
Unforgiving.
Ha’aretz: This has happened in recent days: The Dutch water company Vitens severed its ties with Israeli counterpart Mekorot; Canada’s largest Protestant church decided to boycott three Israeli companies; the Romanian government refused to send any more construction workers; and American Studies Association academics are voting on a measure to sever links with Israeli universities.
Coming so shortly after the Israeli government effectively succumbed to a boycott of settlements in order to be eligible for the EU’s Horizon 2020 scientific cooperation agreement, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that the BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions) movement is picking up speed. And the writing on the wall, if anyone missed it, only got clearer and sharper in the wake of the death of Nelson Mandela.
There were valid arguments to be made both for and against Prime Minister Netanyahu’s participation in Tuesday’s memorial ceremony for Mandela, but there is no denying that the prime minister’s inept on-again, off-again, too-expensive, leave-me-alone public handling of this sensitive issue attracted unwanted publicity and compounded an already precarious situation.
The embarrassing flap singled out Israel as “odd man out,” fueled media scrutiny of Israel’s past collaboration with the apartheid regime and provided valuable ammunition to those who would equate the two. More ominously, from an Israeli point of view, the analogy between today’s Israel and yesterday’s South Africa could also stoke a belief that the former can be brought to its knees in much the same way as the latter was in the late 1970s and early 1980s.
When the United Nations passed its first non-binding resolution calling for a boycott of South Africa in 1962, it was staunchly opposed by a bloc of Western countries, led by Britain and the United States. But the grassroots campaign that had started with academic boycotts in the late 1950s gradually moved on to sports and entertainment and went on from there to institutional boycotts and divestment. Along the way, the anti-apartheid movement swept up larger and larger swaths of Western public opinion, eventually forcing even the most reluctant of governments, including Israel and the U.S., to join the international sanctions regime.
In a 1998 article entitled “International Norms, Dynamics and Political Change,” political scientists Martha Finnemore, now of George Washington University, and Kathryn Sikking of the University of Minnesota laid out the foundations of the “life cycle†by which certain norms develop to shape the behavior of states and then of the international community as a whole. The first step, they claim, is “norm emergence,” when a new norm is championed by NGO’s and “norm entrepreneurs.” The second stage is a “norms cascade,” when states fall into line to embrace the new norm. And a prerequisite for evolution from the first to the second stages is a “tipping point†that occurs when a critical mass of events and opinions converge to create the norms cascade.
In the case of South Africa, the first “tipping point†probably came in the Soweto riots of 1976, which sparked the protest and disinvestment campaigns that ultimately swept American universities, pension funds and multinational corporations. The second “tipping point†came after the black South African rebellion against the racist 1983 constitution and the imposition of a permanent State of Emergency in 1984-1985, which brought the rest of the world into line.
“Tipping points,” of course, are hard to predict, and efforts to do so have been the focal point of widespread, multidisciplinary research in recent years. “You know the edge is out there, but it’s dark and foggy. We’re really great at knowing where thresholds are after we fall off the cliff, but that’s not very helpful,†as lake ecologist and “tipping point†researcher Stephen Carpenter told USA today in 2009.
Israel could very well be approaching such a threshold. Among the many developments that could be creating the required critical mass one can cite the passage of time since the Twin Towers attacks in September 2001, which placed Israel in the same camp as the U.S. and the West in the War on Terror; Israel’s isolation in the campaign against Iran’s nuclear programs; the disappearance of repelling archenemies such as Osama bin Laden, Muammar Gadhafi, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and, to a lesser degree, Yasser Arafat; the relative security and lack of terror inside Israel coupled with its own persistent settlement drive; and the negative publicity generated by revelations of racism in Israeli society, the image of its rulers as increasingly rigid and right wing and the government’s own confrontations with illegal African immigrants and Israeli Bedouin, widely perceived as being tinged with bias and prejudice.
In recent days, American statesmen seem to be more alarmed about the looming danger of delegitimization than Israelis are. In remarks to both the Saban Forum and the American Joint Distribution Committee this week, Secretary of State John Kerry described delegitimization as “an existential danger.” Vice President Joe Biden, speaking to the same JDC forum, went one step further: “The wholesale effort to delegitimize Israel is the most concentrated that I have seen in the 40 years I have served. It is the most serious threat in my view to Israel’s long-term security and viability.â€
One must always take into account the possibility of unforeseen developments that will turn things completely around. Barring that, the only thing that may be keeping Israel from crossing the threshold and “going over the cliff†in the international arena is Kerry’s much-maligned peace process, which is holding public opinion and foreign governments at bay and preventing a “tipping point†that would dramatically escalate the anti-Israeli boycott campaign.
Which only strengthens Jeffrey Goldberg’s argument in a Bloomberg article on Wednesday that Kerry is “Israel’s best friend.” It also highlights, once again, how narrow-minded, shortsighted and dangerously delusional Kerry’s critics, peace process opponents and settlement champions really are (though you can rest assured that if and when the peace process collapses and Israel is plunged into South African isolation, they will be pointing their fingers in every direction but themselves.)
More and more people are making history by joining the right side of history. Read about it here.
Once again, an Israeli leader shows how Israel is on the wrong side of history. I mean, why should Netanyahu attend a funeral for a world leader of unprecedented importance such as Mandela, when the latter opposed everything for which Netanyahu stands? The “costs” are merely an excuse. He simply isn’t going where he doesn’t belong and is not welcome.
Ha’aretz: In his eleventh-hour decision against attending the funeral of Nelson Mandela, Benjamin Netanyahu proved that he is not the smug, petty, vindictive, waffling, in-your-face insulting man he seems. He’s something worse.
The problem is not so much that the prime minister had first informed the South African government that he would, in fact, attend the ceremony, alongside Presidents Obama, George W. Bush and Bill Clinton, French President Francois Hollande, and scores of other world dignitaries, among them Iranian President Hassan Rohani, in what is expected to be a world gathering unprecedented in scope.
Nor is the basic problem the fact that the decision was made so abruptly and with such lack of consultation, that the office of President Shimon Peres was thrown for a loop, and it was unclear if arrangements could be made to have Peres represent Israel in Netanyahu’s stead.
The problem is the reason Netanyahu chose to give: Money. The trip would cost too much. The problem, then, is the message Netanyahu has chosen to send:
My Israel, which so craves and demands legitimacy and recognition as a full partner in the community of nations, does not consider a man like Nelson Mandela, or a nation like South Africa, or the sentiment of an entire world, worth the price of a plane flight.
In sending this message, Benjamin Netanyahu has treated the passing of Nelson Mandela as he does every challenge in statecraft: He has addressed one problem by creating another.
His message is clear: My Israel, which spends untold tens of millions on such matters as bolstering and protecting settlement construction during peace negotiations with the Palestinians, or erecting detention facilities for African asylum seekers rather than formulating coherent and just refugee policies, has nothing left over for this man Mandela.
But that’s only the beginning. With a wink and a nod to the settler right, the academic rabid right, and the KKK-esque far right, Netanyahu is sending an even stronger message:
This is where I stand on this Palestinian-lover, Mandela. And this is where I stand on his Palestinian-lover heirs.
At home, the decision has been interpreted as Netanyahu’s response to recent reports of profligate household spending.
Bottom line, Netanyahu seems to be suggesting: I have learned my lesson from having lavish bedrooms installed in airliners for relatively short trips, and for overspending taxpayers’ money on flowers and candles and pool water for my three homes.
I will economize. No more empty frills. Like the Mandela funeral.
Worst of all, perhaps, and certainly setting a new standard in irony, Netanyahu’s skipping the Mandela commemorations will allow him to oversee an extraordinary exercise in ramming through a Knesset bill to allow authorities to jail African asylum seekers for up to a year without trial, and to keep them from finding gainful employment in Israel.
Just last month, the cabinet approved a budget allocation of 440 million shekels ($126 million) to fund the provisions of the as-yet-unpassed and High Court-vulnerable bill – more than 60 times what it would have cost for Netanyahu to attend the funeral.
Never has Netanyahu sent a message quite this infuriating, with so much apparent success.
He is betting, apparently, that the moderate majority has expectations so low, its resources of outrage so overtaxed and depleted, its capacity for response so beaten flat, that it will do little more than shrug and trudge on. And this bet may well be the smart money.
What we are stuck with, in the end, is the message that Netanyahu is sending to the world. The world that Netanyahu’s Israel is determined not to be a part of.
“The whole world is coming to South Africa,” foreign ministry spokesman Clayson Monyela said at the weekend.
The world, yes. Israel, maybe not.
He was a source of inspiration for people struggling against militarized racism the world over. His example endures in all those who refuse to submit injustice. #PALESTINE
The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan gave us al-Qaeda. The Israeli occupation of the remainder of Palestine gave us Hamas. The American invasion of Iraq gave us Zarqawi and al-Qaeda in Iraq. The Saudi-Qatar-Turkish-American financed “jihad” in Syria today has produced the legion of transnational Chechen jihadists:
The Wall Street Journal: For months, Syrian government forces hunkered down at a remote air base north of Aleppo, deftly fending off rebel assaults—until one morning a war machine rumbled out of the countryside, announcing that the Chechens had arrived.
The vehicle was notable for its primal scariness: Rebels had welded dozens of oil-drilling pipes to the sides of the armored personnel carrier, and packed it with four tons of high explosives, according to videos released online by the rebels.
It was piloted by a suicide driver, who detonated the vehicle at the base, sending a ground-shaking black cloud into the sky in an attack that analysts said finally cleared the way for rebels to storm the airfield.
The final capture of the airport in August immediately boosted the prestige of its unruly mastermind Tarkhan Batirashvili, according to analysts—an ethnic Chechen whose warring skills, learned in the U.S.-funded Georgian army, are now being put to use by a group deeply at odds with more mainstream Western-backed rebels.
The jihadi commander has recently emerged from obscurity to be the northern commander in Syria of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Sham (ISIS), an al Qaeda-connected coalition whose thousands of Arab and foreign fighters have overrun key Syrian military bases, staged public executions and muscled aside American-backed moderate rebel groups trying to topple President Bashar al-Assad.
Conversations with Mr. Batirashvili’s relatives and two of his former army commanders reveal a complex portrait of a modern jihadist from the former Soviet Union, motivated by misfortune as much as newly found religious zeal.
Born to a Christian father and Muslim mother, he served in an intelligence unit of the Georgian army before opportunities dried up at home and he left for holy war, friends and former colleagues said.
Efforts to reach Mr. Batirashvili were unsuccessful. And a website, fisyria.com, which boasts of his accomplishments, didn’t respond to requests for comment.
The arrival of Mr. Batirashvili, known by his Arab nom de guerre Emir Umar al-Shishani, comes as other ethnic Chechens and Russian-speaking Islamists have for the first time responded in large numbers to the call of an international jihad in Syria.
Fighting in tightknit groups, the men have awed and repelled fellow jihadists with their military prowess and brutality, talking to one another in Russian or Chechen and to outsiders in the formal Arabic of the Quran, according to accounts of fellow rebels. Some have carved out fiefdoms inside Syria, enraging locals by collecting taxes and imposing Islamic Shariah law.
Even by the gruesome standards of the war in Syria, their rise has become notable for its unusual violence. One rebel from Russia’s Dagestan, for instance, was chased out of the country after he appeared in an online video where he beheaded three locals for supporting the Syrian government, according to analysts with ties to the rebel groups. And just last week, Mr. Batirashvili’s group apologized for mistakenly beheading a wounded soldier who actually turned out to be an allied rebel commander.
The prominence of the rebels on the battlefield has turned the conflict into a geopolitical struggle between the U.S. and Russia, which has long accused the West of ignoring the danger of Islamists in the troubled Chechen region, where an insurgency has been active for decades.
While people close to Mr. Batirashvili say he views the war as a chance to strike a blow against one of the Kremlin’s allies, he has also talked of his hatred of America. In a recent interview with a jihadi website, he described Americans as “the enemies of Allah and the enemies of Islam.”
Until recently, Mr. Batirashvili had few outward religious convictions, former colleagues said. But like many Chechens he wanted to fight the Kremlin wherever he had the chance. “He had that kind of hatred for them,” said Malkhaz Topuria, a former commander who has watched his onetime subordinate’s stardom grow in videos posted on the Internet. “It was in his genes.”
Moscow has mostly crushed its Islamist rebellion in the North Caucasus region, but a top Kremlin official warned last month of the new “terrorist international” in Syria, which could eventually return its focus on the mother country.
U.S. intelligence estimates that as many as 17,000 foreigners are fighting on the side of rebels in Syria. About half fight for the ISIS; of those, officials in Russia say, at least a thousand are from the country’s North Caucasus and from Europe, where many Chechens have sought asylum since the collapse of the Soviet Union and hostilities in Chechnya in the 1990s.
While the Russian-speaking Islamists represent a fraction of the total rebels, many have risen to positions of power because of their history of fighting a standing army in Russia, according to analysts.
Kremlin officials say that these fighters are picking up more military experience, as well as contacts to Arab financiers who bankrolled uprisings elsewhere in the Middle East and Africa.
“One day, it’s highly likely many of these fighters will return to their home republics in the Caucasus, which will clearly generate a heightened security threat to that region,” said Charles Lister, analyst at IHS Jane’s Terrorism and Insurgency Centre.
The Chechen region has come under scrutiny lately in the U.S. in the wake of this year’s Boston Marathon bombing. The alleged bomber on trial, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, has roots in Chechnya and posted videos online recruiting fighters to Syria.
Mr. Batirashvili’s ability to work with foreign jihadis appears to have been vital to his rise within the ISIS, which has become the main umbrella group for foreign fighters in Syria, including Saudis, Kuwaitis, Egyptians and even Chinese, according to analysts.
The ISIS, originally founded as an umbrella organization for Iraqi jihadists, views the war in Syria as a means not only to overthrow the Assad regime but a historic battleground for a larger holy war and the establishment of a larger Islamic state, Mr. Batirashvili said in an interview recently with a jihadist website.
Some of the men respond to appeals on YouTube under a generic call to fight for an Islamic state under Shariah law, according to analysts. Most fly into Turkey and then slip over the porous border into Syria, according to interviews with fellow Islamists.
Mr. Batirashvili hailed from outside Russia’s borders, but hostility to Kremlin rule pulsed around him. His parents were ethnic Chechens from Georgia’s Pankisi Gorge, a rugged valley that borders Chechnya that has been a traditional safe haven for fighters opposing Russia.
Mr. Batirashvili got his first exposure to the rebel spirit as a shepherd boy, living in a brick hut with no plumbing in the village of Birkiani, his father Temuri said. There, Mr. Batirashvili helped Chechen rebels cross secretly into Russia and sometimes he joined the fighters on missions against Russian-backed troops, his father said.
After high school, he joined the Georgian army and distinguished himself as master of various weaponry and maps, said Mr. Topuria, his former commander, who recruited him into a special reconnaissance group.
Russia has long accused the U.S. of irresponsibly funding the Georgian army, which it says in turn supports Islamists—a charge the Georgians and the U.S. deny.
Mr. Batirashvili was easygoing and popular with fellow soldiers and steered clear of discussing religion, though he did acknowledge his Muslim family, Mr. Topuria said.
Mr. Batirashvili rose fast in the army, being promoted to sergeant in a new intelligence unit, where his monthly salary of about $700 was more than he had ever made in his life, his father and former commanders said.
A representative for the Georgian army confirmed only the basic facts of his service in the army, declining to comment on any other activities.
When Georgian forces were ordered to attack the Russian-backed breakaway province of South Ossetia in 2008, Mr. Batirashvili was near the front line, spying on Russian tank columns and relaying their coordinates to Georgian artillery units, a former commander said. The war lasted five days.
Two years later Mr. Batirashvili’s life began to unravel. He was diagnosed with tuberculosis in 2010 and confined to a military hospital for several months. When he emerged, he was deemed unfit for the military and discharged, the ministry said.
Returning home, Mr. Batirashvili was “very disillusioned,” his father said. The local police force wouldn’t hire him, and his mother died after having fought cancer for years.
“He was very nervous, and worried about money,” a former Georgian army commander said. He said Mr. Batirashvili also appeared to be helping Islamist rebels inside Russia, and asked the former commander for help finding some military-grade maps of Chechnya.
In September 2010, Mr. Batirashvili was arrested for illegally harboring weapons, the defense ministry said, and sentenced to three years in prison.
The ministry refused to provide further details about the case.
Mr. Batirashvili’s cousin Jabrail said he was released from jail after about 16 months in early 2012 and immediately left the country. “He had plenty of time to sit and think in jail about how he had been treated,” his cousin said. “He served in the army in the most dangerous places, and then when he got sick they took his job and then they put him in prison.”
In a recent interview with the jihadi website, Mr. Batirashvili said that prison transformed him. “I promised God that if I come out of prison alive, I’ll go fight jihad for the sake of God,” he said.
Though Mr. Batirashvili announced that he was headed for Istanbul, his father said it was clear he was planning to offer his services to Islamists. Members of the Chechen diaspora in the Turkish capital were ready to recruit him to lead fighters inside Syria, and an older brother had gone there months before, his father said.
“We argued about [his decision] bitterly,” he said. “But he was a man with no job, no prospects. So he took the wrong path.”
His former army commanders also lost contact with him, and only received word of his whereabouts this spring when Georgia’s army intelligence service contacted them.
The army, they said, wanted help identifying a jihadi leader who had appeared lately in videos from Syria. The man spoke Russian with a Georgian accent, they said.
When he opened the first video, “I recognized him immediately,” one of his commanders said. Mr. Batirashvili had traded in his Georgian army fatigues for a traditional South Asian shalwar kameez shirt and had grown a red beard that reached down to his chest.
But his speech, barely above a mumble, and his habit of staring at the ground as he talked were the same, he said.
In videos, Mr. Batirashvili was first identified as commander of a group calling itself Jaish al-Muhajireen wal-Ansar, or “Army of Emigrants and Helpers.” He called for donations, claiming jihadists finally had a chance to establish an Islamic state in the Middle East.
This summer, videos identified him as a newly named commander of the ISIS. His speeches, delivered in Russian, are distributed over a website, www.fisyria.com, which brags of his group’s victories and frequently appeals for donations.
In a recent report, International Crisis Group said that Mr. Batirashvili’s army has imposed extremist rule of law in areas he controls, shooting into peaceful demonstrations and detaining activists for offenses that include nonviolent dissent and smoking cigarettes during Ramadan.
Mr. Batirashvili’s father said he hasn’t heard from his son for almost two years and gets news of him mostly through his older brother, who has been fighting with him in Syria. He said he doubts his son’s beard was grown out of any religious conviction.
“He just switched armies, and now he’s wearing a different hat,” he said.
Sometimes food for critical thought can ruffle some feathers:
The following piece by journalist Asa Winstanley was originally published on Middle East Monitor on November 22, 2013. On November 25 it was replaced by an editor’s note reading, “Due to the large number of complaints we’ve received which deemed this article to be offensive to the sacrifices of the Syrian people in their struggle for justice, it has been removed. Asa Winstanley stands by his article.â€
Although the Jacobin editorial staff has a plurality of positions on Syria, we consider the arguments Winstanley lays out to be a useful contribution to the discussion around the ongoing crisis in the country. We repost it here in its entirety to further this dialogue. — Eds.
What has happened in the Arab world since Tunisian icon Muhammed Bouazizi burned himself to death in protest in December 2010?
A series of popular uprisings, each feeding off the next, swept the region. From Morocco to Oman, there were varying degrees of protest against ossified regimes, demanding everything from the downfall of the regime to more simple reforms.
But we can now say with confidence that none of these uprisings has constituted a revolution. Of course, the immense struggles and sacrifices that people have made may yet sow seeds for the future.
But what is a revolution anyway, if not a struggle to completely transform the state and society? The closest any of the uprisings has come to revolution has been in Tunisia, which still faces immense internal problems.
As my colleague at the Electronic Intifada Ali Abunimah has put it, Egypt is now back behind square one. The generals’ bloody coup regime is fulfilling its junior contractor roll as part of the brutal Israeli siege on Gaza far more effectively than they managed under Muhammed Morsi. The first elected Egyptian president was kidnapped by the military and now sits in their dungeons, awaiting the outcome of a farcical show trial.
Libya is an absolute disaster. Brutal militias now run the country, gunning down demonstrators, and kidnapping government ministers and security officials at will. The same militias ethnically cleansed an entire town of black Libyans and still blocks their return. These are the fruits of the NATO “liberation†campaign of bombs, which was foolishly supported by even some leftists.
I was always against NATO bombing of Libya. But if I look now back at some of my reactions on Twitter in the early part of 2011, it’s clear I, too, was over-optimistic about Egypt and elsewhere. I, too, spoke in favor of the early demonstrations against the Syrian regime, notwithstanding fears from the beginning that they would be hijacked.
Like many others, I hoped for positive change to the sweep the region. As well as the inherent value of such a change in itself, a free Arab world is best placed to confront Israel’s apartheid regime. The road to Jerusalem runs though Arab capitals, as the late Palestinian leader George Habash used to emphasize.
The American imperial power and its clients and allies were caught off guard and seemed paralyzed. But, spurred on by the Israeli-Saudi tag-team that leads the counter-revolutionary forces of the region, the hegemon soon rallied its forces and wasted little time engaging in covert operations.
And so I come to the missing part of this picture: Syria.
To say Syria is now a disaster is a massive understatement. This is a sectarian civil war which could continue for a decade if the regime’s enemies, led by the brutal Saudi tyranny, continue to wage their proxy war on the country.
The mostly widely-relied-on body-count, that of the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (a group which is close to armed rebels, and whose reliability I have questioned in the past), now states that 120,000 Syrians have been killed. The Syrian Observatory claims that the majority of these are combatants — and the majority of those on have been on the pro-Assad side.
The fact of this imbalance is conveniently ignored by western media reporting, which continues with its untenable narrative about a revolution of unarmed Syrian protesters which only took up arms after being shot down by the evil Assad regime.
If that was true, why do even the Syrian Observatory’s figures not bare this picture out? There was never a revolution in Syria.
As I have said, that is also true of other countries, but there are important differences.
Firstly, pro-Western dictators like Ben Ali and Mubarak were resting on their laurels, and failed to cultivate a significant popular base. (Presumably, they foolishly thought they could rely on their American and European funders not to sell them down the river. How mistaken they were.)
This is why, for example, in the early part of 2011, you never saw anything more than small handfuls of cowed government workers in pathetic little pro-Mubarak demonstrations.
But what a difference in Syria. Yes, the regime is dictatorial and ruthless. But from the beginning of the uprising, which initially only demanded “reform,†Syria was split. Along with large anti-Assad demonstrations, there were equally huge pro-Assad demonstrations.
When demonstrations supporting a brutal tyrant are attended on such a massive scale, you shouldn’t fool yourself with the farcical BBC theory that tens of thousands of people were “forced†onto the streets.
By now, there are no demonstrations of significance on either side, and these pro-Assad mobilizations occurred before he committed some of his worst crimes. But there is no doubt this popular support freed his hand for further (and often indiscriminate) military crackdowns on the “terrorist†groups.
This is a tyrant who has (as strongly implied by UN weapons inspectors) used chemical weapons against civilians, and who has bombed whole areas indiscriminately in his fight against armed groups. And yet, Assad has a genuine support base which, almost by default, is only growing as the armed insurgents fighting him become more and more openly aligned to fanatical groups like al-Qaeda.
The always questionable “Free Syrian Army†is disintegrating, with many of its members either joining the al-Qaeda-aligned brigades such as the Jabhat al-Nusra and the Islamic State of Iraq and Sham – or even defecting back to the regime. Astonishingly, some leaders in these supposedly “moderate†brigades now no longer want Assad to leave power.
One recently told the Guardian’s reporter Ghaith Abdul-Ahad that: “I need Bashar [al-Assad] to last for two more years… It would be a disaster if the regime fell now: we would split into mini-states that would fight among each other. We’ll be massacring each other – tribes, Islamists and battalions… There will be either Alawites or Sunnis. Either them or us. Maybe in 10 years we will all be bored with fighting and learn how to coexist… In 10 years maybe, not now.â€
As this sectarian hatred shows, they were never moderate anyway. Which explains why so many “FSA†units have now joined groups pledging allegiance to al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawarhari (formerly Osama bin Laden’s number two).
And herein lies the second key to the mystery of Assad’s continued support base (polarized as it is): the alternative is considered by many normal people in Syria and in the region as a whole, to be far worse.
Armed takfiri fanatics, particularly the Islamic State of Iraq and Sham, now control large parts of the Syrian countryside, even as the regime’s forces are making steady gains. The only “revolution†with any current prospect of succeeding is an al-Qaeda revolution. And of course, that is no revolution at all.
This is the “revolution†which, apparently unnoticed by its Western cheerleaders, expelled Syrian Christians wholesale from the town of Qusair, long before the Lebanese resistance party Hezbollah began its divisive intervention in support of the regime there.
This is the “revolution†whose supposedly moderate “Free Army†brigades fought with al-Qaeda groups who invaded Syrian areas which they considered strongholds of the wrong religion or sect. FSA units fought with Jabhat al-Nusra when it invaded the historic Christian-majority town Ma’loula in September (until they were fought off by the regime).
The exiled and nominal head of the FSA, Salim Idriss (who is quite openly armed and funded by France, the UK and US) participated — apparently in person — in a joint FSA-al-Qaeda invasion of Latakia villages in August. This was a purely sectarian slaughter of at least 190 Alawite civilians, with not even a pretence of a military target.
An eyewitness related to the Guardian journalist Jonathan Steele: “When we got into the [Latakia-area] village of Balouta I saw a baby’s head hanging from a tree. There was a woman’s body which had been sliced in half from head to toe and each half was hanging from separate apple trees. It made me feel I wanted to do something wild.â€
Idriss described this campaign as one of their “important successes and victories that our revolutionaries have gainedâ€. Some victory.
In a November 2011 article, most controversial at the time, renowned Palestinian academic and intellectual Joseph Massad wrote that Syrians “must face up to the very difficult conclusion that they have been effectively defeated, not by the horrifying repression of their own dictatorial regime which they have valiantly resisted, but rather by the international forces that are as committed as the Syrian regime itself to deny Syrians the democracy they so deserve… the struggle to overthrow Asad may very well succeed, but the struggle to bring about a democratic regime in Syria has been thoroughly defeated.â€
Unfortunately, today we can see that Massad was both right and possibly even over-optimistic.
COPENHAGEN, Denmark – A new wave of Europeans is heading to Syria, their ranks soaring in the past six months as tales of easy living and glorious martyrdom draw them to the rebellion against Bashar Assad.
The western Europe-based rebels, mostly young men, are being recruited by new networks that arrange travel and comfortable lodging in the heart of rebel territory, and foster a militant form of Islam that Western security officials fear will add to the terror threat when the fighters return home.
The 11 western European countries with the biggest contingents in Syria are estimated to have some 1,200-1,700 people among rebel forces, according to government and analyst figures compiled by The Associated Press. That compares to estimates of 600-800 from those countries in late spring.
The surge has occurred particularly in France, Germany, Belgium and Sweden. It reflects the increasing ease of travel to Syria’s front lines and enthusiastic sales pitches by the first wave of European volunteers.
A 21-year-old Dane became interested in Syria during a prison term in Denmark for assault and robbery, mainly through online rebel videos. He made two trips into Syria that totaled a little more than one month. He drove trucks carrying relief supplies and transported people, he said, but never fought. Nevertheless, he posted photographs online of himself with heavy weapons.
“It is my duty to travel down there. This is a Muslim cause,” said the young man, a Muslim convert who did not want to be identified for fear of pursuit by authorities.
On his third trip this year, he said, he was stopped at passport control in Istanbul and sent back to Denmark. No reason was given, but he believes his time with the opposition put him on the intelligence community’s radar. He described being questioned multiple times by Danish intelligence agents, including at the Copenhagen airport after returning from Syria for the first time.
“Right now, I cannot go to Syria,” he said. “I wanted to help with humanitarian work and fight.”
Recruitment drives targeting people like the Dane are growing in intensity. The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, one of two main al-Qaida linked groups fighting in Syria, is producing a video featuring a battalion of British fighters “who will be talking to other British Muslims to try and motivate, inspire and recruit them,” said Shiraz Maher, a researcher at the London-based International Center for the Study of Radicalization. In France, authorities in recent weeks say they have dismantled two networks of former fighters who have returned from Syria to recruit.
Governments have reported no examples of ex-fighters from Syria creating trouble on their return. But France remains haunted by the case of Mohammed Merah, a French youth of Algerian descent who trained in Pakistan and returned to southern France to attack a Jewish school and kill seven people in 2012. The French government has since outlawed training in terrorism camps abroad.
The United States has also sounded the alarm about young Americans headed to Syria. But distance and expense have kept the numbers from the U.S. far lower: about 20 American citizens, according to the ICSR.
Despite their lack of battlefield experience, Europeans are a powerful propaganda tool for a rebel force that is trying to show that its appeal goes wider and deeper than the Middle East. The Europeans have the added potential of being able to raise money in places far wealthier than Iraq, Afghanistan and Chechnya, where many of the other foreign rebels have their roots and fighting background.
Many, if not most, are from second-generation immigrant families from outside Europe with parents who describe themselves as secular and fully integrated. Others — like the Dane — are converts with no prior ties to Islam.
France has counted between 300 and 400 European rebel fighters in Syria; Germany has counted more than 220; Belgium puts its number at 150-200, according to the International Center for the Study of Radicalization, citing recent figures that double previous estimates. Sweden is about to double its estimates to 150-200, according Magnus Ranstorp, a terrorism specialist with the Swedish National Defense College. Britain’s total has stayed stable at less than 150, according to recent estimates from U.K. security officials. The Netherlands estimate, which officials said is rising rapidly, is 100-200, according to government and analyst figures. Denmark’s intelligence service estimates “at least 80” fighters from there — with similar numbers from Spain, Austria and Italy. Norway believes about 40 of its citizens have left for Syria in the past year.
“More Europeans have gone to Syria than have gone to all the other conflict zones put together,” including Iraq and Afghanistan, said Thomas Hegghammer, an analyst at the Norwegian Defense Research Establishment. “It’s hard to overstate the importance of this for the future of Islamic radicalism in Europe. They’re radicalizing and training a whole new generation of militants.”
Ranstorp agreed: “In the last two months, there has been an acceleration in the number of people going to Syria.”
The first Europeans to leave for Syria tended to do so haphazardly — catching a flight to Turkey, hopping a bus and hoping for the best. That’s how the 21-year-old Danish man first went, meandering into a refugee camp and stumbling upon people who told him where to go. Those men are returning home or contacting friends and acquaintances by Skype, Facebook, text message, YouTube, or word of mouth to encourage them to follow. They provide the travel arrangements, and say the life of a fighter in Syria is one of comfort punctuated by the adventure of war.
“I talk to fathers and mothers of young people who have left my city. It’s all well-organized. The air tickets are paid for,” said Hans Bonte, mayor of Vilvoorde, a city of 41,000 in Flemish-speaking Belgium that has seen at least 22 young people leave for Syria, including the most recent group in early November. Bonte, who is chief of security for his town as well as a federal lawmaker, speaks at length to each family and is in constant touch with both them and Belgium’s intelligence services.
Bonte said Belgians who are leaving are younger now — teenagers instead of men in their late 20s, and adolescent girls are beginning to appear among the lists of the missing. “It’s a process of following others (who) are trying to convince people to go over there. They are telling stories that it’s fun over there … they are living in a villa with a pool.”
One Vilvoorde mother, whose older son had already left for Syria, was sleeping on her front steps to keep her 15-year-old from slipping out to follow his brother, Bonte said. One night this fall, the boy pushed his mother aside — threatening to kill her if she stopped him from joining the fight in Syria — and stepped into a waiting car. She has heard from neither son since.
Syrian Deputy Foreign Minister Faisal Mekdad said the Assad government is discussing the issue with Western officials “and there is cooperation,” although he did not name any countries.
And authorities have encountered teens trying to board airplanes, including some carrying large amounts of cash for the rebellion, said Martin Bernsen, a spokesman for the police security services. “Of course it is difficult to prove where the money goes,” Bernsen said, “so we are worried that it goes to terror-related activities.”
Hegghammer said Syria has worrisome parallels with Afghanistan of the 1980s, where a young Osama bin Laden was among thousands of Muslims to wage battle against Soviet forces. “The gross number of departures is so high that almost whatever the return rate is, you’re going to have substantial numbers of terrorists,” he said.
Recent comments from Andrew Parker, director general of British intelligence agency MI5, underscore those concerns.
“A growing proportion of our casework now has some link to Syria, mostly concerning individuals from the UK who have traveled to fight there or who aspire to do so,” Parker said in a recent speech.
Maher, who is in regular contact with a contingent of Britons in Syria, said their cheery photos of fighters living bachelor-pad style in comfortable houses, with all the food they can eat and all the weaponry they could hope for, will continue draw ever larger numbers.
“They send pictures of sweets — of candy — and of pop. You can get all this out there. It’s not a life full of privation,” Maher said. “You get this comfortable life in Syria with the option, the possibility to die a martyr.”
I have to admit, US news sources are producing some amazing articles related to the Middle East. I’ve been gathering them and will post them soon in full. But before that happens, I wanted to share this probably-state-sponsored music video of Rohani’s inaugural speech. It’s interspersed with bits of speeches from people of history such as Dr. Mossadegh and Ayatollah Taleghani, 2 of my favorites. I particularly enjoyed the fact that it highlighted Iran’s diversity. Whether we think Rohani is an effective president or not or whether he has any real power as president or not is not the point. Just listen to his speech, it’s such a stark contrast with Ahmadinejad. Here is the video with English subtitles.
Netanyahu and the Arab dictatorships have much in common these days. Both care little for what’s actually in America’s interest and both have lobbied long and hard to get the US to attack Iran. The recent nuclear deal, which is only a stepping stone for now, is a slap in their faces. What’s actually good for the US and the Iranian people is the respect for Iran’s right to a nuclear program, an end to sanctions that have crippled the population as a whole, and safeguards for the international community that Iran is not weaponizing its nuclear program. I hope this recent agreement is a step in that direction. For now, to confirm the snub to Netanyahu’s warmongering, here’s a news piece for your reading pleasure:
Associated Press: Hundreds of Iranians, including university students and members of the country’s Jewish community, rallied Tuesday in support of the Islamic Republic’s disputed nuclear program on the eve of the resumption of talks with world powers.
Iranian state TV showed students gathered at the gate of Fordo enrichment facility, carved into a mountain south of Tehran. They formed a human chain, chanted “Fordo is in our hearts” and denounced the West, which has put pressure on Iran to curb enrichment activity which can be a step toward weapons development.
In Tehran, meanwhile, several dozen people identifying themselves as Iranian Jews gathered outside a UN building. It was a rare public display by the community, which tends to keep a low profile despite being the largest in the region outside Israel and Turkey.
Iran’s nuclear program is popular, including among critics of the clerically dominated system, but any major gatherings or demonstrations would need official approval.
AbuKhalil’s recent post on al-Akhbar is concise and worth reading in full:
It would be fair to say that Khaled Meshaal is one of the biggest casualties of the Arab uprisings. Early on, Meshaal appeared more arrogant and more self-confident than usual. He had his reasons: the sponsoring Qatari regime was on the offensive and it seemed to be leading the entire Arab League and the Arab counter-revolution. Saudi Arabia was absent from the scene for much of 2011 and 2012, or so it appeared. Secondly, the Muslim Brotherhood reached power in Egypt and Tunisia and he received a hero’s welcome in both countries. Thirdly, the statement that was attributed to him in al-Quds al-Arabi in 2012 to the effect that he was willing to switch sides against Iran, contingent on finding an alternative financial sponsor, seemed to have sent the right signals that he and his organization were for sale to the highest bidder. Fourthly, the Syrian regime which had provided shelter to Hamas appeared to be in its last days; statements about the ultimate demise of Bashar were being made on a weekly basis. Fifthly, the Turkish regime was in ascendancy and some argued that Turkey was destined to lead the Arab world again, for the first time since the end of the Ottoman Empire. Sixthly, Saudi Arabia expressed willingness to forgive Hamas for its anti-Israeli sins provided it forswears its relationship with the Iranian regime.
For that reason, Meshaal led Hamas in its most major political shift since its founding. The man who said that he was relinquishing power in the leadership of the movement suddenly changed his mind. He started his dance by signaling his break with the Syrian regime and by publicly expressing disagreements with the Iranian government over Syria. Suddenly, the man who never uttered a word of sympathy in favor of the Egyptian people during the long years of Hosni Mubarak’s rule (when his movement dealt directly with the head of the secret police, Omar Suleiman, who was assigned to deal with Hamas, presumably on the behalf of Israel), started to express sympathy for the Syrian people. But Meshaal never spoke on behalf of the oppressed Syrian people during his long years of alliance with the Syrian regime. Worse, his foreign policy dances on Syria were far from being principled or categorical: He never came out clearly and specifically against the Syrian regime, while he (and others in the movement) only spoke in vague and convoluted terms about “supporting the Syrian people.â€
When Ismail Haniyeh visited Egypt and spoke in a language that was interpreted as supporting the Syrian armed opposition, his formulations never went beyond the vague language of Meshaal. Yet, what was most significant about the euphoria that characterized Meshaal’s performance, was the official and unprecedented subordination of the movement within the larger body of the mother organization of the Muslim Brotherhood. That was the miscalculation of Hamas because Meshaal and his comrades calculated that the rule of the Ikhwan was here to stay, and that the region has just entered the era of the Ikhwan. That was not meant to be, and the change in Egypt and the rising opposition in Tunisia shifted the grounds under the Ikhwan from the Maghrib to the Gulf, where the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries (with the exception of the retreating rulers of Qatar) led an official campaign against the Ikhwan movement and its supporters in all GCC countries.
Nevertheless, the stance of Meshaal did not receive a consensus within the leadership of Hamas. The military wing of the movement, the Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades, and their political allies, like Mahmoud Zahar, did not approve of the policies and steps that were taken by Meshaal. They continued to make it clear that their alliance with Iran and the “resistance camp†supersedes the new alliances of Hamas. That wing never severed its ties with the former allies, but Iran was compelled to end its generous aid program to Hamas. (The Iranian regime looked for new Palestinian allies, and (what is left of) the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine started to receive Iranian military and financial support despite the declared (past?) Marxist-Leninist ideology.)
The political dreams and the satisfaction by Meshaal from his Walid Jumblatt-like shifts all came crashing once the Abdel-Fattah al-Sisi regime removed the Ikhwan regime by force. To make things worse, Qatar had a change of emir and retreated into a role that is more subordinate to the Saudi regime. The Syrian regime (for a variety of reasons and not only – as simplistically indicated by John Kerry and Western media – due to the Hezbollah and Iran’s support) strengthened its position on the ground and Syrian armed opposition fragmented further. Hamas became more isolated.
In the last few weeks, various pro-Syrian regime media have reported that Hamas has been eagerly begging its way back to the “resistance camp.†It will be a humiliating reversal (or reversal of the reversal). Will this reversal cost Meshaal his job? Will Haniyeh be seen yet again kissing the hand of the chief clerical producer of sectarian language in the Middle East? Or will Iran and Hezbollah forgive Meshaal’s “sins†in return for a new role in the Middle East – a role that is not confined to the Arab-Israeli front?
Here is the link to the UCLA Historical Journal where my manuscript titled “The Iranian Legacy in the 2011 Egyptian Revolution: Military Endurance and US Foreign Policy Priorities“ is posted, and here’s the link to the actual text. I wrote in the spring of 2011 in the initial stages of the Arab Uprisings, or the so-called “Arab Spring.” Unfortunately, the subsequent events in Egypt in terms of the counter-revolutionary coup have only validated the thesis of the article.
Excerpts: “Saudi officials have warned online activists from backing protests planned by women challenging the male-only driving rules in the kingdom. Friday’s edition of the pan-Arab newspaper Al-Hayat quoted Saudi Interior Ministry spokesman Turki al-Faisal as saying cyber-laws banning political dissent could apply to anyone supporting the women driving campaign. Conviction can bring up to five-year prison sentences.”
How is it that our government guarantees the security of such an archaic dictatorship? The Saudi government claims that women are not allowed to drive because it wants to safeguard Saudi traditions. What are these traditions? There were no paved roads in Saudi Arabia until the 20th century. Thus, there were also no Saudi men driving cars until the 20th century. If they really want to safeguard “traditions” then cars, pavements, men driving cars on pavements, and so much more would not be allowed. What a silly and selective approach to “tradition.” I suppose the Saudi king, the supposed paragon of “tradition” does not use cars and airplanes and still travels in camel caravans, lol. According to Islamic tradition set forth by the Prophet Muhammad, the entire institution of the monarchy is in violation of “tradition.” I mean, I can go on and on.
Israeli prime minister and the US secretary of state recently met in Italy to talk about prospects for peace between Israelis and Palestinians. Instead, the Israeli prime minister focused the discussion on the “Iranian threat” of nuclear proliferation. I suppose that’s what you do when you’re not interested in peace and are continually expanding your illegal settlement activity in occupied Palestinian territories. When you’re not interested in talking about peace or pursuing peace with your neighbors, you instead focus attention on a supposed boogeyman–in this case Iran. This is a classic Netanyahu tactic that is becoming well known and is losing its effect.