Egypt: New protest law gives security forces free rein

"A new law placing broad restrictions on protests in Egypt is a serious setback that poses a grave threat to freedom of assembly and gives security forces a free rein to use excessive force, including lethal force, against demonstrators, Amnesty International said today.

The law, signed yesterday by Egyptian President Adly Mansour, grants the Ministry of Interior wide discretionary powers over protests and lays out broad circumstances in which demonstrators can be found to violate the law.

“It is a dangerous sign that the first piece of legislation regulating rights and freedoms passed since the ousting of Mohamed Morsi curtails freedom of assembly and treats peaceful protesters like criminals. Not only does it allow the police to disperse peaceful demonstrations, but gives them the power to shoot protesters who pose no threat to the lives or safety of others”, said Hassiba Hadj Sahraoui, Middle East and North Africa Deputy Director at Amnesty International.

“Granting security forces complete discretion to ban protests or disperse them using excessive and lethal force is a serious setback for human rights in Egypt and paves the way for further abuse.” 

In practice, the vague and overbroad grounds in the law will not only allow the authorities to prevent or forcibly disperse protests by supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood, but it will essentially allow for a ban on all opposition protests. 

What is particularly worrying is that it gives the security forces a legal framework for the use of excessive force against any protesters deemed to have committed a “crime punishable by law”. In particular, the law provides for the police to use shotguns and rubber bullets, including to disperse peaceful protesters. Amnesty International has documented cases of protester deaths caused by the use of shotgun pellets, most recently on 6 October. 

Moreover, the law allows security forces to respond to the use of firearms by protesters by “means proportionate to the level of threat to lives, money and property”. The inclusion of money and property in this provision contravenes international law and standards, which permit security forces to use firearms only when that is the sole means of defence against an imminent threat of death or serious injury.

Amnesty International fears that security forces will make use of the authority given to them under the new law to disperse peaceful protests for not complying with the law’s requirements, including on broad grounds such as disrupting traffic and holding demonstrations in places of worship. Moreover, under the new law, any violent act committed by a small minority of protesters, or even just one, can be used as a legal justification for dispersing the entire demonstration.

“Instead of using the opportunity to break the pattern where the security forces repeatedly kill protesters with no consequences, the new law will further entrench abuse,” said Hassiba Hadj Sahraoui. 

The new law grants the Ministry of Interior powers to ban protests on grounds including “threats to security and peace”, “security or public order”, and “influencing the course of justice”, as well as delaying traffic or transport. Protesters found in violation will face up to five years in prison and/or hefty 100,000 Egyptian pound fines (USD$14, 513). These restrictions and punishments, which go well beyond the restrictions permissible under international law, will severely curtail the exercise of the right to peaceful assembly in Egypt.  

The law also imposes blanket prohibitions on protests and public gatherings of a “political nature” in places of worship. Since the ‘25 January Revolution’, many protest marches began after prayers at mosques – a practice continued by Mohamed Morsi’s supporters since he was ousted in July 2013.

The Minister of Interior and Governors can also use the new law to declare public spaces off limits for protest. These include public areas surrounding presidential palaces, parliaments, ministries, diplomatic missions and embassies, court buildings, hospitals, prisons, police stations or points, military zones and heritage sites. 

Protest organizers are required to submit complete plans for any gatherings of more than 10 people to the Ministry at least three days in advance. Taken together with the Ministry’s powers to cancel a demonstration or change its route, this in effect means that demonstrations can take place only with the Ministry’s prior authorization. 

“Since the ‘25 January Revolution’, human rights groups and activists have been struggling to defend their hard-won space to protest. A government – which continues to pay lip service to the sacrifices made by protesters during that period – has now provided a legal cover to ban protests outright and give free rein to security forces, with their abysmal record of using excessive and lethal force, to forcibly disperse protesters at their whim,” said Hassiba Hadj Sahraoui. 

“Instead of investigating the large number of killings of protesters since the ‘25 January Revolution’ and punishing those responsible, the current government seems to be rewarding security forces for their excesses and providing them with further legal means to trample on rights.”

Background

On 24 October 2013, Amnesty International sent a memorandum to President Adly Mansour urging him not to sign into law the restrictive draft Law 107 of 2013 Regulating the Right to Public Gatherings, Processions and Peaceful Protests. While some amendments were introduced since that draft, the adopted law still breaches Egypt’s obligations under International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights to uphold freedom of assembly, and respect the right to life. 

Efforts by Morsi’s government to pass similar restrictive legislation earlier this year were thwarted following an outcry by human rights NGOs, political parties, and other stakeholders. 

Since 3 July, more than 1,300 people have died in protests and political violence in Egypt, many as a result of security forces using excessive and unwarranted lethal force. No adequate investigations have been launched into security force wrongdoing. Instead, thousands of pro-Morsi protesters have been arrested – many during the dispersal of sit-ins and protests – amid concerns on the lack of respect of due process rights."

Al-Jazeera Video: في العمق- التدخلات الخارجية في اليمن

Saudi hostility to the Iran nuclear deal should alarm us more than Israel's

• • 
    Mary Dejevsky
  • theguardian.com, Tuesday 26 November 2013 09.02 EST
  • Jump to comments (8)

The speeches and writings of senior figures such as Prince Turki al-Faisal – the former head of Saudi intelligence – suggest that Saudi Arabia wants to ensure a resurgent Iran does not dislodged it as the region’s dominant power. Photograph: Hassan Ammar/Getty Images

Saudi Arabia feels double-crossed and is determined to contest a resurgent Iran. Could Europe replace the US in Riyadh's affections?

Of the two states most unhappy about the interim agreement with Iran, Israel is generally seen as potentially the more dangerous. This may not be correct. In the longer run, the hostility of Saudi Arabia could present the greater threat to regional stability.

This is not to underestimate Israel's genuine and deeply held fears about the peril that a nuclear-armed Iran would present. How could it feel otherwise, given the extravagant language of Iran's former president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and its own still disputed position in the region. For all its fierce rhetoric, though, there are constraints on Israel, including its reliance on the US and the caution of its own military, that may make it less likely to resort to arms against Iran than many outsiders believe. In the end, it could be Saudi Arabia's quieter concern about a resurgent Iran that has cataclysmic consequences.

I say this after hearing an extremely well-informed and well-connected Saudi academic and adviser analysing his country's position at a London thinktank. From what he said it was clear that Saudi Arabia not only lacks the sort of constraints that rein in Israel, but that it sees Iran's return to the international fold as a threat that it may have to act upon, if it is to retain its present influence in the region – a greater threat, indeed, than the turbulence whipped up by the Arab spring.

Nawaf Obaid is a senior fellow at the King Faisal Centre in Riyadh, and an adviser – past, and probably present - to Prince Turki al-Faisal, the former head of Saudi intelligence and influential former Saudi ambassador to the UK and the US; and he gave his take on the present situation at the European Council on Foreign Relations in London on Monday. What he said was, to put it mildly, not consoling, and there were aspects that were outright alarming.

It is already known, from the speeches and writings of others, including Prince Turki, that Saudi Arabia is embarking on a more active – for active, perhaps read assertive – foreign policy. A new national security doctrine is being formulated to contest a resurgent Iran and its Shia population and ensure that Saudi Arabia is not dislodged as the region's dominant power.

Among the points that emerged from what Obaid said were these.

• Relations with the US are in deep trouble. Saudi Arabia resented the fact that the US-Iranian talks had been kept secret from Saudi Arabia, and felt that it had been double-crossed by a major ally. It was not the fact of the talks – Prince Turki, in fact, had long advocated direct US-Iranian talks – but "the way they were done, hidden from us".

• Saudi Arabia will not stand by as Iran tries to extend its influence regionally – as, Obaid claimed, it was already doing through Hezbollah in Syria. "We will be there to stop them, wherever they are," he said. And he lamented the fact that, in his view, a US-Iran agreement would have the undesirable effect of keeping Syria's President Bashar al-Assad in power, which in turn would "send a message about how much is wrong in the Arab world".

• Saudi Arabia has recently upped its arms supplies to anti-Assad forces in Syria to a significant degree – "we can't tolerate the blaring of Persian music in the middle of Homs" – which does not bode well for any calming of the hostilities soon.

• There is no prospect of imminent democratic change in Saudi Arabia under the influence of the Arab spring: "Any form of democratic opening is just not on the cards."

Not all of what Obaid said was so bleak. Among the more hopeful points, if you were in London or Paris, was his insistence that the Europeans, whether Britain, France or the European Union as a whole, could take over as Saudi Arabia's chief ally and interlocutor, should the US downgrade its alliance with Saudi Arabia or even leave the region altogether. It is not often these days that you hear the European Union presented as a potential major ally for the future. The question that hangs in the air, though, is whether an unreconstructed Saudi Arabia, pursuing its rivalry with a resurgent Iran through the region, is the sort of ally Europeans would want to have."

Friction between Iranian, Syrian soldiers surfaces

November 26, 2013 12:19 AM (Last updated: November 26, 2013 02:29 PM)

The Daily Star

Heydari complains that Syrian forces spend too much time smoking and drinking mate.

"BEIRUT: A pro-Syrian opposition website has published footage on YouTube of an Iranian Revolutionary Guard commander in Syria criticizing the callous behavior of the Assad regime’s forces toward the Syrian people. One clip shows commander Esmail Heydari, who was killed in an ambush in Aleppo province in August along with the filmmaker who recorded the footage, complaining of the “bad habits” of Syrian troops.
“I feel that some of the problems here [in Syria] stem from a cultural problem created by the army,” Heydari says in the video, comparing the behavior of Syrian forces to that of the Iranian military under Iran’s former shah, who is widely reviled in the Islamic Republic and regarded as an oppressive dictator.

“In my meetings with them [Syrian commanders], I am trying to tell them that success comes through winning the respect and trust of the people,” Heydari says.
“I told Syrian commanders, ‘you must be commanders of your people’s hearts, and not act in the Soviet way of just ordering their bodies,’” he says.
“But even when they are driving in their cars, they are kicking up dust on their people,” he complains.
“For some years, people here have been afraid of this army. This army should learn to respect its people,” Heydari says.
Comparing Syrian forces to his own troops, Heydari says that he and his Iranian soldiers have cultivated good relations with the people in the area of his command by treating people with respect and sharing food and medicine with local residents.
“When I want to eat, I’m trying to share our food with anyone around me. If someone is injured, we are trying to give them medical treatment the same as we treat ourselves,” he says.
The video also shows Heydari complaining about the lack of discipline among Syrian troops.
“Here as a cultural habit, they stay up until morning smoking nargileh and drinking mate [tea]. If their smoking and mate are cut off, they will cut off their defense,” he jokes.
Mate is consumed heavily in several rural regions of Syria, including the coast, where the Alawite sect of President Bashar Assad forms a large part of the population.
“We are trying to tell them it’s necessary to practice and drill instead of smoking,” Heydari says.
A separate clip shows Heydari criticizing a member of the Syrian “civil defense” in Aleppo and asking why a nearby engineering base had been left unguarded the previous night.
The Syrian soldier responds that the problem will be corrected, but adds that some of his men want to return to their homes because they’ve been on duty for the last 15 days.
Heydari tells the soldier that he should obtain permission from his commanding officer before departing, volunteering to talk to the Syrian commander to convey the request.
But in another indication of the conflicting ethos of Iranian and Syrian troops, Heydari adds that he himself has been away from his family for more than 48 days and that his own commander had rejected his request for permission to take a short leave.
“So I’m still here,” Heydari says.
The rebel Dawud Brigade is said to have ambushed Heydari’s unit in the province of Aleppo on Aug. 19, killing the commander, as well as cameraman Hadi Baghbani, who was embedded with the troops.
The brigade has periodically released clips of Baghbani’s footage to opposition websites and news outlets."

Current Al-Jazeera (Arabic) Online Poll

The new law regulating protests in Egypt is:

Legalization of crackdown, or organization of the protests?

So far, 93% have said legalization of crackdown.

Jerusalem, Riyadh stunned: Obama makes Iran 7th world power on regional issues, including Palestinians

"DEBKAfile’s exclusive Washington sources reveal exclusively: President Barack Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry secretly agreed to elevate Iran to the status of seventh world power, as a strong inducement for signing the interim nuclear accord in Geneva Sunday, Nov. 24, for living up to its obligations in the coming six months and for then signing a comprehensive agreement.

While Iran has always demanded respect and equal standing as a regional power, never in their wildest dreams had the ayatollahs expected to be granted big power standing, with an authoritative role recognized by the six big powers for addressing issues in a broad region spanning the Persian Gulf, the Middle East and Western Asia, including Afghanistan.

DEBKAfile’s Iranian sources report that President Hassan Rouhani and Foreign Minister Javad Zarif presented this awesome achievement Monday to their hard-line critics at home, who accused them of giving away too much in terms of Iran’s nuclear program for the sake of a deal with the West.

We come home from Geneva with recognition as a world power, they replied.

The small print of Iran’s new rating is not yet in place, but Western sources familiar with the new US-Iranian understandings say they would not be surprised to find President Rouhani sitting in future summits on the same side of the table as the six powers who faced Iran in the Geneva negotiations. Zarif would also attend future foreign ministers’ meetings as an world-class equal.
Jerusalem and Riyadh are aghast at this development. Our Jerusalem sources report that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, who has kept it back from his cabinet colleagues, has been holding back-to-back confidential consultations with the heads of Israel’s security and intelligence services and the high IDF command to decide how to handle Obama’s sudden replacement of Israel with Iran as America’s No. 1 ally in the region.
Most immediately, a hostile Iran with a role in the ongoing US-sponsored negotiations with the Palestinians does not bear thinking off.

The Saudi royal house is deep in similarly anxious and angry discussions.
Some of DEBKAfile’s Western and Israeli sources in the two capitals say Israel and Saudi Arabia both find Iran’s promotion to world status more shocking and deleterious even than its pretensions to a nuclear weapon. Neither had imagined the Obama administration capable of an about face so extreme.
DEBKAfile has obtained full details of the secret US-Iranian deal as concluded between Kerry and Zarif in Geneva and endorsed by the Russian and Chinese foreign ministers. They will be revealed in the coming DEBKA Weekly Issue No. 613 out next Friday, Nov. 29."

أجراس الحقيقة

أجراس الحقيقة 

فهمي هويدي | نشر فى : الإثنين 25 نوفمبر 2013 - 7:00 ص | آخر تحديث : الإثنين 25 نوفمبر 2013 - 7:00 ص

فى أجواء الاستقطاب الراهنة فى مصر بات متعذرا علينا أن نتحصل على قراءة نزيهة ومحايدة للواقع الذى استجد بعد عزل الرئيس محمد مرسى. إذ ضاقت الخيارات بحيث إنك إذا لم تكن مع ما جرى فأنت متهم ومصنف فى معسكر الضد. إلا أن غيرنا أعفانا من المغامرة وفعلها. ذلك أن مؤسسة زغبى ذات المصداقية العالية فى عالم الاستطلاعات والبحوث أجرت استطلاعا فى مصر حول مؤشرات واتجاهات الرأى العام، ورجعت فى ذلك إلى عينة من المواطنين فى عشر محافظات. الاستطلاع تم فى شهر سبتمبر من العام الحالى، وقورنت نتائجه بقياسات مماثلة للرأى العام جرت فى المحافظات ذاتها خلال شهرى مايو ويونيو السابقين.

المهمة كانت عادية بالنسبة للباحثين المتخصصين فى المؤسسة الأمريكية. ذلك أنهم يباشرون العملية ذاتها فى العديد من أقطار العالم، وحتى إذا أسفرت الاستطلاعات عن مفاجآت أو مفارقات أيا كان نوعها فإن ذلك لا ينال من صدقيتهم أو يضيرهم فى شىء. إلا أن نشر نتائج الاستطلاع فى مصر كان مغامرة من جانب الدكتور مصطفى النجار الذى عرضها فى مقالة له نشرتها جريدة «الشروق» يوم الجمعة الماضى 22 نوفمبر. ذلك أن النشر صدم معسكر المهللين الذين استسلموا لغرائزهم وملأوا الفضاء المصرى بضجيج حناجرهم، الأمر الذى أشاع جوا من الإرهاب الفكرى الذى لم يسلم الدكتور النجار وأمثاله من رذاذه وسهامه. وهى السهام التى ما برحت جريدة «الشروق» تتلقاها منذ اختارت أن تفسح صفحاتها لمختلف الآراء، وقبلت بأن تدفع ثمن ذلك الموقف الذى لا يريد أن يغفره لها آخرون.

من أبرز النتائج التى توصل إليها الاستطلاع ما يلى:

إن الثقة فى المؤسسة العسكرية انخفضت من 93٪ فى يوليو الماضى إلى 70٪ فى شهر سبتمبر. والثقة فى القضاء انخفضت من 67٪ فى مايو إلى 54٪ فى سبتمبر. أما الشرطة فالثقة فيها مستقرة نسبيا، حيث كانت 52٪ فى مايو مقابل 49٪ فى شهر سبتمبر.

الثقة فى الحكومة الانتقالية لم تتجاوز 42٪ فى حين أن الذين فقدوا ثقتهم فيها كانت نسبتهم 52٪.

بالنسبة للقادة السياسيين فإن الفريق السيسى يحتل أعلا نسبة تأييد (46٪) بينما يرفضه 52٪. والثقة فى الرئيس المؤقت عدلى منصور لم تتجاوز 29٪ بينما رفضه 58٪. أما الرئيس المعزول محمد مرسى فقد بلغت نسبة تأييده 44٪ فى حين رفضه 54٪ من المصريين.

فيما خص القوى السياسية فإن نسبة مؤيدى الإخوان فى شهر سبتمبر بلغت 34٪ وكانت 26٪ فى مايو و24٪ فى يوليو. وقد أعرب 59٪ عن رفضهم لهم. حزب النور انخفضت نسبة مؤيديه إلى 10% مقابل 86% لا يثقون فيه. ومثله جبهة الإنقاذ التى تدنى تأييدها إلى 13٪ بينما رفضها 84٪ أعربوا عن عدم الثقة فيه. وحركة تمرد عانت بدورها من تراجع الثقة. فقد رفضها 62٪ من المصريين مقابل 35٪ أيدوها. أما نسبة المصريين الذين ليست لديهم ثقة فى أى حزب فقد بلغت فى شهر سبتمبر 17٪ بعد أن كانت فى شهر مايو 39٪.

فى تقييم الموقف من عزل الدكتور محمد مرسى بعد ثلاثة أشهر من العملية أبدى 46٪ من المصريين تأييدهم لتلك الخطوة، فى حين رأى 51٪ أن عزله بتلك الطريقة لم يكن صوابا بما ترتب عليه من نتائج، ورأى 35٪ أن مصر أحسن حالا بعد 30 يونيو و46٪ قالوا إنها صارت أسوأ، بينما قال 18٪ إنه لم يتغير شىء.

عن موقف المصريين من المصالحة وإدماج الإخوان سياسيا رأى 50٪ ضرورة حظرهم، بينما رأى 42٪ ضرورة إيجاد صيغة لإدماجهم. ورأى 79٪ من المصريين أهمية المصالحة بشكل عام. حين رفضها 21٪.

ليس ذلك آخر كلام بكل تأكيد، لكنه ليس أى كلام. أعنى أننا لا نستطيع أن نعتبر هذه النتائج قراءة نهائية للواقع المصرى، إلا أننا أيضا لا ينبغى أن نتجاهلها تماما. ذلك أن أهميتها تكمن فى أنها ــ حسب علمى على الأقل ــ أول محاولة من نوعها سعت لدراسة الواقع المصرى بأسلوب علمى، بعيدا عن التشنج والتهويل الإعلامى والتهريج السياسى. فى ذات الوقت فإنها تدفعنا إلى إعادة النظر فى فكرة «التفويض» التى اطلقت فى الفضاء السياسى. وعند الحد الأدنى فإنها تنفى الادعاء بأنه كان تفويضا على بياض.

لن أستبعد أن يهب نفر من الناس غاضبين وقائلين بأن المؤسسة المذكورة جزء من المؤامرة الأمريكية. وأن جيمس زغبى استعاد أصوله اللبنانية والتحق سرا بالتنظيم الدولى للإخوان. وقد تفاجأ بفتوى تدعى أنه فى الأصل كافر لا تسمع شهادته. لن أستغرب شيئا من ذلك بطبيعة الحال. لكن الذى أستغربه وأحذر منه أن نصدق تلك الدعاوى، بما يجعلنا ندفن رءوسنا فى الرمال ونصر على تجاهل الواقع وإنكاره.

إننى لا أدعو إلى الانطلاق من نتائج ذلك الاستطلاع، لكننى أدعو فقط إلى استعادة الوعى والانتقال من السكرة إلى الفكرة، بحيث نكف عن الاستسلام للأوهام والغرائز وننصت إلى أجراس الحقيقة قبل فوات الأوان.

No Comment Needed

"Great Satan" No More

Emad Hajjaj's Cartoon: Budding Romance Between the "Axis of Evil" and the "Great Satan"

Love and Kisses!

Gen. Hayden: Iran Deal 'Worst of All Possible Outcomes'

Sunday, 24 Nov 2013 11:21 AM

"Former CIA Director Gen. Michael Hayden on Sunday criticized the Obama administration's deal with Iran saying it will only delay, not derail the country's nuclear program.

Hayden told CNN's "State of the Union" that Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry "hit the pause button, rather than delete button."

"Practically the worst of all possible outcomes, because now what you have here is a nuclear capable state," Hayden said.

"I think frankly that is Iran's bottom line, so what we're negotiating on is how much time we're putting between their nuclear capability and a nuclear weapon, a nuclear reality," Hayden said. 

"And my fear is, this interim agreement, which doesn't roll back much of anything at all, becomes a permanent agreement," Hayden said.

The six-month agreement between the U.S. and other nations requires Iran to limit its nuclear activities in exchange for some relief on sanctions. 

Hayden said the agreement contradicts the U.S. alignment with Sunnis Muslim and Israelis in the region, and that it will take "an awful lot of hand holding" to convince our allies this is the correct course of action.

Former Secretary of State John Negroponte also appeared on CNN and said that the U.S. should not consider lifting sanctions until after all of the demands to roll back the nuclear program have been met.

"I think what worries a number of people is that we might get salami-sliced and that the Iranians will engage in dilatory tactics and then seek some more momentary relief from sanctions," Negroponte said."

مقتل 20 عنصرا من حزب الله في المعارك الدائرة بسوريا

NOVEMBER 25, 2013

جنوب لبنان- الأناضول: أفادت مصادر موثوقة في جنوبي لبنان أن 20 عنصرا من “حزب الله” قتلوا في المعارك الدائرة في سوريا خلال اليومين الماضيين.

وقالت مصادر مقربة من عائلات القتلى إن “20 من أبناء مناطق الجنوب وبالتحديد النبطية، صيدا، وبنت جبيل، قضوا خلال اليومين الماضيين في المعارك المحتدمة في سوريا”، لافتة الى أن “بعض الجثث وجدت مقطوعة الرأس وأن عددا كبيرا منها لا يزال بقبضة المعارضة”.

وينتمي القتلى، بحسب المصادر، إلى عائلات عزالدين، هزيم، اسكندر، كالوت والحاج علي.

ويسود جو من الترقب والحذر وحالة من الحزن المناطق الجنوبية بعد شيوع الخبر.

جاء ذلك فيما أكّد المرصد السوري لحقوق الانسان مقتل عدد من عناصر الحزب في معارك ريف حلب (شمال سوريا) والغوطة الشرقية لدمشق.

وأوضح رامي عبد الرحمن، مدير المرصد السوري لحقوق الإنسان (الذي يعرف نفسه على أنه منظمة حقوقية مستقلة، تتخذ من لندن مقراً لها) أن “عددا من مقاتلي حزب الله سقطوا في اليومين الماضيين في المعارك الدائرة في ريف حلب والغوطة الشرقية”، مؤكدا عدم وجود عناصر للحزب في منطقة القلمون (غرب) حيث تدور اشتباكات عنيفة بين قوات النظام السوري والمعارضة المسلحة.

وقال عبد الرحمن في اتصال هاتفي من مقره في بريطانيا مع وكالة الأناضول: “معلوماتنا تفيد أيضا عن سقوط عدد من قتلى لواء (أبو فضل العباس) من عراقيين وإيرانيين في معارك القلمون المحتدمة في النبك ودير عطية منذ يوم الأربعاء الماضي”.

وبالتزامن، أوردت صفحة (صقور الضاحية) التي تبث أخبار حزب الله على موقع التواصل الاجتماعي (فيسبوك) قبل ساعات، أن “عدد شهداء حزب الله في الغوطة الشرقية قد بلغ 4 أحدهم من آل هزيم قضى ذبحاً فيما قارب عدد قتلى المسلحين الـ 250″.

وأشارت الصفحة الى أنّه “يتم تداول صورة الشهيد علي عز الدين هزيم مقطوع الرأس″، ودعا القيمون عليها إلى عدم تداول الصورة في حال وصلت اليهم لأنّه “لا يجوز نشرها شرعا وأهل الشهيد غير مسامحين من يقوم بنشرها”.

وأوضحت معلومات أخرى وردت على الصفحة أنّه تم مساء أمس الأحد في بلدة البازورية في صور جنوب لبنان، إعلان مقتل أحد مقاتلي “حزب الله” في سوريا، مبينة أنّ الحزب نعى عبر مكبرات الصوت في جامع البلدة “الأخ المجاهد علي إسكندر”.

وقالت الصفحة: “في حين اكتفى بيان النعي بالإشارة إلى أنه قضى أثناء قيامه بواجبه المقدّس، نقلت المصادر ترجيحات تم تداولها بين أهالي البلدة تتحدث عن أنّ إسكندر سقط خلال الساعات الأخيرة أثناء مشاركته في المعارك الدائرة في الغوطة الشرقية لدمشق.”

وكان المرصد السوري وثّق الشهر الماضي مقتل 187 عنصرا من حزب الله منذ اندلاع الأحداث في سوريا قبل عامين ونصف العام.

وأكّد الأمين العام لحزب الله حسن نصر الله، مطلع الشهر الحالي أن مقاتليه باقون في سوريا ما دامت الأسباب قائمة لمحاربة ما اسماها “الهجمة التكفيرية” والدفاع عن سوريا

الاتفاق الايراني الامريكي: لا عزاء للعرب؟!

رأي القدس

NOVEMBER 24, 2013

استقبل الايرانيون الاتفاق الذي توصل اليه وزير خارجيتهم محمد جواد ظريف مع مجموعة 5+1 بالفرح والاستبشار وهم محقّون في ذلك بغض النظر عن الشروط القاسية التي وضعتها القوى العالمية الكبرى والتي تنهي عملياً اية امكانية لاستخدام المشروع النووي الايراني في صنع قنبلة نووية.
فبعد 34 عاماً على انطلاق الثورة الايرانية والمفاعيل الخطيرة التي اطلقتها في العالمين الاسلامي والعربي، وبعد نزاع طويل لم تنته فصوله بعد مع الغرب، تبدو ايران على الطريق الى تطبيع علاقاتها مع هذا الغرب، واستبدال الحالة الثورية العنيفة التي ميّزت علاقاتها معه بالتطبيع التدريجي، وصولاً، الى حل شامل ودائم، حسب نصّ الاتفاق، والى شرعيّة دولية وتقاسم للنفوذ في المنطقة.
قراءة مدققة في نصوص الاتفاق تظهر تخلّي ايران عن اتجاهها السابق لفرض ارادتها النووية على العالم، فايران ستتخلى عملياً عن مفاعل اراك وستقدم معلومات التصميم ‘الحساسة’ عنه، كما ستتيح للمفتشين زيارات يومية الى المفاعلين الآخرين في فوردو ونطنز، وسيكون كل ذلك مقابل تخفيف محدود للعقوبات ‘يمكن الرجوع عنه’.
يظهر الاتفاق وجود استراتيجية سياسية ايرانية طويلة الأمد، بدأت مع طيّ صفحة الرئيس الايراني السابق محمد احمدي نجاد بمزاجه الهجومي وتصريحاته المثيرة للجدل (مثل ان امريكا تريد منع ظهور المهدي المنتظر ومثل حديثه عن هالة النور التي أحاطت به خلال خطابه في الجمعية العامة للأمم المتحدة)، واتفاق اقطاب المؤسسة الايرانية (المرشد خامنئي، الحرس الثوري والمؤسسة العسكرية – الأمنية) على ترشح وانتخاب رئيس أكثر قابلية لتطبيع صورة ايران مع العالم.
للوصول الى هذا الاتفاق لعبت ايران بالأوراق الكثيرة التي اشتغلت على بنائها على مدى عقود وكذلك بالأوراق التي كسبتها من أخطاء الولايات المتحدة الأمريكية وحلفائها الغربيين بعد احتلال افغانستان والعراق، ومن تكدّس أخطاء الأنظمة العربية التي لا تملك قطباً وازناً يقدم استراتيجية حقيقية لمواجهة المخاطر الحقيقية التي تحيط بمنطقتها.
ما يثير التساؤل في الاتفاق ليس المكتوب في نصوصه بل غير المكتوب فيها، فهو يعالج القضية التي تهم الغرب (منع ايران من صناعة القنبلة النووية) ويترك القضايا الأساسية الأخرى التي تقضّ مضاجع العرب والمسلمين، وعلى رأسها استفحال النزاع الشيعي السنّي الذي يهدد بتهشيم حدود وكيانات ومجتمعات العراق وسورية ولبنان.
الاتفاق يتجه الى تسوية كبيرة في المنطقة لا نرى للدول العربية الرئيسية أثراً كبيراً في تحديد معالمه، فالسعودية فقدت البوصلة استراتيجياً وصدّعت اولوياتها بتقديم الغطاء السياسي والمالي لاستعادة نظام حسني مبارك عبر المؤسسة العسكرية المصرية، واستعداء احزاب الاسلام السياسي وحلفائها الاقليميين وخصوصاً تركيا وقطر، فيما تتجه مصر نحو فقدان وزن تاريخي وشرعي بعد ازاحة الرئيس المنتخب محمد مرسي وتراكم الأخطاء السياسية في الداخل (من خلال منع التسويات السياسية واقرار قوانين تمهد لدكتاتورية طويلة الأمد) وفي الخارج (قطع العلاقات الدبلوماسية مع تركيا، والتضييق على حماس).
يعتقد البعض ان الاتفاق يمهد عملياً لحلف امريكي- ايراني بغطاء روسي على حساب المنطقة العربية نموذجه العراق، وستكون سورية ولبنان ضحيّتيه المرتقبتين، ويقوم أساساً على استخدام أدوات ايران في المنطقة، مثل الفصائل الشيعية في العراق وحزب الله في لبنان للقضاء على التنظيمات القريبة منالقاعدة (مثل داعش و’النصرة’)، بعد ان تم استرضاء اسرائيل بالقضاء على المشروع الكيميائي السوري.
ما دامت الدول العربية غير مؤهلة للتخطيط والاتفاق على استراتيجية اقليمية ودولية فإن هذا السيناريو سيكون واقعياً وممكناً.
أحد العوامل الخطيرة المؤثرة الأخرى والتي ستنتج عن الاتفاق هو توقع خسارة 20 دولاراً في سعر برميل النفط، وهو ما يعادل خسارة 72 مليار دولار سنوياً للسعودية وحدها.
رغم علائم الامتعاض والاستنكار التي أبدتها اسرائيل، فالحقيقة الدامغة ان الغرب حصل على ما يريده، واسرائيل، بالاستتباع، ستنال حصتها من الاتفاق، وستكون راضية بالنتيجة النهائية، اما العرب، غير المدعوّين للعرس السعيد، فسيكتفون من الغنيمة بالاياب

A Moment of Great Danger

... and great promise

by Justin Raimondo, November 25, 2013

"The news that the P5 + 1 and the Iranians have reached an interim agreementlimiting Tehran’s nuclear program sent a chill down my spine.

That may seem like a counterintuitive reaction: after all, wouldn’t a shout of joy be more appropriate? Finally, after decades of a very tense adversarial relationship – which more than once threatened to escalate into open conflict – Washington and Tehran have managed to bridge an enormous gap, and war has been averted in the Middle East, albeit temporarily.

What’s not to like?

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has found plenty he doesn’t like, and the signals he and his government are sending must be taken seriously. For just one example, here’s what Naftali Bennett, the economics minister and member of the extremist "Homeland" party, had to say about the agreement:

"If five years from now a nuclear suitcase explodes in New York or Madrid, it will be because of the deal that was signed this morning."

What’s interesting about this prepared statement – it wasn’t just an off the cuff remark – is that Bennett doesn’t say who would be responsible for that nuclear suitcase. I mean, can we assume he means the Iranians will do it – or is he threatening the US with the specter of Israeli retaliation? Given the anger level in Tel Aviv right now, I think that’s a fair question.

Everything about the Israeli response to the agreement implies a threat of some kind. Says Bibi:

"Israel is not bound by this agreement. As prime minister of Israel, I would like to make it clear: Israel will not allow Iran to develop a military nuclear capability."

Echoed by his crazy extremist Foreign Minister, Avigdor Lieberman – "All the options are on the table!" – the Israeli Prime Minister is clearly threatening to attack Iran. Too bad we can’t count on President Obama to take Zbigniew Brzezinski’s advice and shoot down the Israeli planes as they wing their way through Iraqi airspace toward Tehran.

An Israeli attack on Iran, however, would be Bibi’s last resort: the Israelis are good atagitating for other nations to go to war on their behalf, but when it comes to actually doing the fighting themselves – and losing some of their own people – their enthusiasm tends to cool down a bit. Before they attack Iran, the Israelis will do everything in their power to derail the agreement – and no one should underestimate what they’re capable of.

Their first line of attack is through Congress, where the Israel lobby holds a dominant position. Even before the agreement was signed, the lobby’s congressional contingent was already being lined up to introduce new sanctions on Iran. Prominent Democrats, including Majority leader Harry Reid, New York’s Chuck Schumer, and Bob Menendez of New Jersey have already endorsed the new sanctions bill, and the usual Republican suspects are already denouncing the agreement as "another Munich."

The second line of attack is a possible provocation engineered by the Israelis: this could involve an incident between the US and Iran in international waters in the Gulf, as has happened before, or it could be a simple exposure of an alleged Iranian violation of the terms of the interim agreement. This latter course could be carried out by Israel’s regional allies, including the Mujahideen-e-Khalq (MEK), a neo-Marxist cult that has long been an instrument in Israeli hands and has a history of pushingdisinformation about Iran’s alleged nuclear activities. Nor should we rule out Israeli collaboration with hardliner elements within Iran: although they are ostensibly in irreconcilable opposition, both Israeli and Iranian hardliners are united in theiropposition to a nuclear deal.

The third line of attack would be direct Israeli action against the US – no, not military action (don’t be silly), but some kind of covert action that would inflict enough damage to impact our ability to make the interim agreement permanent.

This isn’t pure speculation: in 1954, the Israelis recruited a group of Egyptians to plant bombs in Western targets, including the American information center, in major Egyptian cities. The idea was to blame the attacks on Islamists and Nasserites, and cause the British government to keep its troops in the Suez Canal zone. The plan failed, but only because the Israeli scheme was exposed: after years of denying the affair, the Israeli government finally owned up to it by awarding their agents medals of appreciation, bestowed on the surviving spies by President Moshe Katzav in 2005.

For years the Israelis have been saying their country faces an "existential" crisis on account of Iran’s nuclear program: another Holocaust, they have said, is imminent unless the Iranians are stopped. And Tehran, they aver, is intent on breaking any agreement they make with the West: the Iranians are determined to acquire nuclear weapons, and will stop at nothing in their drive to destroy Israel.

It doesn’t matter what the Israelis really believe: that they are saying this means we should take them at their word – and not underestimate their capabilities. Do I really have to remind my readers of this Carl Cameron story, run in four parts on Fox News in December of 2001, in which Cameron declared:

"Since September 11, more than 60 Israelis have been arrested or detained, either under the new patriot anti-terrorism law, or for immigration violations. A handful of active Israeli military were among those detained, according to investigators, who say some of the detainees also failed polygraph questions when asked about alleged surveillance activities against and in the United States. 

"There is no indication that the Israelis were involved in the 9-11 attacks, but investigators suspect that the Israelis may have gathered intelligence about the attacks in advance, and not shared it. A highly placed investigator said there are ‘tie-ins.’ But when asked for details, he flatly refused to describe them, saying, ‘evidence linking these Israelis to 9-11 is classified. I cannot tell you about evidence that has been gathered. It’s classified information.’” 

America has never been in greater danger than it is now. The battle between the US and Israel has always been fought on a covert level, but recently this hidden conflict has been coming closer to the surface – and is now about ready to erupt aboveground. If the President hasn’t put America’s defenses on a state of high alert, then he isn’t doing his duty to defend the country.

We have reached a moment of great promise – the promise of peace in the Middle East – and of great danger. Let us pray that the latter is bypassed and the former is fulfilled."

Iran and US could cause shift in tectonic plates of Middle East alliances

Historic allies of US – Saudi Arabia and Israel – circumspect and angry over deal hailed by Syria and tolerated by Russia

• • 
    Ian Black in Riyadh
  • theguardian.com, Sunday 24 November 2013 09.40 EST
  • Jump to comments (10)

One direction? – John Kerry, with the Saudi foreign minister (in brown), Prince Saud al-Faisal bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, in Riyadh this month. What does this deal mean for US-Saudi relations? Photograph: Jason Reed/AP

"It is too early to tell whether the Geneva nuclear agreement heralds a genuinely new phase in the tangled web of relations between the west,Iran, Israel and the Arabs. But initial reactions suggest it is a big deal – and one that has the potential at least, over time, to change the status quo of more than 30 years.

By the time the dramatic news came through from Switzerland, it was already morning in Tehran, Riyadh and Jerusalem so the early hours of Sunday echoed to the rumbling of a tectonic shift in the Middle East – and scrambling by governments to work out their response in an altered situation.

Mutual hostility between Iran and the US has formed the backdrop to much else that has happened since the great rupture of 1979, when a staunchly pro-American dictator was overthrown by the Islamic Revolution. The eight-year war launched by Saddam Hussein against Ayatollah Khomeini and the subsequent Iraqi invasion of Kuwait took place in the shadow of that estrangement.

Efforts at peacemaking between Israel and its Palestinian and other Arab enemies have also faced complications because of Iranian hostility to the US and Israel – whose own undeclared (but internationally tolerated) nuclear arsenal is a significant element of this story. Lebanon's Hezbollah, the strongest non-state actor in the region, remains one of Tehran's most potent assets.

And the Middle East's worst current crisis, the devastating war in Syria, is in some ways the frontline of a strategic and sectarian confrontation, fought both directly and by proxy, between Iran and the US-backed conservative monarchies of the Gulf.

It was no coincidence that President Bashar al-Assad's government was so quick to hail the "historic accord" in Geneva. Russia, Assad's main international ally and protector, has also done well out of the P5 + 1 negotiation, enhancing its role as a mediator.

So the nuclear agreement may help trigger some movement in the Syrian stalemate if Tehran and Moscow use their influence with Damascus. That may make it easier to convene the long-delayed Geneva II conference, though prospects for a diplomatic end to the war remain slim as long as the rebels insist Assad must go. Opposition supporters fear he will now feel emboldened.

There are plenty of other reasons for caution. The deal is an interim one for six months and the sanctions relief it brings will be reversible. It faces threats from hardliners in Tehran and Washington. It is also still hard to envisage the often mentioned "grand bargain" between these old enemies – not least because there are so many outstanding contentious issues that have not been addressed.

Israel, looking uncomfortably isolated, has made its position clear, with Binyamin Netanyahu condemning the agreement as a "historic mistake". But the reality is that Israel's ability to attack Iranian nuclear facilities – without overt or covert US help – now looks like a hollow threat, for political reasons as well as the limited capabilities of even its formidable air force. It will also fear renewed pressure to come clean about its own nuclear arsenal – still a regional monopoly.

Elsewhere, the discomfort is most obvious in Saudi Arabia and the smaller Gulf states, which have long seen Iran as a greater threat and strategic rival than Israel. Pejorative talk of a "Zionist-Wahhabi" alliance reflects that. King Abdullah, as revealed by WikiLeaks, famously urged Barack Obama to "cut off the head of the [Iranian] snake". Instead, the US president has done a deal with it. The silence in Riyadh on Sunday morning was thunderously eloquent.

It would be smart of the Iranians to extend their current charm offensive to their Gulf neighbours but it will likely be difficult to allay suspicions, especially in Riyadh. Viewed from the heartlands of the Middle East, the most striking conclusion of the Geneva drama is that the US is now prepared to act more independently of its traditional allies – the Israelis and Saudis– than ever before.

That appears to confirm the dawning realisation that Obama is simultaneously pivoting away from the region while helping to craft its new realities."

"Peace in Our Time?"

I Would not Bet on it; Just Look at That Hyena Grinning.