Archive | November 8th, 2015

The Flood of Refugees into Europe: “The New Slave Trade”

Global Research
Some of the millions of people who have fled Syria. Photo credit: The UN Refugee Agency / G. Gubaeva

The flood of refugees entering Europe is endless. Nobody knows exactly how many there are and where they go and went. This year, 2015, up to November, estimates vary from the low of 750,000 to a high of 2 million. Most of them went to Germany, or want to go to Germany. Up to a million, perhaps more may end up in Germany by the end of this year. For 2016 predictions are for up to 2 million. They are the direct results of the Washington-NATO driven wars and conflicts in the Middle East which keep raging on; creating chaos. Complete deliberate and manmade chaos.

The German Government has made a commitment to accept a comparatively extra-large contingent of refugees, to give them shelter, to feed them. But where and with what? – Is it guilt that strikes Madame Merkel and Co. for being complicit in the destruction of their lands, their homes, their families, their economies – in one short word, their lives?

This flood of refugees, ordered by the Washington Dictator to be retained by Turkey at the tune of 2.5 million – or more – in camps with full infrastructure that have cost some 6 billion dollars to build – not counting their maintenance – and then let lose in huge hordes at the appropriate times, like now, in stormy fall weather, followed by harsh European winters, also by orders of the Dictator. He, in turn, is comfortably protected between two oceans, oblivious to the pain of far-away others – creating purposely more confusion, destabilization and havoc within the EU – which has never really been a union, with or without refugees. The refugees are used as a weapon of destabilization

( ).

And yes, he the Washington strongman can, because the Europeans are his trusted vassals.

One by one of these un-solidary union members are pushing and shoving the stream of forced migrants, desperate hungry and sick people – on to the next country. Some build walls, or lock their borders with barbed wire fences, patrolled by armed police, military and vicious dogs. Sea-water or rain-soaked refugees are beaten, families pulled and pushed apart, dragged in the dirt. Police and military hatred and brutality in Serbia, Hungary the Czech Republic and others know no limits. Blood is flowing, small children in the arms of their hopeless and hapless parents – crying, not understanding the cruel world they have been born into – and will have to endure. Misery for millions in a world where injustice is ever more becoming the order of the day. – And we are blinded to it. Cohabitation with misery and injustice by millions has become the new normal.

Misery, hardship and submission are part of the dogma of the neoliberal masters we have allowed to take over our western world in the last 30 years. Our comfort and obscene consumerism has blinded us – and is still blinding us – to the drip-by-drip brainwashing MSM propaganda. The neocons are in the driver’s seat and will remain there until We, The People – the vast majority of the planet – 99.99% – show them the way to get lost – lost for good. Yes we can. We really can. But we have to become conscious of what’s going on and transpose our conscience to a level of non-acceptance.

Individual faces of those poor souls on the run don’t count. Small children, women, old men – thousands and thousands die en route to a ‘more decent life’; they are mere statistics, faceless numbers. They are used as weapons to destabilize, to weaken other nations, to soften them, so to speak, for easier dominance and digestion of the hungry arrogant, outsized beast, appearing in the form of the United States of America, but representing a global, Zionist-led elite, with an intimidating, scary killer army that absorbs more than half of the world’s military budget.

Obey or you will be sanctioned. Economically or by forced regime change. Either you follow the dictate, or a false flag will make you guilty deserving of punishment and annihilation. Europe has been ‘bought’, coerced and manipulated into this humiliation. The European Union is a sham. The European Commission is a deceit. There is not one non-neoliberal country in the entire 28 member European non-union. How is this possible? – A uniform world view whether your label is ‘right’ or ‘left’ – all meaningless.

Universal election fraud is presented on a silver platter like the severed head of democracy, but nobody wants to see it. It’s like admiring the emperor’s wonderful clothes, not wanting to admit that he is stark naked. We keep talking about democratic elections. Nonsense. There is no democracy anymore as it was crafted 2500 years ago by the minds of the philosophers of Delphi in ancient Greece. Most all and everybody in our western world is buyable. Rare is the politician who isn’t. He won’t last. Money reigns.

Why can’t we admit to the falsehood of things? – In our deep conscience we all know that ‘something is wrong’. Millions of refugees suddenly flooding the European Continent – something must be wrong. Does anybody see the systematic destruction of the entire Middle East and North Africa (MENA) Region – and make the connection to the refugees?

The propaganda lies of the media are ever bolder, more flagrant. We sense it. But we don’t do anything about it. If we were, we would not live in a world of permanent war, conflicts, killing for power, dominance and greed, exploitation – endless egocentricity. We would not believe the barrage of lies we are showered with day-by-day by the corrupt mainstream media. We would not be forced to run from one fire to the next. There would be no refugees, but, instead, these proud and honest people would be building their countries there cultures and strive for living well – which is the right of every human being.

Back to reality. In some small German villages the number of refugees is larger than the local population. With all good will, shelters cannot be created fast enough and warm enough (winter is approaching) – and the food supply. Who pays? – The nationals feel overwhelmed. A few weeks ago, the mood among Germans was cheery. Welcome signs everywhere – yes, welcoming the refugees, with smiles, with hugs, with food and gifts. The warmness of the German people was stunning.

That’s gone now.

We Europeans and Germans in particular, are beset by confusion. The EU leaders (sic) are saying one thing but doing another. They are confused at best and lying at worst. Trust has been corrupted by lies after lies after lies.

We do not seem to see through the scheme, a multi-faceted Machiavellian plan:

Refugees are becoming the new slaves. Many are highly educated, but poor, hungry and without shelter. They will work for peanuts just to feed their families, pressing on local wages, increasing unemployment – destroying local economies, creating fear, anxieties among locals – anxious people have no energy to stand up for their rights – defend themselves their sovereignty. They are easy prey. That’s what Washington and its associated vassal dictators want.

The exit of millions from Syria, Iraq, Libya – the MENA Region as a whole, is a brain drain for the refugees’ home countries, creating a ’brain-overflow’ in Europe, in Germany in particular – competing with locals, demoralizing, fomenting jealousy, dividing communities and entire societies – breaking down livelihoods.

These educated refugees are fleeing north, a few to Sweden Denmark, Norway, but the vast majority to the assumed heaven of well-being – Germany, where cheap labor and low-wage academics may eventually replace locals, increasing unemployment, lowering production costs, boosting profits and widening the gap between rich and poor, rapidly increasing social inequity.

Why is Germany singled out by the overseas masters? Is it still the old Churchill saying, “keep Americans in, Germans down and Russians out (of Europe)?”- Does Madame Merkel not understand this – the strongest link in Europe has to be weakened on as many fronts as possible, to make it vulnerable for easy takeover by the Washington masters. If you control Germany, you control Europe. That dogma appears not having changed since Churchill.

The flood of refugees may also contain large numbers of disguised  jihadists, Islamists (some estimates say at least 10%, but there is no proof, of course), with the intent of establishing cells in Europe – explosive cells to create unrest when needed by the Big Dictator, à la failed Arab Spring and the infamous so-called ‘Colour Revolutions’ – remember?  – For which we know by now infiltrated ‘sleeper’ cells were responsible.

These are Zionist-Washington’s well-targeted challenges for Europe. Challenges Europe is unable to cope with. One wonders what these lackeys in Brussels and the newly ‘elected’ neolibs in the so-called EU member-countries were told, when they were given the marching orders – or else. They must have been given some incentives, because any halfwit would understand that this – plus the TTIP – ah yes, the TTIP – will have Europe crumble economically, if not by WWIII, and also crumble would their careers and livelihoods. Perhaps they were given the promise of a free ticket to Florida – “The Sunshine State” – or the Bahamas, when the moment comes.

UNHCR carries in its worldwide statistics about 50 million refugees (people at risk) – but in reality by now they are more like 60-70 million. Imagine these refugees as hordes of poor homeless, roofless, hapless, hungry and often sick and desperate people – a pool of cheap labor – called otherwise SLAVES. All the system needs to do is direct them to the ‘right’ countries, those on the list of having to be subdued. Germany has Europe’s lowest unemployment rate of 4.5%. If Germany ‘falls’, Russia becomes considerably more vulnerable. Russia will have to fight for Germany, for Europe’s survival, and Vladimir Putin knows it and is already doing it.

There are also the artificial ‘economic crises’ all instigated by the Washington Consensus, the western fraudulent fiat monetary system, managed and directed by the FED, Wall Street, BIS (Bank for International Settlement) and IMF. These crises maintain and accelerate the rate of unemployment in Europe which, according to Eurostat has been hovering on average between 9% and 11% over the last 20 years.

New work forces, like the slaves made from refugees will increase unemployment, lower production costs, increase corporate profits – create human misery on the one end of the spectrum and capital gains for the elite.

Marx in his Das Kapital called unemployment the ‘cushion’ for capital that presses wages down. The cushion needs to become greater in as much as capital grows. – Unemployment and underemployment embody the concept of the “industrial reserve army”. The larger the cushion, the better for the capitalists, for the investors. Others, like Keynes, have countered that capitalism could survive practically with full employment. That’s a nice thought, but unsuitable for today’s no holds-barred capitalism – called neoliberalism.

The higher the pressure on the labor force, the more instant profit accrues. No consideration for tomorrow. No respect for the worker, or the environment. Endless exploitation is required by constant growth, needed for capitalism to survive. Growth and GDP are our western economic fetishes. They are the gods of our predatory economic system which is not sustainable. In fact it is suicidal as any logic shows. The western world today uses natural resources at the rate of about 4 times what Mother Earth has to offer. And she is very generous.

Please do understand – this has been said and repeated many times – as long as we are hooked to the western monetary and linear, growth-bound economic system we are cooked. We are economically powerless and in the hands of the globalized Washington directed ZAS elite which are marching rapidly towards Full Spectrum Dominance.

No – this is not conspiracy – read up on it. There are many internet sites that give you plenty of background information on this and other burning subjects – Global Research, Information Clearing House, CounterPunch, VNN, New Eastern Outlook-NEO, to name just a few – for you to form your own ideas and opinion.

For example, the FED has just sanctioned Deutsche Bank with 250 million dollars for violating the US-imposed sanction regime, i.e. for dealing with such sanctioned countries as Iran, Syria and Libya. DB is also being probed for ‘illegal’ business with Russia. Earlier, BNP Paribas, France, was fined US$ 8.9 billion and Crédit Agricole US$ 800 million for dealing with ‘sanctioned’ countries. You may say that’s peanuts for such banks. That’s not the point. The point is: Is it right that they have to follow Washington’s dictate?

Why do they not just ignore the fines? – Simply because if they don’t pay, they would be barred from using the privately owned international transaction clearing system, SWIFT / BIS which is so far the only system for western monetary transfers. Not paying the fines would put them out of business in the western world. So – the banks almost immediately acquiesce and pay. That’s the extent to which Washington-FED is coercing its fraudulent corrupt system upon the world.

Fortunately, the system is crumbling, as there are alternatives emerging: The Russia-China monetary exchange system – CIPS (Chinese International Payment System) which is already in use for transactions between Russia and China and among most BRICS and SCO countries. Hence, it is already accessible for about half the world population, representing about one third of the globes economic output. This system is not forced upon any country. Sovereign nations are free to join if and when it suits them.

Remember, the economies of many countries for no fault of theirs still heavily depend on the fraudulent US dollar system. Switching quickly may have damaging consequences, like sanctions, embargos of a country’s assets abroad. A slow and gradual transition may be of the order.

Nevertheless, it is worth noting that according to the western international transaction system, SWIFT, the Chinese Yuan has become the second largest international trading currency after the US dollar. ‘Things’ are on the move. The prospects for a new and more democratic monetary system are on the horizon.

Back to the refugees cum new slaves. President Hollande has just announced that French labor laws are to be revised. The sacrosanct 35 h week is being questioned, among other hard-fought for union gains over the last half a century.  This means, future labor contracts may be negotiated directly between workers unions and corporations, without the backing of the government as a regulatory body behind the workers. Hence, deregulating labor laws will be playing directly into the hands of the new arriving labor force in the form of refugees – and into the possible future playing field of the TTIP.

Now you compound all these tentacles of destabilization with the nefarious and secretly negotiated TTIP (Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership) – which we all hope will not pass despite of Brussels and thanks to the German public which demonstrates ferociously against it. But if it does pass, with corporations dictating labor laws, unemployment in Europe may increase exponentially with good jobs switching to the US as labor standards are lower there than they are in Europe; and with the TTIP imposed private corporate courts that would have supremacy over national legislation — if that happens, the continent will be further destabilized. Europe ceases to be the way we know it. It may be reduced to just a geographic land mass. Future generations may be enslaved by globalized corporate power not much different from what the wave of refugees will be – if they, the refugees, stay in Europe.

Apropos staying in Europe – Madame Merkel recently negotiated a deal with Turkish President Erdogan, basically telling him, you keep the refugees locked away in your refugee camps, we will give you 3 billion euros and may reconsider Turkey’s membership in the EU. That, in itself sounds like a deal made by mafia. Instead of seeking a treaty with untrustworthy terrorist supporting Turkey, Madame Merkel may contemplate talking to Justin Trudeau, Canada’s new Prime Minister. He may want to consider settling the vast, fertile and unpopulated western Canada with refugees from the Middle East. The 3 billion euros Merkel promised Erdogan could become a joint German-Canada cooperation project to help develop the basic infrastructure to accommodate the new settlers. This could become a huge ‘win-win’ situation: economic development for Canada and well-being for Middle-Eastern migrants chased from their lands by empirical wars.

There may be, after all, a light at the end of the tunnel for Germany and even Europe, for those willing to abandon Washington vassal-hood. And this with regard to the new wave of migration and all its implications, as well as a new approach to national economies, for which the East may offer an alternative.


Posted in Europe4 Comments

Nazi army Terrorizes Hebron Residents


Israel Terrorizes Hebron Residents. Settlers urge Soldiers to Kill the Palestinians.

Global Research
Hebron, Image by Wickey-nl (CC BY-SA 3.0)

Hebron is a microcosm of Israel’s war on Palestine, unrestrained state terror, at least 22 of its residents murdered by security forces since October 1 alone.

Israel’s claim about “continu(ing) to allow as normal a fabric of life as possible for all residents” is baloney – B’Tselem calling it “a far cry from (horrific daily) reality.”

“There has been no ‘normal fabric of life’ in Hebron for many days, and the measures taken in the name of security are draconian and not dictated by reality,” it stressed.

Tel Rumeidah neighborhood near Hebron’s Old City is besieged, completely closed off and isolated – access granted only to so-called “registered residents,” forced to endure intrusive security checks on entering or leaving, discouraging free movement altogether.

Some residents refused to submit their names to a security list required for them to enter their own homes freely. Others are denied entry for various intolerable reasons.

Tel Rumeida resembles a ghost town. Visible residents are settlers, many openly displaying guns, protected by heavily armed soldiers in combat gear.

Palestinian shops and other businesses were closed, their owners denied access. Draconian measures were imposed on area villages and towns, sealed off like Hebron.

All vehicles leaving the city of Yatta are stopped, contents and passengers intrusively searched, making travel impossible. All youths are suspected “terrorists.”

Thousands of Palestinians endure severe disruptions to their daily lives, collectively punished, commonplace Israeli policy – US major media ignoring what’s ongoing entirely, reporting nothing, horrific human rights abuses unnoticed.

Hebron-based Youth Against Settlements (YAS) is an activist group against Israeli colonization of Palestine – “through non-violent popular struggle and civil disobedience,” explaining:

Ostensibly to protect approximately 600 fundamentalist Israelis that have forcibly established a settlement right in the heart of Hebron, the Israeli state has imposed on the Palestinian residents of the city a regime of forced evictions, curfews, market closures, street closures, military checkpoints, subjection to military law including frequent random searches and detention without charge, and lack of protection from rampant settler violence, which has pressured approximately 13,000 Palestinian civilians to flee their homes in the Hebron city center, turning it into a virtual ghost town.

The area is surrounded by hostile settlements, Palestinian residents terrorized by harassment, violence, and vandalism, Israeli closed military zones imposed to displace them from their own land – forcing them to leave, preventing their return, confiscating their property and possessions, whatever they can’t take with them.

YAS coordinator Issa Amro said Hebron “is besieged. Soldiers storm Palestinian homes pre-dawn, evicting their residents, taking them over.

Settlers urge them to kill the Palestinians. “They are rejoicing that they took over my home and building,” Amro explained. “One of the soldiers said that they were (raiding the home) as punishment for speaking to the international media about what’s happening in Hebron.”

The raid happened hours after heavily protected settlers attacked Hebron area Palestinian homes. Besieged residents call draconian conditions intolerable.

Overnight Saturday into early Sunday morning, soldiers kidnapped 18 Hebron area Palestinians, at the same time storming and ransacking homes.

On Sunday, Israeli media said Netanyahu will offer Palestinians supposed goodwill gestures when he meets with Obama on Monday, aimed at easing tensions, a shameless ploy to try ending justifiable resistance, another unconditional surrender scheme likely to be denounced and rejected by long-suffering people demanding freedom.



Posted in Palestine Affairs, ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Nazi army Terrorizes Hebron Residents

“Greater Israel”: The Zionist Plan for the Middle East


The Infamous “Oded Yinon Plan”. Introduction by Michel Chossudovsky

Global Research
Association of Arab-American University Graduates, Inc. 3 March 2013
Settlements israeli flag

This article was first published on Global Research on April 29, 2013.

Global Research Editor’s Note

The following document pertaining to the formation of “Greater Israel” constitutes the cornerstone of powerful Zionist factions within the current Netanyahu government (which has recently been re-elected), the Likud party, as well as within the Israeli military and intelligence establishment.  The election was fought by Netanyahu on a political platform which denies Palestinian statehood.  

According to the founding father of Zionism Theodore Herzl, “the area of the Jewish State stretches: “From the Brook of Egypt to the Euphrates.”  According to Rabbi Fischmann,  “The Promised Land extends from the River of Egypt up to the Euphrates, it includes parts of Syria and Lebanon.”

When viewed in the current context, the war on Iraq, the 2006 war on Lebanon, the 2011 war on Libya, the ongoing war on Syria and Iraq, the war in Yemen, the process of regime change in Egypt, must be understood in relation to the Zionist Plan for the Middle East. The latter consists in weakening and eventually fracturing neighboring Arab states as part of an Israeli expansionist project.

“Greater Israel” consists in an area extending from the Nile Valley to the Euphrates.

The Zionist project supports the Jewish settlement movement. More broadly it involves a policy of excluding Palestinians from Palestine leading to the eventual annexation of both the West Bank and Gaza to the State of Israel.

Greater Israel would create a number of proxy States. It would include parts of Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, the Sinai, as well as parts of  Iraq and Saudi Arabia. (See map).

According to Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya in a 2011 Global Research article,   The Yinon Plan was a continuation of Britain’s colonial design in the Middle East:

“[The Yinon plan] is an Israeli strategic plan to ensure Israeli regional superiority. It insists and stipulates that Israel must reconfigure its geo-political environment through the balkanization of the surrounding Arab states into smaller and weaker states.

Israeli strategists viewed Iraq as their biggest strategic challenge from an Arab state. This is why Iraq was outlined as the centerpiece to the balkanization of the Middle East and the Arab World. In Iraq, on the basis of the concepts of the Yinon Plan, Israeli strategists have called for the division of Iraq into a Kurdish state and two Arab states, one for Shiite Muslims and the other for Sunni Muslims. The first step towards establishing this was a war between Iraq and Iran, which the Yinon Plan discusses.

The Atlantic, in 2008, and the U.S. military’s Armed Forces Journal, in 2006, both published widely circulated maps that closely followed the outline of the Yinon Plan. Aside from a divided Iraq, which the Biden Plan also calls for, the Yinon Plan calls for a divided Lebanon, Egypt, and Syria. The partitioning of Iran, Turkey, Somalia, and Pakistan also all fall into line with these views. The Yinon Plan also calls for dissolution in North Africa and forecasts it as starting from Egypt and then spilling over into Sudan, Libya, and the rest of the region.

Greater Israel” requires the breaking up of the existing Arab states into small states.

“The plan operates on two essential premises. To survive, Israel must 1) become an imperial regional power, and 2) must effect the division of the whole area into small states by the dissolution of all existing Arab states. Small here will depend on the ethnic or sectarian composition of each state. Consequently, the Zionist hope is that sectarian-based states become Israel’s satellites and, ironically, its source of moral legitimation…  This is not a new idea, nor does it surface for the first time in Zionist strategic thinking. Indeed, fragmenting all Arab states into smaller units has been a recurrent theme.” (Yinon Plan, see below)

Viewed in this context, the war on Syria and Iraq is part of the process of Israeli territorial expansion. Israeli intelligence working hand in glove with the US, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and NATO is directly supportive of the crusade directed against the so-called Islamic State (ISIS), which ultimately seeks to destroy both Syria and Iraq as nation states. 

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, September 06, 2015 

The Zionist Plan for the Middle East 

Translated and edited by

Israel Shahak

The Israel of Theodore Herzl (1904) and of Rabbi Fischmann (1947)

In his Complete Diaries, Vol. II. p. 711, Theodore Herzl, the founder of Zionism, says that the area of the Jewish State stretches: “From the Brook of Egypt to the Euphrates.”

Rabbi Fischmann, member of the Jewish Agency for Palestine, declared in his testimony to the U.N. Special Committee of Enquiry on 9 July 1947: “The Promised Land extends from the River of Egypt up to the Euphrates, it includes parts of Syria and Lebanon.”


Oded Yinon’s

“A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties”

Published by the

Association of Arab-American University Graduates, Inc.

Belmont, Massachusetts, 1982

Special Document No. 1 (ISBN 0-937694-56-8)

Table of Contents

 Publisher’s Note 1

The Association of Arab-American University Graduates finds it compelling to inaugurate its new publication series, Special Documents, with Oded Yinon’s article which appeared in Kivunim (Directions), the journal of the Department of Information of the World Zionist Organization. Oded Yinon is an Israeli journalist and was formerly attached to the Foreign Ministry of Israel. To our knowledge, this document is the most explicit, detailed and unambiguous statement to date of the Zionist strategy in the Middle East. Furthermore, it stands as an accurate representation of the “vision” for the entire Middle East of the presently ruling Zionist regime of Begin, Sharon and Eitan. Its importance, hence, lies not in its historical value but in the nightmare which it presents.


The plan operates on two essential premises. To survive, Israel must 1) become an imperial regional power, and 2) must effect the division of the whole area into small states by the dissolution of all existing Arab states. Small here will depend on the ethnic or sectarian composition of each state. Consequently, the Zionist hope is that sectarian-based states become Israel’s satellites and, ironically, its source of moral legitimation.


This is not a new idea, nor does it surface for the first time in Zionist strategic thinking. Indeed, fragmenting all Arab states into smaller units has been a recurrent theme. This theme has been documented on a very modest scale in the AAUG publication,  Israel’s Sacred Terrorism (1980), by Livia Rokach. Based on the memoirs of Moshe Sharett, former Prime Minister of Israel, Rokach’s study documents, in convincing detail, the Zionist plan as it applies to Lebanon and as it was prepared in the mid-fifties.


The first massive Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1978 bore this plan out to the minutest detail. The second and more barbaric and encompassing Israeli invasion of Lebanon on June 6, 1982, aims to effect certain parts of this plan which hopes to see not only Lebanon, but Syria and Jordan as well, in fragments. This ought to make mockery of Israeli public claims regarding their desire for a strong and independent Lebanese central government. More accurately, they want a Lebanese central government that sanctions their regional imperialist designs by signing a peace treaty with them. They also seek acquiescence in their designs by the Syrian, Iraqi, Jordanian and other Arab governments as well as by the Palestinian people. What they want and what they are planning for is not an Arab world, but a world of Arab fragments that is ready to succumb to Israeli hegemony. Hence, Oded Yinon in his essay, “A Strategy for Israel in the 1980′s,” talks about “far-reaching opportunities for the first time since 1967″ that are created by the “very stormy situation [that] surrounds Israel.”


The Zionist policy of displacing the Palestinians from Palestine is very much an active policy, but is pursued more forcefully in times of conflict, such as in the 1947-1948 war and in the 1967 war. An appendix entitled  ”Israel Talks of a New Exodus” is included in this publication to demonstrate past Zionist dispersals of Palestinians from their homeland and to show, besides the main Zionist document we present, other Zionist planning for the de-Palestinization of Palestine.


It is clear from the Kivunim document, published in February, 1982, that the “far-reaching opportunities” of which Zionist strategists have been thinking are the same “opportunities” of which they are trying to convince the world and which they claim were generated by their June, 1982 invasion. It is also clear that the Palestinians were never the sole target of Zionist plans, but the priority target since their viable and independent presence as a people negates the essence of the Zionist state. Every Arab state, however, especially those with cohesive and clear nationalist directions, is a real target sooner or later.


Contrasted with the detailed and unambiguous Zionist strategy elucidated in this document, Arab and Palestinian strategy, unfortunately, suffers from ambiguity and incoherence. There is no indication that Arab strategists have internalized the Zionist plan in its full ramifications. Instead, they react with incredulity and shock whenever a new stage of it unfolds. This is apparent in Arab reaction, albeit muted, to the Israeli siege of Beirut. The sad fact is that as long as the Zionist strategy for the Middle East is not taken seriously Arab reaction to any future siege of other Arab capitals will be the same.

Khalil Nakhleh

July 23, 1982


by Israel Shahak


The following essay represents, in my opinion, the accurate and detailed plan of the present Zionist regime (of Sharon and Eitan) for the Middle East which is based on the division of the whole area intosmall states, and the dissolution of all the existing Arab states. I will comment on the military aspect of this plan in a concluding note. Here I want to draw the attention of the readers to several important points:


1. The idea that all the Arab states should be broken down, by Israel, into small units, occurs again and again in Israeli strategic thinking. For example, Ze’ev Schiff, the military correspondent of Ha’aretz (and probably the most knowledgeable in Israel, on this topic) writes about the “best” that can happen for Israeli interests in Iraq: “The dissolution of Iraq into a Shi’ite state, a Sunni state and the separation of the Kurdish part” (Ha’aretz 6/2/1982). Actually, this aspect of the plan is very old.


2. The strong connection with Neo-Conservative thought in the USA is very prominent, especially in the author’s notes. But, while lip service is paid to the idea of the “defense of the West” from Soviet power, the real aim of the author, and of the present Israeli establishment is clear: To make an Imperial Israel into a world power. In other words, the aim of Sharon is to deceive the Americans after he has deceived all the rest.


3. It is obvious that much of the relevant data, both in the notes and in the text, is garbled or omitted, such as the financial help of the U.S. to Israel. Much of it is pure fantasy. But, the plan is not to be regarded as not influential, or as not capable of realization for a short time. The plan follows faithfully the geopolitical ideas current in Germany of 1890-1933, which were swallowed whole by Hitler and the Nazi movement, and determined their aims for East Europe. Those aims, especially the division of the existing states, were carried out in 1939-1941, and only an alliance on the global scale prevented their consolidation for a period of time.


The notes by the author follow the text. To avoid confusion, I did not add any notes of my own, but have put the substance of them into this foreward and the conclusion at the end. I have, however, emphasized some portions of the text.

Israel Shahak

June 13, 1982

A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties

by Oded Yinon

This essay originally appeared in Hebrew in KIVUNIM (Directions), A Journal for Judaism and Zionism; Issue No, 14–Winter, 5742, February 1982, Editor: Yoram Beck. Editorial Committee: Eli Eyal, Yoram Beck, Amnon Hadari, Yohanan Manor, Elieser Schweid. Published by the Department of Publicity/The World Zionist Organization, Jerusalem.


At the outset of the nineteen eighties the State of Israel is in need of a new perspective as to its place, its aims and national targets, at home and abroad. This need has become even more vital due to a number of central processes which the country, the region and the world are undergoing. We are living today in the early stages of a new epoch in human history which is not at all similar to its predecessor, and its characteristics are totally different from what we have hitherto known. That is why we need an understanding of the central processes which typify this historical epoch on the one hand, and on the other hand we need a world outlook and an operational strategy in accordance with the new conditions. The existence, prosperity and steadfastness of the Jewish state will depend upon its ability to adopt a new framework for its domestic and foreign affairs.


This epoch is characterized by several traits which we can already diagnose, and which symbolize a genuine revolution in our present lifestyle. The dominant process is the breakdown of the rationalist, humanist outlook as the major cornerstone supporting the life and achievements of Western civilization since the Renaissance. The political, social and economic views which have emanated from this foundation have been based on several “truths” which are presently disappearing–for example, the view that man as an individual is the center of the universe and everything exists in order to fulfill his basic material needs. This position is being invalidated in the present when it has become clear that the amount of resources in the cosmos does not meet Man’s requirements, his economic needs or his demographic constraints. In a world in which there are four billion human beings and economic and energy resources which do not grow proportionally to meet the needs of mankind, it is unrealistic to expect to fulfill the main requirement of Western Society, 1 i.e., the wish and aspiration for boundless consumption. The view that ethics plays no part in determining the direction Man takes, but rather his material needs do–that view is becoming prevalent today as we see a world in which nearly all values are disappearing. We are losing the ability to assess the simplest things, especially when they concern the simple question of what is Good and what is Evil.


The vision of man’s limitless aspirations and abilities shrinks in the face of the sad facts of life, when we witness the break-up of world order around us. The view which promises liberty and freedom to mankind seems absurd in light of the sad fact that three fourths of the human race lives under totalitarian regimes. The views concerning equality and social justice have been transformed by socialism and especially by Communism into a laughing stock. There is no argument as to the truth of these two ideas, but it is clear that they have not been put into practice properly and the majority of mankind has lost the liberty, the freedom and the opportunity for equality and justice. In this nuclear world in which we are (still) living in relative peace for thirty years, the concept of peace and coexistence among nations has no meaning when a superpower like the USSR holds a military and political doctrine of the sort it has: that not only is a nuclear war possible and necessary in order to achieve the ends of Marxism, but that it is possible to survive after it, not to speak of the fact that one can be victorious in it.2


The essential concepts of human society, especially those of the West, are undergoing a change due to political, military and economic transformations. Thus, the nuclear and conventional might of the USSR has transformed the epoch that has just ended into the last respite before the great saga that will demolish a large part of our world in a multi-dimensional global war, in comparison with which the past world wars will have been mere child’s play. The power of nuclear as well as of conventional weapons, their quantity, their precision and quality will turn most of our world upside down within a few years, and we must align ourselves so as to face that in Israel. That is, then, the main threat to our existence and that of the Western world. 3 The war over resources in the world, the Arab monopoly on oil, and the need of the West to import most of its raw materials from the Third World, are transforming the world we know, given that one of the major aims of the USSR is to defeat the West by gaining control over the gigantic resources in the Persian Gulf and in the southern part of Africa, in which the majority of world minerals are located. We can imagine the dimensions of the global confrontation which will face us in the future.


The Gorshkov doctrine calls for Soviet control of the oceans and mineral rich areas of the Third World. That together with the present Soviet nuclear doctrine which holds that it is possible to manage, win and survive a nuclear war, in the course of which the West’s military might well be destroyed and its inhabitants made slaves in the service of Marxism-Leninism, is the main danger to world peace and to our own existence. Since 1967, the Soviets have transformed Clausewitz’ dictum into “War is the continuation of policy in nuclear means,” and made it the motto which guides all their policies. Already today they are busy carrying out their aims in our region and throughout the world, and the need to face them becomes the major element in our country’s security policy and of course that of the rest of the Free World. That is our major foreign challenge.4


The Arab Moslem world, therefore, is not the major strategic problem which we shall face in the Eighties, despite the fact that it carries the main threat against Israel, due to its growing military might. This world, with its ethnic minorities, its factions and internal crises, which is astonishingly self-destructive, as we can see in Lebanon, in non-Arab Iran and now also in Syria, is unable to deal successfully with its fundamental problems and does not therefore constitute a real threat against the State of Israel in the long run, but only in the short run where its immediate military power has great import. In the long run, this world will be unable to exist within its present framework in the areas around us without having to go through genuine revolutionary changes. The Moslem Arab World is built like a temporary house of cards put together by foreigners (France and Britain in the Nineteen Twenties), without the wishes and desires of the inhabitants having been taken into account. It was arbitrarily divided into 19 states, all made of combinations of minorites and ethnic groups which are hostile to one another, so that every Arab Moslem state nowadays faces ethnic social destruction from within, and in some a civil war is already raging. 5 Most of the Arabs, 118 million out of 170 million, live in Africa, mostly in Egypt (45 million today).


Apart from Egypt, all the Maghreb states are made up of a mixture of Arabs and non-Arab Berbers. In Algeria there is already a civil war raging in the Kabile mountains between the two nations in the country. Morocco and Algeria are at war with each other over Spanish Sahara, in addition to the internal struggle in each of them. Militant Islam endangers the integrity of Tunisia and Qaddafi organizes wars which are destructive from the Arab point of view, from a country which is sparsely populated and which cannot become a powerful nation. That is why he has been attempting unifications in the past with states that are more genuine, like Egypt and Syria. Sudan, the most torn apart state in the Arab Moslem world today is built upon four groups hostile to each other, an Arab Moslem Sunni minority which rules over a majority of non-Arab Africans, Pagans, and Christians. In Egypt there is a Sunni Moslem majority facing a large minority of Christians which is dominant in upper Egypt: some 7 million of them, so that even Sadat, in his speech on May 8, expressed the fear that they will want a state of their own, something like a “second” Christian Lebanon in Egypt.


All the Arab States east of Israel are torn apart, broken up and riddled with inner conflict even more than those of the Maghreb. Syria is fundamentally no different from Lebanon except in the strong military regime which rules it. But the real civil war taking place nowadays between the Sunni majority and the Shi’ite Alawi ruling minority (a mere 12% of the population) testifies to the severity of the domestic trouble.


Iraq is, once again, no different in essence from its neighbors, although its majority is Shi’ite and the ruling minority Sunni. Sixty-five percent of the population has no say in politics, in which an elite of 20 percent holds the power. In addition there is a large Kurdish minority in the north, and if it weren’t for the strength of the ruling regime, the army and the oil revenues, Iraq’s future state would be no different than that of Lebanon in the past or of Syria today. The seeds of inner conflict and civil war are apparent today already, especially after the rise of Khomeini to power in Iran, a leader whom the Shi’ites in Iraq view as their natural leader.


All the Gulf principalities and Saudi Arabia are built upon a delicate house of sand in which there is only oil. In Kuwait, the Kuwaitis constitute only a quarter of the population. In Bahrain, the Shi’ites are the majority but are deprived of power. In the UAE, Shi’ites are once again the majority but the Sunnis are in power. The same is true of Oman and North Yemen. Even in the Marxist South Yemen there is a sizable Shi’ite minority. In Saudi Arabia half the population is foreign, Egyptian and Yemenite, but a Saudi minority holds power.


Jordan is in reality Palestinian, ruled by a Trans-Jordanian Bedouin minority, but most of the army and certainly the bureaucracy is now Palestinian. As a matter of fact Amman is as Palestinian as Nablus. All of these countries have powerful armies, relatively speaking. But there is a problem there too. The Syrian army today is mostly Sunni with an Alawi officer corps, the Iraqi army Shi’ite with Sunni commanders. This has great significance in the long run, and that is why it will not be possible to retain the loyalty of the army for a long time except where it comes to the only common denominator: The hostility towards Israel, and today even that is insufficient.


Alongside the Arabs, split as they are, the other Moslem states share a similar predicament. Half of Iran’s population is comprised of a Persian speaking group and the other half of an ethnically Turkish group. Turkey’s population comprises a Turkish Sunni Moslem majority, some 50%, and two large minorities, 12 million Shi’ite Alawis and 6 million Sunni Kurds. In Afghanistan there are 5 million

Shi’ites who constitute one third of the population. In Sunni Pakistan there are 15 million Shi’ites who endanger the existence of that state.


This national ethnic minority picture extending from Morocco to India and from Somalia to Turkey points to the absence of stability and a rapid degeneration in the entire region. When this picture is added to the economic one, we see how the entire region is built like a house of cards, unable to withstand its severe problems.


In this giant and fractured world there are a few wealthy groups and a huge mass of poor people. Most of the Arabs have an average yearly income of 300 dollars. That is the situation in Egypt, in most of the Maghreb countries except for Libya, and in Iraq. Lebanon is torn apart and its economy is falling to pieces. It is a state in which there is no centralized power, but only 5 de facto sovereign authorities (Christian in the north, supported by the Syrians and under the rule of the Franjieh clan, in the East an area of direct Syrian conquest, in the center a Phalangist controlled Christian enclave, in the south and up to the Litani river a mostly Palestinian region controlled by the PLO and Major Haddad’s state of Christians and half a million Shi’ites). Syria is in an even graver situation and even the assistance she will obtain in the future after the unification with Libya will not be sufficient for dealing with the basic problems of existence and the maintenance of a large army. Egypt is in the worst situation: Millions are on the verge of hunger, half the labor force is unemployed, and housing is scarce in this most densely populated area of the world. Except for the army, there is not a single department operating efficiently and the state is in a permanent state of bankruptcy and depends entirely on American foreign assistance granted since the peace.6


In the Gulf states, Saudi Arabia, Libya and Egypt there is the largest accumulation of money and oil in the world, but those enjoying it are tiny elites who lack a wide base of support and self-confidence, something that no army can guarantee. 7 The Saudi army with all its equipment cannot defend the regime from real dangers at home or abroad, and what took place in Mecca in 1980 is only an example. A sad and very stormy situation surrounds Israel and creates challenges for it, problems, risks but also far-reaching opportunities for the first time since 1967. Chances are that opportunities missed at that time will become achievable in the Eighties to an extent and along dimensions which we cannot even imagine today.


The “peace” policy and the return of territories, through a dependence upon the US, precludes the realization of the new option created for us. Since 1967, all the governments of Israel have tied our national aims down to narrow political needs, on the one hand, and on the other to destructive opinions at home which neutralized our capacities both at home and abroad. Failing to take steps towards the Arab population in the new territories, acquired in the course of a war forced upon us, is the major strategic error committed by Israel on the morning after the Six Day War. We could have saved ourselves all the bitter and dangerous conflict since then if we had given Jordan to the Palestinians who live west of the Jordan river. By doing that we would have neutralized the Palestinian problem which we nowadays face, and to which we have found solutions that are really no solutions at all, such as territorial compromise or autonomy which amount, in fact, to the same thing. 8 Today, we suddenly face immense opportunities for transforming the situation thoroughly and this we must do in the coming decade, otherwise we shall not survive as a state.


In the course of the Nineteen Eighties, the State of Israel will have to go through far-reaching changes in its political and economic regime domestically, along with radical changes in its foreign policy, in order to stand up to the global and regional challenges of this new epoch. The loss of the Suez Canal oil fields, of the immense potential of the oil, gas and other natural resources in the Sinai peninsula which is geomorphologically identical to the rich oil-producing countries in the region, will result in an energy drain in the near future and will destroy our domestic economy: one quarter of our present GNP as well as one third of the budget is used for the purchase of oil. 9 The search for raw materials in the Negev and on the coast will not, in the near future, serve to alter that state of affairs.


(Regaining) the Sinai peninsula with its present and potential resources is therefore a political prioritywhich is obstructed by the Camp David and the peace agreements. The fault for that lies of course withthe present Israeli government and the governments which paved the road to the policy of territorial compromise, the Alignment governments since 1967. The Egyptians will not need to keep the peace treaty after the return of the Sinai, and they will do all they can to return to the fold of the Arab world and to the USSR in order to gain support and military assistance. American aid is guaranteed only for a short while, for the terms of the peace and the weakening of the U.S. both at home and abroad will bring about a reduction in aid. Without oil and the income from it, with the present enormous expenditure, we will not be able to get through 1982 under the present conditions and we will have to act in order to return the situation to the status quo which existed in Sinai prior to Sadat’s visit and the mistaken peace agreement signed with him in March 1979. 10


Israel has two major routes through which to realize this purpose, one direct and the other indirect. The direct option is the less realistic one because of the nature of the regime and government in Israel as well as the wisdom of Sadat who obtained our withdrawal from Sinai, which was, next to the war of 1973, his major achievement since he took power. Israel will not unilaterally break the treaty, neither today, nor in 1982, unless it is very hard pressed economically and politically and Egypt provides Israel with the excuse to take the Sinai back into our hands for the fourth time in our short history. What is left therefore, is the indirect option. The economic situation in Egypt, the nature of the regime and its pan-

Arab policy, will bring about a situation after April 1982 in which Israel will be forced to act directly or indirectly in order to regain control over Sinai as a strategic, economic and energy reserve for the longrun. Egypt does not constitute a military strategic problem due to its internal conflicts and it could bedriven back to the post 1967 war situation in no more than one day. 11


The myth of Egypt as the strong leader of the Arab World was demolished back in 1956 and definitely did not survive 1967, but our policy, as in the return of the Sinai, served to turn the myth into “fact.” In reality, however, Egypt’s power in proportion both to Israel alone and to the rest of the Arab World has gone down about 50 percent since 1967. Egypt is no longer the leading political power in the Arab World and is economically on the verge of a crisis. Without foreign assistance the crisis will come tomorrow. 12 In the short run, due to the return of the Sinai, Egypt will gain several advantages at our expense, but only in the short run until 1982, and that will not change the balance of power to its benefit, and will possibly bring about its downfall. Egypt, in its present domestic political picture, is already a corpse, all the more so if we take into account the growing Moslem-Christian rift. Breaking Egypt down territorially into distinct geographical regions is the political aim of Israel in the Nineteen Eighties on its Western front.


Egypt is divided and torn apart into many foci of authority. If Egypt falls apart, countries like Libya, Sudan or even the more distant states will not continue to exist in their present form and will join the downfall and dissolution of Egypt. The vision of a Christian Coptic State in Upper Egypt alongside a number of weak states with very localized power and without a centralized government as to date, is the key to a historical development which was only set back by the peace agreement but which seems inevitable in the long run. 13


The Western front, which on the surface appears more problematic, is in fact less complicated than the Eastern front, in which most of the events that make the headlines have been taking place recently. Lebanon’s total dissolution into five provinces serves as a precendent for the entire Arab world including Egypt, Syria, Iraq and the Arabian peninsula and is already following that track. The dissolution of Syria and Iraq later on into ethnically or religiously unqiue areas such as in Lebanon, is Israel’s primary target on the Eastern front in the long run, while the dissolution of the military power of those states serves as the primary short term target. Syria will fall apart, in accordance with its ethnic and religious structure, into several states such as in present day Lebanon, so that there will be a Shi’ite Alawi state along its coast, a Sunni state in the Aleppo area, another Sunni state in Damascus hostile to its northern neighbor, and the Druzes who will set up a state, maybe even in our Golan, and certainly in the Hauran and in northern Jordan. This state of affairs will be the guarantee for peace and security in the area in the long run, and that aim is already within our reach today. 14


Iraq, rich in oil on the one hand and internally torn on the other, is guaranteed as a candidate for Israel’s targets. Its dissolution is even more important for us than that of Syria. Iraq is stronger than Syria. In the short run it is Iraqi power which constitutes the greatest threat to Israel. An Iraqi-Iranian war will tear Iraq apart and cause its downfall at home even before it is able to organize a struggle on a wide front against us. Every kind of inter-Arab confrontation will assist us in the short run and will shorten the way to the more important aim of breaking up Iraq into denominations as in Syria and in Lebanon. In Iraq, a division into provinces along ethnic/religious lines as in Syria during Ottoman times is possible. So, three (or more) states will exist around the three major cities: Basra, Baghdad and Mosul, and Shi’ite areas in the south will separate from the Sunni and Kurdish north. It is possible that the present Iranian-Iraqi confrontation will deepen this polarization. 15


The entire Arabian peninsula is a natural candidate for dissolution due to internal and external pressures, and the matter is inevitable especially in Saudi Arabia. Regardless of whether its economic might based on oil remains intact or whether it is diminished in the long run, the internal rifts and breakdowns are a clear and natural development in light of the present political structure. 16


Jordan constitutes an immediate strategic target in the short run but not in the long run, for it does notconstitute a real threat in the long run after its dissolution, the termination of the lengthy rule of King Hussein and the transfer of power to the Palestinians in the short run.


There is no chance that Jordan will continue to exist in its present structure for a long time, and Israel’s policy, both in war and in peace, ought to be directed at the liquidation of Jordan under the present regime and the transfer of power to the Palestinian majority. Changing the regime east of the river will also causethe termination of the problem of the territories densely populated with Arabs west of the Jordan. Whether in war or under conditions of peace, emigration from the territories and economic demographic freeze in them, are the guarantees for the coming change on both banks of the river, and we ought to be active in order to accelerate this process in the nearest future. The autonomy plan ought also to be rejected, as well as any compromise or division of the territories for, given the plans of the PLO and those of the Israeli Arabs themselves, the Shefa’amr plan of September 1980, it is not possible to go on living in this country in the present situation without separating the two nations, the Arabs to Jordan and the Jews to the areas west of the river. Genuine coexistence and peace will reign over the land only when the Arabs understand that without Jewish rule between the Jordan and the sea they will have neither existence nor security. A nation of their own and security will be theirs only in Jordan. 17


Within Israel the distinction between the areas of ’67 and the territories beyond them, those of ’48, has always been meaningless for Arabs and nowadays no longer has any significance for us. The problem should be seen in its entirety without any divisions as of ’67. It should be clear, under any future political situation or military constellation, that the solution of the problem of the indigenous Arabs will come only when they recognize the existence of Israel in secure borders up to the Jordan river and beyond it, as our existential need in this difficult epoch, the nuclear epoch which we shall soon enter. It is no longer possible to live with three fourths of the Jewish population on the dense shoreline which is so dangerous in a nuclear epoch.


Dispersal of the population is therefore a domestic strategic aim of the highest order; otherwise, we shall cease to exist within any borders. Judea, Samaria and the Galilee are our sole guarantee for national existence, and if we do not become the majority in the mountain areas, we shall not rule in the country and we shall be like the Crusaders, who lost this country which was not theirs anyhow, and in which they were foreigners to begin with. Rebalancing the country demographically, strategically and economically is the highest and most central aim today. Taking hold of the mountain watershed from Beersheba to the Upper Galilee is the national aim generated by the major strategic consideration which is settling the mountainous part of the country that is empty of Jews today. l8


Realizing our aims on the Eastern front depends first on the realization of this internal strategic objective. The transformation of the political and economic structure, so as to enable the realization of these strategic aims, is the key to achieving the entire change. We need to change from a centralized economy in which the government is extensively involved, to an open and free market as well as to switch from depending upon the U.S. taxpayer to developing, with our own hands, of a genuine productive economic infrastructure. If we are not able to make this change freely and voluntarily, we shall be forced into it by world developments, especially in the areas of economics, energy, and politics, and by our own growing isolation. l9


From a military and strategic point of view, the West led by the U.S. is unable to withstand the global pressures of the USSR throughout the world, and Israel must therefore stand alone in the Eighties, without any foreign assistance, military or economic, and this is within our capacities today, with nocompromises. 20 Rapid changes in the world will also bring about a change in the condition of world Jewry to which Israel will become not only a last resort but the only existential option. We cannot assume that U.S. Jews, and the communities of Europe and Latin America will continue to exist in the present form in the future. 21


Our existence in this country itself is certain, and there is no force that could remove us from here either forcefully or by treachery (Sadat’s method). Despite the difficulties of the mistaken “peace” policy and theproblem of the Israeli Arabs and those of the territories, we can effectively deal with these problems in the foreseeable future.



Three important points have to be clarified in order to be able to understand the significant possibilities of realization of this Zionist plan for the Middle East, and also why it had to be published.


The Military Background of The Plan

The military conditions of this plan have not been mentioned above, but on the many occasions where something very like it is being “explained” in closed meetings to members of the Israeli Establishment, this point is clarified. It is assumed that the Israeli military forces, in all their branches, are insufficient for the actual work of occupation of such wide territories as discussed above. In fact, even in times of intense Palestinian “unrest” on the West Bank, the forces of the Israeli Army are stretched out too much. The answer to that is the method of ruling by means of “Haddad forces” or of “Village Associations” (also known as “Village Leagues”): local forces under “leaders” completely dissociated from the population, not having even any feudal or party structure (such as the Phalangists have, for example). The “states” proposed by Yinon are “Haddadland” and “Village Associations,” and their armed forces will be, no doubt, quite similar. In addition, Israeli military superiority in such a situation will be much greater than it is even now, so that any movement of revolt will be “punished” either by mass humiliation as in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, or by bombardment and obliteration of cities, as in Lebanon now (June 1982), or by both. In order to ensure this, the plan, as explained orally, calls for the establishment of Israeli garrisons in focal places between the mini states, equipped with the necessary mobile destructive forces. In fact, we have seen something like this in Haddadland and we will almost certainly soon see the first example of this system functioning either in South Lebanon or in all Lebanon.


It is obvious that the above military assumptions, and the whole plan too, depend also on the Arabs continuing to be even more divided than they are now, and on the lack of any truly progressive mass movement among them. It may be that those two conditions will be removed only when the plan will be well advanced, with consequences which can not be foreseen.


Why it is necessary to publish this in Israel?

The reason for publication is the dual nature of the Israeli-Jewish society: A very great measure of freedom and democracy, specially for Jews, combined with expansionism and racist discrimination. In such a situation the Israeli-Jewish elite (for the masses follow the TV and Begin’s speeches) has to bepersuaded. The first steps in the process of persuasion are oral, as indicated above, but a time comes inwhich it becomes inconvenient. Written material must be produced for the benefit of the more stupid “persuaders” and “explainers” (for example medium-rank officers, who are, usually, remarkably stupid). They then “learn it,” more or less, and preach to others. It should be remarked that Israel, and even the Yishuv from the Twenties, has always functioned in this way. I myself well remember how (before I was “in opposition”) the necessity of war with was explained to me and others a year before the 1956 war, and the necessity of conquering “the rest of Western Palestine when we will have the opportunity” was explained in the years 1965-67.


Why is it assumed that there is no special risk from the outside in the publication of such plans?

Such risks can come from two sources, so long as the principled opposition inside Israel is very weak (a situation which may change as a consequence of the war on Lebanon) : The Arab World, including the Palestinians, and the United States. The Arab World has shown itself so far quite incapable of a detailed and rational analysis of Israeli-Jewish society, and the Palestinians have been, on the average, no better than the rest. In such a situation, even those who are shouting about the dangers of Israeli expansionism (which are real enough) are doing this not because of factual and detailed knowledge, but because of belief in myth. A good example is the very persistent belief in the non-existent writing on the wall of the Knesset of the Biblical verse about the Nile and the Euphrates. Another example is the persistent, and completely false declarations, which were made by some of the most important Arab leaders, that the two blue stripes of the Israeli flag symbolize the Nile and the Euphrates, while in fact they are taken from the stripes of the Jewish praying shawl (Talit). The Israeli specialists assume that, on the whole, the Arabs will pay no attention to their serious discussions of the future, and the Lebanon war has proved them right. So why should they not continue with their old methods of persuading other Israelis?


In the United States a very similar situation exists, at least until now. The more or less serious commentators take their information about Israel, and much of their opinions about it, from two sources. The first is from articles in the “liberal” American press, written almost totally by Jewish admirers of Israel who, even if they are critical of some aspects of the Israeli state, practice loyally what Stalin used to call “the constructive criticism.” (In fact those among them who claim also to be “Anti-Stalinist” are in reality more Stalinist than Stalin, with Israel being their god which has not yet failed). In the framework of such critical worship it must be assumed that Israel has always “good intentions” and only “makes mistakes,” and therefore such a plan would not be a matter for discussion–exactly as the Biblical genocides committed by Jews are not mentioned. The other source of information, The Jerusalem Post, has similar policies. So long, therefore, as the situation exists in which Israel is really a “closed society” to the rest of the world, because the world wants to close its eyes, the publication and even the beginning of the realization of such a plan is realistic and feasible.

Israel Shahak

June 17, 1982 Jerusalem

About the Translator

Israel Shahak is a professor of organic chemistly at Hebrew University in Jerusalem and the chairman of the Israeli League for Human and Civil Rights. He published The Shahak Papers, collections of key articles from the Hebrew press, and is the author of numerous articles and books, among them Non-Jewin the Jewish State. His latest book is Israel’s Global Role: Weapons for Repression, published by theAAUG in 1982. Israel Shahak: (1933-2001)


 1. American Universities Field Staff. Report No.33, 1979. According to this research, the population of the world will be 6 billion in the year 2000. Today’s world population can be broken down as follows: China, 958 million; India, 635 million; USSR, 261 million; U.S., 218 million Indonesia, 140 million; Brazil and Japan, 110 million each. According to the figures of the U.N. Population Fund for 1980, there will be, in 2000, 50 cities with a population of over 5 million each. The population ofthp;Third World will then be 80% of the world population. According to Justin Blackwelder, U.S. Census Office chief, the world population will not reach 6 billion because of hunger.

 2. Soviet nuclear policy has been well summarized by two American Sovietologists: Joseph D. Douglas and Amoretta M. Hoeber, Soviet Strategy for Nuclear War, (Stanford, Ca., Hoover Inst. Press, 1979). In the Soviet Union tens and hundreds of articles and books are published each year which detail the Soviet doctrine for nuclear war and there is a great deal of documentation translated into English and published by the U.S. Air Force,including USAF: Marxism-Leninism on War and the Army: The Soviet View, Moscow, 1972; USAF: The Armed Forces of the Soviet State. Moscow, 1975, by Marshal A. Grechko. The basic Soviet approach to the matter is presented in the book by Marshal Sokolovski published in 1962 in Moscow: Marshal V. D. Sokolovski, Military Strategy, Soviet Doctrine and Concepts(New York, Praeger, 1963).

 3. A picture of Soviet intentions in various areas of the world can be drawn from the book by Douglas and Hoeber,ibid. For additional material see: Michael Morgan, “USSR’s Minerals as Strategic Weapon in the Future,” Defense and Foreign Affairs, Washington, D.C., Dec. 1979.

 4. Admiral of the Fleet Sergei Gorshkov, Sea Power and the State, London, 1979. Morgan, loc. cit. General George S. Brown (USAF) C-JCS, Statement to the Congress on the Defense Posture of the United States For Fiscal Year1979, p. 103; National Security Council, Review of Non-Fuel Mineral Policy, (Washington, D.C. 1979,); DrewMiddleton, The New York Times, (9/15/79); Time, 9/21/80.

 5. Elie Kedourie, “The End of the Ottoman Empire,” Journal of Contemporary History, Vol. 3, No.4, 1968.

 6. Al-Thawra, Syria 12/20/79, Al-Ahram,12/30/79, Al Ba’ath, Syria, 5/6/79. 55% of the Arabs are 20 years old and younger, 70% of the Arabs live in Africa, 55% of the Arabs under 15 are unemployed, 33% live in urban areas, Oded Yinon, “Egypt’s Population Problem,” The Jerusalem Quarterly, No. 15, Spring 1980.

 7. E. Kanovsky, “Arab Haves and Have Nots,” The Jerusalem Quarterly, No.1, Fall 1976, Al Ba’ath, Syria, 5/6/79.

 8. In his book, former Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin said that the Israeli government is in fact responsible for the design of American policy in the Middle East, after June ’67, because of its own indecisiveness as to the future of the territories and the inconsistency in its positions since it established the background for Resolution 242 and certainly twelve years later for the Camp David agreements and the peace treaty with Egypt. According to Rabin, on June 19, 1967, President Johnson sent a letter to Prime Minister Eshkol in which he did not mention anything about withdrawal from the new territories but exactly on the same day the government resolved to return territories in exchange for peace. After the Arab resolutions in Khartoum (9/1/67) the government altered its position but contrary to its decision of June 19, did not notify the U.S. of the alteration and the U.S. continued to support 242 in the Security Council on the basis of its earlier understanding that Israel is prepared to return territories. At that point it was already too late to change the U.S. position and Israel’s policy. From here the way was opened to peace agreements on the basis of 242 as was later agreed upon in Camp David. See Yitzhak Rabin. Pinkas Sherut, (Ma’ariv 1979) pp. 226-227.

 9. Foreign and Defense Committee Chairman Prof. Moshe Arens argued in an interview (Ma ‘ariv,10/3/80) that the Israeli government failed to prepare an economic plan before the Camp David agreements and was itself surprised by the cost of the agreements, although already during the negotiations it was possible to calculate the heavy price and the serious error involved in not having prepared the economic grounds for peace.

The former Minister of Treasury, Mr. Yigal Holwitz, stated that if it were not for the withdrawal from the oil fields, Israel would have a positive balance of payments (9/17/80). That same person said two years earlier that the government of Israel (from which he withdrew) had placed a noose around his neck. He was referring to the Camp David agreements (Ha’aretz, 11/3/78). In the course of the whole peace negotiations neither an expert nor an economics advisor was consulted, and the Prime Minister himself, who lacks knowledge and expertise in economics, in a mistaken initiative, asked the U.S. to give us a loan rather than a grant, due to his wish to maintain our respect and the respect of the U.S. towards us. See Ha’aretz1/5/79. Jerusalem Post, 9/7/79. Prof Asaf Razin, formerly a senior consultant in the Treasury, strongly criticized the conduct of the negotiations; Ha’aretz, 5/5/79. Ma’ariv, 9/7/79. As to matters concerning the oil fields and Israel’s energy crisis, see the interview with Mr. Eitan Eisenberg, a government advisor on these matters, Ma’arive Weekly, 12/12/78. The Energy Minister, who personally signed the Camp David agreements and the evacuation of Sdeh Alma, has since emphasized the seriousness of our condition from the point of view of oil supplies more than once…see Yediot Ahronot, 7/20/79. Energy Minister Modai even admitted that the government did not consult him at all on the subject of oil during the Camp David and Blair House negotiations.Ha’aretz, 8/22/79.

 10. Many sources report on the growth of the armaments budget in Egypt and on intentions to give the army preference in a peace epoch budget over domestic needs for which a peace was allegedly obtained. See former Prime Minister Mamduh Salam in an interview 12/18/77, Treasury Minister Abd El Sayeh in an interview 7/25/78, and the paper Al Akhbar, 12/2/78 which clearly stressed that the military budget will receive first priority, despite the peace. This is what former Prime Minister Mustafa Khalil has stated in his cabinet’s programmatic document which was presented to Parliament, 11/25/78. See English translation, ICA, FBIS, Nov. 27. 1978, pp. D 1-10.

According to these sources, Egypt’s military budget increased by 10% between fiscal 1977 and 1978, and the process still goes on. A Saudi source divulged that the Egyptians plan to increase their militmy budget by 100% in the next two years; Ha’aretz, 2/12/79 and Jerusalem Post, 1/14/79.

 11. Most of the economic estimates threw doubt on Egypt’s ability to reconstruct its economy by 1982. SeeEconomic Intelligence Unit, 1978 Supplement, “The Arab Republic of Egypt”; E. Kanovsky, “Recent EconomicDevelopments in the Middle East,” Occasional Papers, The Shiloah Institution, June 1977; Kanovsky, “The Egyptian Economy Since the Mid-Sixties, The Micro Sectors,” Occasional Papers, June 1978; Robert McNamara, President of World Bank, as reported in Times, London, 1/24/78.

 12. See the comparison made by the researeh of the Institute for Strategic Studies in London, and research camed out in the Center for Strategic Studies of Tel Aviv University, as well as the research by the British scientist, Denis Champlin, Military Review, Nov. 1979, ISS: The Military Balance 1979-1980, CSS; Security Arrangements in Sinai…by Brig. Gen. (Res.) A Shalev, No. 3.0 CSS; The Military Balance and the Military Options after the Peace Treaty with Egypt, by Brig. Gen. (Res.) Y. Raviv, No.4, Dec. 1978, as well as many press reports including El Hawadeth, London, 3/7/80; El Watan El Arabi, Paris, 12/14/79.

 13. As for religious ferment in Egypt and the relations between Copts and Moslems see the series of articles published in the Kuwaiti paper, El Qabas, 9/15/80. The English author Irene Beeson reports on the rift between Moslems and Copts, see: Irene Beeson, Guardian, London, 6/24/80, and Desmond Stewart, Middle EastInternmational, London 6/6/80. For other reports see Pamela Ann Smith, Guardian, London, 12/24/79; The Christian Science Monitor 12/27/79 as well as Al Dustour, London, 10/15/79; El Kefah El Arabi, 10/15/79.

 14. Arab Press Service, Beirut, 8/6-13/80. The New Republic, 8/16/80, Der Spiegel as cited by Ha’aretz, 3/21/80, and 4/30-5/5/80; The Economist, 3/22/80; Robert Fisk, Times, London, 3/26/80; Ellsworth Jones, Sunday Times, 3/30/80.

 15.  J.P.  Peroncell  Hugoz,  Le  Monde,  Paris  4/28/80;  Dr.  Abbas  Kelidar,  Middle  East  Review,  Summer  1979;

Conflict Studies, ISS, July 1975; Andreas Kolschitter, Der Zeit, (Ha’aretz, 9/21/79) Economist Foreign Report,10/10/79, Afro-Asian Affairs, London, July 1979.

 16. Arnold Hottinger, “The Rich Arab States in Trouble,” The New York Review of Books, 5/15/80; Arab PressService, Beirut, 6/25-7/2/80; U.S. News and World Report, 11/5/79 as well as El Ahram, 11/9/79; El Nahar El Arabi Wal Duwali, Paris 9/7/79; El Hawadeth, 11/9/79; David Hakham, Monthly Review, IDF, Jan.-Feb. 79.

 17. As for Jordan’s policies and problems see El Nahar El Arabi Wal Duwali, 4/30/79, 7/2/79; Prof. Elie Kedouri,Ma’ariv 6/8/79; Prof. Tanter, Davar 7/12/79; A. Safdi, Jerusalem Post, 5/31/79; El Watan El Arabi 11/28/79; El Qabas, 11/19/79. As for PLO positions see: The resolutions of the Fatah Fourth Congress, Damascus, August 1980. The Shefa’amr program of the Israeli Arabs was published in Ha’aretz, 9/24/80, and by Arab Press Report 6/18/80. For facts and figures on immigration of Arabs to Jordan, see Amos Ben Vered, Ha’aretz, 2/16/77; Yossef Zuriel, Ma’ariv1/12/80. As to the PLO’s position towards Israel see Shlomo Gazit, Monthly Review; July 1980; Hani El Hasan in an interview, Al Rai Al’Am, Kuwait 4/15/80; Avi Plaskov, “The Palestinian Problem,” Survival, ISS, London Jan. Feb. 78; David Gutrnann, “The Palestinian Myth,” Commentary, Oct. 75; Bernard Lewis, “The Palestinians and the PLO,”Commentary Jan. 75; Monday Morning, Beirut, 8/18-21/80; Journal of Palestine Studies, Winter 1980.

 18. Prof. Yuval Neeman, “Samaria–The Basis for Israel’s Security,” Ma’arakhot 272-273, May/June 1980; Ya’akov Hasdai, “Peace, the Way and the Right to Know,” Dvar Hashavua, 2/23/80. Aharon Yariv, “Strategic Depth–An Israeli Perspective,” Ma’arakhot 270-271, October 1979; Yitzhak Rabin, “Israel’s Defense Problems in the Eighties,”Ma’arakhot October 1979.

 19. Ezra Zohar, In the Regime’s Pliers (Shikmona, 1974); Motti Heinrich, Do We have a Chance Israel, Truth Versus Legend (Reshafim, 1981).

 20. Henry Kissinger, “The Lessons of the Past,” The Washington Review Vol 1, Jan. 1978; Arthur Ross, “OPEC’s Challenge to the West,” The Washington Quarterly, Winter, 1980; Walter Levy, “Oil and the Decline of the West,”Foreign Affairs, Summer 1980; Special Report–”Our Armed Forees-Ready or Not?” U.S. News and World Report10/10/77; Stanley Hoffman, “Reflections on the Present Danger,” The New York Review of Books 3/6/80; Time 4/3/80; Leopold Lavedez “The illusions of SALT” Commentary Sept. 79; Norman Podhoretz, “The Present Danger,”Commentary March 1980; Robert Tucker, “Oil and American Power Six Years Later,” Commentary Sept. 1979; Norman Podhoretz, “The Abandonment of Israel,” Commentary July 1976; Elie Kedourie, “Misreading the Middle East,” Commentary July 1979.

 21. According to figures published by Ya’akov Karoz, Yediot Ahronot, 10/17/80, the sum total of anti-Semitic incidents recorded in the world in 1979 was double the amount recorded in 1978. In Germany, France, and Britain the number of anti-Semitic incidents was many times greater in that year. In the U.S. as well there has been a sharp increase in anti-Semitic incidents which were reported in that article. For the new anti-Semitism, see L. Talmon, “The New Anti-Semitism,” The New Republic, 9/18/1976; Barbara Tuchman, “They poisoned the Wells,” Newsweek 2/3/75.

Posted in Palestine Affairs, Middle East, ZIO-NAZIComments Off on “Greater Israel”: The Zionist Plan for the Middle East

Eulogy for the Late Nazi Rabin by C.I.A puppet Hosni Mubarak


Image result for Hosni Mubarak CARTOON



Eulogy for the Late NaziYitzhak Rabin by C.I.A puppet Hosni Mubarak NAZI YITZHAK RABIN: 1922-1995 


6 November 1995

Mrs. Rabin and the family, Mr. Ezer Weizman, the president of State of Israel, Mr. Shimon Peres, acting prime minister, dear friends, it is with deep regret that we assemble here today to pay our last respects to Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, a courageous leader and a recognized statesman. His earnest efforts to achieve peace in the Middle East are a testament to his vision, which we share, to end the suffering of all the peoples of our region.

He defied the prejudices of the past to tackle the most complicated of problems, namely the Palestinian problem, in a forthright manner. The success he achieved in this regard has firmly laid the foundations of peaceful coexistence between Palestinians and the Israelis in a climate of trust and a mutual respect. These achievements have undoubtedly established him as a true hero of peace.

The untimely loss of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin at this important juncture in the history with the Middle East has dealt a severe blow to our noble cause. We must, therefore, redouble our efforts and reaffirm our obligation to continue the sacred mission to achieve a just and lasting peace. We must deprive those treacherous hands hostile towards our goal from reaping the rewards of their vile actions. Only through our unwavering commitment to this objective can we truly honor the memory of this fallen hero of peace.

And I could say that the message memorial for Yitzhak Rabin is to continue what he started, which is the peace process and, of course, as we mentioned several times, peace is so precious for the whole people all over the world. On this sad occasion, ladies and gentlemen, I extend the condolences of the people and the government to Egypt, and my personal condolences, to the government and the people of Israel and the family of Mr. Yitzhak Rabin. Thank you.

Posted in ZIO-NAZI, EgyptComments Off on Eulogy for the Late Nazi Rabin by C.I.A puppet Hosni Mubarak

Eulogy for the Late Nazi Rabin by Zionist gatekeeper Traitor Hussein of Jordan


Image result for KING of Jordan CARTOON

 YITZHAK RABIN: 1922-1995
Eulogy for the Late Nazi Yitzhak Rabin by Zionist gatekeeper traitor  King Hussein of JordanOccupied Jerusalem
6 November 1995

My sister, Mrs. Leah Rabin, my friends, I had never thought that the moment would come like this when I would grieve the loss of a brother, a colleague and a friend – a man, a soldier who met us on the opposite side of a divide whom we respected as he respected us. A man I came to know because I realized, as he did, that we have to cross over the divide, establish a dialogue, get to know each other and strive to leave for those who follow us a legacy that is worthy of them. And so we did. And so we became brethren and friends.

I’ve never been used to standing, except with you next to me, speaking of peace, speaking about dreams and hopes for generations to come that must live in peace, enjoy human dignity, come together, work together, to build a better future which is their right. Never in all my thoughts would it have occurred to me that my first visit to Jerusalem and response to your invitation, the invitation of the Speaker of the Knesset, the invitation of the president of Israel, would be on such an occasion.

You lived as a soldier, you died as a soldier for peace and I believe it is time for all of us to come out, openly, and to speak our piece, but here today, but for all the times to come. We belong to the camp of peace. We believe in peace. We believe that our one God wishes us to live in peace and wishes peace upon us, for these are His teachings to all the followers of the three great monotheistic religions, the children of Abraham.

Let’s not keep silent. Let our voices rise high to speak of our commitment to peace for all times to come, and let us tell those who live in darkness who are the enemies of life, and through faith and religion and the teachings of our one God, this is where we stand. This is our camp. May God bless you with the realization that you must join it and we pray that He will, but otherwise we are not ashamed, nor are we afraid, nor are we anything but determined to fulfill the legacy for which my friend fell, as did my grandfather in this very city when I was with him and but a young

boy. He was a man of courage, a man of vision and he was endowed with one of the greatest virtues that any man can have. He was endowed with humility. He felt with those around him and in a position of responsibility, he placed himself, as I do and have done, often, in the place of the other partner to achieve a worthy goal. And we achieved peace, an honorable peace and a lasting peace. He had courage, he had vision, and he had a commitment to peace, and standing here, I commit before you, before my people in Jordan, before the world, myself to continue with our utmost, to ensure that we leave a similar legacy. And when my time comes, I hope it will be like my grandfather’s and like Yitzhak Rabin’s.

May your spirit rise high and may it sense how the people of Jordan, my family, the people of Israel, decent people throughout the world feel today. So many live and so many inevitably die. This is the will of God. This is the way of all, but those who are fortunate and lucky in life, those who are greater, those who leave something behind, and you are such a man, my friend.

The faces in my country amongst the majority of my people and our armed forces and people who once were your enemies are somber today and their hearts are heavy. Let’s hope and pray that God will give us all guidance, each in his respective position to do what he can for the better future that Yitzhak Rabin sought with determination and courage. As long as I live, I’ll be proud to have known him, to have worked with him, as a brother and as a friend, and as a man, and the relationship of friendship that we had is something unique and I am proud of that.

On behalf of the people of Jordan, my large Jordanian family, my Hashemite family, to all those who belong to the camp of peace, our deepest sympathies, our deepest condolences as we share together this moment of remembrance and commitment, to continue our struggle for the future of generations to come, as did Yitzhak Rabin, and to fulfill his legacy. Thank you.

Posted in ZIO-NAZI, JordanComments Off on Eulogy for the Late Nazi Rabin by Zionist gatekeeper Traitor Hussein of Jordan

Flashback to 1995: The U.S.-I$raHell-Turkey-Jordan-Egypt Alliance at Nazi Rabin’s Funeral

Global Research
6 years before the launch of a genocidal, never-ending and ever-expanding “global war on terror” across Asia and Africa, the funeral of the assassinated “hero of peace” Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin proved to be an opportune moment to discreetly reveal an overt military alliance
That alliance is between U.S., I$raHell, Turkey, Jordan and Egypt against Iraq, Iran, Syria, Libya and the Lebanese resistance movement Hezbollah. 
U.S. President Bill Clinton gives a eulogy at the funeral of the assassinated Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, Mount Herzl, Jerusalem, 6 November 1995   U.S. President Bill Clinton gives a eulogy at the funeral of the assassinated I$raHell Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, Mount Herzl, Jerusalem, 6 November 1995

Eulogy for the Late Prime Minister and Defense Minister Yitzhak Rabin by U.S. President Bill Clinton

Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs website, 6 November 1995

Jordan’s King Hussein gives a eulogy at the funeral of the assassinated Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, Mount Herzl, Jerusalem, 6 November 1995  Jordan’s King Hussein gives a eulogy at the funeral of the assassinated Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, Mount Herzl, Jerusalem, 6 November 1995

Eulogy for the Late Prime Minister and Defense Yitzhak Rabin by His Majesty King Hussein of Jordan

Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs website, 6 November 1995

Egypt’s President Hosni Mubarak gives a eulogy at the funeral of the assassinated Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, Mount Herzl, Jerusalem, 6 November 1995Egypt’s President Hosni Mubarak gives a eulogy at the funeral of the assassinated Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, Mount Herzl, Jerusalem, 6 November 1995

Eulogy for the Late Prime Minister and Defense Yitzhak Rabin by Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak

Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs website, 6 November 1995

[emphasis added]

Excerpts from:  With blessing of U.S., Israel draws closer to Turkey and Jordan  –  Eyes on post-Saddam Iraq

by Amy Dockser Marcus, Wall Street Journal, 30 May 1996

After attending funeral services for assassinated Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin in November [1995], U.S. President Bill Clinton held an impromptu meeting in […] [King David Hotel in Jerusalem]. Among those in attendance were acting Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres, King Hussein of Jordan […] then-Prime Minister Tansu Ciller of Turkey […] [and] Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak […]

Few realized it at the time, but the Israeli television cameras that panned the room for the nightly newscast were offering the first glimpse of a new strategic alignment in the Middle East. Six months later, both the promise of that picture and the complications that go with it are increasingly apparent. […]  Martin Indyk, the U.S. ambassador to Israel, says Turkey, Israel, Jordan and Egypt share the “common thread” of threats from terrorism and the prospect of rogue states [i.e. Iran, Iraq, Libya, Syria] possessing weapons of mass destruction. […]

Israel and Turkey have signed agreements calling for everything from free trade between the two countries to joint air-force training, naval visits and intelligence sharing. [1]  […]  This month, eight Israeli F-16 jets began training in Turkish air space. […]  Turkish-Israeli naval maneuvers in the Mediterranean Sea are planned for next month, and a joint mid-air refueling exercise has already been conducted [at NATO’s Incirlik Airbase in southern Turkey [2] ]. According to Turkish and Israeli officials familiar with the [February 1996 military cooperation] agreement, Turkey will also allow Israel to gather intelligence on Syria and Iran from Turkish soil, and Israel will help with training in preventing infiltration of [PKK] terrorists across Turkey’s border [with Syria, Iraq and Iran]. […]

For the first time, U.S. warplanes in March [1996] began using a Jordanian air base from which to fly daily sorties over [the no-fly zone in] southern Iraq. […]  U.S. officials say Jordan’s military cooperation has also led to a change in the Clinton administration’s “dual containment” policy, which calls for keeping both Iran and Iraq weak but making no intensive effort to overthrow either regime. Now the U.S. is employing an enhanced version, says one official, a kind of dual containment with teeth. “We’re stepping up the pressure on Saddam,” this official says. “And we’re only able to do that because Jordan has now joined the anti-Iraq camp.” […]  It is of critical importance to the U.S., Turkey, Jordan and Israel that post-Saddam Iraq doesn’t ally itself with more radical states such as Syria, Iran or Libya. […]

[1]   The list below indicates that an overt military cooperation between Israel and Turkey was actually put into practice even before Yitzhak Rabin began his second term as a prime minister in July 1992:

April 1992: […] [Israel and Turkey’s] defense ministries sign a document on principles for [defense] cooperation.

November 1993: […] [Israel and Turkey] sign a memorandum of understanding creating joint committees of senior officials to handle regional threats such as terrorism and fundamentalism. The countries agree to cooperate in gathering intelligence on Syria, Iran, and Iraq and to meet regularly to share assessments pertaining to terrorism and military capabilities in these three countries. Turkish foreign minister Hikmet Cetin visits Israel, the first visit ever by a Turkish foreign minister.

January 1994: Israeli president Ezer Weizman visits Turkey, the first official visit ever by an Israeli head of state.

May 1994: A Security and Secrecy Agreement is signed, guaranteeing secrecy in the exchange and sharing of information between […] [Israel and Turkey].

October 1994: Israeli director of security Asaf Haffetz visits Turkey. The April 1992 protocol on defense cooperation is embellished and solidified. Specific areas for military cooperation are delineated.

November 1994: Turkish prime minister Tansu Ciller visits Israel, the first official visit by a Turkish prime minister. The two nations’ police forces reach an agreement on cooperation over the exchange of
information.  [3]

September  1995: Leaders of both countries sign a memorandum of understanding for the training ofpilots in each other’s airspace.

November 1995: Israeli naval commander Adm. Ami Ayalon visits Turkey.  [4]

source:  Timeline of Turkish-Israeli Relations, 1949–2006, by Brock Dahl and Danielle Slutzky, Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), 2006

[2]   source:  Syria fears Israeli-Turkish joint air maneuvers and intelligence, by Leslie Susser, Jerusalem Report, 2 May 1996

[3]   [At the state dinner held by Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin in honour of Turkey’s Prime Minister Tansu Ciller at King David Hotel on November 3, 1994], Mrs Ciller told her hosts, “I can assure you that you will have your promised land!” […]  The Israelis’ promised land extends from the Nile to the Euphrates, and takes in Turkish territory!

(source: ‘Turkey likely to launch “American style” strikes against Syria and Lebanon’s Bekaa’, Mideast Mirror, 16 October 1998. Note: hyperlink added)

[4]   Commander of the Israeli Navy Ami Ayalon returned from Ankara on the eve of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin’s assassination.

From the archives:

“Greater Israel”: The Zionist Plan for the Middle East – The Infamous “Oded Yinon Plan”

[“A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties” article by Oded Yinon, 1982]

by Israel Shahak, Global Research, 6 September 2015

A Zionist in disguise: Prime Minister Erdogan’s phony anti-Israel rhetoric

by Cem Ertür, Indybay, 30 November 2012

Preparing the Chessboard for the “Clash of Civilizations”: Divide, Conquer and Rule the “New Middle East”

by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, Global Research, 26 November 2011

A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm

[report by Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies, June 1996]

Posted in ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Flashback to 1995: The U.S.-I$raHell-Turkey-Jordan-Egypt Alliance at Nazi Rabin’s Funeral

Syrian Crisis: Real Terrorists Detected


Image result for SYRIA Terrorists PHOTO

By Sajjad Shaukat

Sometimes, the hunter becomes the hunt and the gunner himself becomes a target. It happens so

with the United States whose ex-President George W. Bush and President Barrack Obama had

been utilizing various forms of terrorism in the last 14 years at the cost of their own country as

well as the whole world, while giving priority to the Israeli interests.

But, Russian President Vladimir Putin has played a key role in detecting the real terrorists. In this

context, recent developments in relation to the Syrian crisis such as Russian airstrikes on the

ISIL (Daesh) strongholds in the northern Syria and Israeli-occupied Golan Heights, its coalition

with Iran, Iraq and Syria in support of President Bashar al-Assad, retreat of the CIA-supported

rebels and mercenaries after their failure to topple his government, proving links of Al-Qaeda

and ISIL with America and Israeli, Putin’s clear-cut statement, indicating the Zionist regime in

the US and Israel for their “fake war on ISIL”, and remarking, “NWO (New World Order)

agents and Satan worshipers simply have no clothes,” including the Vienna meeting where the

US Secretary of State Jonh Kerry agreed to keep the Syrian president in power (Contrary to

previous demand of regime change), for a unified, independent secular state of Syria, not to

allow ISIL militants group to reign in Syria, absence of Israel in the meeting and America’s

decision of sending 50 special forces to Syria to help in taking down ISIL terrorists have clearly

exposed the hidden aims of the US global war on terror.

Since the US started war against terrorism, after the 9/11 tragedy, various political experts have

opined that terrorism comes in a variety of forms such as religious terrorism, secular terrorism

Bruce Hoffman, in his book ‘Inside Terrorism’ writes: “For the religious terrorism, violence is

the foremost divine duty executed in direct response to some demand or imperative…the secular

terrorist sense leads to a sanctioning of limitless violence against a virtually open-ended category

Judging in these terms, either it is religious terrorism or secular terrorism, while backing the

Zionist Jews and Israeli supremacy in the Middle East in particular and the world in general, the

US which claims to be a secular state, has broken all the records of violence, genocide and

massacre by targeting the Muslims—even badly affecting the patriot Americans, during the

As regards terrorism, Machiavelli advises the rulers to have a lion-like image outwardly, and act

upon the traits of goat inwardly. He also suggests them foreign adventures and the use of terror

to obtain their goals. In his sense, a good ruler should be a good opportunist and hypocrite. While

echoing Machiavelli, Morgenthau points out that sometimes, rulers act upon immoral activities

like deceit, fraud, falsehood and even murder to fulfill their selfish aims.

Although, such a sinister politics was replaced by new trends such as fair-dealings, reconciliation

and economic development, yet by implementing the old strategies in the modern era, the then

President Bush and neoconservatives who were in collusion with the Jews and Tel Aviv

orchestrated a drama of global war on terror, following the false flag of 9/11, as they wanted to

change Henry Kissinger’s dream of the greater Israel into reality.

However, under the cover of the 9/11 tragedy, US employed coercive diplomacy on the weak

countries like Pakistan, Indonesia etc., including almost all the Arab States which joined

America’s war on terror. A majority of these states is still facing more militancy and internal

instability. US-led NATO forces attacked Afghanistan. Then, a deliberate disinformation

campaign was launched by the CIA and Jewish-controlled media all over the world that Iraq had

Weapons of Mass Destructions (WMDs). In that respect, on the self-fabricated intelligence

report and without mandate of the UN Security Council, American-Anglo forces invaded Iraq.

US-led forces employed state terrorism by special military operations, extra-judicial

assassinations and heavy aerial bombardment, which killed more than half million innocent

persons especially in Iraq and Afghanistan—and those countries like Somalia and Yemen where

the US was indirectly involved. And suspected Muslims were also kept in Guantanamo Bay, Abu

Graib and other cells, established in some Islamic countries and small European states where

personnel of the CIA, the FBI, and the military employed various methods of torture like

physical violence and even murder.

By availing the golden opportunity of the 9/11, both Israel and India joined Bush’s anti-terrorism

bandwagon and fully exploited the world phenomena of terrorism and anti-Muslim approach of

the US-led west in order to obtain their secret designs. They equated the wars of liberation with

terrorism. Their forces have been employing military terrorism such as curfews, crackdowns,

sieges, massacre and targeted killings to maintain alien rule on the controlled territories of

Palestine and Kashmir. Particularly, Tel Aviv’s brutal tactics like use of chemical weapons

against the Palestinians, Gaza blockade and starvation of the innocent persons—conversion of

the area into another concentration camp might be cited as example.

Meanwhile, President Obama who had said during his first election, “Bush has made the world

the most dangerous place”, and he would rectify the blunders, committed by his predecessor in

the name of war on terror, continued the same in their worst form. However, Obama-led

Administration went on with various techniques of ruthless terror and extrajudicial killings of the

innocent persons through illegitimate drone attacks—assisting undemocratic forces, toppling the

elected government in Egypt, and like Iraq, creation of more failed states such as Libya, Syria

etc., and covert assistance to Israel.

If, during the Bush era, Al-Qaeda was subsidiary of the CIA, ISIL which was also created by that

intelligence agency has been serving similar role, under Obama’s presidency. The militant acts

of both the terrorist outfits in Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen and especially in Syria, including other

volatile Muslim countries have been utilized by Obama in distorting the image of Islam and

Jihad so as to pacify American public in wake of multiple internal and external problems like

heavy cost of prolonged ‘different war’, financial crisis, demoralization of troops in Afghanistan

etc., and to justify the US-sponsored state terrorism, particularly Israeli military terrorism.

Here, sectarian terrorism is also of particular attention. In this context, the US had planned to

spark a civil war between the Sunnis and Shias. For the purpose, a study of the leading think

tank, Rand Corporation, titled ‘US Strategy in the Muslim World After 9/11’ was conducted on

behalf of the then US Deputy Chief of Staff for Air Force. Its report which was released on

December 27, 2004 advocated that Sunni-Shia sectarian division should be exploited to promote

the US objectives in the Muslim World.

The report was first implemented in Iraq. CIA also got the services of Israeli Mossad to fuel

sectarian violence in Iraq. In 2004, major terror-attacks were carried out against the Shias.

Afterwards, a chain of Shia-Sunni clashes started between Iraqi Shias and Sunnis, targeting each

other’s mosques, religious leaders through bomb blasts, suicide attacks etc. After Iraq’s

experiment, more deadly pattern of sectarian strife and clashes have been conducted in Pakistan,

which still continues in one or the other way.

In March, 2013, an investigative report by the British Gurdian/BBC revealed that acting under

the direction of the US high officials, atrocities carried out by Iraqi police and forces in

Iraq—unleashed a deadly sectarian militia which terrorized the Sunni community and

Nevertheless, under Obama, America is still manipulating sectarian differences between Saudi

Arabia and Iran—also noted in Syria and Yemen which have been destabilized due to civil wars.

Nonetheless, US brand of war against terrorism which has gained significance after the 9/11 is

marked by confusion about its definition and application. It has been made complicated by the

deliberate propaganda of the Jewish-controlled media, so that, it could become difficult for the

general masses of the world to detect the real terrorists. In this regard, Palestinian, Afghan and

Kashmiri freedom fighters are waging the wars of national liberation. Therefore, their acts can

not be equated with terrorism.

World history proves that wars of independence in connection with various nations were their

reaction against subjugation, maintained by alien powers through state terrorism. In the 20th

century, a majority of the Third World countries got independence after an armed struggle

against the colonial powers. Even independence of the US, unification of Germany and Italy

became possible after an armed struggle. So, question arises that were the peoples of these

countries terrorists at that time?

As a matter of fact, US-led occupying powers in Afghanistan, Palestine etc. are intruders and

hence, the real terrorists who tend to conceal their own terrorist measures which have become

Consequently, main credit goes to Putin who has exposed the actual terrorists in case of Syrian

crisis and Iraq. Now, it is established fact that Bush, Obama, neo-conservatives and the related-

top officials of America—those of Israel and other Islamic countries who committed crimes

against the larger interest of humanity, are the real terrorists.


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 SyriaComments Off on Syrian Crisis: Real Terrorists Detected





بالفيديو/الجيش السوري يقتل اخطر المسلحين ويواصل تقدمه بالقلمون

DAMASCUS:  The hushed rumors are now being disclosed to persons like myself, and, therefore, to my readers.  There is a deeply held Russian suspicion that the crash of the Russian airliner over the Sinai as it took off from Sharm Al-Shaykh was the work of none other than Prince Muhammad bin Salmaan, the Deputy Heir Apparent and the “Minister of Defense” for the imploding kingdom of mental squalor.  That’s right.  When this arrogant little pimp left the office of President Putin, in Socchi, he mumbled a threat which was recorded by the Russian minders in the building.  The best effort at decrypting it produced a threat to punish Russia for its help to Dr. Assad and to pay Mr. Putin back for the rude treatment the prince received.   I will be updating all of you on this curious development.  But, you can always say you read it first right here at SyrPer.

In the meantime, the British Press is making a big deal out of a pronouncement from the Ministry of Defense that the Russian Metrojet was downed by an IED placed on board, probably at Sharm Al-Shaykh.  What the British are doing is giving cover to a bomb placed on the passenger jet by an agent of the Saudi regime.  That agent received the bomb from a British contractor to the Saudi General “Intelligence” Directorate.  The bomb is believed to have been designed around a barometric triggering device which is technology not available yet to ISIS.  Nonetheless, the British liars are kiting this story in an effort to anticipate the results of the investigation which will prove that the plane was downed by a bomb.  It smells of British.  It was a British operation.

Don’t pay any attention to the coordinated Western effort to deflect attention from the Saudis who are definitely behind this operation.  CNN, also, is referring to ISIS as the culprit.  They are a part of the same boring cabal of Zionist-controlled media.  What they won’t tell you is that the captain and the crew of the plane could not communicate their plight for the reason that the plane was severed in midair by an explosion of C-4 ignited by a barometric device. The explosion cut the plane’s hydraulics and all wiring for communication.  Even the transponder was vaporized in the conflagration.  The passengers were killed nearly instantly.  Saudi Arabia will pay for this.

More Propaganda:  The Ayraab Propaganda outlets are claiming the Russians are floating a plan for a transition in Syria without Dr. Assad. Be careful, these too appear to be lies from the British and their Middle Eastern factotums.  I can assure you that any suggestion of our president leaving office under any circumstances will result in rioting all over Syria.

Darayyaa:  D-Day has begun in earnest.   The SAA, has attacked Daarayyaa from 6 different axes in a huge assault involving air and ground forces.  The assault began on Tuesday morning in the early hours from Al-Shiyyaah,  Ardh Al-Najaassa and 16th Street.  The purpose of the attack was not only to clean out the town, but, to protect the Mazza Military Airbase which of late had come under some danger of falling withing the artillery range of the terrorists.

Early reports indicate that the rodents, most of whom belong to Alqaeda/Nusra, Ahraar Al-Shaam and Jaysh Al-Islam, are withdrawing from all positions behind destroyed fortifications.  Already, we can assure our readers that an American-Zionist trainer has been killed along with 10 Saudi accomplices and 5 Kuwaitis, Palestinians and Yemenis who acted as his aides under order from the Zionist Mossad. The American-Zionist trainer is named “Stefan Flicks” (or possibly, Felix).


(Thanks, Khaled Nawaz Al-Nouri)

Doumaa:  ‘Alloosh, if alive, is now on his last rat leg.  Here too, rodents are withdrawing in large numbers to buildings where innocent Syrian citizens have been placed in cages on the roofs, ostensibly to prevent increased aerial bombings and ground missile attacks. Needless to say, the Western Media will not report this even though HRW, a Soros lie factory, has condemned the practice. Here are some of the names of dead Syrian traitors who were carrying proper identification.  The actual number of dead ‘Allooshis, so far, exceeds 58:

Usaamaa Al-Maraakibi  

Jihaad Sawwaan

Muhammad Jarboo’

‘Abdul-Fattaah Shamass

Muhammad Khateeb

Firaas Abu-Hussayn

Daawood Al-‘Annaab

Ahmad Zayn Maksoof

Hassan Al-‘Atri  (Var. Al-‘Utari)


This is supposedly Abu Bakr Al-Turkmaani, killed in Ghumaam, Latakia, yesterday.  Looks kind of funny for a Turkman.  (Thanks to Aida)



Harastaa:  SAA is pounding Alqaeda near the Chemical Components Directorate and is cleaning up the Damascus-Homs Highway.

Mu’adhdhamiyyat Al-Shaam:  Right next to Daarayyaa, SAA units are assaulting rodents to prevent any reinforcements who might be sent to Daarayyaa.


(Thanks, Khaled Nawaz Al-Nouri)



Syria: Democracy vs. Foreign Invasion


Who is Bashar Al Assad?

A Syrian’s Perspective: Bashar al-Assad’s Democratic Movement

Global Research

Bashar al-Assad has been systematically demonized by the mainstream and so-called alternative media who claim that he is a brutal dictator.

Actually Bashar is a reformer who has done much to further the causes of democracy and freedom. It is the “opposition” and their foreign supporters which represent the most repressive elements of the former ruling party in Syria.

To fully understand this its is helpful to look at the historical context of the current crisis. The so-called “spontaneous popular uprising” started in Daraa on March 15th, 2011. The court house, police stations, governor’s house, and other public buildings were looted and torched by the “peaceful protestors” in the first week of the crisis. The people in Homs then began to protest in solidarity with Daraa, but this was uncharacteristic of peaceful Homs and many Syrians knew that it was a fake revolution.

About 110 unarmed police officers were murdered in Daraa and Homs, sparking anger against the “revolutionaries.” There was an incident in the city Baniyas where an Alawite truck driver was attacked by an armed mob, skinned, and paraded through the city. This was strongly resented by almost all Syrians and since then not a single major city actually rebelled against the government.

The foreign backed “revolutionaries” would attack a neighborhood, police station, or army base, from across the borders of Lebanon, Jordan, Turkey, and Iraq. Then they would claim that the city was in rebellion.

But the Syrians, seeing the same lies in all the western and Arab news stations, and the exiled rotten officials adopting the ‘revolution’, mostly took an anti-revolution stance. That is why whenever the rebels would infest a town or city you would immediately hear of a massacre to punish the residents for not supporting them. Of course the mainstream media would claim that it was Assad forces punishing the town that dared to oppose him!

Assad took advantage of the revolution to introduce his packages of reforms, putting aside those in the old guards who opposed them. Many of the old guard then joined the opposition abroad.

The opposition demanded the removal of article 8 from the Syrian constitution making the Baath Party head of the government. Instead of just deleting it Bashar Assad had the constitution re-written buy a specialized committee of Syrian experts from all parties in Syria and with input from all Syrians.

A referendum was held and the new constitution was approved with almost 90% of a voter turnout of 60%.

Assad then enacted a Media Law that would allow more freedom of expression and the establishment of new independent media outlets. Assad eased requirements on the formation of political parties, excluding sectarian based parties. We now have at least nine new political parties.

Municipal elections were held in December 2011. Many of those who won seats were assassinated or threatened throughout the country by the same revolutionaries who claimed to want democracy. Parliamentary elections were held in May 2012 with no eligibility restraints on the candidates.

Many new members of parliament have also been assassinated by the FSA including the wife and three daughters of parliament elect trustee Abdulla Mishleb in the infamous Houla massacre.

Historical Context: Syria in the 1980s

Recent events can be better understood in the context of Syrian history. Bashar al-Assad is the son of late president Hafez al-Assad. Hafez was described by western mainstream media as a tyrant and oppressor but he was not nearly as bad as any other leader in his time like Thatcher, Reagan, or any of the region’s rulers including Turkey’s military rule.The current anti-Assad opposition often refer to the 1982 Hama ‘massacre’.

They claim that Hafez besieged the city and then bombed it killing up to 40,000 civilians. I lived in Damascus at that time and you must understand the conditions in the country at the time to know what really happened.

1) The Muslim Brotherhood was engaged in a war of terror at that time, nothing less than what the Free Syrian Army (FSA) is doing now. The Muslim Brotherhood’s forces were called the ‘Fighting Vanguard’ (Arabic “Al Taleea Al Muqatleh”). Many of the present leaders of the FSA are the same men who led the Fighting Vanguard in the 80s; and they were as savage as their sons now. One of the Fighting Vanguard’s bombings included the Azbakiyeh Bombing in Damascus which took the lives of over 175 civilians and injured hundreds more, and there were many other terror attacks.

2) The entire Hama episode was led by Hafez al-Assad’s younger brother (Bashar al-Assad’s uncle) Rifaat Assad. Rifaat was heading the Saraya Difaa (later to become the Republican Guard). At that time the Syrian minister of defense was Mustapha Tlass, and the Syrian minister of foreign affairs was Abdul Halim Khaddam. All three of them: Riffaat al-Assad, Mustapha, and Abdul Khaddam are leading and financing the political opposition against Bashar from abroad right now.In the current conflict Mustapha’s son Manaf Tlass was sent to negotiate a settlement with his cousins who were rebelling in Rastan.

3) But instead of negotiating he gave them weapons from the Republican Guards caches and leaked secrets causing the deaths of many Republican Guard soldiers at the hands of the FSA.Thirty years after the fighting in Hama a report by US intelligence was declassified revealing that the death toll didn’t even reach 2,000. That number included 400 Muslim Brotherhood Fighting Vanguard militants; many Syrian Army soldiers and officers; Baath Party and other state officials; and a number of civilians who were caught in the fire.

4) Syria was under harder sanctions than it is now. Syria has been under increasingly severe western sanctions since 1956, 15 years before Hafez Assad took power.

Late Hafez Assad followed a more complex policy regarding foes and foreign agents in his government than Bashar does. Hafez would keep his foes in their posts but under his watchful eyes.

When Bashar was selected by the Syrian Parliament to succeed his father in 2000 he removed all of the treasonous foes and foreign agents that Hafez had maintained in office.Bashar’s first reform was to ease some political restrictions, allowing politicians to move more freely. In June 2000 the Damascus Spring was started. It lasted until Autumn 2001 by which time most of the treasonous opposition’s foreign funding, and relations with the US Department of State and corporate think tanks had been exposed. The corrupt officials and their families were expelled from Syria and settled in foreign countries.

They used their massive accumulations of wealth to mount political opposition to Bashar from abroad. In 2003 the US was occupying Iraq.

US Secretary of State Collin Powell visited Bashar and handed him a list of demands including:

1. Cutting all ties with the five main Palestinian factions in Syria,

2. Severing Syria’s relations with Iran in exchange for a promise of better relations with some Arab states.

3. Signing a peace treaty with Israel similar to one Syria had already refused.

4. Removing books from schools with any enmity towards Israel.

5. Allowing western banks and companies unhindered access to Syrian markets and resources along with other neo-liberal reforms.

Bashar refused these demands in the face of the nearly 200,000 coalition troops across the Syrian border in Iraq. Instead Bashar sought to hinder the occupation of Iraq and demanded that the occupying forces withdraw. Because of the proximity of Damascus to the western boarder with Lebanon Syria has the strategic need to secure this border. None the less in 2000 Bashar started withdrawing Syrian troops from Lebanon where they had battled Israeli forces.

The troops were reduced from 35,000 in the year 2000 to 14,000 in early 2004.In 2005 Lebanese Prime Minster Rafic Hariri was assassinated with the help of members of the Lebanese Future Movement party and likely the help of the US and France. This was a political blow to Assad within Lebanon, and he was also blamed for the assassination using media manipulation and prepared activists.

Tens of thousands of Lebanese took to the streets to condemn the killing of Hariri including members of Syria’s closest allies Hizbullah and Amal.The media claimed that the crowds were against the Syrian Army presence in Lebanon. US and France tried to pressure Assad into reinforcing the Syrian Army in Lebanon to stabilize the country but Bashar withdrew all Syrian troops from Lebanon.

This background gives the context accompanying president Assad’s reform attempts in Syria, where he had to face foreign powers from abroad and their agents from within.

The current crisis is not a civil war or rebellion, but a foreign aggression against a sovereign nation.


Posted in SyriaComments Off on Syria: Democracy vs. Foreign Invasion

Turkish plans to attack Islamic State excuse for hitting Kurds

Twitter Erdogan censorship 2

Ankara is worried about possible Kurdish-American collaboration after the backing the Kurds got from Moscow, says Dr. Jamal Wakim, Professor of History and International Relations at Lebanese University.

Turkey says it will carry out a military operation against ISIS in the near future, without specifying when.

RT: Turkey’s already carrying out air strikes. What kind of military operation does it have in mind now?

Dr. Jamal Wakim: Well, I believe that Turkey’s declaration that it intends to launch a military operation against ISIL is a mere cover up for its real intention to wage a war against the Kurds. It is on the Kurds and against the PKK [Kurdistan Workers’ Party] militants. Especially that Turkey is worried now; mainly Erdogan is worried about the prospects of Kurdish-American collaboration after the backing that the Kurds got from Moscow.

In this case the Kurds of Turkey, who are spread over 40 percent of Eastern Anatolia, will be in a better position to pressure for getting their own rights within Turkey on the one hand, and maybe they can push for autonomy or even independence as they claimed in the past four decades. So that is why I believe that the real intention is to wage a war against the Kurds and marginalize them at the time when the Kurds are getting support from both the US and Russia at the same time.

RT: Turkey has been using its air strikes to take out Kurdish targets. Is fighting ISIL just a pretext?

Dr. JW: In the past two years the main support that ISIL got was from Turkey. Mainly there were media reports in the West about logistical support, about using Turkish airports – ISIL militants would go to Turkish airports and then go by land to Northern Syria and Iraq. When Turkey declared that it was launching attacks on ISIL, actually its main attacks were on the Kurds of Northern Syria.

There were even media reports that said that ISIL served the purpose of Turkey to clear out the Kurds from Northern Syria, especially in the case of Kobani at one point, and to target the Christian population that is considered as hostile to Turkish influence in Northern Syria. That is why I don’t believe that the intention of Turkey is really to fight ISIL.

Posted in TurkeyComments Off on Turkish plans to attack Islamic State excuse for hitting Kurds

Shoah’s pages


November 2015
« Oct   Dec »