Saturday, February 25, 2017
Friday, February 24, 2017
Thursday, February 23, 2017
THE FOOLS ARE OUTMANEUVERED AGAIN!
THE FOOLS ARE OUTMANEUVERED AGAIN!
ENOUGH OF THIS MUSKHARA!
DUMP THESE LOSERS AND START OVER AGAIN.
ضد المفاوضات
A GREAT PIECE!
سلامة كيلة
Link
تعود التحضيرات لمفاوضات جنيف بعد فشل مفاوضات جنيف 3، وبعد أن فتح الروس مسرباً في أستانة، جرى خلاله التفاوض مع مجموعاتٍ مسلحةٍ، كانت تعتبرها روسيا مجموعات إرهابية. وخصوصاً بعد التفاهم التركي الروسي، والذي جعل تركيا تميل الى "تليين" مواقف المجموعات التي ترتبط بها، لقبول منظور روسي، يريد إنهاء الصراع عبر إنهاء "تمرّد" الشعب، وتحويل جزء من الذين قاتلوا النظام الى "التحالف" معه ضد "الإرهاب"، أي ضد وهم جرى اختراعه ورعايته من دول متعددة، لكي يخدم تدمير الثورة بحجة الإرهاب.
لهذا يعد الروس لجنيف بما يسمح بفرض "معارضة" هي ليست معارضة، و"معارضة" باتت تقبل الشروط الضرورية لـ "نجاح المفاوضات"، وهي الشروط التي أسّست روسيا رؤيتها عليها منذ بدء دعمها النظام، وخصوصاً بعد تدخلها العسكري. بمعنى أن روسيا ترتب نظاماً على مقاسها، وتحت سلطة بشار الأسد كذلك. ولهذا، فهي تعمل على قضم المناطق التي باتت خارج سيطرة النظام، وإنهاء وجود الثوار فيها، وتقليص المساحة إلى حدّ السيطرة الكاملة على تلك المناطق، والتي لا تشمل مناطق "داعش" وجبهة النصرة، كونهما "وحدات خاصة" سورية، يحمون ويحكمون لمصلحة النظام، على الرغم من أنهم مدعومون من دول متعددة، بدت أنها ضد النظام.
بالتالي، وباختصار، ما تريده روسيا هو حل يبقي النظام ورئيسه، ويؤدي إلى تشكيل حكومة "وحدة وطنية" من أزلام النظام المفروزين بين النظام ذاته و"المعارضة". ليعاد إنتاج النظام بأشخاص جدد، لا يختلفون عن النظام ذاته، في وقتٍ تكون روسيا قد فرضت سيطرة قواتها وقوات إيران وبقايا قوات النظام (التي باتت الطرف الأضعف والأقل عدداً) على سورية. وهي تشتغل لكي تفرض "مجموعتها" كجزء أساسي في وفد التفاوض، والتي ستكون المجموعة التي تقبل "العودة إلى حضن النظام" تحت مسمى الحل السياسي.
يفرض هذا الأمر أن نكون ضد المفاوضات هذه، وألا يدخل أحد شريف فيها، بالضبط لأنها مسرحية ليس غير، وهي شكل إعادة إنتاج النظام كما هو بلا بتغيير، فالروس عدو يسيطر ويقتل، ولا يجب أن يُنظر إليها بمنظور آخر، وهي التي تريد فرض منطقها انطلاقاً من عنجهية تركبها بأنها باتت قادرةً على "قيادة العالم"، وعلى فرض سطوتها، وهو الأمر الذي جعلها تمارس كل العنف والوحشية، وتستخدم كل سلاحها المتطور، وتصرّ على أن ما قالته منذ البدء هو الذي يجب أن يُفرض في الواقع. وهي لا تفاوض إلا بعد أن تكون قد مارست وحشيتها، لكي يأتي المفاوض قابلاً بما تقرّر، وحين لا يتحقق ذلك تعود الى وحشيتها. وهذا الأمر يجعل الأمر المطروح هو قبول الحل الروسي كما هو أو استمرار عملية التدمير والقتل.
لهذا، لا يجدر التفاوض الآن، ويجب رفض كل علاقة مع روسيا التي باتت تحتل سورية، كذا بكل معنى الكلمة. إنها قوة احتلال، وهي تريد قبول كل الاتفاقات المذلة التي وقعتها مع النظام، وهي عقد إذعان احتلالي. وما يجب أن يجري التركيز عليه هو: كيف يمكن أن تغرق روسيا في أفغانستان جديدة؟ لأن ذلك وحده الذي سوف يجعلها "تتواضع"، وتتخلى عن عنجهيتها، وبالتالي، تعرف أنها فشلت في كسر "الثورات الملونة" (كما تسميها)، وأن الثورة ستنال منها.
روسيا الإمبريالية يجب أن تُواجه، وبالتالي لا بد من ممارسة "حرب عصاباتٍ" ضد قواتها في سورية، كما ضد قوات إيران، وضد كل المجموعات السلفية التي زُرعت لتخريب الثورة. ليست السيطرة على الأرض هي الأساس الآن، بل التحوّل إلى حرب عصابات هو الضروري، ولكي يُفتح الأفق لتفاوض حقيقي، يحقق بعض مطالب الشعب السوري. ليتفاوض النظام وقفاه برعاية روسيا، وليتوهموا أنهم نجحوا في الوصول إلى حل يبقي النظام بكامل أركانه. أما الثورة فيجب أن تمارس فعلها على الأرض، وأن تُسقط من صفوفها كل الذين ركبوا الموجة، وخضعوا لدول وقوى إقليمية ودولية.
ليس هذا زمن التفاوض، بل زمن إعادة لملمة صفوف الثورة.
سلامة كيلة
Link
تعود التحضيرات لمفاوضات جنيف بعد فشل مفاوضات جنيف 3، وبعد أن فتح الروس مسرباً في أستانة، جرى خلاله التفاوض مع مجموعاتٍ مسلحةٍ، كانت تعتبرها روسيا مجموعات إرهابية. وخصوصاً بعد التفاهم التركي الروسي، والذي جعل تركيا تميل الى "تليين" مواقف المجموعات التي ترتبط بها، لقبول منظور روسي، يريد إنهاء الصراع عبر إنهاء "تمرّد" الشعب، وتحويل جزء من الذين قاتلوا النظام الى "التحالف" معه ضد "الإرهاب"، أي ضد وهم جرى اختراعه ورعايته من دول متعددة، لكي يخدم تدمير الثورة بحجة الإرهاب.
لهذا يعد الروس لجنيف بما يسمح بفرض "معارضة" هي ليست معارضة، و"معارضة" باتت تقبل الشروط الضرورية لـ "نجاح المفاوضات"، وهي الشروط التي أسّست روسيا رؤيتها عليها منذ بدء دعمها النظام، وخصوصاً بعد تدخلها العسكري. بمعنى أن روسيا ترتب نظاماً على مقاسها، وتحت سلطة بشار الأسد كذلك. ولهذا، فهي تعمل على قضم المناطق التي باتت خارج سيطرة النظام، وإنهاء وجود الثوار فيها، وتقليص المساحة إلى حدّ السيطرة الكاملة على تلك المناطق، والتي لا تشمل مناطق "داعش" وجبهة النصرة، كونهما "وحدات خاصة" سورية، يحمون ويحكمون لمصلحة النظام، على الرغم من أنهم مدعومون من دول متعددة، بدت أنها ضد النظام.
بالتالي، وباختصار، ما تريده روسيا هو حل يبقي النظام ورئيسه، ويؤدي إلى تشكيل حكومة "وحدة وطنية" من أزلام النظام المفروزين بين النظام ذاته و"المعارضة". ليعاد إنتاج النظام بأشخاص جدد، لا يختلفون عن النظام ذاته، في وقتٍ تكون روسيا قد فرضت سيطرة قواتها وقوات إيران وبقايا قوات النظام (التي باتت الطرف الأضعف والأقل عدداً) على سورية. وهي تشتغل لكي تفرض "مجموعتها" كجزء أساسي في وفد التفاوض، والتي ستكون المجموعة التي تقبل "العودة إلى حضن النظام" تحت مسمى الحل السياسي.
يفرض هذا الأمر أن نكون ضد المفاوضات هذه، وألا يدخل أحد شريف فيها، بالضبط لأنها مسرحية ليس غير، وهي شكل إعادة إنتاج النظام كما هو بلا بتغيير، فالروس عدو يسيطر ويقتل، ولا يجب أن يُنظر إليها بمنظور آخر، وهي التي تريد فرض منطقها انطلاقاً من عنجهية تركبها بأنها باتت قادرةً على "قيادة العالم"، وعلى فرض سطوتها، وهو الأمر الذي جعلها تمارس كل العنف والوحشية، وتستخدم كل سلاحها المتطور، وتصرّ على أن ما قالته منذ البدء هو الذي يجب أن يُفرض في الواقع. وهي لا تفاوض إلا بعد أن تكون قد مارست وحشيتها، لكي يأتي المفاوض قابلاً بما تقرّر، وحين لا يتحقق ذلك تعود الى وحشيتها. وهذا الأمر يجعل الأمر المطروح هو قبول الحل الروسي كما هو أو استمرار عملية التدمير والقتل.
لهذا، لا يجدر التفاوض الآن، ويجب رفض كل علاقة مع روسيا التي باتت تحتل سورية، كذا بكل معنى الكلمة. إنها قوة احتلال، وهي تريد قبول كل الاتفاقات المذلة التي وقعتها مع النظام، وهي عقد إذعان احتلالي. وما يجب أن يجري التركيز عليه هو: كيف يمكن أن تغرق روسيا في أفغانستان جديدة؟ لأن ذلك وحده الذي سوف يجعلها "تتواضع"، وتتخلى عن عنجهيتها، وبالتالي، تعرف أنها فشلت في كسر "الثورات الملونة" (كما تسميها)، وأن الثورة ستنال منها.
روسيا الإمبريالية يجب أن تُواجه، وبالتالي لا بد من ممارسة "حرب عصاباتٍ" ضد قواتها في سورية، كما ضد قوات إيران، وضد كل المجموعات السلفية التي زُرعت لتخريب الثورة. ليست السيطرة على الأرض هي الأساس الآن، بل التحوّل إلى حرب عصابات هو الضروري، ولكي يُفتح الأفق لتفاوض حقيقي، يحقق بعض مطالب الشعب السوري. ليتفاوض النظام وقفاه برعاية روسيا، وليتوهموا أنهم نجحوا في الوصول إلى حل يبقي النظام بكامل أركانه. أما الثورة فيجب أن تمارس فعلها على الأرض، وأن تُسقط من صفوفها كل الذين ركبوا الموجة، وخضعوا لدول وقوى إقليمية ودولية.
ليس هذا زمن التفاوض، بل زمن إعادة لملمة صفوف الثورة.
Wednesday, February 22, 2017
‘Politics of demonization’ breeding division and fear
Link
- Amnesty International releases its Annual Report for 2016 to 2017
- Risk of domino effect as powerful states backtrack on human rights commitments
- Salil Shetty, head of the global movement, warns that “never again” has become meaningless as states fail to react to mass atrocities
Politicians wielding a toxic, dehumanizing “us vs them” rhetoric are creating a more divided and dangerous world, warned Amnesty International today as it launched its annual assessment of human rights around the world.
The report, The State of the World’s Human Rights, delivers the most comprehensive analysis of the state of human rights around the world, covering 159 countries. It warns that the consequences of “us vs them” rhetoric setting the agenda in Europe, the United States and elsewhere is fuelling a global pushback against human rights and leaving the global response to mass atrocities perilously weak.
Whether it is Trump, Orban, Erdoğan or Duterte, more and more politicians calling themselves anti-establishment are wielding a toxic agenda that hounds, scapegoats and dehumanizes entire groups of people.
“2016 was the year when the cynical use of ‘us vs them’ narratives of blame, hate and fear took on a global prominence to a level not seen since the 1930s. Too many politicians are answering legitimate economic and security fears with a poisonous and divisive manipulation of identity politics in an attempt to win votes,” said Salil Shetty, Secretary General of Amnesty International.
“Divisive fear-mongering has become a dangerous force in world affairs. Whether it is Trump, Orban, Erdoğan or Duterte, more and more politicians calling themselves anti-establishment are wielding a toxic agenda that hounds, scapegoats and dehumanizes entire groups of people.
“Today’s politics of demonization shamelessly peddles a dangerous idea that some people are less human than others, stripping away the humanity of entire groups of people. This threatens to unleash the darkest aspects of human nature.”
Today’s politics of demonization shamelessly peddles a dangerous idea that some people are less human than others.
Politics of demonization drives global pushback on human rights
Seismic political shifts in 2016 exposed the potential of hateful rhetoric to unleash the dark side of human nature. The global trend of angrier and more divisive politics was exemplified by Donald Trump’s poisonous campaign rhetoric, but political leaders in various parts of the world also wagered their future power on narratives of fear, blame and division.
This rhetoric is having an increasingly pervasive impact on policy and action. In 2016, governments turned a blind eye to war crimes, pushed through deals that undermine the right to claim asylum, passed laws that violate free expression, incited murder of people simply because they are accused of using drugs, justified torture and mass surveillance, and extended draconian police powers.
Governments also turned on refugees and migrants; often an easy target for scapegoating. Amnesty International’s Annual Report documents how 36 countries violated international law by unlawfully sending refugees back to a country where their rights were at risk.
Most recently, President Trump put his hateful xenophobic pre-election rhetoric into action by signing an executive order in an attempt to prevent refugees from seeking resettlement in the USA; blocking people fleeing conflict and persecution from war-torn countries such as Syria from seeking safe haven in the country.
Meanwhile, Australia purposefully inflicts terrible suffering by trapping refugees on Nauru and Manus Island, the EU made an illegal and reckless deal with Turkey to send refugees back there, even though it is not safe for them, and Mexico and the USA continue to deport people fleeing rampant violence in Central America.
Elsewhere, China, Egypt, Ethiopia, India, Iran, Thailand and Turkey carried out massive crackdowns. While other countries pursued intrusive security measures, such as prolonged emergency powers in France and unprecedented catastrophic surveillance laws in the UK. Another feature of “strongman” politics was a rise in anti-feminist and -LGBTI rhetoric, such as efforts to roll back women’s rights in Poland, which were met with massive protests.
Instead of fighting for people’s rights, too many leaders have adopted a dehumanizing agenda for political expediency.
“Instead of fighting for people’s rights, too many leaders have adopted a dehumanizing agenda for political expediency. Many are violating rights of scapegoated groups to score political points, or to distract from their own failures to ensure economic and social rights,” said Salil Shetty.
“In 2016, these most toxic forms of dehumanization became a dominant force in mainstream global politics. The limits of what is acceptable have shifted. Politicians are shamelessly and actively legitimizing all sorts of hateful rhetoric and policies based on people’s identity: misogyny, racism and homophobia.
“The first target has been refugees and, if this continues in 2017, others will be in the cross-hairs. The reverberations will lead to more attacks on the basis of race, gender, nationality and religion. When we cease to see each other as human beings with the same rights, we move closer to the abyss.”
World turns its back on mass atrocities
Amnesty International is warning that 2017 will see ongoing crises exacerbated by a debilitating absence of human rights leadership on a chaotic world stage. The politics of “us vs them” is also taking shape at the international level, replacing multilateralism with a more aggressive, confrontational world order.
With world leaders lacking political will to put pressure on other states violating human rights, basic principles from accountability for mass atrocities to the right to asylum are at stake
“With world leaders lacking political will to put pressure on other states violating human rights, basic principles from accountability for mass atrocities to the right to asylum are at stake,” said Salil Shetty.
“Even states that once claimed to champion rights abroad are now too busy rolling back human rights at home to hold others to account. The more countries backtrack on fundamental human rights commitments, the more we risk a domino effect of leaders emboldened to knock back established human rights protections.”
The world faces a long list of crises with little political will to address them: including Syria, Yemen, Libya, Afghanistan, Central America, Central African Republic, Burundi, Iraq, South Sudan and Sudan. Amnesty International’s Annual Report documented war crimes committed in at least 23 countries in 2016.
Despite these challenges, international indifference to war crimes has become an entrenched normality as the UN Security Council remains paralyzed by rivalries between permanent member states.
“The beginning of 2017 finds many of the world’s most powerful states pursuing narrower national interests at the expense of international cooperation. This risks taking us towards a more chaotic, dangerous world,” said Salil Shetty.
“A new world order where human rights are portrayed as a barrier to national interests makes the ability to tackle mass atrocities dangerously low, leaving the door open to abuses reminiscent of the darkest times of human history.
“The international community has already responded with deafening silence after countless atrocities in 2016: a live stream of horror from Aleppo, thousands of people killed by the police in the Philippines’ ‘war on drugs’, use of chemical weapons and hundreds of villages burned in Darfur. The big question in 2017 will be how far the world lets atrocities go before doing something about them.”
The big question in 2017 will be how far the world lets atrocities go before doing something about them.
Who is going to stand up for human rights?
Amnesty International is calling on people around the world to resist cynical efforts to roll back long-established human rights in exchange for the distant promise of prosperity and security.
The report warns that global solidarity and public mobilization will be particularly important to defend individuals who stand up to those in power and defend human rights, who are often cast by governments as a threat to economic development, security or other priorities.
Amnesty International’s annual report documents people killed for peacefully standing up for human rights in 22 countries in 2016. They include those targeted for challenging entrenched economic interests, defending minorities and small communities or opposing traditional barriers to women’s and LGBTI rights. The killing of the high-profile Indigenous leader and human rights defender Berta Cáceres in Honduras on 2 March 2016 sent a chilling message to activists but nobody was brought to justice.
“We cannot passively rely on governments to stand up for human rights, we the people have to take action. With politicians increasingly willing to demonize entire groups of people, the need for all of us to stand up for the basic values of human dignity and equality everywhere has seldom been clearer,” said Salil Shetty.
“Every person must ask their government to use whatever power and influence they have to call out human rights abusers. In dark times, individuals have made a difference when they took a stand, be they civil rights activists in the USA, anti-apartheid activists in South Africa, or women’s rights and LGBTI movements around the world. We must all rise to that challenge now.”
In dark times, individuals have made a difference when they took a stand
Background
Amnesty International has documented grave violations of human rights in 2016 in 159 countries. Examples of the rise and impact of poisonous rhetoric, national crackdowns on activism and freedom of expression highlighted by Amnesty International in its Annual Report include, but are by no means limited, to:
Bangladesh: Instead of providing protection for or investigating the killings of activists, reporters and bloggers, authorities have pursued trials against media and the opposition for, among other things, Facebook posts.
China: Ongoing crackdown against lawyers and activists continued, including incommunicado detention, televised confessions and harassments of family members.
DRC: Pro-democracy activists subjected to arbitrary arrests and, in some cases, prolonged incommunicado detention.
Egypt: Authorities used travel bans, financial restrictions and asset freezes to undermine, smear and silence civil society groups.
Ethiopia: A government increasingly intolerant of dissenting voices used anti-terror laws and a state of emergency to crack down on journalists, human rights defenders, the political opposition and, in particular, protesters who have been met with excessive and lethal force.
France: Heavy-handed security measures under the prolonged state of emergency have included thousands of house searches, as well as travel bans and detentions.
Honduras: Berta Cáceres and seven other human rights activists were killed.
Hungary: Government rhetoric championed a divisive brand of identity politics and a dark vision of “Fortress Europe”, which translated into a policy of systematic crackdown on refugee and migrants rights.
India: Authorities used repressive laws to curb freedom of expression and silence critical voices. Human rights defenders and organizations continued to face harassment and intimidation. Oppressive laws have been used to try to silence student activists, academics, journalists and human rights defenders.
Iran: Heavy suppression of freedom of expression, association, peaceful assembly and religious beliefs. Peaceful critics jailed after grossly unfair trials before Revolutionary Courts, including journalists, lawyers, bloggers, students, women’s rights activists, filmmakers and even musicians.
Myanmar: Tens of thousands of Rohingya people - who remain deprived of a nationality - displaced by “clearance operations” amid reports of unlawful killings, indiscriminate firing on civilians, rape and arbitrary arrests. Meanwhile, state media published opinion articles containing alarmingly dehumanizing language.
Philippines: A wave of extrajudicial executions ensued after President Duterte promised to kill tens of thousands of people suspected of being involved in the drug trade.
Russia: At home the government noose tightened around national NGOs, with increasing propaganda labelling critics as “undesirable” or “foreign agents”, and the first prosecution of NGOs under a “foreign agents” law. Meanwhile, dozens of independent NGOs receiving foreign funding were added to the list of “foreign agents”. Abroad there was a complete disregard for international humanitarian law in Syria.
Saudi Arabia: Critics, human rights defenders and minority rights activists have been detained and jailed on vaguely worded charges such as “insulting the state”. Coalition forces led by Saudi Arabia committed serious violations of international law, including alleged war crimes, in Yemen. Coalition forces bombed schools, hospitals, markets and mosques, killing and injuring thousands of civilians using arms supplied by the US and UK governments, including internationally banned cluster bombs.
South Sudan: Ongoing fighting continued to have devastating humanitarian consequences for civilian populations, with violations and abuses of international human rights and humanitarian law.
Sudan: Evidence pointed strongly to the use of chemical weapons by government forces in Darfur. Elsewhere, suspected opponents and critics of the government subjected to arbitrary arrests and detentions. Excessive use of force by the authorities in dispersing gatherings led to numerous casualties.
Syria: Impunity for war crimes and gross human rights abuses continued, including indiscriminate attacks and direct attacks on civilians and lengthy sieges that trapped civilians. The human rights community has been almost completely crushed, with activists either imprisoned, tortured, disappeared, or forced to flee the country.
Thailand: Emergency powers, defamation and sedition laws used to restrict freedom of expression.
Turkey: Tens of thousands locked up after failed coup, with hundreds of NGOs , a massive media crackdown, and the continuing onslaught in Kurdish areas.
UK: A spike in hate crimes followed the referendum on European Union membership. A new surveillance law granted significantly increased powers to intelligence and other agencies to invade people’s privacy on a massive scale.
USA: An election campaign marked by discriminatory, misogynist and xenophobic rhetoric raised serious concerns about the strength of future US commitments to human rights domestically and globally.
Venezuela: Backlash against outspoken human rights defenders who raised the alarm about the humanitarian crisis caused by the government’s failure to meet the economic and social rights of the population.
Amnesty International Annual Report 2016/17
US Muslims raise $58k to help repair vandalised Jewish graveyard
Activists condemn attack on Chesed Shel Emeth Cemetery in Missouri, where more than 100 headstones were damaged at weekend
Link
Lina Sarsour led the campaign along with other activists to raise funds to restore the desecrated graveyard (AFP)
Link
Two American Muslim campaigners raised tens of thousands of dollars within hours of launching a campaign to help repair a vandalised Jewish graveyard.
Linda Sarsour and Tarek el-Messidi condemned the attack on the Chesed Shel Emeth Cemetery in Missouri, where more than 100 headstones were damaged this weekend.
The campaigners called the attack a "horrific act of desecration" on a "sacred space where Jewish-American families have laid their loved ones to rest".
Sarsour and Messidi announced that they had reached their target of $20,000 within a few hours of launching their campaign on Tuesday. By Wednesday the total raised stood at almost three times that amount.
READ: Trump, Netanyahu and the pro-Israel monster
"We are overjoyed to reach our goal of $20,000 in three hours," the campaign said. "Any additional funds raised in this campaign will assist other vandalised Jewish centres nationwide.
"Through this campaign, we hope to send a united message from the Jewish and Muslim communities that there is no place for this type of hate, desecration, and violence in America."
Lina Sarsour led the campaign along with other activists to raise funds to restore the desecrated graveyard (AFP)
Meanwhile, two Muslim organisations, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the Missouri chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), both spoke out against the incident.
"We encourage our members to reach out to their local synagogue and Jewish neighbours to express their solidarity and support and to generously support the rebuilding of the recently desecrated cemetery," ISNA President Azhar Azeez said in a statement.
No arrests were made in relation to the attacks and investigators have not yet determined whether it was a hate crime or vandalism.
Police said investigators were looking at surveillance camera footage to help identify those behind the attacks.
Since the election of Donald Trump as president in November 2016, the US has seen a surge in both hate crimes and bomb threats against dozens of minority groups.
Israeli jets use Lebanese airspace to bomb Damascus airbase
Link
The Lebanese armed forces report the airstrikes were made from Lebanese airspace in order to bypass Russian air defences in the south of Syria.
Israeli aircraft reportedly bombed a number of Syrian airbases near Damascus for the second time this year on Wednesday night.
The Israeli military has not officially commented on the reported airstrikes.
The Lebanese army has said Tel Aviv's jets used Lebanese airspace at around 3:00am [0100GMT] to launch the strikes, reported Al-Jadeed Lebanon.
The Lebanese army has said Tel Aviv's jets used Lebanese airspace at around 3:00am [0100GMT] to launch the strikes, reported Al-Jadeed Lebanon.
One of the targets was a Hizballah arms convoy travelling with the Syrian army's 3rd division, reported the Jerusalem Post.
Lebanese media reported that the strike was launched from Lebanese airspace in order to bypass the Russian-made air defence systems in southern Syria.
Hizballah's leader, Hassan Nasrallah, last week reiterated his organisation's opposition to Israel.
"Hizballah will have no red lines in the next war with Israel," he said.
"Israel should think a million times before it goes to war with Lebanon."
Lebanon's President Aoun spoke in support of Hizballah's arms stockpile in the country's south, saying it was "essential" for the country's defence.
"Hizballah weapons are not contradictory to the state, but are an essential part in defending the country," he said.
Syria issued a warning when Israel last struck an arms convoy on January 13 near Damascus airport, a short distance from President Assad's palatial residence.
"The Syrian armed forces warns the Israeli enemy of the repercussions of this blatant aggression, and insists on continuing the war on terrorism to eliminate it," a regime figure told the state news agency SANA.
There has been no comment from Damascus with regards to the latest airstrike.
Last year, the UN Security Council condemned Iran's arms shipments to Hizballah, saying they could have violated the country's nuclear agreement.
"The statement suggests that transfers of arms from Iran to Hizballah may have been undertaken contrary to resolution 2231 (2015)," said Under Secretary-General Jeffrey Feltman.
Time to tackle ISIL's millions of sympathisers?
It is necessary to improve the underlying conditions that transformed ordinary citizens into desperate ISIL supporters.
Link
Significant international concern that thousands of Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) fighters and their leaders will soon disperse to many countries - once Raqqa and Mosul are liberated - has focused on possible terror threats from a renewed global underground army of frustrated radicals.
This narrow focus will exacerbate the radicalism and terror that have plagued Arab and other countries for decades, for two critical reasons: It neglects the more important underlying drivers of extremism and violence in the Arab world from which both al-Qaeda and ISIL emerged, and it ignores the harsh reality that perhaps tens of millions of ordinary Arab men and women have become ISIL and al-Qaeda sympathisers, which makes it easier for terrorists fleeing Raqqa and Mosul to find refuge and regroup to fight another day.
Concentrating on military attacks against ISIL is sensible to a large extent, but on its own it simply repeats the same mistakes that Middle Eastern and Western leaderships have made for the past 25 years in fighting al-Qaeda and its progeny, ISIL.
Focusing excessively on security responses while reinforcing Arab autocratic regimes ignores the critical political, social, economic, psychological and other factors that must be addressed to truly "defeat" and eliminate those movements.
Millions of sympathisers
Flushing out ISIL from Raqqa and Mosul may even heighten sympathy and practical support for it among ordinary citizens across the Middle East.
The tens of thousands of ISIL fighters and their bureaucratic supporters in the territories that they currently control are a bad enough threat by themselves.
We should focus our attention to a much bigger - and an increasingly clear - reality that perhaps up to 30 or 40 million people across the Arab world express sympathy, support, or approval for ISIL and its actions, based on numerous credible surveys of Arab public opinion.
The Arab world now faces three massive challenges in the post-Raqqa and post-Mosul ISIL era.
First, the very large absolute numbers of ISIL "sympathisers"; second, the many reasons for this situation across almost all sectors of society; and third, how the likelihood that both the numbers and the sympathies underpinning ISIL will both increase, if it is dismantled but nothing is done to improve the degrading conditions that have pushed millions of desperate Arabs to turn to ISIL as a last resort.
Polling and analyses over the past decade show that a steady average of 4 to 10 percent of Arab survey respondents express some degree of understanding, sympathy, or outright support for ISIL and al-Qaeda's activities or motives.
The actual percentage of supporters in some countries reaches up to 40 percent or more in some years, and fluctuates widely, in response to current events usually.
Yet ISIL and al-Qaeda's core support or sympathy among Arabs remains steady in the 4 to 10 percent range mostly.
This means that among the 400 million Arabs today, anywhere between 16 and 40 million people sympathise with ISIL, support its mission or tactics, see its goals or actions as compatible with Islamic principles or, in some other manner, view ISIL positively or with understanding for its aims.
Most ISIL supporters were not motivated by religious sentiments, but rather by political, social, economic and other grievances.
|
One possibility is that frustrated Arab citizens who express sympathy for ISIL would not actively assist it, but rather they see it as a proxy means of expressing their anger with their own governments and societies, since ISIL directly challenges all ruling Arab power elites.
Even if we cut these figures in half - to be on the safe side - we are still looking at somewhere between eight and 20 million Arabs who view ISIL positively in some manner.
The immediate, frightening aspect about these figures, beyond the core sympathetic base that persists across the region, is that millions of people could make it very easy for ISIL militants who flee Raqqa and Mosul to find refuge in safe places across many Arab lands.
But why?
More problematic are the many underlying reasons why millions of Arabs seem to sympathise with ISIL and al-Qaeda. My own research over the past year into the many causes of Arab discontent indicates as many as 60 distinct reasons why people join, like, or support ISIL.
They can be compartmentalised into five broad categories that affect most citizens: material living standards (housing, income, healthcare, water access, public transportation, etc), human capabilities and opportunities (education, jobs, access to capital), personal freedoms and rights (political participation and accountability, free expression, cultural diversity), reactions to political policies of one's own or aggressive foreign governments, and psychological and personal issues that include positive religious values alongside negative feelings of helplessness, lack of direction, and, ultimately, hopelessness.
The combination of two or more of these conditions tends to drive citizens into the hands of extremists, with the most common sentiment among many who join or like ISIL being a desire to transform their life of vulnerability, humiliation, weakness and suffering into a new life defined by strength, purpose, direction and pride.
An important finding in the 2014 Doha-based Arab Center poll across 12 Arab countries was the lack of any correlation between religiosity and ISIL support; in other words, most ISIL supporters were not motivated by religious sentiments, but rather by political, social, economic and other grievances (PDF).
Two related points should be emphasised: first, any serious attempt to destroy ISIL or minimise its adherents into insignificance requires a complete understanding of the factors that gave rise to it in the first place; and second, those factors comprise dozens that touch on almost every dimension of life, which means that only comprehensive reforms in the Arab world, alongside military action, can win this war.
This point should be even more evident in view of the global "war on terror", because military attacks did not include improving the underlying conditions that transformed ordinary citizens into desperate terrorists.
These realities are shocking by any standard but, most of all, they should force Arab and foreign political leaders - who now fight ISIL militarily - to also initiate serious reforms of the underlying social, political, economic and other deeply rooted problems in Arab societies that drive ordinary men and women to look kindly on ISIL.
Rami G Khouri is a senior public policy fellow at the Issam Fares Institute at the American University of Beirut and a non-resident senior fellow at Harvard University Kennedy School.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)