turned to acts of violent resistance. Samir was not one of them and he remained optimistic that the Golan would be returned peacefully to Syria in the next decade. “It is a question of when, not if” he repeated in answer to many questions.
But with two thirds of Israelis telling pollsters they want to hang on to the Heights, and four decades of accumulated grievance bubbling like lava beneath the rocks, the future remains uncertain. When asked what might happen if hope for a peaceful solution faded, Samir frowned and looked up at the mountain. “In this case,” he said gently, “maybe people will take this other way to struggle.”
sexta-feira, 20 de maio de 2011
LA REVOLUTION ARABE FRAPPE AUX PORTES D’ISRAËL
Mai 17 2011, Humanité (France) http://www.humanite.fr
Les soldats de l’armée israélienne ont fait feu sur des milliers de manifestants palestiniens qui, depuis le Liban, la Syrie et la Jordanie, commémoraient la Nakba, l’exil de tout un peuple contraint de fuir ses terres ancestrales.
Le quotidien israélien Haaretz ne s’y est pas trompé. Commentant la mobilisation exceptionnelle de dimanche, jour de la commémoration de la Nakba – la catastrophe – pour les Palestiniens, il a titré : « La révolution arabe a frappé hier aux portes d’Israël. » Mais frapper à la porte d’Israël s’avère dangereux. La commémoration a été ensanglantée par des violences sans précédent, qui ont fait au moins 16 morts et des centaines de blessés, la plupart à la périphérie des territoires palestiniens, dans le Golan syrien occupé, et au Liban.
Sur le Golan, l’armée israélienne a ouvert le feu sur des manifestants palestiniens venus de Syrie qui avaient pénétré dans la partie occupée. Deux protestataires ont été tués et quatre grièvement blessés. Dix personnes ont été tuées par des tirs israéliens à la frontière libanaise, où des milliers de réfugiés palestiniens s’étaient rassemblés dans la localité de Maroun ar-Ras, à un kilomètre d’Israël. Haaretz n’a pas manqué de relever que «le scénario catastrophe qu’Israël redoute depuis sa création s’est réalisé : que des réfugiés palestiniens marchent tout simplement de leurs camps vers la frontière pour tenter d’exercer leur droit au retour».
«Répression mortelle », selon le PC d’israël
Cette mobilisation est sans précédent en nombre, mais, surtout, elle a été observée partout : à Gaza, en Égypte, en Jordanie, en Cisjordanie et parmi les Palestiniens de 1948, c’est-à-dire ceux vivant en Israël. « Si les réfugiés en Syrie et en Jordanie sentent que le régime dans ces pays s’affaiblit et que la réconciliation palestinienne avec le Hamas leur confère une nouvelle légitimité, ils risquent de relever la tête et, avec l’encouragement des forces islamiques, de défier l’État d’Israël », craint un responsable politique dans les colonnes du quotidien Maariv, ne voulant voir qu’un danger islamiste là où l’expression populaire ne fait que reprendre les résolutions de l’ONU.
Le Parti communiste israélien a condamné cette « répression mortelle » et appelle à développer la campagne pour la reconnaissance de l’État palestinien dans les frontières de 1967.
L’armée israélienne a accusé le pouvoir syrien d’avoir « organisé cette manifestation violente pour tenter de détourner l’opinion mondiale de ce qu’il se passe dans ses villes ». Mais ces déclarations ne font pas illusion.
Accusations «infantiles et non professionnelles»
Le spécialiste des questions de sécurité du quotidien Yediot Aharonot juge « infantiles et non professionnelles » ces accusations contre la Syrie et l’Iran et met en garde contre « d’autres tentatives d’organiser des manifestations de masse, et pas seulement à partir de la Syrie ». Selon lui, « cela pourrait se produire en juin, au moment de la flottille pour Gaza, ou en septembre, en conjonction avec la déclaration d’un État palestinien ».
Incontestablement la donne change au Moyen-Orient. Le printemps arabe libère de nouvelles forces et la règle du jeu n’est plus la même, les États-Unis, l’Europe et même Israël ne pouvant plus compter sur le rôle plus que conciliant de certains pays, notamment l’Égypte. « Les manifestants qui ont pénétré dans le village druze sur les contreforts du mont Hermon (dans le Golan syrien occupé – NDLR) ont brisé l’illusion qu’Israël pouvait vivre confortablement, une “villa dans la jungle”, totalement coupé des événements extraordinaires qui l’entourent », estime Haaretz. (P. B.)
Les soldats de l’armée israélienne ont fait feu sur des milliers de manifestants palestiniens qui, depuis le Liban, la Syrie et la Jordanie, commémoraient la Nakba, l’exil de tout un peuple contraint de fuir ses terres ancestrales.
Le quotidien israélien Haaretz ne s’y est pas trompé. Commentant la mobilisation exceptionnelle de dimanche, jour de la commémoration de la Nakba – la catastrophe – pour les Palestiniens, il a titré : « La révolution arabe a frappé hier aux portes d’Israël. » Mais frapper à la porte d’Israël s’avère dangereux. La commémoration a été ensanglantée par des violences sans précédent, qui ont fait au moins 16 morts et des centaines de blessés, la plupart à la périphérie des territoires palestiniens, dans le Golan syrien occupé, et au Liban.
Sur le Golan, l’armée israélienne a ouvert le feu sur des manifestants palestiniens venus de Syrie qui avaient pénétré dans la partie occupée. Deux protestataires ont été tués et quatre grièvement blessés. Dix personnes ont été tuées par des tirs israéliens à la frontière libanaise, où des milliers de réfugiés palestiniens s’étaient rassemblés dans la localité de Maroun ar-Ras, à un kilomètre d’Israël. Haaretz n’a pas manqué de relever que «le scénario catastrophe qu’Israël redoute depuis sa création s’est réalisé : que des réfugiés palestiniens marchent tout simplement de leurs camps vers la frontière pour tenter d’exercer leur droit au retour».
«Répression mortelle », selon le PC d’israël
Cette mobilisation est sans précédent en nombre, mais, surtout, elle a été observée partout : à Gaza, en Égypte, en Jordanie, en Cisjordanie et parmi les Palestiniens de 1948, c’est-à-dire ceux vivant en Israël. « Si les réfugiés en Syrie et en Jordanie sentent que le régime dans ces pays s’affaiblit et que la réconciliation palestinienne avec le Hamas leur confère une nouvelle légitimité, ils risquent de relever la tête et, avec l’encouragement des forces islamiques, de défier l’État d’Israël », craint un responsable politique dans les colonnes du quotidien Maariv, ne voulant voir qu’un danger islamiste là où l’expression populaire ne fait que reprendre les résolutions de l’ONU.
Le Parti communiste israélien a condamné cette « répression mortelle » et appelle à développer la campagne pour la reconnaissance de l’État palestinien dans les frontières de 1967.
L’armée israélienne a accusé le pouvoir syrien d’avoir « organisé cette manifestation violente pour tenter de détourner l’opinion mondiale de ce qu’il se passe dans ses villes ». Mais ces déclarations ne font pas illusion.
Accusations «infantiles et non professionnelles»
Le spécialiste des questions de sécurité du quotidien Yediot Aharonot juge « infantiles et non professionnelles » ces accusations contre la Syrie et l’Iran et met en garde contre « d’autres tentatives d’organiser des manifestations de masse, et pas seulement à partir de la Syrie ». Selon lui, « cela pourrait se produire en juin, au moment de la flottille pour Gaza, ou en septembre, en conjonction avec la déclaration d’un État palestinien ».
Incontestablement la donne change au Moyen-Orient. Le printemps arabe libère de nouvelles forces et la règle du jeu n’est plus la même, les États-Unis, l’Europe et même Israël ne pouvant plus compter sur le rôle plus que conciliant de certains pays, notamment l’Égypte. « Les manifestants qui ont pénétré dans le village druze sur les contreforts du mont Hermon (dans le Golan syrien occupé – NDLR) ont brisé l’illusion qu’Israël pouvait vivre confortablement, une “villa dans la jungle”, totalement coupé des événements extraordinaires qui l’entourent », estime Haaretz. (P. B.)
Assinar:
Comentários (Atom)