by Ghassan Kadi for The Saker Blog
Subtle news sources coming on the grapevine allude to impending Middle East fresh peace talks. The end of the “War on Syria” will bring serious and realistic opportunities for Russian-sponsored peace talks, and there are direct and indirect hints and leaks made by certain officials here and there, hints and leaks which will become overt and obvious in the near future, culminating into news to the effect that new peace talks will resume.
The Arab/Israeli conflict seems intractable, and every time peace talks loom, we need to remember to examine the root of the problem and consider ways in which the deadlock can be surmounted.
Four decades after Kissinger pushed the USSR out of its position in the Arab/Israeli negotiation talks and made it law for America to defend Israel, the one-sided unparalleled superiority that America provided Israel with was not “good enough” to give Israel the “safe haven” that Zionism promised Jewish migrants with after the horrors of the Holocaust. If anything, the more aggression the state of Israel displayed and the more audacious America was in providing it with impunity, the more determined Palestinians became; and Hamas was the direct outcome of the joint Israeli/American bullying and the Palestinian despair that followed the supposed peace talks of the Oslo Agreement.
In retrospect, Kissinger, the man who gave “shuttle diplomacy” its name, has inadvertently created a deadlocked situation, and in doing so, America has done itself a huge disfavour in the unconditional support it provided Israel with over all those years and has turned itself into a de-facto pariah arbitrator; a mediator that axis-of-resistance Arabs, and all Palestinians in particular, do not trust. In doing so, it kicked itself out of the scene, paving the way for Russia to fill the void it left behind.
On the other hand, Russia is on talking terms with all parties in the Middle East and President Putin personally has good and strong relationships with Israel, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and of course Syria. Furthermore, Putin had all the reasons to sever ties with Erdogan, however the master of pragmatism managed to find a way to mend the rift without losing face, and even though Erdogan has not yet shown any credibility, Putin sees Turkey as a potential key player in the peace process in Syria.
Notwithstanding all of the above, all the American Russophobic rhetoric amounts to nothing, because America and Russia will always be on talking terms.
Briefly put, no entity other than Russia is potentially able to bring all Middle Eastern parties to the negotiation table, and the “hints” speak of such eventuality, come the end of the War on Syria; and this is what Putin wants.
In the meantime, relevant parties will have to accept to come to the negotiation table, and be prepared to negotiate.
It was easy back in 1948 for the Arabs to carry the “push them back” slogan; referring to sending Jewish migrants back to where they came from. More than seven decades after the establishment of Israel, if the Palestinian cause were to maintain the moral upper ground, this “ambition” can no longer apply to second and third generation Jews who were born in the land their forefathers migrated to; albeit those forefathers migrated and settled illegally. By the same token, and most importantly, Palestinians cannot be expected to take the moral upper ground alone without a reciprocal agreement that grants them the long-awaited justice; including the right of return.
And as negotiations mean to give and take, it is interesting to note that the English term is said in this sequence; give and take, rather than take and give, because if a negotiator does not begin with giving, he will not be able to take.
This will be the sticking point because religious hardliners on both Arab and Israeli sides have perfected the art of each claiming to be the rightful and exclusive owner of the Holy Land. As a matter of fact, it was only when the religious spin replaced the national argument of the Arab struggle that a secular fight was taken to theocratic camp and Zionism was, to some degree, able to use history to support its argument. That said, even though Jewish presence in Palestine indeed predates Islam, this does not justify the displacement of Palestinian Arabs, both Muslims and Christians. For Palestinians therefore to win both the humane and religious arguments, the endorsement of an Arab-Palestinian-Levantine identity and carrying its banner is one that cannot be refuted; because it is an all-inclusive definition; including Jews, and one that is moral and timeless.
But let us briefly examine the fundamentalist counter Muslim claim of the ownership of Palestine from a realistic vantage point. Are Muslims the rightful and exclusive owners of Palestine?
Back in 2011, I wrote an article titled “Palestine is not for Muslims”. I had it edited when the UN was voting for a Palestinian state, and now it is time to revise it.
The Quran is a Holy Book and not a real estate title deed. There is no mention of any land rights in the Quran. The city of Jerusalem (Al-Quds in Arabic) is not even mentioned in the Quran. There is however a mention of “Al-Masjed Al-Aksa” which Muslims believe to be in Jerusalem/Al-Quds. This does not make Al-Quds inherently a Muslim city, and even if it did, there is absolutely no reference in the Quran to any Muslim exclusivity.
Speaking of claims of exclusive ownership of Jerusalem, we cannot and should not ignore a time in history during which the Catholic Church was so desirous to take the city from the “infidels”. The “infidels” back then were the Muslims, not the Christians as per the current ISIS terminology; but the congruency in the ideologies behind the definitions is clear.
Speaking of ISIS, when Zionism established the state of Israel, the Zionist aggression was (and continues to be) practised equally against both Arab Muslims and Christians. The anti-Zionist resistance was the Arab Resistance, and it was comprised of both Christians and Muslims. When Fateh was established, it was then meant to be an armed struggle for the liberation of Palestine. George Habash, the founder of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) was a Christian.
Back then, the state of Israel was the ideological ISIS equivalent of the time, and the Palestinian resistance was a secular force trying to redeem freedom and secularism. In reality, the ISIS-like stance of Israel did not change at all.
To this effect, ISIS-minded Zionists regarded all Arabs as equally unequal to them, and when they were pillaging the Church of Nativity two decades ago, the West stood back and watched. The world seems to be totally at ease that the state of Israel continues to act as an ISIS; only of different denomination.
As Israel treated both Christian and Muslim Palestinians as second grade citizens, it was only natural for the anti-Israeli resistance to be nationally-based and driven. The slogan of those days was “Al-Quds lil Arab” ie Al-Quds belongs to Arabs. There was even a song with that title. The term Arabs meant back then referred to the inhabitants of the land; ie Muslims, Christians, as well as Jews who refute Zionism.
Suddenly, sometime in the 1980’s, a huge turn of events took place in Lebanon and Palestine almost at the same time.
The 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon was soon followed by a resistance then named the “Lebanese Resistance”. Soon after Hezbollah rose to prominence the name changed to “Islamic Resistance”. In Palestine, Hamas rebunked the anti-Israeli resistance and turned into an Islamic resistance as well. All of a sudden, the struggle against Zionism changed course from a national secular Arab struggle into a religious one.
The biggest losers here are the Palestinian Christians as they are well and truly excluded by both Zionists and fundamentalist Muslims.
It is most ironic that Western Christian Zionists find it so easy to sympathize with Zionism, and at the same time manage to ignore the plight of Palestinian Christians. How ironic! The truth about Christian Zionists is that they are neither Christians nor Jews; they are Zionists, period.
When Islamists make claims of ownership of Palestine in general and of Al-Quds/Jerusalem to be specific, they would be using the same false argument of Zionists; only from their own equally unfounded perspective. Two wrongs do not make it right.
Fair and open-minded Palestinians, especially non-fundamentalist Muslims, need to realise that they have to make loud and clear statements to their policy makers that they refuse fanaticism and bigotry irrespective who the culprit is.
If we refute the ISIS mind, we must refute it in all of its forms, denominations and agendas. Justice cannot be selective any more than one wrong can be undone by another wrong.
Palestine is not for Muslims, nor is it for Jews or Christians; not exclusively. It is for all of them combined, but again not exclusively. Palestine is for its people, and they don’t have to belong to any of the Abrahamic religions. That land is for its people without any favouritism and exclusion. And, if any hard-line, orthodox, fanatic, violent, militant Zionist settlers don’t accept this, justice stipulates it is they who should be made to leave.
So back to President Putin and his hush-hush peace plan. Adversity often brings opportunities, and Putin is quite aware of the historical and geopolitical significance of the present moment.
Russia will most probably be trying to broker a two-state solution that is acceptable by all parties concerned. Realistically however, there is no lasting resolution that can be based on anything other than a one-state resolution in which all citizens have equal rights; just like any other self-respecting nation state. Any resolution short of this outcome is tantamount to endorsing an apartheid-type system.
This brings us back to the give-and-take concept for conflict resolution. Normally, in a negotiation situation, giving is seen to be for losers and taking is for winners, but reality can dictate pragmatic changes in direction; and it has, at least on the Palestinian side.
From the early days during which Palestinians expressed anger and frustration saying they wanted to push back Jewish migrants into the sea and restore the homeland from “water to water” (ie from the Mediterranean to the Jordan River), the Palestinian leadership had to learn from the humiliation of many defeats, numerous let downs from Arab states, the UN and the whole world, to accept to settle for the West Bank and Gaza in lieu of putting an end to armed resistance and acknowledging the state of Israel.
This Palestinian “acceptance” did not come easy and was not endorsed by all Palestinians, but when the PLO went to Oslo with this objective in mind with the expectation of a reciprocal “acceptance” from Israel, the final outcome was more than disappointing.
Israel reached its military height specifically on the 9th of June 1967; the day when Egyptian President Nasser made his resignation speech. At that point in time, Arabs were at their nadir, and with the most humiliating defeat they have endured in history, all they felt they could seek was a withdrawal of Israel to the pre-1967 war borders.
Slowly and gradually, Arabs had to go through the phase of denial of defeat that they were not prepared to accept.
They first demanded the UN for a resolution and managed to gain support for UNSC Resolution 224 which called for the unconditional Israeli withdrawal of Israel from the “occupied territory”. In this, Arab states accepted that the new definition of “occupied territory” meant what Israel managed to occupy during the Six-Day-War of 1967. This was a huge shift, because the original Arab definition of “occupied territory” meant all of Israel. But the Arab forced resignation to the status quo was not enough to persuade Israel into negotiating a land-for-peace deal. Israel was not prepared to give in order to take (peace).
The October 1973 War, aka Yom Kippur War, was a turning point in history. Even though the military gains of Egypt and Syria were not huge, they were big enough to change the course of events; at least psychologically. However, when Egyptian President Sadat signed a unilateral peace agreement with Israel, the Arab World fell into disarray.
In simple and short terms, Arab expectations were dwindling while the Israeli ones were escalating; despite the rise of the new form of anti-Israeli resistance spearheaded by Lebanon’s Hezbollah and Palestine’s Hamas.
In simple and short terms again, though Israel’s refusal to relent has resulted in creating an Arab camp that is prepared to accept its agenda, it also created another camp that has vowed to fiercely resist any settlement that does not provide justice to the Palestinian people, and this latter group has become battle-hardened and prepared to fight and inflict serious damage to Israel’s might.
The most prominent player here is the Hezbollah military factor that rained rockets on Israel during the July 2006 war, even hitting a frigate, and sees itself more capable in any future escalation. Hezbollah is deeply embedded in the Lebanese society and cannot be uprooted. It sees time to be on its side and it is moving from strength to strength.
The axis-of-resistance is living in the euphoria of the outcome of the July 2006 war between Israel and Hezbollah, the many setbacks of Israel in Gaza and the victory of Syria against all odds.
The resistance side is waiting and poised for further confrontations. Hezbollah therefore will not easily accept any resolution that does not provide it with some real and tangible victory.
Meanwhile, Israel is tooth and nail still hanging on to the euphoria of the outcome of the 1967 Six-Day War. The Israeli side is not yet prepared to accept that time is not on its side. In a nutshell, Israel is not yet prepared to give so it can take (peace).
This will be Russia’s main obstacle in bringing all parties to negotiations on pragmatic grounds. Short of being able to convince Israel to give, Russia may find that the only way for this paradigm shift to happen in the Israeli psyche is through war; and in this case by a resounding Israeli defeat. This is perhaps why Russia is bolstering Syrian defences and specifically air defences. After all, if Israel loses its superiority in the air, and if its ground defences are unable to stop Hezbollah’s rockets, or at least some of them, then the new balance of power will no longer be on Israel’s side.
Now, will Netanyahu’s government, or any other future Israeli government for that matter, be prepared to take the risk of a new military confrontation with the prior knowledge that it has lost its upper hand in the fight? Will Israel accept to sacrifice its citizens in the hope that a new battle will restore its military superiority against all odds? To ask the question in a different way, what punishment does Israel need in order to be brought down to the negotiating table, the agenda of which is to find a way to establish a two-state solution let alone a one-state solution? But once again, Israel is not yet ready to give and take. It won’t return the Golan for any political gain, and it won’t even agree to lift the siege on Gaza.
At this stage, the best outcome to expect from Russian-mediated peace talks, with or without a war, if one is reached at all, is perhaps a two-state solution. This will be a huge step in the right direction, but in reality, such a resolution is nothing more than a disengagement. That said, Sharon’s wall has made it virtually impossible to draw practical border lines for a viable Palestinian state to exist, and thus created a nightmare for any future serious two-state-based peace talks. Whilst walls can be reconfigured, or even better torn down, in the long run, an apartheid two-state solution will always be morally wrong, and at best, should be regarded as an interim step towards establishing one state that ensures equal rights to all of its citizens.
The authors’ sentiments are mine as well, probably also echoed by millions of Christians, Muslims, Jews and non-religious “Men of good will”. Palestine is special because it is a Holy Land, and ought to be a Land of Peace and Goodwill to All. Paraphrased from the article (as a South African I take the liberty of spelling Apartheid in correct pronunciation):
Palestine is not _exclusively_ for Muslims, nor is it for Jews or Christians. It is for all of them combined, but again _not exclusively_. Palestine is for its people, and they don’t have to belong to any of the Abrahamic religions. _That land is for its people without any favouritism and exclusion_. And, if any militant Zionist settlers don’t accept this, justice stipulates it is they who should be made to leave.
Realistically, there is no lasting resolution that can be based on anything other than a _One State Solution in which all citizens have equal rights_ just like any other self-respecting nation state. Any resolution short of this outcome is tantamount to endorsing an Apart-Hate system.
”Short of being able to convince Israel to give, Russia may find that the only way for this paradigm shift to happen in the Israeli psyche is through war; and in this case by a resounding Israeli defeat.”
Exactly. Exceptional and indispensable countries — especially their deluded, moronic populations — only understand the language of force. It is when, suddenly, all their beliefs are called into question (in no uncertain terms) that they have to think ”outside the box”. Might be an excruciating challenge for certain inbred tribes.
Jerusalem specifically and Palestine generally, is not just an Arab cause but it is an Islamic one. Secular type of analysis often do not grasp or understand this key issue, especially when the historic context and background is not taken into consideration in the analysis.
Muslims (or Arabs for that matter) are not Native American Indians or Aborigines.
Palestine is not South Africa, Australia or North America.
The occupation and colonization of Palestine is not sustainable. The Western Christian Crusaders attempted it several times, were able to hold it for some periods, but could not keep it in the long term. The only way to permanently keep Palestine for a substantial period and live in relative peace is if you either eradicate or deport a substantial portion of the Arab population in the area. Then you would still have to deal with the surrounding Muslim populations.
Can the Zionist Jews substantially reduce the Arab populations in the area ? It would be difficult but not impossible, if a major regional, international or even world war breaks out, they could have a chance to expand they’re occupation, but not it is too early to tell.
As for a peace process…it makes no sense from a Jewish Zionist perspective. Expansion of land and resources is very important and a key element of the Zionist State. If I was a Zionist, I would only participate in a peace process in order to buy more time to expand and wait for more wars to be triggered by regional or world powers to weaken the area….
Yes, the field of inquiry on this (and all) subjects must be expanded. Scientific research, especially in the area of Human Ecology, would provide heuristic clues; extracting the “narrative” from subjective to objective discussion and problem-solving might yet rescue Palestine, the planet, humanity from extinction. Cultural cooperation and creativity (symbiosis)must replace predatory conflict immediately, despite the fact we have evolved as super predators, and controlling elites use this pattern to their advantage, ruthlessly suppressing ancient holistic wisdom. Enlightened team leadership models providing education toward healthy cultural transformations are key.
The Palestinian Mandate was divided into Muslim Palestine (a.k.a Jordan) and Jewish Palestine (a.k.a. Israel). The creation of a transitional period where there are three states Muslim Palestine, Jewish Palestine, and the PLO Authority could make sense.
Given the 70+ years of animosity between the peoples of Jewish Palestine and the PLO Authority, there is no real hope of joining these bodies together as one-state. It is now like the Balkans, grudges handed down from each generation to the next. Even with the best intention of leaders on both sides, it is near certain that individuals on both sides would take violence into their own hands. Humans are imperfect. Realism shows that it is best to limit temptation, “Men of Good Will, Separated by a Good Wall”.
However, a one-state solution is still possible. Joining the PLO Authority with Muslim Palestine would eliminate the non-viable enclave problem and generate the necessary one-state. There is no baked in animosity among these people that would lead to immediate, uncontrollable violence.
If all sides are committed to peace, this solution could work as it produces cohesive, separate Jewish and Muslim states within Palestine.
If one side secretly remains committed to conquest, they will reject and denigrate this solution out of hand. It would close the door on the idea of a stealth conquest as population changes over time. “Demographics are Destiny” and one population is growing faster than the other.
______
The most immediate problem facing any Putin, Trump, or, Other effort is — Who Represents the PLO side? Key to any “Land for Peace” deal is actually delivering on the Peace.
Abbas lacks credibility. He is in the 14th or 15th year of his four year term of office and it is fairly obvious that he has no control of Gaza & Hamas. He cannot deliver on commitments to keep the peace, which will lead any negotiation to the unfortunate roadblock “No Peace, No Land”. No other name springs to mind. It is hard to see how any deal can take place until Fatah and Hamas manage to come back together under a single leader.
@A123. Only 3 Bantustans? Why stop dividing Palestine at only 3?
A1: Muslim Palustan.
A2: Jewish Palustan.
A3: Palestinian Liberation Authority Palustan.
But what about
A4: Christian Palustan?
A5: Secular Palustan? …..
The possibilities for setting up Apart-Hate Walls in The Holy Land are endless.
“There’s something in us doesn’t like a wall” — Robert Frost, Mending a Wall
“If one side secretly remains committed to conquest”
“stealth conquest”
On what planet are you exactly living on ??
What secret and stealth conquest plans are you talking about ??
The Zionist Western Jewish Settler occupation state of Israel is an out in the open clear to all occupation and conquest project of Western Zionist Jews in the Middle-East. There objective is to increase the number of settlements and to drive out as much of the indigenous population as possible (regardless of their religion).
Who represents the Palestinians is irrelevant. The Jews will never allow the Palestinian refugees back to their lands and they will never give up anything for peace. They are the more powerful force and they will continue to apply force and confrontation to meet their objectives.
Thank you Ghassan for this great article. I shared it on twitter (Although I dont have many followers, but tweet visibility is good😉).
I think Russia giveing Syria the green light to shoot down two or three Israeli airplanes will do the trick to initiate some kind of peace talks.
Russia’s focus is on a peace deal between Israel and Syria/Hizbullah, with as you said an interim step on the Palestinian front.
https://sputniknews.com/us/201812191070826973-us-military-syria/
Report on Sputniknews US preparing to withdraw all troops north east Syria…
But don’t be fooled…some tribe type vpeople intend…Damascus a smoking ruin…so US troop withdrawel may signify that nuclear strikes on Syria and the Lebanon will follow soon thereafter.
It is in the Book.
Moon of Alabama (MOA) has a new piece posted claiming a solid US withdrawal (retreat) from Syria is in progress now.. Would like to see more about that.
Looks like The Donald has decided to troll everyone by suddenly announcing they are pulling out of Syria. The Pentagon is shitting bricks right now. The CIA are crying themselves to sleep tonight. The Kurds are going “Oh, Fuck.” Has Donald finally grown a pair? It seems he is doing something useful afterall. But we should remain carefully optimistic, because if this really happens then he may be impeached soon, or the whole thing could be canceled by a false flag. We will see.
@Anon (the one who wrote: ” if this really happens then he may be impeached soon”).
Or else it may be Trump’s Ace card for re-election? I suspect a lot of citizens are sick of paying for Israel’s military hardware, shedding their sons blood to fight against the latest “existential threat” to Israel, and having Israeli “performing artists” dancing and high fiving one another when buildings with people in them blow up in New York city.
I would stick my neck out even further: if Trump honestly, cleanly and clearly puts an end to the insane Hillary / Obomba incursion into Syria, and does the same for their cookie adventure in Ukraine, then Trump will win hands down — even if Adelson&Co withdraw all financial support for Trump’s re-election campaign.
It would be dangerous for the US to attack Iran while the US has troops in Syria.
Exactly…and so this peace and safety is…the horrid calm…before the nuclear storm.
Trump is the watchman of the renegade nation found in Daniel 8…and so expect this situation to be reversed…the US with Trump at the helm will attack Russia in Syria in 2019.
Damascus will be struck by nuclear nomads…whether the nukes are US or French or some of the way way more than 200 nukes the Israeli’s are hiding is the question…but this is the calm before the nuclear storm
The one-state solution is really the only practical one. In my opinion, the two-state solution died with Yitzhak Rabin whose loss was, to me, the greatest catastrophe ever to befall the State of Israel. Unfortunately, in the Israeli mindset, the one-state solution is equivalent to national suicide. Even were extreme pressure to be exerted on the Jewish State it would be an extremely unlikely outcome. I can’t imagine that any party, either Russia and certainly not the Trump administration willing to apply such pressure.
Having good relations with both sides Russia indeed is uniquely positioned to conduct peace talks between Israelis and Palestinians, should both side come to see the benefit at some time in the future. It is too early to see whether China’s One Belt One Road will reach as far as Syria or Turkey, and it would be at such a world-changing change in the economy of Western Asia that all the tribes of the area would look up fom their mess of potage to see what economic opportunities might lie just beyond their borders. Such an opportunity to participate in ground-shaking change to an economic and political renaisance might awaken the Zionists from their self-fulfilling nightmares. The origin of Islamic terrorism in Palestine is a perfect case study to know how not to manage spirals of mutual terror, revenge, hate.and fear.
I witnessed the amazing atmosphere in Jerusalem in late June 1967 when people who had been separated from each other for 19 years by a heavily fortified barbed wire fence that had separated East Jerusalem from West Jerusalem woke one morning to find the barbed wire fence and separating fortifications was gone. There were five of us in the household where I was staying and David, a Burmese Jew who had migrated to Israel, woke us up with the words “Look out the window! All the cars heading west have Jordanian numberplates, and the cars heading east have Israeli numberplates!” We joined a throng of Israelis walking across where the barrier had been and gasped at the beauty of the old walls and alleyways of the Old City. Palestinians and Israelis were mingling and negotiating for goods at every stall. Throughout Israel people awoke to find a family gazing at their house, a place of memories they hadn’t seen for 19 years. Israeli Jews had never spoken to Palestinians for a generation, Palestinians had never met or spoken to any Jews for a generation. That entire day there was not a single act of violence. On the contrary people invited strangers, linked by strange fate to a single house, into their living room to wonder what the coming weeks would bring to two nations suddenly brought together unexpectedly. People went home dumbfounded that the enemy didn’t have the horns they imagined, and wondered what would happen in the coming weeks.
That night the government and army of Israel, appalled by what had happened that day, put the barbed wire up again. The populations were to be separated from each other. For one day Palestinians and Israelis had treated each other without enmity. It was unprecidented and was immediately put to an end.
After the humiliating defeat of the Six-Day War (1967), Yasser Arafat’s PLO became the organization leading the Palestinian National Authority, the governmental body representing Palestinians after Oslo Accords of 1993. On the other hand, PLO and al-Fatah reputation began to fall in the 1980s. This happened because of the hard humiliation experienced by Palestinians during the last years of the 70s. Thanks to the agreement between Egypt and Israel in the Camp David Accords of 1978, where the Palestinian position and their will to recover territories lost during the war was simply ignored. It was a shock for Palestinians and the international scenario had changed as well. The following is from https://www.globalsecurity.org/security/library/report/2014/self-fulfilling-prophecies-of-terrorism.pdf
“The Khomeinist revolution had changed balances in the Middle East, because of the Anti-American Shi’ite Islam preached in the new-born Iran (1979). Iran rapidly became one of the most important geopolitical actors in the ME, deeply influencing the entire area, especially Lebanon. Islamism was growing all around the region, but a trigger was going to make the situation explode. In 1987, the First Intifadah erupted in Palestine. It was the first signal of another form of rebellion against the Israeli domination, and it left a mark of disorganized desperation, one of young men throwing stones toward Israeli military officers. Among desperate people, two organizations started their activity in 1987: Hamas and Islamic Jihad. They rapidly became a nightmare of Israeli citizens, carrying on an effective and violent campaign against the occupiers. Moreover, Hamas became one of the most important political actors in Palestine, overthrowing Arafat and the PLO. They offered an alternative point of view, strictly linked with Sunni Islam and able to give a meaning to Palestinian suffering, canalized in a new form of struggle, that complex Quran concept named jihad. This way, the fight against Israel now enrolled in religious conflicts scenario… PLO was an important actor in the attempt by the new-born Iran to export the revolution in Lebanon… But other hostile plots were ongoing, and this way, a complex situation transformed itself in a real nightmare, because of a suicidal and arrogant policy choice by Israel: the Iron fist. Grievances led Palestine into the hand of two of the most violent and organized movements: Hamas and Islamic Jihad.”
“Hezbollah hasn’t born as an anti-Israel movement. The Party of God – the meaning of the word Hezbollah – perceived itself as a proxy movement of the Iranian new government. With time, it became the dominant party in Lebanon, until it absorbed Beirut’s pro-Iran militias (1985). During this transition the “State within the State” (as named by Hussain Abdul al-Hussain) took a different path from the one imagined. During the period of Lebanese civil war (1975-1990), Hezbollah’s militiamen had been deeply influenced by Palestinian groups, especially the PLO. It was a period of growing terror: PLO forces in Lebanon were accused of rapes, robberies and extortions. Therefore, when in 1982 Israel invaded Lebanon to expel the PLO, Israeli troops were first perceived in southern Lebanon as liberators from a hideous regime. But the situation rapidly changed. It’s in 1982 that Khomeini tried to guide the inception of Hezbollah from Iran, while Hafiz al-Assad was doing the same from Syria, protecting the Shi’ite Amal movement. Syria and Iran were entering the game for the control of Lebanon, but they did it exploiting the humiliation suffered by the Lebanese people on a daily basis. Israeli raids were continuous and brutal. They used the same method later experimented during the first and second Intifadah (19871993; 2000-2005). And an interesting connection can be found between these events.
On 16 October 1983, Israeli commanders entered Nabatiyeh, in Southern Lebanon. They consciously imposed (an Israeli military) passage through the market, while the most sacred religious festival in Shi’ite Islam – the Ashura – was being attended by about 50,000 Lebanese. Shocked, Muslims started throwing stones at soldiers. All together: men, women and children. They even started piling burning tires in the streets to stop the convoy. Trucks were overturned. In the aftermath, Israeli forces called in reinforcements and started shooting – an incredibly wrong way to deal with rebels. But take a glance at what happened in Palestine about twenty years later. In 2000, Ariel Sharon entered the “Temple Mount” (as Israelis call the al-Aqsa mosque platform in Jerusalem), a very sacred place for Muslims, and he was escorted by hundreds of police forces. This act was considered an unacceptable provocation. Suddenly, the second Intifadah exploded, but now Israel had to face trained militiamen, and no more civilians throwing stones. That’s an excellent example of how military repression could radicalise people more and more, literally inventing the terrorism they had self-prophesised.”
No Bergman. I don’t think any nation of Goy can count on actually negotiating anything with the ever so pleasant Israeli’s. They want to rule the world as the Chosenites. They just sacrificed at the Western Wall in defiance of the gift of Christ. They cannot be trusted. They intend our doom. They will destroy all of north Israel and southern Lebanon. Turn it into a np mans land. They will see to it that terror falls upon Damascus and that in one night it will be reduced to a smoking ruin.
They have enough nukes to destroy the earth.
It was estimated i the early 1980’s that they has something like 200 nukes.
Nearly 40 years have elapsed since then.
A one-state solution for Palestine is a no-brainer; the two-state solution was always a Zionist lie.
“The end of the “War on Syria” will bring serious and realistic opportunities for Russian-sponsored peace talks”
How can the war be over if one third of your country is occupied by Zionist proxies? Why do people keep pushing this narrative?
@Flopot: “How can the war be over if one third of your country is occupied by Zionist proxies? Why do people keep pushing this narrative?”
This might point to an answer. From analyst Canthama BTL SyrPer #282118:
Early news that the US airforce has stopped bombing “ISIS” in eastern Syria, it is well known that without air support there will be no SDF advance in the area.
9) For the past few months a large contingent of Russian soldiers and SAA 5th Corps were moved to Deir ez Zour, and since Monday, this move has been intensified, few thousand soldiers were transferred to Deir ez Zour, quietly, that means the SAA is now in a very good position to protect the oil and gas fields.