Archive | January 11th, 2013

What the Rationale of Long March?


By Sajjad Shaukat


At this crucial juncture, when general elections are very close, the announcement of long march by Dr Muhammad Tahirul Qadri, the chief of Tehrik-e-Minhaj-ul-Quran (TMQ) and Pakistan Awami Tehrik (PAT) to Islamabad on January 14, 2013 is quite irrational.

In this regard, while addressing a massive public meeting at Minar-e-Pakistan on December 23, last year, Dr Qadri demanded postponement of general elections and formation a caretaker set-up of his choice in order to bring revolutionary changes in political and electoral system. He had given the deadline of January 10, 2013 to the federal government to fulfil his conditions. But in case of non-implementation of his terms, he has threatened to hold a rally of four million people towards Islamabad, turning the capital’s Constitution Avenue into Tahrir Square. The march will proceed from Lahore on January 13. Notably, chief of Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) Altaf Hussain who decided to participate in the long march of Tehrik-e-Minhaj-ul-Quran, while favouring the demands of Dr Tahirul Qadri, has now withdrawn his support.

On the other hand, the Punjab and the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa assemblies unanimously passed resolutions against Tahirul Qadri’s long march and condemned attempts to derail democratic process in the country under the pretext of bringing electoral reforms.

It is notable that leaders of the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP), Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), Muslim League (Q), Awami National Party (ANP) Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam (JUI-F) Tehrik-i-Insaaf Pakistan (PTI) and renowned figures have strongly denounced the long march. In their separate statements, they said that real aim of Dr Qadri’s demands through long march is to sabotage the democratic process in Pakistan, to block the forthcoming elections and to create unrest in the country. Some of them pointed out that Dr Tahirul Qadri himself want to become the prime minister of the caretaker government. Prime Minister Raja Pervez Ashraf remarked that Tahirul Qadri should better take part in the Polls, instead of inciting the general masses for long march. Nawaz Sharif stated that his party would obstruct all efforts to derail democracy.

The All-Parties Conference organised by the Supreme Court Bar Association on January 10, which was participated by political leaders and member of civil societies also rejected the long march as unconstitutional and against democracy.

Although Federal Interior Minister Rehman Malik met MQM leader Altaf Hussain and Dr Qadri assuring security to his rally and informing him of the terror-attack on his life and procession, yet Tahirul Qadri’s intentions are suspicious as he seeks to create anarchy in Islamabad like the Tahrir Square of Egypt.

In this respect, in a threatening style, Dr Qadri repeatedly warned that both the federal and Punjab governments along with President Asif Ali Zardari would be responsible for consequences, if the governments tried to stop his long march, adding that containers were being put on the roads to block the march.

Taking cognisance of the long march and real intentions of the leader of TMQ, the rival ruling rulers of the PPP and PML-N contacted each other in an attempt to counter Dr Qadri’s threat of a long march to Islamabad. In this context, in a meeting, the ruling allies presided over by President Asif Ali Zardari on January 10 also resolved to hold forthcoming general elections in time, and vowed not to allow any attempt to thwart the polls due to long march.

While consolation has also started between the PPP and PML-N in relation to the caretaker government, and while Election Commission of Pakistan has been preparing for the upcoming polls, long march led by Qadri is quite illogical, having no justification.

Earlier, some rumours were spread by some hostile elements that Pak Army is covertly backing Dr Tahirul Qadri’s long march. But, on January 2, 2012, Director General of Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR), Major General Asim Saleem Bajwa categorically denied the speculation, linking Dr Tahirul Qadri to the military establishment.

It is mentionable that it is owing to non-interference of Chief of the Army Staff Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani in politics during many crises that the present civil government completed its tenure. On the other side, some politicians have also stated that external hands are behind Qadri’s movement and his unjustified demands. So, if we analyse the rationale behind the sudden re-emergence of Dr Qadri in Pakistan including some other dimensions, it will expose his real face as some foreign powers have been assisting him to destabilise Pakistan.

In this context, sudden return of Dr Tahirul Qadri, holder of Canadian nationality to Pakistan, after seven years shows that his integrity is doubtful. While in the recent years, Pakistan has been passing through very sensitive phase, facing multiple crises like subversive activities which killed thousands of innocent people—earthquake of 2005 and floods, load shedding of electricity and gas, but Dr Qadri did not came back to his native country.

In fact, first of all, US-led Israel and some western powers have been weakening Pakistan as it is the only nuclear country in the Islamic World. For the purpose, especially American CIA, Indian RAW, Afghan intelligence-National Directorate of Security (NDS) and Israeli Mossad which have established their tentacles in Afghanistan have been sending highly motivated militants and suicide bombers along with sophisticated weapons to attack the security forces of Pakistan and to commit various forms of terror acts in Pakistan besides assisting separatist elements of Balochistan in order to obtain the secret designs of their countries. American blame game, cross-border terrorism and drone attacks are also part of the game. However, after creating political instability and economic problems and social strife by subversive acts through their affiliated militant outfits, particularly, the US thought that time is ripe to send Dr Qadri to Pakistan so as to conduct a civil war in the country.

Apparently Qadri’s so-called demands may attract the laymen, but apprehensions remain that real agenda behind his rally at Islamabad is to bring bloody revolution, which may result in the killings of innocent human beings by threatening the very sovereignty of the country. Notably, at Cairo’s Tahrir Square, several people died, which tuned into a battlefield. Besides, the revolution at the Tahrir Square was against ex-president Hosni Mubarak, a dictator who ruled over Egypt for 30 years by suppressing the fundamental rights of people. But in Pakistan, people are already enjoying fundamental rights and the benefits of democracy. And judiciary is quite free in redressing the grievances of the public, while media is also free to criticise any institute or inform the people of any controversial issue.

In this democratic phenomenon in Pakistan, Dr Tahirul Qadri’s revolutionary act by converting Islamabad Constitution Avenue into Tahrir Square of Cairo through undemocratic tactics clearly indicates that he is pursuing the guidelines of the US. He wants to conduct a bloody civil war between the military and general masses.

Surprisingly, while calling Dr Tahirul Qadri as ‘Foreign Actor’, even the spokesman of the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), Ihsanullah Ihsan pointed out on December 22, “Mr Qadri is working upon foreign agenda and could never be patriot.”

At present, Pakistan is facing multiple threats. In this regard, recently, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani repeatedly said that the country was passing through a very critical phase and “is pitched against an amorphous enemy, while the conventional threat has also grown manifold.” He explained that internal challenge like terrorism could be defeated through collective national efforts, and the armed forces had a pivotal role to play in harmony with other state instruments.

While in their separate speeches of November 5, 2012, both Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani and Chief Justice of Pakistan, Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry expressed similar views. While realisation of forgetting mistakes of the past and to take a fresh start for the protection of the homeland, they asserted about the supremacy of the constitution, strengthening the institutions, rule of law and fundamental rights.

Moreover, Qadri could redress his grievances by approaching any court of competent jurisdiction, if he wanted reforms in the electoral system. But he directly decided a revolutionary step of long march to covert Pakistan into another Somalia so as to fulfil secret agenda of the US which is already playing double game with the country.  

Sajjad Shaukat writes on international affairs and is author of the book: US vs Islamic Militants, Invisible Balance of Power: Dangerous Shift in International Relations

Posted in Pakistan & KashmirComments Off on What the Rationale of Long March?

Zionist Saudi positions لماذا قررت الرياض إعادة فتح القناة الأمنية مع دمشق؟

تقرير ديبلوماسي

داود رمال

لم تكن قوى وشخصيات لبنانية بعيدة عن خطاب الرئيس السوري بشار الأسد، لا بل اطلع بعضها على بعض عناصره والأهم على معطيات عسكرية كانت تشي بأن لا كلام يصدر عن القيادة السورية قبل حسم معركة داريا على الأرض… وهذا ما حصل علىمسافة ساعات قليلة جدا من الخطاب الرئاسي السوري.

ويشير تقرير ديبلوماسي الى أنه كان لافتا للانتباه في خطاب الاسد أنه لم يأت على ذكر السعودية برغم حديثه عن الدول التي تموّل وتسلّح وتدعم المسلحين، ويربط التقرير ذلك بالموقف السعودي والمصري الذي عبّر عنه وزيرا خارجيتي البلدين والداعي الى حل الازمة السورية سياسيا، ويعتبره «بمثابة تحول في مسار مقاربة البلدين للاحداث في سوريا».لماذا تجنّب الاسد ذكر اي من الدول وليس فقط السعودية؟

يكشف ديبلوماسي عريق على تواصل دائم مع السفراء العرب والاجانب في لبنان لـ«السفير»، أن الاتصالات السعودية بالعاصمة السورية لم تتوقف ويستند الى معلومات وتقارير ديبلوماسية اشارت اكثر من مرّة الى ذلك، فضلا عن قيام وفد من الاستخباراتالمصرية بزيارة دمشق في الآونة الأخيرة.

ويوضح المصدر الديبلوماسي «ان الذي دفع القيادة السعودية الى اعادة فتح قنوات الاتصال مع القيادة السورية على المستوى الامني، هو استشعار السعوديين بسقوط رهانهم على سقوط النظام السوري، وبالتالي هم يخشون أن ترتد الجماعات الاصولية المتطرفة التي موّلوها وسلّحوها لإسقاط الاسد ونظامه، على الداخل السعودي، خاصة بعد الانفجار الذي وقع قرب وزارة الداخلية في العاصمة السعودية، اضافة الى بروز مجموعة دول داخل مجلس التعاون الخليجي تقودها الامارات العربية المتحدة اعلنت صراحة ما يشبه الحرب على «الإخوان المسلمين» وصولا الى ملاحقة خلاياهم، من دون اغفال الموقف الايجابي لسلطنة عمان فضلا عن تطور الموقف الكويتي لمصلحة رفض أن تحتل بعض المجموعات السورية المتطرفة صدارة موقف المعارضةالسورية».

ويقول المصدر «ان كل ذلك دفع الرياض الى اعادة التواصل مع دمشق، باشراف نجل العاهل السعودي الأمير عبد العزيز بن عبد الله حيث أوكلت المالمخابرات الاردنية.

ويشير المصدر الى أن الموقف الذي ابلغه الجانب السوري في اللقاءات الى الجانب السعودي، بان القيادة السورية لا تقبل بالحديث عن اي تسوية مع السعودية او غيرها قبل وقف تمويل وتسليح المتطرفين وسحبهم من كل الاراضي السورية، «لان الدولة السورية مصممة على القضاء على كل الخلايا الارهابية السلفية، وهذا الموقف السوري يلقى تعاطفا من عدة دول عربية لم تقطعتواصلها غير المعلن مع القيادة السورية».

ويتوقف المصدر نفسه عند الدور الأمني والسياسي الذي يقوم به الأردن، حتى أن القيادة الأردنية لم تخف صراحة في الآونة الأخيرة انحيازها الى ما تقوم به القيادة السورية، في ظل ارتفاع منسوب المخاوف من أن يؤدي سقوط النظام السوري الى تقدم المشروع «الأخواني» في الأردن بدعم من أوساط خليجية (قطر تحديدا)، مع ما يمكن أن يشكله ذلك من خطر على العرشالهاشمي.

ويشير المصدر الى ان «الموقف السعودي بفتح قنوات أمنية للتواصل مع القيادة السورية جاء نتيجة عوامل عدة وهي:
ـ صمود الاسد وجيشه على مدى 22 شهرا.
ـ تنامي دور القوى السلفية في سوريا والخوف من امتدادها الى السعودية وغيرها من الدول.ـ موقف عدد من دول الخليج وخاصة الامارات في مواجهة تقدم ظاهرة «الإخوان».

ـ الموقف الاميركي بعد التجديد للرئيس باراك اوباما، حيث رشّح جون كيري لتولي وزارة الخارجية خلفا للوزيرة هيلاري كلينتون وهو المعروف بصداقته للأسد، وتزامن ذلك مع موقف بريطاني متميز اذ ابدت الحكومة البريطانية تخوفها من تنامي جيل جديد منالتيار السلفي ـ القاعدي في سوريا والخشية من تسربه الى الدول الاوروبية وقيامه بأعمال ارهابية.

ـ كلام وزير خارجية روسيا سيرغي لافروف الذي اعلن ان الغرب يصلي كي تظل روسيا والصين تمارسان حق النقض «الفيتو» ضد اي قرار بالتدخل الغربي في سوريا، وقد ادركت السعودية ان لافروف ما كان ليقول هذا الكلام لو لم يكن متأكدا من عدم قدرة الدول الغربية على التدخل عسكريا في سوريا، وبالتالي اصرار الغرب على التسوية السياسية وليس الحسم العسكري.
ـ ما كان الاسد يدعو لإجراء انتخابات نيابية مبكرة لو لم يكن واثقا بأن جيشه يسيطر على النسبة الأكبر من الارض السورية، وخاصة المدن، وهو يعرف تماما أن شريحة من الشعب السوري التي كانت تتعاطف مع المعارضة السورية بدأت تبتعد عنها نتيجة الممارسات السلفية وخاصة «جبهة النصّرة» المنبثقة عن تنظيم «القاعدة» والتي تتجه لتكريس إمارة اسلامية في بعضمناطق ريف حلب».

ويستدرك المصدر بالقول «يكفي التمعن في مضمون خطاب الاسد لتبيان امساك النظام بالواقع الميداني بنسبة كبيرة»، ويشير الى أن مقاربة ميدانية جديدة باتت تحكم سلوك النظام قوامها تقليص مساحة الانتشار العسكري لمصلحة الامساك بالمدن وتقليل حجم الانتشار في الأرياف وصولا الى بناء ما يشبه الحزام الأمني حول دمشق لمنع اقتراب المعارضين منها.

Posted in Saudi Arabia, SyriaComments Off on Zionist Saudi positions لماذا قررت الرياض إعادة فتح القناة الأمنية مع دمشق؟

Is Zionist puppets Saudi Arabia Shifting Its Stance ?


Is Saudi Arabia Shifting Its Stance On Syria?

Qatar’s prime minister and foreign minister, Zionist puppet Hamad bin Shlomo Jassim al-Thani (L), Morocco’s foreign minister, Zionist puppet Saad-Eddine El Othmani (C), and his Zionist Saudi Arabian counterpart, CIA agent Saud al-Faisal bin Abdulaziz al-Saud, attend a conference of the Friends of Syria group in Marrakech, Dec. 12, 2012. (photo by REUTERS/Abderrahmane Mokhtari )
Authorities and prominent figures in Lebanon were not kept in the dark regarding Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s speech. Some of them were even briefed on some of its most important elements and had military information stating that the Syrian leadership would make no statement before it settles the battle on the ground in Daraya. All of this transpired within hours of the Syrian president’s speech.

About This Article

Summary :

Saudi Arabia braces to deal with the repercussions of its support for Syria’s armed opposition as it re-establishes communication with Damascus, writes Daoud Rammal.

Publisher: As-Safir (Lebanon)
Original Title:
Why Did Riyadh Decide to Re-Open Security Channel with Damascus?
Author: Daoud Rammal
posted on : January 8, 2013
Translated on: January 9 2013
Translated by: Sami-Joe Abboud

Categories :  Saudi Arabia    Syria   Security

According to a diplomatic report, it was noteworthy that Assad did not mention Saudi Arabia despite the fact that he talked about countries financing, arming and supporting insurgents. The report explains that this is due to Saudi and Egyptian positions, as expressed by their ministers of finance, calling for a political solution to the Syrian crisis. This represents a “shift in the two countries’ approach to events in Syria,” the report adds.

Why did Assad avoid mentioning any of the countries, and not just Saudi Arabia? A veteran diplomat in close communication with Arab and foreign ambassadors in Lebanon told As-Safir that Saudi contact with the Syrian capital has been constant and that diplomatic information and reports have indicated this on more than one occasion. He also added that an Egyptian intelligence delegation recently visited Damascus.

The diplomatic source said that “Saudi leadership reopened channels of communication with the Syrian leadership at the security level due to the Saudis’ misguided prediction of the fall of the Syrian regime. Therefore, they feared that the fundamentalist and extremist groups that they financed and armed in order to overthrow Assad and his regime would retaliate within Saudi Arabia, especially following the blast that took place near the Interior Ministry in the Saudi capital. Moreover, a group of countries led by the United Arab Emirates within the GCC explicitly announced what appeared to be a war on the Muslim Brotherhood in a bid to pursue their cells. This is all in addition to a markedly positive attitude on the part of the Sultanate of Oman and growing rejection in Kuwait of Syrian extremist groups at the forefront of the Syrian opposition.”

The same source stated that “all of this prompted Riyadh to re-connect with Damascus under the supervision of the Saudi monarch’s son, Prince Abdul Aziz bin Abdullah, and to entrust this task to Saudi security officials,” adding that the meetings are taking place in Jordan in the presence of Jordanian intelligence officers.

The source further points out that Syria told Saudi Arabia during the meetings that the Syrian leadership would not accept any discussions about settlements, either with Saudi Arabia or any other country until these countries stop funding and arming extremists. They want them to withdraw these groups from all of the occupied Syrian territories “as the Syrian state is determined to eliminate all terrorist and Salafist cells. The source says that this position is supported by several Arab countries that had not cut their undeclared ties with the Syrian leadership.”

The same source dealt with the security and political role played by Jordan. Jordanian leadership recently showed flagrant bias toward the Syrian leadership in light of the rising fears that the fall of the Syrian regime would pave the way for the rise of the Brotherhood in Jordan with the support of Gulf circles — more specifically in Qatar — and the resulting danger that this could pose to the Hashemite throne.

The source indicates that the “Saudi decision to reopen security channels to communicate with the Syrian leadership results from several factors:

• The steadfastness of Assad and his army over the past 22 months.
• The growing role of Salafist forces in Syria and the fear of the spread of this role to Saudi Arabia and other countries.
• The position taken by a number of Gulf states, especially the United Arab Emirates, to confront the spread of the Muslim Brotherhood.
• The US position after the renewal of President Barack Obama’s term. John Kerry, known for his friendship with Assad, was nominated to take over the State Department as successor to Secretary Hillary Clinton. This coincided with a prominent UK position as the British government expressed fears of a rising generation of Salafists — al-Qaeda in Syria — and fears of them infiltrating European countries to carry out acts of terrorism.
• Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov’s announcement that the West is praying that Russia and China keep practicing their veto against any move for Western intervention in Syria. Saudi Arabia realized that Lavrov would not have said this had he not been sure of the West’s inability to intervene militarily in Syria and its insistence on a political rather than a military solution.
• Assad would not have called for early parliamentary elections had he not been confident that his army controls the largest part of the Syrian territory, and the cities in particular. Moreover, Assad knows full well that a segment of the Syrian people who once sympathized with the Syrian opposition are no longer supportive of it given the practices of the Salafists and Jabhat al-Nusra in particular, an offshoot of al-Qaeda, which is seeking to establish an Islamist emirate in rural areas surrounding Aleppo.”

The source says, “It is sufficient to simply reflect on the content of Assad’s speech to conclude that the regime is largely controlling the ground,” adding that the regime is now adopting a new field approach consisting of reducing the area of military deployment, focusing on controlling cities, limiting the size of expansion in the countryside and building something like a security belt around Damascus to prevent opponents from approaching it.

Posted in Saudi Arabia, SyriaComments Off on Is Zionist puppets Saudi Arabia Shifting Its Stance ?



Revolution and Imperialism in Syria


Fred Leplat argues that socialists cannot be neutral or ambivalent about Bashar al-Assad’s bloody dictatorship.

 A recent Guardian article “Russian military presence in Syria” (23 December 2012) undermines Seamus Milne’s analysis in his “Intervention in Syria” (Comment – 19 December 2012) in which he only looks at intervention by the US, Britain and France in support of the opposition Syrian National Coalition. He argues that “the only way out of an increasingly grim conflict is a negotiated settlement, with regional and international backing”, a process which would allow the Assad regime to stay in place. He is not the only one on the left in Britain to approach this tragedy in such a manner. Lindsey German, convenor of the Stop the War Coalition, concludes in a recent statement “anyone who cares about human rights in the region should see their main aim as stopping western imperialism on its march again”, but is silent as to whether Bashar al-Assad should go.

It is no surprise that the USA, Britain and France want to ensure that the outcome of this tragedy is the establishment of a new regime which suits their interests. But this is also the case of Russia and Iran who are supporting Bashar al-Assad. The two-year long civil war started as a peaceful popular uprising against the brutal dictatorship of the Assad regime, but the opposition has been forced to take up arms to defend itself.

Socialists should be in solidarity with the movement for democracy against Bashar al-Assad,  demand the ending of all foreign intervention, not just that of western countries, as well as the departure of the Assad regime, so as to allow the people of Syria to freely and independently determine their own future.

As the second anniversary approaches of the uprising against the Assad regime in Syria, so do the warnings against western military intervention in support of the opposition. With neither side able to inflict a significant blow against the other, the prospect is that of a continuation of the tragedy of a civil war.

The movement which started as a peaceful protest for democracy against the Assad dictatorship, has now escalated into a militarised civil war as the regime refuses to make any concessions and escalates the repression. It all started in the town of Daraa on the 6 March 2011 when young boys were arrested and tortured for writing the slogan “the people want to overthrow the regime” on walls across the city. Shortly after this outrage, demonstrations were held in cities across Syria, demanding the release of political prisoners, the abolition of Syria’s 48-year emergency law, more freedoms, and an end to pervasive government corruption. These were severely repressed by the Syrian army who shot at and killed the unarmed protesters.

The assault over the last two years by Syrian military forces on demonstrators and towns that support the opposition have left at least 50,000 dead and made 500,000 into refugees. Reports abound of human rights violations and war crimes on both sides. But with its superior equipment and organisation, and its long history of repression, the vast majority have been committed by the Syrian army, security forces and their allied militias.  Since the 1970 when the then defence minister Hafez al-Assad, Bashar’s father, came to power in  coup, repression and torture of opponents has been a feature of the regime. The most notorious incident being in 1982 when tens of thousands were killed in the city of Hama by the army in order to quell an “Islamist” uprising.

The uprising for democracy in Syria is part of the same movement which swept through the Middle east and North Africa following the immolation of Mohamed Bouazizi  in Tunis on 17 December 2010. Just like in Syria, the main demands were for democracy, against corruption and against the poverty caused by the neo-liberal economic reforms. The movement against the Assad regime has been forced into a phase where military actions are taking place instead of mass popular demonstrations. But it should still be considered as a movement for democracy to be supported, while being critical of the methods and programme of the Syrian National Council, the Free Syrian Army, and other opposition forces, including abuses they have committed as reported by Human Rights Watch.

Mass protests

The violent repression by the Assad regime of the mass peaceful protests in the early phases of the movement forced upon opposition activists the need to take arms to defend themselves. Large areas of the countryside are under the control of the opposition, and the Syrian army is unable to dislodge them from many towns such as Aleppo where fighting has been taking place for nearly a year. The city of Douma, north of Damascus with a population of 300,000, has cleared regime forces out of the area and established a democratically elected administration. The only way that the armed units of the opposition could maintain such a position is by having extensive support from the population who provide them with shelter and food.

The regime forces have been unable to inflict a significant military defeat against the opposition despite having superior equipment including tanks, artillery, planes and helicopter gunships. The armed opposition groups rely on small arms and rocket propelled grenades obtained in raids, from defectors or by being purchased, and with the odd tank or missile captured from the army. Reports of extensive supplies of sophisticated weapons from Western countries or Gulf states have not been confirmed by events in the battlefield.

The unfolding of events in Syria poses a big problem for the imperialist countries, such as the USA, Great Britain and France, who have had a historical interest in the area. Assad father and son, like Mubarak and Ben Ali, have been convenient allies over the last decades. While having part of Syria, the Golan heights, occupied by Israel since 1967 and giving refuge to 120,00 Palestinians, the regime has never threatened any action to upset the status-quo in the Middle East. The widespread opposition to Bashar Al-Assad means that imperialism can no longer do business with his regime.

Despite calls from the Syrian National Council (SNC) for western military intervention, such a course of action is fraught with dangers for the USA, Britain and France. These countries are certainly threatening intervention   should Assad use chemical weapons. But Syria is a well-armed country with up-to-date air defences provided by Russia, and it would not be possible to impose a no-fly zone as in Libya. Military intervention would open up uncontrollable events in the Middle East as Syria is supported not just by Russia, but also by Iran and Iraq. Furthermore Russia may be reluctant to let Bashar al-Assad go as it has its only military base outside of the former Soviet Union at the port of Tartus.

Imperialist intervention

The opposition forces are not reliable or strong enough allies for imperialism. The Syrian National Council (SNC)  is a group of regime opponents in exile and is dominated by political parties, notably the Muslim Brotherhood and liberals, linked to Western imperialism and their clients in the Gulf. The SNC has called several times for foreign military intervention in Syria. This is not a popular option in the opposition as Syrians remember the consequences of imperialist intervention in neighbouring Iraq, as their country had to accommodate over 1.5million refugees. Western military intervention would also stop the defections from the Syrian army and would provide an opportunity for al-Assad to appeal for national unity in defence of the country and confirm his claim that the opposition is a foreign conspiracy. These defections are beginning to be a significant factor in the uprising. Over a dozen generals have gone over to the opposition, including in December the chief of the military police.

There are other groups present in Syria which are fighting against the regime, including the National Coordination Committee for Democratic Change (a group inside the country, gathering together nationalists, left-wingers and Kurds), and the Watan Coalition of around 17 left-wing  political organisations, including the Syrian Revolutionary Left. At a local level inside the country, the main organizers of demonstrations, civil disobedience and strikes are the Local Coordination Committees (LCC), a grassroots activist networks helping organize and document protests, the General Commission of the Syrian Revolution, Communist Co-ordination Committees and other local youth committees. There has been a long of history of left and communist organisations in Syria, some now active in the opposition such as the Revolutionary Left Current. These are the real forces of resistance have been the main targets of the regime since the beginning of the uprising.

The Free Syrian Army (FSA) is more a label behind which a series of independent armed groups operate and which is attempting to rally the armed groups behind a unified command. Although many armed groups are organised on “religious” lines, for many, but not all, this is due to the social origins of the fighters for whom religious practice is common, rather than these groups adopting a religious fundamentalist political orientation. It also ignores the fact that the opposition,  including the fighters, is not just Sunni but also Alawite and Christian. But since the outbreak of civil war, the regime has stoked up communalism and religious sectarianism to create divisions in the opposition and frighten off support.

Victory is possible

As the uprising approaches its second anniversary, the sacrifices, tenacity and widespread nature of the opposition has put Bashar al-Assad in weak position. He is unable to defeat the opposition, defections continue and his  control of cities and the countryside is tenuous. Victory against Assad is possible, but the opposition has to continue to be on a mass popular and democratic basis with the armed units acting in a supportive and defensive role, as it is not possible for it to defeat militarily the 300,000 Syrian army. Winning over the army’s rank and file conscript soldiers is a key aspect of weakening the regime. To continue to convince defectors to join the uprising, the opposition has to be pluralistic by welcoming every opponent of the dictatorship, regardless of their religious or ethnic origin. Areas and cities freed from regime control should organise on a democratic basis such as in Douma. To defeat al-Assad just like Mubarak and Ben Ali, the opposition has to appeal to every Syrian opposed to the dictatorship by fighting for democracy, against corruption and against the poverty caused by the neo-liberal economic reforms.

The left outside of Syria needs to give its solidarity to the opposition and campaign against all foreign intervention. This of course should not prevent us from being critical when sections of the opposition call for western intervention or commits abuses. But anyone concerned about human rights, should welcome the victory of the opposition and the downfall of Bashar al-Assad. We must oppose all foreign intervention, not just that of the USA, Britain and France, but also that of Russia, Iran and the Gulf states – countries not known for their respect of human rights. That is the only way to ensure that it is the people of Syria themselves who should determine independently and freely their own future. The toppling of the Assad regime by the democracy movement would bring about a much deeper change in the state and society in Syria than it did in Egypt or Tunisia, as it would also be a defeat for the army and the corrupt elites. It would give confidence to the democracy movement in Tunisia, Egypt and other Arab countries to continue their fight for deeper changes. A victory for the Syrian uprising will open a new front of popular resistance against the imperialist powers in the Middle East.


Militarization, military intervention and the absence of strategy

Contribution to meeting of Syrian opposition; Monday 21 November 2011, by Gilbert Achcar,

Syria: Open letter to the British Stop the War Coalition, or real solidarity is needed! Khalil Habash, 24 May 2012;

One Year After the Beginning of the Revolution, Thursday 12 April 2012, by Khalil Habash;

Nature, rôle et place de la résistance armée en Syrie, July 2012, Khalil Habash,

Intervention in Syria risks blowback and regional war, Seumas Milne, The Guardian, Wednesday 19 December 2012;

Who’s in the Syria driving seat as the US and NATO prepare for military intervention? 14 December 2012, Lindsey German;

Free Duma – popular councils and democracy from below, Wednesday 26 December 2012, “Front Line”, organ of the Revolutionary Left Current, October-November 2012;

Foundation of the Dera’a section of the Revolutionary Left Current, Wednesday 26 December 2012;


The grandfather of Jordan’s Zionist puppet King, Will Be Buried in The Royal Cemetery in Amman Accordance to Jewish Service

مات جد الملك الاردني في عمان … وسيدفنفي المقابر الملكية على الطريقةاليهودية

 Posted by: Sammi Ibrahem Sr 

كلف حاخام اسرائيلي باقامة مراسم الدفن لجد الملك الاردني الذي مات في عمان عن 96 عاما وسيدفن الجد في مقابر العائلة المالكة بينما نقلت طائرة اردنية خاصة المئات من المشيعين الانجليز اليهود الى عمان للمشاركة في مراسم الدفن
وكان الملك عبدالله قد قطع جولته الخليجية وعاد إلى عمان أمس للمشاركة في تشييع جثمان جده الكولونيل الانجليزي والتر بيرسي غاردنرالذي توفي صباح أمس في عمان والذي تربى عبدالله على يديه خاصة بعد انفصال امه ( انطوانيت ) عن ابيه بعد رفضها الدخول في الاسلام واصرارها البقاء على دينها


وكان الملك بدأ الأحد جولة خليجية، شملت عمان، حيث شارك في احتفالات السلطنة بعيد الاستقلال الأربعين وكان من المقرر أن يتوجه إلى البحرين حيث يلقي كلمة في مؤتمر حوار المنامة حول الأمن الإقليمي.
وأعلن الديوان الملكي أن مراسم جنازة خاصة ستقام اليوم الخميس لتشييع جثمان غاردنر الذي توفي عن 95 عاماً.وكان جد العاهل الأردني الذي كان صديقا لجلوب باشا قد اختار في السنوات الأخيرة عمان مكانا للعيش إلى جانب ابنته اانطوانيت غاردنر مطلقة الملك حسين بن طلال ووالدة الملك عبد الله الثاني والتي تعرف بين الاردنيين باسم ( الاميرة منى )
وقال القصر الملكي ان الكولونيل غاردنر توفي في أثناء نومه قبل أيام من عيد ميلاده الـ 96، والذي يصادف في 12 من ديسمبر إلتقت انطوانيت غاردنر بالملك حسين أثناء عملها في التحضير لفيلم عن لورنس العرب قام ببطولته عمر الشريف وصور في مدينة العقبة في الستينات، حيث سمح الملك لبعض القوات العسكرية بالمشاركة في التصوير وكان يزور مواقع التصوير من وقت لآخر وتزوجها بعد ذلك خاصة وانه كان مطلقا من ابنة عمه الملكة دينا ( التي تزوجت لاحقا من احد قادة حركة فتح وهو صلاح التعمري الذي اشتهر خلال حصار بيروت بتزعم اسرى معتقل انصار ) وفي فترة زواجهما لم تسم ملكة رغم زواجها من ملك لانها رفضت ان تسلم وظلت على ديانتها اليهودية
وكان موقعا سعوديا مشهورا على الانترنيت يعتقد انه ممول من قبل الامير عزوزي ( ابن الملك فهد ) قد نشر ان الملك عبدالله يهودي لان ابن اليهودية يهودي … وبعد نشر عرب تايمز لرابط هذا الخبر او التعليق قام الموقع السعودي بحذفه …
من المعروف ان محطة اخوال الامير عزوزي ( فضائية ام بي سي ) هي التي عرضت برنامجا وثائقيا بعنوان خمسون عاما على الصراع انتجته شركة مملوكة لعبد الرحمن الراشد الرئيس الحالي لمحطة العربية اوردت فيه اعترافا تلفزيونيا كان الملك حسين قد سجله للتلفزيون الاسرائيلي يعترف فيه بانه قام شخصيا بالسفر الى تل ابيب قبل يومين من حرب اكتوبر تشرين ليخبر الاسرائيليين بنية المصريية والسوريين بشن هجوم عليها
بسبب اصرار انطوانيت على البقاء على ديانتها اليهودية قد اضطر الملك الأردني ( الهاشمي ) حسين الى اعلان الطلاق منها عام 1971 وتزوج بعدها بالفلسطينية علياء طوقان ومنحها لقب ملكة وهي ام الامير علي وماتت لاحقا في عملية اسقاط طائرة هليوكوبتر كانت تستقلها وقيل يومها ان جدة الملك الحالي لابيه الملكة زين كانت وراء ترتيب الحادث , وكان يفترض ان يكون ابن علياء طوقان وليا للعهد لكن مصادر اردنية ذكرت ان زوجة الملك الثالثة تمكنت من ابعاد الامير علي ابن علياء عن الصورة لصالح ابنها حمزة بعد مزاعم عن تورط الامير علي بادمان الحشيش … لكن غاردنر وابنته انطوانيت ختما الصراع على كرسي العرش الاردني بلعبة ذكية جدا على الطريقة الانجليزية ساهم فيها رئيس المخابراتع السابق السوري الاصل سميح البطيخي وزوجته الانجليزية جيل البطيخي حين تم اقناع الملك بان ولي عهده الحسن يتامر عليه مع زوجته الباكستانية ( سروت ) وان ابنه منها الامير راشد سيكون وليا للعهد وان حمزة لم يبلغ بعد سن الرشد وانه لا مناص من تعيين عبدالله وليا للعهد ريثما يطز شارب حمزة على ان يتعهد عبدالله امام والده وقبل موته بتعيين حمزة وليا للعهد في حال تسلم عبدالله الحكم …
ووفى عبدالله بوعده لابيه فعين حمزة وليا للعهد ثم حلق له ع الناشف بعد اشهر ليسمي بعد ذلك ابنه من رانيا وليا للعهد … كل شيء تم على الطريقة الهاشمية تماما كما حلق الملك حسين من قبل لابيه الملك طلال … وكما حلق جده الملك عبدالله لابيه شريف مكة حسين بن علي الذي لم يسمح له ابنه عبدالله مؤسس امارة شرق الاردن حتى بالموت في عمان … فطيروه الى قبرص حتى يموت فيها
تماما كما مات الملك طلال في مستشفى للمجانين في تركيا
مات جد الملك الاردني في عمان … وسيدفن غدا في المقابر الملكية على الطريقة اليهودية

Posted in JordanComments Off on The grandfather of Jordan’s Zionist puppet King, Will Be Buried in The Royal Cemetery in Amman Accordance to Jewish Service

Obama’s War On Terror is Orwell’s Never Ending War Of Terror


What started as a War on Terror in Afghanistan has now become the front for an Orwellian never ending War of Terror which is rapidly draining the heart, resources and spirit of America


by Allen L Roland


 War against a foreign country only happens when the moneyed classes think they are going to profit from it. ~ George Orwell


Wikipedia defines Perpetual war as such “Perpetual war refers to a lasting state of war with no clear ending conditions. It

also describes a situation of ongoing tension that seems likely to escalate at any moment, similar to the Cold War.”

 The obvious goal of Obama’s perpetual war on terror is economic control and manipulation which has been more than borne out by the neo-colonialism war of terror being waged by the west in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria and eventually Iran with the obvious intent of Regime Change.

As Peter Symonds correctly points out in WSWS ~ “Afghanistan has been the testing ground for 21st Century neo-colonialism. The occupation has set the pattern for US-led operations in Iraq, Libya and now Syria, as Washington seeks to extend its economic and strategic dominance in the energy-rich regions of the Middle East and Central Asia

In the landmark George Orwell novel Nineteen Eighty Four, Eurasia is described as having “always been at perpetual war with Eastasia” a fictional super state in Orwell’s novel but far from fictional in America’s current war of terror in the Middle East.

Obviously, the model for 21st century neo-colonialism is Afghanistan ~ America’s current longest standing occupation and so-called 12 year war on terror. Claims that the US occupation will end in 2014 are most certainly refuted by obvious plans for an indefinite American military presence in Afghanistan.

According to the New York Times” General John Allen, the top US commander in Afghanistan, has submitted three options to the Pentagon for the period after the supposed withdrawal of “combat troops” at the end of 2014. One is to maintain US troop levels at 6,000, another calls for 10,000 soldiers, and the third is based on a force of 20,000. As explained by unnamed defense officials, central to all three proposals is the continued presence of “Special Operations commandos who would hunt down insurgents.” Additional US forces would be used to bolster the Afghan security forces through air support, logistics and training. All of this continues to be justified on the phony pretext of the “war on terror.” In reality, over 12 years of relentless, bloody war, Afghanistan has served as a base of operations for the projection of American influence and military force throughout the region.”    See WSWS article

The object of this perpetual war, as Orwell describes, is to keep a society or ‘Our Way of Life’ intact ~The war in actuality is waged by each ruling group against its own subjects, and the object of the war is not to make or prevent conquests of territory, but to keep the structure of society or the status quo intact. 

 Who can ever forget Tony Blair justifying the Iraq war and occupation as “protecting our way of life” ~

War criminal Zionist Blair wearing Yarmulke

The very word ‘war’, therefore, has become misleading. It would probably be accurate to say that by becoming perpetual and continuous ~ war has ceased to exist.

From the book 1984 ~

” The economy of many countries was allowed to stagnate, land went out of cultivation, capital equipment was not added to, great blocks of the population were prevented from working and kept half alive by State charity. But this, too, entailed military weakness, and since the privations it inflicted were obviously unnecessary, it made opposition inevitable. The problem was how to keep the wheels of industry turning without increasing the real wealth of the world. Goods must be produced, but they must not be distributedAnd in practice the only way of achieving this was by continuous warfare. “The essential act of war is destruction, not necessarily of human lives, but of the products of human labor. War is a way of shattering to pieces, or pouring into the stratosphere, or sinking in the depths of the sea, materials which might otherwise be used to make the masses too comfortable, and hence, in the long run, too intelligent. Even when weapons of war are not actually destroyed, their manufacture is still a convenient way of expending labor power without producing anything that can be consumed. A Floating Fortress, for example, has locked up in it the labor that would build several hundred cargo-ships. Ultimately it is scrapped as obsolete, never having brought any material benefit to anybody, and with further enormous labors another Floating Fortress is built. In principle the war effort is always so planned as to eat up any surplus that might exist after meeting the bare needs of the population…”

However, the American Killing machine most certainly still exists and now we have Nick Turse’s new book, Kill Anything that Moves: The Real American War in Vietnam  to confirm this obvious truth ~ “No one has ever described the American killing machine in that country the way he has; nor, as he did, tracked down Americans charged with war crimes by the U.S. military in that era, nor tramped through distant rural Vietnam to hear what it felt to be on the other side of massacres or experience the American-imposed “system of suffering” in those years. A decade in the making, it is a book that should reshape in fundamental ways how we remember the Vietnam War.

Afghanistan excerpt: Untold numbers of Afghans have also died of everything from lack of access to medical care (there are just 2 doctors for every 10,000 Afghans) to exposure, including shocking reports of children freezing to death in refugee camps last winter and againthis year.  They were among the hundreds of thousands of Afghans who have been internally displaced during the war.  Millions more live as refugees outside the country, mostly in Iran and Pakistan.  Of the women who remain in the country, up to 2 million are widows.  In addition, there are now an estimated 2 million Afghan orphans.  No wonder polling by Gallup this past summer found 96% of Afghans claiming they were either “suffering” or “struggling,” and  just  4 %  just “thriving.”      See article:

So there you have it, The Cheney/Bush/Obama War on Terror is a never ending war of terror and no one understood the implications of this perpetual war better than George Orwell.

“I guess every generation is doomed to fight its war…suffer the loss of the same old illusions, and learn the same old lessons on its own.” – Phillip Caputo

Posted in USAComments Off on Obama’s War On Terror is Orwell’s Never Ending War Of Terror

Sabotaging Relations Between India and Pakistan


TARGET: India-Pakistan Visa on arrival & the growing bonhomie between the two countries.

by Feroze Mithiborwala & Kishore Jagtap


The killings of the 2 Indian & 1 Pakistani soldier at the LOC and the rising tensions & rhetoric need to be analysed. The killings of the 3 soldiers have an agenda to target India-Pakistan relations & that is obvious. On the 15th of January onwards India & Pakistan were going to start issuing “VISAS ON ARRIVAL” for Senior Citizens.

This was the first major path-breaking step that would finally lead to ordinary Indians & Pakistani having an opportunity to meet each other & this would definitely lead to a process of normalization of relations on either side of the border. There are clearly right-wing religious fanatics on either side, both within the Military establishment & more importantly within the Intelligence establishment, (IB-RAW-India & ISI-Pakistan) both of which are closely intertwined with the CIA-Mossad.

There is also a pattern to these false-flag terror attacks targeting India-Pakistan peace talks. Thus the terror attacks in Jaipur (13th May 2008) & the Pune German Bakery Terror attack (11th February 2010), were both engineered 10-12 days before the Foreign Secretaries of the two countries were to undertake a process of dialogue, despite the prevailing unpopular sentiment. These terror attacks were obviously meant to ensure that the talks were sabotaged.

There are very strong vested interests to ensure that the tensions continue & both the nations continue to buy weapons & security equipment from the West. There is certainly no reason at all for the civilian government in Pakistan to engineer this incident & even the Pakistani military leadership wants to reduce tensions on their eastern border, so as to deal with the threat from the western border, as well as the rampant jihadist-militancy within that threatens to destroy Pakistan in a veritable implosion along sectarian & ethnic lines. This is again there for all to see. Similarly, the Indian political class in general is pursuing a serious peace process with Pakistan, as there are numerous benefits for India, which again are obvious by all strategic & economic counts.

Thus this ridiculous & brazen anti-Pakistan tirade being waged in our media, whilst mocking “Aman ki Asha” & worse calling for an American-Rambo style attack on Pakistan, is utterly stupid & is indicative of either the utter dishonesty, ignorance & worse – stupidity on the oart of the Indian political & media elite.

The Indian & Pakistani peace activists who have for now struggled for more than two decades, with admirable results against all odds, need to be supported & their sane words listened & more so right now.

Thus to the people of both countries – please analyse the reason for the current crisis, a veritable false-flag terror attack, with a clear agenda to destroy the growing India-Pakistan relationship.

So freinds, come out with your Indian & Pakistani flags & say that, we the people of South Asia are committed to peace & harmony between our two nations.

Jai Ho India & Chakde Pakistan!!

Posted in Pakistan & KashmirComments Off on Sabotaging Relations Between India and Pakistan

Fixing India’s Rape Problem

by: Aruna Kashyap

JANUARY 10, 2013
With politicians and the public at last giving sexual assault the attention it deserves, the time has come for action—and for dignified treatment of survivors of sexual assault.
Aruna Kashyap, women’s rights Asia researcher

MUMBAI—“You there! You are so dirty! Don’t sit on that chair!”

These were words that a woman in India—bloodied and soiled after she had been raped—heard when she sought help from a doctor. A social worker described this scene to me in 2010, recounting the kind of mistreatment she frequently witnessed when accompanying survivors of rape to hospitals.

Dr. Rajat Mitra of Swanchetan, a New Delhi–based group that supports survivors of violence, told me that when heaccompanies rape victims to police stations or hospitals, officials often say things like, “Why are you crying? You have only been raped.” Such statements, while anecdotal, capture the insensitivity many rape survivors encounter when they approach police officers and doctors in India.

The prompt response of the police following last month’s brutal gang rape and death of a 23-year-old New Delhi student—investigating the case and arresting the accused men—was a good thing, but unfortunately it may have given the world the wrong idea about how rape cases are generally handled here.

For while that response is commendable, it is the exception, triggered primarily by the national outrage and protests following news reports of the rape. A far more common response I found in researching some of the challenges Indian women and girls face in seeking justice after sexual assault is a combination of delays, inaction, and degradation by the very officials who should be helping these victims. Dr. Mitra told me that their treatment by police and doctors “adds to their overall trauma after rape. Some of them just become numb. Others find the whole process entirely dehumanizing.”

The good news is that in the wake of the December attack, Indian authorities are now focusing on creating harsher criminal punishments for rapists. The country’s sexual-assault laws need reform to ensure the full range of sexual assault is punished in accordance with human-rights law, and that existing legal immunities—such as requiring government permission for the investigation and prosecution of police officials and other public servants—are eliminated. But prosecutions are only one piece of the puzzle; equally concerning is India’s cultural attitude toward survivors of sexual assault.

Changing these attitudes—for instance, the tendency to question a woman’s clothes and conduct, suggesting she “invited” or did not “resist” rape—won’t happen overnight. But the government can play a role in that change, and it must start now.

One key is establishing a mechanism for police accountability. Currently, police often refuse to register complaints, or recommend that families “compromise” cases, citing the “shame” it will bring to the survivor in the community. As a result, survivors of rape either do not come forward to report the offense or feel pressured to give up their fight for justice midway.

But we must also change our approach to medical treatment and examination of rape survivors. Often a woman who reports rape is treated merely as a “body of evidence,” rather than as a person who needs medical attention and care.

It doesn’t help that India has no uniform national standards and protocol for treatment and examination of survivors of sexual assault, or specialized training for police and doctors.

This lack of standards has adverse reproductive, sexual, and mental-health consequences for survivors of sexual violence. It also undermines the potential for successful prosecution, and perpetuates outdated stereotypes about rape during investigation and trials. Many police officials, doctors, and judges look for evidence of “struggles” or “injuries” in medical reports, with the assumption that all rape survivors should struggle and have visible injuries, especially injuries to the hymen, suggesting that those who do not report such visible injuries have “consented.” Many medical reports reinforce ideas of “virginity” by noting degrading findings about the “laxity” of the vagina and whether the survivor is “habituated to sex.”

Rights groups, including Human Rights Watch, have urged the Indian government to establish national standards for medical treatment and the collection of medical evidence in sexual-assault cases. There’s been some improvement on that count: India’s Health Ministry has developed a protocol that omits questions about whether the survivor is “habituated to sex,” but it does not prescribe any minimum standards for therapeutic care. The Indian government should consult with leading health and human-rights experts to further amend and introduce this protocol across India.

The government has also announced that it will introduce a program of monetary compensation to survivors of rape—but the scheme has yet to be rolled out. This would indeed be an important step forward, but would be far more effective when supported by other measures. For example, around-the-clock services for survivors, and a uniform protocol for medical care and examination backed by training for police officers and doctors to ensure its use. These should be coupled with mechanisms for monitoring the use of such protocols and accountability where they are being flouted.

When it comes to even thorny challenges like maternal mortality, the Indian government has shown that political will can reduce the scope of the problem. With politicians and the public at last giving sexual assault the attention it deserves, the time has come for action—and for dignified treatment of survivors of sexual assault.

Posted in IndiaComments Off on Fixing India’s Rape Problem

Saudi Arabia: Halt Execution of Sri Lankan Migrant Worker

Beheading May Be Imminent for Rizana Nafeek, Age 17 at Alleged Killing
  • A Sri Lankan woman holds a placard in protest of the death sentence against Rizana Nafeek outside the Saudi Arabian embassy in Colombo on November 9, 2010.
    © 2010 Getty Images
Rizana was just a child herself at the time of the baby’s death, and she had no lawyer to defend her and no competent interpreter to translate her account. Saudi Arabia should recognize, as the rest of the world long has, that no child offender should ever be put to death.
Nisha Varia, senior women’s rights researcher

UPDATE: On January 9, 2013, the Saudi Ministry of Interior announced the execution of Rizana Nafeek, a Sri Lankan domestic worker convicted of killing a baby in her care in 2005 when she was 17 years old.

Human Rights Watch strongly condemns the execution.

Saudi Arabia is one of just three countries that executes people for crimes they committed as children,” said Nisha Varia, senior women’s rights researcher at Human Rights Watch. “Rizana Nafeek is yet another victim of the deep flaws in Saudi Arabia’s judicial system.”


(New York) – Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah and the interior ministry should halt the execution of Rizana Nafeek, a Sri Lankan domestic workerconvicted of killing a baby in her care in 2005 when she was 17. According to Sri Lankan government sources, Saudi Arabia’s Interior Ministry under Prince Mohammed bin Nayef bin Abdul Aziz has issued instructions for Nafeek’s execution.

Under the system of qisas (retaliation) that governs murder cases in Saudi Arabia, the baby’s parents may still grant Nafeek a pardon or seek blood money in compensation.

“The Saudi king and interior minister should immediately cancel the execution orders against Rizana Nafeek,” said Nisha Varia, senior women’s rights researcher at Human Rights Watch.  “Saudi officials should then meet with the baby’s family and Sri Lankan authorities to make sure the death penalty won’t be considered again.”

Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapaksa sent an appeal to King Abdullah on January 6, 2013, requesting a stay of the execution until a settlement can be reached between the baby’s family and a Saudi reconciliation committee.

Nafeek had been working in Saudi Arabia for two weeks in 2005 when the ‘Utaibi family’s 4-month-old baby died in her care. Nafeek retracted a confession that she said was made under duress, and says that the baby died in a choking accident while drinking from a bottle. Authorities have incarcerated Nafeek in Dawadmi prison since 2005.

Past Human Rights Watch interviews with Sri Lankan embassy officials and reporting from Arab News found serious problems with Nafeek’s access to lawyers and competent interpreters during her interrogation and trial. Nafeek had no access to legal counsel until after a court in Dawadmi sentenced her to death by beheading in 2007.

In 2010, Saudi Arabia’s Supreme Court upheld Nafeek’s conviction and death sentence, exhausting all judicial remedies unless new evidence emerges. However, the king and interior minister must sign execution orders before a sentence may be carried out.

International law prohibits the death penalty for crimes committed before the age of 18. A recruitment agency in Sri Lanka altered the birthdate on Nafeek’s passport to present her as 23 so she could migrate for work, but her birth certificate shows she was 17 at the time. The High Court in Colombo, Sri Lanka later sentenced two recruitment agents to two years in prison for the falsification of Nafeek’s travel documents.

“Rizana was just a child herself at the time of the baby’s death, and she had no lawyer to defend her and no competent interpreter to translate her account,” said Varia. “Saudi Arabia should recognize, as the rest of the world long has, that no child offender should ever be put to death.”

Saudi Arabia is a state party to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which expressly prohibits the death penalty or life sentences without parole for offenses committed before the accused turned 18. Nevertheless, Saudi law gives judges wide discretion to treat children as adults in criminal cases, and courts have imposed death sentences on children as young as 13.

Saudi Arabia is one of only three countries worldwide known to have executed people in the past five years for crimes committed when they were children.

Saudi Arabia executes those sentenced to death by beheading them in public with a sword.

Human Rights Watch opposes the death penalty in all circumstances because of its inherent cruelty and finality. Given the possibility of mistakes in any criminal justice system, innocent people may be executed. Saudi Arabia executed at least 69 people in 2012.

Posted in Saudi ArabiaComments Off on Saudi Arabia: Halt Execution of Sri Lankan Migrant Worker

من هو جورج عبد الله الذي ستفرج عنه فرنسا بعد إعتقال دام 28 عام


Who Is George Abdallah? Will be released from jail after 28 years

ا ف ب- قرر القضاء الفرنسي الافراج عن اللبناني جورج ابراهيم عبد الله، المسجون في فرنسا منذ 28 عاما لادانته بالضلوع في اغتيال دبلوماسيين اثنين في باريس عام 1982، شرط ترحيله من الاراضي الفرنسية، معيدا بذلك الكرة الى السلطات.

فقد بات يتعين على وزارة الداخلية ان تتخذ قرار الطرد بحلول الاثنين، كما قررت غرفة تنفيذ الاحكام في باريس.

ومن دون هذا الشرط المسبق، لن يكون بامكان جورج ابراهيم عبد الله، الذي ادين باغتيال الدبلوماسي الاميركي تشارلز روبرت راي، والاسرائيلي ياكوف برسيمنتوف، مغادرة سجن لانميزان (جنوب غرب) حيث هو معتقل.

واكد قضاة الاستئناف القرار الذي اصدرته في 21 تشرين الثاني/نوفمبر غرفة تنفيذ الاحكام في باريس التي استجابت لطلب الافراج عن جورج ابراهيم عبد الله، وحددوا 14 كانون الثاني/يناير موعدا نهائيا لترحيله.

 , H 1 ,  9 ( /  ' D D G  ' D E 9 * B D  E F 0 28  9 ' E '  A J  3 , H F  A 1 F 3 '

ورد محاميه جاك فيرجيس، في تصريح لوكالة فرانس برس بالقول “آمل ان يكون لدينا حكومة مستقلة لترحيله (…)”.

واضاف فيرجيس “انني ارحب بهذا القرار، لاني طلبت من القضاء الفرنسي، التوقف عن التصرف كمومس امام القواد الاميركي”.

وكان جورج ابراهيم عبد الله قريبا من الجبهة الشعبية لتحرير فلسطين، وقد اوقف في 24 تشرين الاول/اكتوبر 1984 وحكم عليه بالسجن مدى الحياة في 1987 بتهمة الضلوع في اغتيال الدبلوماسيين الاسرائيلي ياكوف بارسيمنتوف، والاميركي تشارلز روبرت راي في 1982 في باريس.

وندد فيرجيس، على الدوام بارادة “سياسية” و”املاء اميركي” لابقاء موكله قيد الاحتجاز في حين كان يفترض الافراج عنه منذ 1999. وقد طلب اخلاء سبيله ثماني مرات.

وكان هذا السيناريو حدث في 2003 عندما قرر قضاء بو، الذي كان مختصا بالقضية حينذاك اطلاق سراحه بشروط، لكن الحكم أُلغي في الاستئناف في كانون الثاني/يناير 2004.

وكانت الولايات المتحدة انزعجت من القرار الايجابي في محكمة البداية: فقد عبر السفير الاميركي في باريس عن اسفه لقرار القضاء الفرنسي. وقال تشارلز ريفكين ان جورج ابراهيم عبد الله “زعيم مجموعة ارهابية لبنانية” و”لم يبد اي ندم على اغتيال الدبلوماسي الاميركي تشارلز راي، في 1982 في باريس ومحاولة اغتيال القنصل العام للولايات المتحدة في ستراسبورغ، روبرت هوم في 1984″.

والتحفظات نفسها صدرت عن النيابة التي عارضت الافراج عن جورج ابراهيم عبد الله. واعتبرت ان “المشروع غير المؤكد الذي يمثله عبد الله لا يسمح بضمان عدم تكراره” لفعلته واستئناف معركته الثورية في لبنان، مشيرة الى انه لم يبدأ في دفع تعويضات الى المدعين بالحق المدني ويواصل تبني افعاله.

وقال المحامي فيرجيس “يرفض دفع اي يورو لعائلة عميل اميركي وهو على حق!”. وقال المحامي ان جورج ابراهيم عبد الله “في صحة عقلية وجسدية جيدة”، ويأمل في العودة الى لبنان حيث “تدير عائلته مدرسة يمكن ان يعمل فيها”.

وكان رئيس الوزراء اللبناني نجيب ميقاتي، طلب خلال زيارة الى فرنسا في شباط/فبراير من السلطات اطلاق سراح الرجل الذي يوصف بانه “سجين سياسي”، مؤكدا انها “قضية انسانية”.

من هو جورج عبدالله؟

يجسد الناشط اللبناني جورج ابراهيم عبد الله (61 عاما) الذي قرر القضاء الفرنسي الخميس، الافراج عنه بشرط ترحيله من الاراضي الفرنسية بعد 28 من السجن، نموذجا للكفاح المسلح في حقبة الثمانينات من القرن الماضي.

ويعد هذا المدرس اللبناني المسيحي الذي يتقن عدة لغات والمولود لضابط صف، مؤسس الفصائل المسلحة الثورية اللبنانية، (وهي حركة ماركسية) في عام 1980.

 , H 1 ,  9 ( /  ' D D G  ' D E 9 * B D  E F 0 28  9 ' E '  A J  3 , H F  A 1 F 3 '

وتبنت هذه الحركة خمس هجمات في 1981 و1982 سقط في اربعٍ منها قتلى.

وقال هذا المدرس الذي تزعم منظمة شبه عائلية، نشطت في نهاية السبعينات في الشرق الاوسط، واعتبارا من 1981 في اوروبا، للقضاة “أنا مناضل ولست مجرما”.

ومنذ سن الخامسة عشرة، نشط جورج ابراهيم عبد الله في الحزب القومي السوري الاجتماعي.

وخلال الاجتياح الاسرائيلي للبنان في 1978 جرح، وانضم مع راعيه وديع حداد الى الجبهة الشعبية لتحرير فلسطين التي كانت بزعامة الراحل جورج حبش.

وبعد سنتين أسس مع عشرة اشخاص آخرين، بينهم اربعة من اخوته، وخمسة من اقرباء آخرين، الفصائل المسلحة الثورية اللبنانية.

وكان على اتصال مباشر مع منظمات العمل المباشر، والالوية الحمراء، والفنزويلي كارلوس،الذي نشط في تلك المرحلة.

وقال خلال محاكمته في ليون في 1986 ان “الرحلة التي قطعتها حكمتها الانتهاكات لحقوق الانسان في فلسطين”.

وفي الرابع والعشرين من تشرين الاول/اكتوبر 1984، اوقف جورج ابراهيم عبد الله في ليون.

وقد قدم جواز سفر، جزائريا بينما كانت بحوزته جوازات سفر من مالطا والمغرب ومن اليمن الجنوبي. لكن الاستخبارات كشفته وعثرت على ترسانة كاملة في مساكنه.

واصبح “الافراج الفوري” عن عبد القادر سعدي وهو اسمه الحركي، احد مطالب لجنة التضامن مع السجناء السياسيين العرب، وفي الشرق الاوسط التي نفذت هجمات في 1985 و1986 ادت الى مقتل 13 شخصا وجرح 250 آخرين في فرنسا.

وقد حكم عليه بالسجن مدى الحياة، في 1987 بتهمة الضلوع في اغتيال دبلوماسيين، هما الاسرائيلي ياكوف بارسيمنتوف، والاميركي تشارلز روبرت راي، في 1982 في باريس.

وكانت الفصائل المسلحة الثورية اللبنانية، تعتبر بارسيمنتوف، رئيس الموساد في فرنسا. وتبنت الفصائل نفسها هجوما فاشلا في 1981 في باريس، استهدف الدبلوماسي الاميركي كريستيان شابمان، وتفجير سيارة مفخخة في آب/اغسطس 1982 في باريس مستهدفة المستشار التجاري للسفارة الاميركية روديريك غرانت.

وانتهت مدة سجن جورج ابراهيم عبد الله في العام 1999 وحصل على حكم بالافراج المشروط العام 2003، لكن المحكمة استأنفت القرار والغي في كانون الثاني/نوفمبر 2004.

Posted in FranceComments Off on من هو جورج عبد الله الذي ستفرج عنه فرنسا بعد إعتقال دام 28 عام

Shoah’s pages