IOF INVASION FAILS TO PENETRATE HEZBOLLAH DEFENCE

Diarmuid Breatnach

(Reading time: 7 mins.)

After a terrorist attack through exploding hand-held communication devices1 and later, following the assassination of veteran Hezbollah leader Nasrallah,2 the IOF announced on 30th September their intention of a ground invasion of Lebanon.3

The reaction of the western imperialist allies to the terrorism was mostly silent but to the Zionist planned invasion was either positive or worried – not about the predictable ensuing carnage but about its impact on their assets in the region.

The current Zionist leadership was gung-ho albeit with worried comments from the sidelines, including from some high-ranking retired commanders. Those campaigning for a peace deal with the Resistance and the return of their captured relatives were naturally mostly hostile.

People who knew something about the situation, both those in solidarity with the Resistance and those supporting the Zionist state, wondered how the IOF imagined they were going to be successful, considering the calibre of Hezbollah combined with logistics.

Firstly, the IOF would have to prepare its staging or invasion launch areas in the reach of Hezbollah missiles, rockets and drones. Then they would have to cross at least 300 kilometres under bombardment in terrain well-zeroed already by Hezbollah.

If and when the invaders crossed that land, they would confront their old enemy Hezbollah, many battle-hardened veterans from fighting ISIS and NATO proxies in Syria. And strongly motivated ideologically also, in particular in defending their homeland.

The IOF infantry on the other hand has not faced any conventional fighting force in pitched battle since 1966, being mostly experienced in repression and genocidal operations against civilians already under close surveillance with air dominance and much intelligence support.

Despite their advantages, against the armed resistance of those areas, the IOF have not performed at all well, with a high rate of casualties in personnel and armoured vehicles. In invasion of Lebanon, their armour would be even more vulnerable.

True, the IOF has air advantage in air-to-ground strikes with their US-supplied fighters. But the resistance artillery4 batteries are situated far back from the Lebanon front line, yet able to strike targets with coordinates called in from Hezbollah facing the enemy.

The Zionist air force boasts of having eliminated those batteries in their bombardment were quickly proved false as missiles rose behind the returning IOF aircraft to fall on their regular targets in northern occupied Palestine. Most of those batteries and launchers are underground.

So the main IOF assault and penetration would have to be of their infantry, the issue decided by the calibre of contending fighting personnel, their weapons, along with defences of the defenders, remembering also that a 3-1 superiority is necessary for offensive breakthrough at any point.5

The situation would be bad enough for the IOF if they could at least prepare their staging areas in safety but of course Hezbollah is not letting them do that, pounding their bases and visible troop movements and assemblies again and again with missiles, drones and rockets.

IOF INVASION PROGRESS?

So how has the invasion force fared to date? Hezbollah chose not to fall back fighting the IOF on the way, sucking them further in and hitting their supply lines. Instead, they met the invasion on or around their front lines, with some flexibility and so far have remained there.

All outcomes into the second week so far have justified the pessimists in the Zionist and Western allies camp. Ground assault after assault has been beaten back by Hezbollah, at times in ambushing or other targeting of approaching infantry and some armour.

In one such ambush, Hezbollah forward fighters observed a special IOF force reconnoitring and decided to leave them under observation while they figured the route of advance. When the whole IOF special unit advanced they were hit with a pre-laid explosive and then by small-arms fire.

The IOF are widening their attack front and in the western sector, the IOF attempted to infiltrate again through Labouneh, despite the previous day’s qualitative ambush where according to reports, Zionist vehicles “burned live on air”; the resistance again forced their retreat.

This last was a reference to Ras Al-Naqoura where an entire IOF convoy was struck by the resistance. Al-Mayadeen reports that the convoy was made up of about 60 soldiers, 5 Merkava tanks, and a number of other vehicles and repeated IOF rescue services have been repulsed.

Al-Manar added that “The occupation army advanced along the western line near the sea and attempted to take control … to oversee the coastline stretching to Sour,”6 and “attempted six times in recent days to enter this area and was met with resistance missiles and fire.”

The Resistance reported numerous confrontations against enemy infantry forces in the forests of Al-Labouneh, south of Naqoura and engagements on the Blida, Muhaybib, and Maroun Al-Ras axis.

The Zionist forces have also attempted to use the UNIFIL station as cover and the Hezbollah decision to hold on targeting them for fear of hitting uninvolved forces, reported by Al Mayadeen, raised concerns for the safety of Irish state troops garrisoned there.7

In 10 days of repeated attempts, the IOF has not managed to enter and hold one southern Lebanese village or town and advances of even a 100 metres have been beaten back with casualties. The Zionists have been reduced to fantasy stories of advances and staged photos.8

And this IOF fighting here are considered by the Zionists the elite of their infantry, facing not even Hezbollah’s elite, the al-Hajj Radwan Regiment. Hezbollah is much more a medium-sized army than guerrilla force, though it grew from one, created against the ‘Israeli’ occupation of Lebanon.

On Wednesday the IOF, which maintains a strict censorship on casualties and battle-damage reporting and is well-known for vastly underplaying their battle casualties in Gaza, admitted that over the past 24 hours, 38 soldiers had been wounded in ground battles in southern Lebanon.

In what seems a departure from the Gaza norm, some reports seem to suggest that Hezbollah may not be granting the IOF the same freedom to recover their dead and wounded as has been the case until now from the Gaza resistance (despite IOF targeting of hospitals and medical personnel).9

As it was in Gaza, bombing the civilian population has been the response of the IOF, targeting multi-occupation housing blocks, medical services, emergency services, media service, gatherings of displaced people and refugee routes into Syria.

The only large-scale comprehensive defeats suffered by the IOF were against Hezbollah in Lebanon, in 2000 and in 2006, forcing the Zionist retreat from Lebanon on both occasions. Many Hezbollah are battle-hardened from Syria and of high morale, particularly in battle against the IOF.

REASON

Given the history and sober assessments, why is the Zionist state engaging in this attack and being backed by the western imperialists? Yoav Gallant, Minister for the armed forces, claimed it was in order to degrade Hezbollah and return the Zionist settlers to northern occupied Palestine.

This is a large area denuded of thousands of settlers now being housed in hotels or even camps deeper in occupied Palestine (‘Israel’) or who have left the state altogether, whether temporarily of permanently. Currently it is occupied mostly by the IOF, in bases and Settler houses.

The reason for the emptying of the region of Settler communities is its daily bombardment by Hezbollah since October 8th, the day the IOF began this latest and most intensive period of genocidal bombings. And they’ve been clear: Stop the genocide and we stop the bombardment.

Hezbollah artillery rocket batteries (Photo credit: AZIZ TAHER/REUTERS)

However, despite the wishes of a large section of ‘Israeli’ society, the dominant section of the Zionist ruling class is not prepared to stop its Gaza bombardment and do a deal which would result in admission of defeat and, for Netanyahu, appearance in court to face corruption charges.

Some of the western imperialist alliance are worried that ‘Israel’ will drag10 the US and with it the rest of the Western alliance, at a time also of a war in Ukraine, into a regional war with Hezbollah, Yemen, the Iraqi resistance, Syria and of course Iran, a long-intended NATO target.

Many voices from different positions regarding the Zionist state have warned that in a regional Middle Eastern war, all western military bases in the Middle East become targets, as do all oil and gas wells delivering to the West, with huge economic results across the world.

There are indications of other motivations, beyond loss of Zionist face, of extending ‘Israel’ ‘from the sea to the river’ (!),11 re-occupying Gaza with settlers and ‘remodelling of the Middle East’ in a Zionist messianic dream but combined with a gung-ho attitude in the White House.

In a recent interview on YouTube, Iranian professor Marandi commented that strategic and tactical decisions made by the imperialists are not logical but emotional. I would agree that emotion is involved however also logical calculation — but there are times when emotion overcomes logic.

Such was the situation for example in the ‘forever war’ of the US in ‘Indochina’ when it continued despite all the evidence that it was losing, year after year, could not possibly win and was alienating huge populations even at home.

One of the many jacket designs of the classic Sci-fi novel, based to large extent on the War of the USA in Viet Nam.

It took the logic of a section of the ruling class to overcome emotion and to subdue the Reagan section to sue for peace, under of course the heroic assault of the people of Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia. But the arrogance and world ambition of the US ruling class never died.

Can this now extended war of the IOF endanger all of Western imperialism’s substantial assets in the Middle East? Most certainly. So stop it, pull back! says one section of the imperialists. But Bring it on, says the other section, because after this we’ll have only Russia and China to worry about.

For the next war.

End.

Footnotes

1On 17 and 18 September https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/9/18/more-devices-exploding-across-lebanon-whats-happening

227th September https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/sep/28/israel-says-it-has-killed-hezbollah-leader-hassan-nasrallah

3https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/oct/01/israel-lebanon-attack-hezbollah-ground-operation-war-latest

4Using the term here to encompass missiles, rockets such as the Katyusha-types, rather than cannon.

53-1 advantage in numbers needed for the attacker, other considerations being equal. (Seehttps://www.mearsheimer.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/A0013.pdf)

6Perhaps with the additional intention of establishing a beachhead for IOF naval landings.

7https://www.thenational.scot/news/24636493.israel-endangering-irish-troops-lebanon-border/

and https://english.almayadeen.net/news/politics/ireland-calls-israeli-demand-to-move-un-troops–outrageous

8These included stories of paratroop landings, overrunning Hezbollah defences and a photo of IOF taken in a very forward but abandoned Settler village, which Hezbollah commented had cost the IOF 10 dead and wounded.

9In one notorious instance, they executed two wounded fighters in hospital. Both from the air and the ground the IOF has repeatedly targeted paramedics and civil defence crews and have continued doing so from the air in Lebanon. However commentators have noted how IOF helicopters landing to evacuate wounded and dead IOF, though clearly under observation, are never targeted by the Resistance in Gaza.

10,Assuming its unwilling to do so which may not at all be the case.

11https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/haaretz-today/2024-09-05/ty-article/.highlight/netanyahus-map-shows-israel-from-the-river-to-the-sea-its-no-accident/00000191-c2a8-d09f-ab91-debc90e60000

and https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/benjamin-netanyahu-maps-brief-history-enduring-love-affair

References
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/oct/01/israel-lebanon-attack-hezbollah-ground-operation-war-latest

FUNERAL OF ZIONISM HELD IN DUBLIN – ITS COFFIN DUMPED IN THE RIVER

Clive Sulish

(Reading time: 4 mins.)

Scores of people participated in a symbolic ‘funeral of Zionism’ on Monday evening (7th October) in Dublin’s city centre. In front of the James Connolly monument1 and near a mock coffin of ‘Zionism’, they listened to a song and short speeches.

This was followed by a march carrying the ‘coffin’ through city centre streets to O’Connell Bridge, where it was dumped in the Liffey river.

The ethnic composition of the mostly young mixed-gender crowd, by appearance and accent, seemed to be a mixture of Irish and Middle Eastern origin.

The chairperson of the event recalled that a year had passed since the heroic action from Gaza of October 7th and the events that followed, all being gathered there at the James Connolly memorial to hold a funeral for Zionism, the ideology of settler colonialism and genocide.

The first contribution was from a man introduced as Seán Óg with a song of his own composition, three verses rendered acapella in fine voice to the air of two well-known Irish patriotic ballads, Men of the West/ Fir an Iarthair and The Boys of Killmichael.2

The audience began to pick up and join in the chorus lines:

So here’s to the boys of Gaza,
Jenin, Nablus and Hebron,
Who fought ‘neath the brave flag of Palestine
and sent the Settlers on.

Section of crowd at event listening to speeches, viewed facing north-eastwards. (Photo: R. Breeze)

Two speakers followed, pointing out the unanimity of imperialism nowadays in supporting Zionism as distinct from the 1950s and the importance of struggles such as that in Palestine to our own in Ireland, of internationalist solidarity and the need for that solidarity to be for the Resistance.

One speaker interspersed his words in English with some phrases in Irish and recalled the protest against the 1897 visit of the British Queen Victoria which saw James Connolly and Constance Markievicz leading a funeral cortège through the streets bearing a coffin for British Imperialism.

Though a ‘funeral’ for British Imperialism might’ve seemed only aspirational in 1897, the speaker said, signs of its decline were there to be seen for the educated, the intelligent and those who wished to see them — and before two decades elapsed it had received a major challenge.

(Photo: R. Breeze)

It survived that challenge of the First World War victorious but weakened and the embers of revolt were burning around its Empire. Before two decades after that funeral march, the torch of freedom had been lit in Dublin,3 the first uprising against world war of that century anywhere in the world.

The speaker went on to recall the subsequent War of Independence in Ireland three years later and remarked that had it not been for some Irish failures in unity and resolution that British Imperialism might have been given its mortal blow then in Ireland.

Subsequently British Imperialism survived by serving as a subject ally to US Imperialism. “Zionism is a rotten tree”, he said, “planted in Palestine by British Imperialism and nurtured by US Imperialism. Even so, Zionism is damaging its very fosterers and we welcome that.”

“Rotten trees don’t fall on their own,” the speaker continued. Trees that are rotten inside may seem healthy on the outside but when a strong storm comes along, they are knocked down. It is then we can easily see the rot inside them that we may not have noticed before.

Storms are now breaking out around the world, he said. We can and need to play our own part in those storms, “to knock down the rotten tree of Zionism and go on to demolish the whole rotten evil forest of imperialism.”

Section of crowd listening to speeches at the event, photo taken facing south-eastwards. (Photo: R. Breeze)

After applause some chants were led, among them: From Ireland to Palestine – Occupation is a crime! Saoirse don-Phalaistín! There is only one solution – Intifada revolution! From the river to the sea – Palestine will be free! Resistance is an obligation – in the face of Occupation!

The attendance then took to the street, carrying the coffin and flying Irish and national flags of Palestine along with those of factions of the Resistance, also Hezbollah’s and Lebanon’s, continuing the chants as they marched up lower Abbey Street,4 then turning left along O’Connell Street.

Along the way, some bystanders cheered and a man leaned out of a delivery van to shout encouragement with clenched fist in the air.

On O’Connell Bridge, after a few words, the ‘coffin’ containing ‘Zionism’ was pushed over the parapet into the river Liffey, to cheers, which then changed to cycling through the accustomed solidarity chants.

The ‘coffin’ is on the Bridge parapet (left of photo) and about to be dumped into the river Liffey. (Photo: R. Breeze)

There were three external interventions.

A known Irish Zionist who regularly tries to harass Palestinian solidarity participants appeared at the outset in attempted intimidation of an activist but was quickly discouraged from doing so. At the Bridge, a person under the influence of alcohol and shouting confusedly was calmed by activists.

Break the Chains of Zionism banner next to James Connolly Monument (Photo: R. Breeze)

A Garda patrol car crew whose political undercover colleagues had clearly overlooked keeping informed drew up at the Bridge bemusedly during the chanting and, after attempting to gain some information as to events, left again – as did the participants soon afterwards.

The event was organised by Anti-Imperialist Action Ireland and Saoirse Don Phalaistín, the former’s Facebook page having been taken down by Meta while the event was being organised but the groups may be followed on Instagram and Twitter.

End.

Footnotes

1The location of this fine monument is in Beresford Place, across from the site of the original Liberty Hall, home of the Irish Transport and General Workers Union which Connolly led after Jim Larkin departed for the USA at the end of the 1913 Dublin Lockout. The site is now occupied a multi-storey building of SIPTU.

2The first is about the last major engagements of the 1798 Republican uprising, when a relatively small French force landed in Co. Mayo and was joined by Irish Republican insurgents; the second celebrates the IRA ambush of a column of the Auxiliary Regiment in West Cork, wiping it out almost to the last British terrorist.

3The 1916 Rising.

4Until they reached O’Connell Street they were following in the footsteps of the GPO Garrison on Easter Monday, 1916 and passed by a number of historical political and artistic locations of 1848 and of the early 20th Century.

IF YOU WANT PEACE, KENNEL YOUR DOG!

Diarmuid Breatnach

(Reading time: 6 mins.)

The whole western imperialist cabal is in full cry desperately seeking a 21-day ceasefire both sides of northern occupied-Palestine and the Lebanon ´border´, as the ´Israeli´ Occupation Forces allegedly prepare/ carry out a ground invasion.

The concern of the western imperialists is not about the slaughter of mostly civilians in Lebanon, climbing towards a thousand this month but rather about the strong possibility of all-out regional war which would endanger the various western military bases and economic interests in the region.

Projectiles above Jerusalem, on Oct. 1, 2024. Iran has launched a missile and drone attack on Israel’s military airports and some other targets. (Photo cred: MENAHEM KAHANA/AFP via Getty Images)

And also, if the Zionist leadership is serious, about an IOF ground invasion of Lebanon which the western powers fear will end not only in the defeat of the IOF as before in 2000 and 2006, but also in the collapse of the Zionist settler state itself, their most dependable ally in the region.

Fighting on two fronts is rarely recommended and the Zionists are engaged in Palestine mostly in genocide, it is true but also against the Palestinian resistance: the allied factions, Islamist and secular fighting a heroic struggle of defence.

Since the by far most aggressive phase of the Zionist genocide of Palestinians from October 8th last year, Hezbollah has been bombarding mostly military sites and movements and, to a much lesser degree, Zionist settler sites. In particular ´Israeli´ air defence and spying sites have been hit.

As a result, wide areas of occupied Palestine have been abandoned by settlers who are being accommodated at substantial cost to the Zionist state in hotels and even camps. On the Lebanon side, due to IOF barrages, the people have also abandoned their homes.

Hezbollah is a long-standing enemy of the Zionist state which in turn can be ´credited´with the creation of the organisation through its invasions of Lebanon and massacres both directly and through its proxy, the South Lebanese Army, for example in the Tel Al Zataar refugee camp.1

The only complete defeats of the IOF to date, with its European allies and superior level of armament, have been by Hezbollah on Lebanese soil. However Hezbollah´s bombardment of occupied Palestine from October 8th has been in support of the Gaza population against genocide.

Herzi Halevi, top commander of the IOF and Ori Gordin commanding their northern sector recently told their troops that they might soon be employed in a ground invasion of Lebanon in order to crush Hezbollah and two reserve Brigades of the IOF have been called up also.2

However a White House spokesperson recently stated that they did not believe that a ground invasion was imminent. In fact, they are probably hoping it is not because before even reaching Lebanon the infantry and armour will need to cross a large area covered by Hezbollah missiles.

While the IOF air force and artillery might hope to knock out their enemy´s launch sites their bombardments have so far failed to prevent the launching of Hezbollah missiles which have not only continued as before but reached further, including to the Mossad HQ near Haifa.

Upon entering Lebanon, should they reach that far, the infantry would need to confront confident, highly-motivated soldiers fighting in defence of their homeland against a hated enemy. In addition some Hezbollah have been battled-hardened in actual combat against western proxies in Syria.

This is unlike the IOF, mostly accustomed to attacking civilians and their support infrastructure, rarely engaging the Palestinian resistance at close quarters and, when they do, calling in air strikes. In Lebanon in the past, their superior military resources did not prevent their defeat – twice.

The various commentaries from the western powers have not promised any ceasefire in Gaza, only a resumption of talks. However these can go nowhere unless the Zionist leadership and in particular Netanyahu agrees to the terms broadcast in July and to which Hezbollah agreed.

These are the minimum required by Hezbollah: removal of all IOF forces from Gaza, opening of the Rafah gate and safe conduct for delivery of food, medicine and fuel supplies; exchange of prisoners; to be followed by reconstruction of the enormous damage to housing and infrastructure.

So far Netanyahu has refused to agree to complete removal of IOF forces from Gaza and whatever else he or anybody else says, without that there will be no peace or truce agreement in Gaza. And without that, Hezbollah will not cease their bombardment and there will be no ceasefire.

It may be that the Western powers are obliquely trying to pressure the Zionist leadership to agree to the realistic Gaza peace terms but without the removal of Netanyahu and his fascist support coalition this may be a false hope.

As I finished writing the above, the IOF announced a “limited ground offensive” on Lebanon despite the advice (if genuine) of the USA and of its western allies.

However, the Western Powers are not helpless in this, despite their public pronouncements; the closure of the supply chain of armaments and finance would force the Zionist ruling class to come to terms within days, certainly inside of a week.

This step they have refused so far to take and it remains to be seen whether they will take that action to avoid regional war, continue to risk it or indeed, enter that war regardless of the great danger for them and their future plunder of the region and strategic control of much of it.

If they truly want peace around Lebanon, they will need to have peace in Gaza, which means agreeing to the minimum and entirely reasonable terms of the Palestinian resistance.

If the Western Powers want a cessation of conflict around Lebanon and in Gaza, they will need to call off their attack dog. However, the dog is reluctant to acknowledge defeat and also fears that its days, in the longer term, are numbered.

Meanwhile, the Axis of Resistance have taken their own measures, Hezbollah bombarding deep into Zionist-occupied territory and all gatherings of IOF forces preparing to advance towards Lebanon, so far preventing them stepping on Lebanese soil, despite the fabrications of the Zionists.

And the long-awaited retaliation of Iran has arrived also, its missiles and drones hitting in particular the Zionist entity´s military airports, apparently with great success, destroying many of the US-made jets with which the IOF have bombed so many civilians and their infrastructures.

And there it rests while we await how the IOF and their allies will respond. Iran´s leadership have more or less told the Zionists: “Accept that as a just punishment for your attacks on our personnel and on our allies in our land. If you don´t, the next response will be a lot worse for you!”

The Islamic Resistance in Iraq has promised, in the event of USA retaliation on Iran, to attack every USA base currently on their land (and long overdue to depart). And we add: “If it´s peace you want in Palestine, call off your dog and kennel it.”

end.

FOOTNOTES

1https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tel_al-Zaatar_massacre

2https://edition.cnn.com/2024/09/25/middleeast/israel-lebanon-hezbollah-ground-invasion-intl/index.html

SOURCES

https://english.almayadeen.net/news/politics/us–france-call-for-temporary-ceasefire-in-lebanon

Dublin demonstration in solidarity with Hezbollah and the Lebanese people.

As the Zionist state followed up its communication device terrorism with aerial bombing … (Report from AIAI- For National Liberation and Socialist Revolution):

On Friday September 20, Anti-Imperialist Action Ireland and Saoirse Don Phalaistín held an emergency solidarity demonstration with Hezbollah and the Lebanese people on O’Connell Bridge in Dublin.

(Photo sourced: AIA social media page)

Although called at short notice, there was a great turn out, demonstrating the support of Irish Revolutionaries for the Anti Zionist Resistance.

A large Hezbollah flag was the centrepiece of the demonstration and flew proudly beside Irish Republican flags including the Tricolour and Green Starry Plough of the Irish Citizen Army, Palestine, Lebanese, Iraqi and Basque national flags and the flags of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.

Chants at the demonstration included From Ireland to Palestine – Occupation is a crime! and Hands off Lebanon!. As it was culture night, two singers gave renditions of ‘We only want the earth’ by James Connolly and ‘Go on Home British and Zionist Soldiers’, a twist on the Republican classic linking the fights for Freedom in Ireland and Palestine.

(Photo sourced: AIA social media page)

The demonstration was monitored by the special branch who took photos of the participants but their presence could not stop the solidarity action with Hezbollah and the Lebanese People.

Irish Republicans will always stand with our international anti imperialist comrades in the fight against Imperialism and Zionism. AIA and SDP will continue to organise events and actions to increase our solidarity with the Anti Zionist Resistance.

(Photo sourced: AIA social media page)

Additional comment – Clive Sulish: The event was also filmed by a well-known Irish Zionist who regularly tries to intimidate Palestine solidarity activists and also tries to get the Gardaí to arrest those carrying flags of Palestinian resistance organisations.

O’Connell Bridge crosses the Liffey river dividing the north from the south Dublin city centres and is directly passed by north and southbound traffic but also closely by west and eastbound traffic along the quays.

There were many expressions of appreciation from passersby on foot, in vehicles or on bicycle.

End
.

(Photo sourced: AIA social media page)
(Photo sourced: AIA social media page)

Britain secretly helped Chile’s military intelligence after Pinochet coup

John McEvoy 5 September2023

(Reading time: 6 mins.)

NB: Rebel Breeze shares this near the anniversary of the fascist military coup in Chile, the same date as the Twin Towers massacre years later.. The article is a year old but relevant as long as British imperialism exists.

As the Pinochet regime rounded up and murdered its political opponents after the 1973 coup, a UK Foreign Office propaganda unit passed material to Chile’s military intelligence and MI6 connived with a key orchestrator of the coup, newly declassified files show.

  • Foreign Office helped Pinochet regime to develop a counter-insurgency strategy based on British military campaigns in Southeast Asia
  • MI6 officer David Spedding was attached to British embassy in Santiago in 1972-4, and had relations with a key member of the military junta

The UK government assisted Chile’s military intelligence in the aftermath of the brutal 1973 coup against elected president Salvador Allende, newly declassified files show.

The assistance was authorised by the Information Research Department (IRD), a secret Foreign Office propaganda unit which worked closely with Britain’s secret intelligence service, MI6.

Foreign and Commonwealth Office building, Whitehall, London. Many a dark deed was planned here. (Photo accessed: Internet)

The IRD had long seen Allende as a political threat. As Declassified previously revealed, throughout the 1960s, the unit had sought to prevent Allende from ever becoming president through election interference and covert propaganda operations.

After Allende was elected in 1970, the IRD’s distribution of propaganda material became “strictly limited”, with the British embassy having fewer reliable contacts in the Chilean government. 

This all changed after the coup.

In January 1974, the IRD began to “extend the distribution” of its material, which was now passed “to the Chilean Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Government information organisations” and, crucially, the dictatorship’s “military intelligence” services.

At this time, Chile’s security forces – including the country’s intelligence apparatus – were responsible for massive human rights violations, including the widespread use of torture as a political weapon.

The UK government was under no illusions about this. As Foreign Office official Christopher Crabbie noted three months after the coup in December 1973, “I do not think that anyone seriously doubts that torture is going on in Chile”. 

Reliable figures indicate that, between 1973 and 1988, Chilean state agents were responsible for over 3,000 deaths or disappearances and tens of thousands of cases of torture and political arrests. This was in a country which, in 1973, had a population of only 10 million people.

Our major interest is copper’: Britain backed Pinochet’s bloody coup…

Chile Army 1973 coup soldiers watch detainees – many were shot, many more tortured then shot, many more still ‘disappeared’, probably tortured and shot. Many, many more were jailed where they were also tortured; young children were also abducted and given to fascist childless couples. (Photo accessed: Internet)

Hearts and minds’

The nature of the information passed to Chile’s military intelligence remains unclear, though the files suggest it may have included material for use in propaganda, research reports on left-wing activity, and even manuals on domestic security operations.

For instance, newly declassified files show how the UK government secretly helped the Chilean authorities to develop a counter-insurgency strategy, using techniques refined during Britain’s colonial interventions in Southeast Asia.

The idea for such assistance was first raised during the visit of British navy chief Sir Michael Pollock to Chile in late November 1973, two months after the coup. 

The timing of Pollock’s visit was “politically tricky”, noted the British ambassador in Santiago, Reginald Secondé, since there was “much critical attention” being given “to the Chilean Government’s treatment of their political opponents”.

However, there were “two frigates and two submarines for the Chilean Navy under construction in British yards” – an arms deal worth around £50m – and “this was not a moment to prejudice the historic tradition of Anglo-Chilean naval friendship”. 

“This was not a moment to prejudice the historic tradition of Anglo-Chilean naval friendship”

In Santiago, Pollock and Secondé met with a number of regime officials, including navy chief José Toribio Merino Castro, defence minister Patricio Carvajal Prado, and foreign minister Ismael Huerta.

With Huerta, the British officials spoke about the UK government’s “hearts and minds” campaign in Northern Ireland, a counter-insurgency strategy inspired by Britain’s war in Malaya (1948-60).

Huerta “seemed impressed with the concept”, and Secondé “later twice heard him muttering to himself ‘hearts and minds’”.

Subsequent meetings were held between Secondé, British information officer Tony Walters, and Captain Carlos Ashton, the director of overseas information in Chile’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Like Huerta, Ashton was “very receptive to the idea that this kind of approach to Chilean security problems might be the right answer”, and requested “details of what practical measures a ‘hearts and minds’ exercise would involve”.

Exclusive: Secret cables reveal Britain interfered with elections in Chile

Counter-insurgency advice

Ashton’s request for assistance was forwarded to Rosemary Allott, the head of the IRD’s Latin American desk.

In a letter dated 15 February 1974 and marked ‘secret’, Allott agreed to provide the Chilean regime with counter-insurgency advice, but limited this to material on Britain’s past colonial interventions.

“In view of the delicate political considerations involved”, Allott wrote, “it would be best to confine, at this stage at least, the material we send you of insurgencies of the past, rather than those currently preoccupying HMG” such as Northern Ireland.

The Pinochet regime was soon issued with three books on British counter-insurgency strategy, alongside a “Manual of Counter Insurgency Studies”. 

“Britain agreed to share its colonial policing methods with the Chilean junta”

Allott also tracked down “various official reports on Malaya” including “The Fight Against Communist Terrorism in Malaya”, the “Review of the Emergency in Malaya (1948-57)”, and “two booklets on the Philippines insurrection”. 

Britain’s military campaign in Malaya involved the “resettlement” of over 500,000 civilians, aerial bombardment, and an intensive propaganda operation. 

Embassy officials suggested that they were teaching Chilean officers “tactics of tolerance and magnanimity”. However, brutal repression often lay behind the UK government’s rhetoric about “winning hearts and minds”, and the Chilean authorities were only sharpening their repressive techniques.

None of the material given to the Pinochet regime was “for attribution to HMG”. This meant that the Chilean authorities could use the information but not source it to the UK government. 

The extent to which Britain’s advice was acted upon remains unclear; the Pinochet regime was certainly not lacking in support from the CIA. 

Nonetheless, it is clear that Britain agreed to share its colonial policing methods with the Chilean junta, with the goal of stabilising Pinochet’s regime against domestic opposition.

MI6 in Chile

Evidence of British assistance to Chile’s intelligence services raises further questions about what Britain’s own secret intelligence service, MI6, was doing in Chile. 

In 1972, MI6 officer David Spedding was attached to the British embassy in Santiago – his only foreign posting outside of the Middle East throughout his career. 

This was not Spedding’s first visit to Chile. As a postgraduate student at Oxford University during the mid-1960s, Spedding had spent his gap year in Santiago and found work as an assistant in the British embassy’s press office. 

Spedding’s first role in the diplomatic service was thus in the same British embassy that had been directing covert propaganda operations against Allende throughout the 1960s. The job gave him “an entrée into SIS [MI6]”, historian Nigel West noted.

Spedding remained in Chile until September 1974. He was subsequently made responsible for MI6 operations across the Middle East, and would go on to become MI6 chief between 1994 and 1999.

Our relationship with Admiral Merino’

Spedding’s name rarely appears in declassified Foreign Office files on Chile.

Yet in one file, dated 4 December 1973, Spedding informed the Foreign Office that 2,800 civilians and 700 armed forces personnel had been killed during and after the coup. 

“In order to protect our relationship with Admiral Merino”, Spedding noted, “we would not like these figures to be quoted, at least for the time being”. 

Admiral Merino was one of the key orchestrators of the 1973 coup. He was head of the Chilean navy in September 1973, and remained in post until the fall of the dictatorship in 1990. Merino claimed responsibility for convincing Pinochet to join the coup.

Some of the culprits saluting (Photo accessed: Internet)

One of Spedding’s roles, then, was to ensure close collaboration with the Chilean junta by covering up its responsibility for massive political repression and human rights violations. 

The MI6 station in Santiago was only closed down in 1974 amid the UK Labour Party’s return to government.

It would not be surprising if MI6 played a supporting role to the CIA’s covert operations against Allende during the early 1970s. It was recently revealed that the Australian Secret Intelligence Service (ASIS) had “opened a base in Santiago to assist in the US Central Intelligence Agency’s destabilisation of the Chilean government” in 1971.

Britain’s secret assistance to the Pinochet regime was consistent with the UK government’s position on the coup. 

The Conservative government under Edward Heath had welcomed the coup and rushed to give diplomatic recognition and arms to the Chilean junta, with the Foreign Office noting that it had “infinitely more to offer British interests than the one which preceded it”.

The coup against Allende inaugurated a 17-year dictatorship under General Augusto Pinochet, who only left office in 1990.

end.

John McEvoy is co-directing a forthcoming documentary investigating Britain’s hidden role in the death of Chile’s democracy and rise of the Pinochet dictatorship. You can support the film’s production here.

CENSORSHIP OVER PALESTINE EXPOSES SHAM OF WESTERN ‘FREE PRESS’

Diarmuid Breatnach

(Reading time: 2 mins.)

The image of freedom of the press in Western society has been undermined by the biased reporting of the corporate media and yet further by the wave of censorship of social media in recent years, including blocking media platforms.

Time and again readers have seen that the version of events reported is that which favours the western powers and if and when the latter’s enemies are reported it is done perfunctorily and often with an air of doubt.

In war zones, the reporters for western media tend to be embedded among western military and rarely among their opponents.

Media censorship was already rife on reporting the war in Ukraine but has spread higher and wider during the current ‘Israeli’ genocide in Palestine, causing increasing numbers of people to resort to social media news and commentary platforms. But these alternatives too are targeted in turn.

The Western powers have attacked social media platforms such as Telegram, arresting its founder a few days ago1 and this week blocking to subscribers throughout the European Union the Resistance News Network, which reported throughout the day on events in the ‘Israeli’ genocide on Telegram.

Pavel Durov, founder of Telegram, currently under French State arrest. (Image sourced: Internet)

Earlier this month the FBI raided the homes of two US citizens, Scott Ritter and Dimitri K. Simes, journalists whose broadcasting has been hosted by Russian media,2 in alleged concern over possible Russian interference in the Presidential elections (!).

Both men have been critical of US foreign policy, which is likely the reason for intimidation through house searches, the same going for the UK police ‘welcome home’ upon Heathrow arrival of Richard Medhurst, an independent journalist and his arrest under ‘Anti-Terrorism’ law.3

Censorship in Reporting the War in Ukraine

Ukraine war news censorship has been running since 2014 but it really ramped up when Russia invaded in 2022. Any prominent individual or site, whether pro-Russia or just NATO-critical that challenged or did not follow the western imperialist line, was soon subjected to censorship.

Pablo González, a dual-nationality Basque reporter, was threatened by Ukrainian intelligence agents and then arrested and jailed in Poland, allegedly for spying for Russia. No evidence was produced during the 886 days he was jailed but now he’s released4 they claim they have a lot.

The Russia-based site RT America was closed down in the USA in 2022,5 as was RT UK in the UK.6

Oliver Stone’s documentary Ukraine On Fire was removed from YouTube7 and veteran conflict reporter and author Christopher Hedges, who left his post as Middle East reporter for the New York Times because of the paper’s censorship, was censored again by YouTube.8

Oliver Stone’s acclaimed documentary on Ukraine prior to Russian invasion was removed by Youtube.

The Grayzone electronic media outlet was characterised as a ‘pro-Russia’ site and veteran anti-imperialist and celebrated linguist Naom Chomsky was accused of being naive or also biased towards Russia.

To what would be their shame if they were capable of such a saving grace, much of the western Left and liberals, both reformist and revolutionary-claiming sections, rowed in behind the censors and labelled all who didn’t swallow their line, including Chomsky9 as “Putinistas”.

The reporting of the western mass media was accepted uncritically while any alternative reporting was attacked, some being characterised as Russian-backed media (in contrast with the corporate media, which of course is free of bias!).

Challenging journalists have also disappeared in Ukraine, where regime-critical journalist Gonzalo Lira died in Ukrainian jail,10 whereas in Palestine, the Israeli Occupation Force had killed at least 116 journalists as August drew to a close.11

In their acceptance of western censorship, those sections of the Left helped to ideologically prepare the ground for the wide-scale censorship around Palestine about which some of them complain bitterly now.

End.

(Image sourced: Internet)

Footnotes

1https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/telegram-messaging-app-ceo-pavel-durov-arrested-france-tf1-tv-says-2024-08-24/ Update: Durov’s arrest in custody had been extended (see References & Sources).

2https://www.reuters.com/world/us/fbi-searched-homes-two-americans-with-ties-russian-state-media-2024-08-22/

3Medhurst is currently out on bail.

4In a prisoner exchange https://elpais.com/espana/2024-08-01/el-periodista-espanol-pablo-gonzalez-liberado-en-un-intercambio-de-presos-entre-ee-uu-y-rusia.html

5https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202204/1258996.shtml

6‘The UK media regulator Ofcom has repeatedly found RT to have breached its rules on impartiality and on one occasion found it had broadcast “materially misleading” content.[3][4][5] On 18 March 2022, Ofcom cancelled RT’s UK broadcasting licence “with immediate effect” after concluding the outlet was not “fit and proper” or a “responsible broadcaster”’(Wikipedia). The unconscious irony is staggering.

7https://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2022/03/13/678482/Video-sharing-giants-delete-documentary-Ukrainian-revolution

8Six years of his broadcasts for On Contact and Russia Today were removed from Youtube, prompting him to set up on Substack.

9For many years the darling of the western Left.

10https://www.helsinkitimes.fi/world-int/24744-the-tragic-end-of-gonzalo-lira-a-voice-silenced-in-ukraine.html

11https://cpj.org/2024/08/journalist-casualties-in-the-israel-gaza-conflict

References & Sources

59 news organisations protest ‘Israeli’ slaughter of journalists in Palestine: https://english.almayadeen.net/news/politics/media-groups-urge-eu-to-sanction–israel—suspend-treaty

Thoughtful piece on bias in reporting the Ukraine War: https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2022/8/4/western-media-and-the-war-on-truth-in

Ukrainian state censorship on war reporting: https://theintercept.com/2023/06/22/ukraine-war-journalists-press-credentials/

French authorities’ arrest of Telegram founder: https://www.breakingnews.ie/world/french-police-custody-extended-after-arrest-of-telegram-chief-executive-durov-1665708.html

THREAT AND COUNTER THREAT 1: ISRAEL-LEBANON

Clive Sulish

(Reading time: 8 mins.)

Over recent months threats have been exchanged between ‘Israeli’ leaders and Hezbollah in Lebanon and also between leaders of Yemen and Saudi Arabia. The former reached its hottest pitch recently and seemed to be heralding open war.

Hezbollah and ‘Israel’

Hezbollah is an Islamist anti-imperialist resistance organisation of an estimated 50-100,000 trained fighters1 and has been characterised, in numbers and equipment, as “a medium-sized army”. Its artillery units have been firing into ‘Israeli’-occupied territory since October 8th last year.

The resistance organisation has taken action in solidarity with the Palestinians facing genocide and daily massacres and has vowed to continue it until the ‘Israeli’ Occupation Force ceases its attacks on the Palestinians.

Vast areas of Israeli settlements have been temporarily abandoned by settlers (or permanently by at least 60) as a result,2 the genocidal state accommodating former residents in camps and hotels, while the IOF occupies some buildings in the regions, enduring constant Hezbollah bombardments.

IOF base hit by Hezbollah strike during during the current conflict. (Photo source: Internet)

As the genocidal assault continues, Hezbolah has begun to shell settlements which it had previously excluded from its regular bombardment. In addition, the organisation has been repeatedly hitting IOF surveillance equipment and parts of the ‘Iron Dome’ air defence system.

One might say that the ‘Israeli’ army was responsible for the creation of Hezbollah; the organisation came into existence fighting the IOF’s occupation of Lebanon and its facilitation of the massacre at Sabra and Shatila Palestinian refugee camp by its Christian Phalangist allies.3

Hezbollah fought the IOF occupation of Lebanon in 2000 and the re-invasion in 2006, forcing the settler state to recall its army with substantial losses. They were the first campaign defeats inflicted on the IOF since its creation.

Hezbollah stages a military parade in Beirut, Lebanon in April 2024
(Image credit: AP Photo/Hussein Malla/Alamy)

Threats

Recently Yoav Gallant, the Occupation’s Minister of Defence (sic) threatened Hezbollah with war and claimed that it would be “quick, surprising and decisive”, also that they could shift the focus of their war from Gaza to Hezbollah in an instant.

Yoav Gallant, ‘Israeli’ Minister for Defence (sic), meeting some IOF personnel. The Purple beret is one of the signature uniforms of the Givati Brigade (84th), one of the five infantry brigades of the IOF and is one of the two infantry brigades under the Southern Command. (Photo sourced: Internet)

Certainly the most nazi part of Netanyahu’s fascist coalition threatens to resign unless the IOF attacks Hezbollah; it’s been speculated for some time that ‘Bibi’ himself would like that to draw the USA into it and as a distraction from his failed war against the Palestinian resistance.4

But it was almost certainly empty bluster from Gallant, to which Hezbollah replied, in case he were serious, that while the IOF could of course cause damage in Lebanon, that Hezbollah’s damage to the ‘Israeli’ state’s military bases and civilian infrastructure would be much greater.

Had Gallant been talking about aerial bombardment only there could have been some reality in his threat — but a land invasion? Having to cross the buffer zone they themselves created,5 meanwhile under fire from Hezbollah’s missiles? And how many undamaged tanks does the IOF have left?6

And then fighting Hezbollah on the ground? Gallant’s words might also have been bravado in the face of the shock settler society received with Hezbollah’s publication the day previously of the photographs of ‘Israeli’ military and civilian infrastructure taken by undetected drone.

Last Saturday evening, Hezbollah published more photos from a new undetected “flight of the hoopoe”7 which must have given the Israeli ruling class even more pause, this one picking out military targets including its “secure” air force base and naming commanding officers.

Indeed, Shin Bet8 was recently reported shocked to find that Hamas has an extensive database of IOF personnel at all ranks, including combat history and current addresses; they tracked the IOF commander of the Al Shifa Hospital massacre,9 field-executing him two months later.

Hezbollah published the material as a warning (and also to coincide with butcher Netanyahu’s visit to address the USA’s Congress in the Capitol, Washington DC). “If we can photograph it, we can hit it” Hezbollah said and it is known that their missiles can reach any part of the ‘Israeli’ state.

As this goes to publication we read that two Hezbollah M90 missiles were targeted at ‘Tel Aviv’. Though apparently intercepted it will be unsettling for the regime to say the least to learn that the missiles were launched from an area of proximity to a concentration of IOF vehicles invading the Gaza strip.

Recently, ‘Israeli’ threats escalated following an explosion which killed 12 children playing football in the ‘Israeli’-occupied Syrian Golan. In shocking hypocrisy considering the massacres of thousands of Palestinian children, Israeli and US representatives went into paroxysms of rage.

Aside from patently untrue claims that the victims were “Israeli children”,10 Hezbollah has also denied responsibility; it’s much more likely that the explosion was an accidental IOF Iron Dome missile strike, given the haste with which the missile remains were rushed off-site (and out of sight) by the IOF.11

But with the ‘casus belli’ established, real or not, on Tuesday the IOF sent an explosive drone on an apparently assassination attempt to a southern part of the Lebanese capital, Beirut, killing a woman and two children, injuring 68 and perhaps more inside the collapsed building.

The strike also killed Fuad Shukr, leader of Hezbollah military wing, veteran of the resistance in Lebanon to the IOF invasions and until now, sole survivor of the leadership of those days, all killed in battle or in assassination.

Hezbollah at the very least will continue its bombardment and may feel it necessary to hit some part of “Tel Aviv”. Then the USA and the UK may step in. Meanwhile the Islamist Resistance in Iraq has recommenced its attacks on US bases there, Yemen’s return serve is awaited …

And Iran is in the game, inevitably bound to respond after ‘Israel’s’ assassination in Tehran of Ismail Haniyeh, political leader of Hamas and chief ceasefire/ peace negotiator for the Palestinians, who was in Tehran to speak at the inauguration of the new President of Iran..

End.

FOOTNOTES

1Many with battle experience rather than killing civilians, like most of the IOF. Hezbollah’s leader claimed 100,000 fighters in Lebanon three years ago while a western agency puts the figure at 50,000. However the genocide in Palestine and the response of Hezbollah, combined with punitive ‘Israeli’ bombing and assassinations, is likely to have brought many more recruits to the organisation. It can also call on its fighters who are in Syria helping to defending the country from ISIS and US proxies.

2https://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2024/04/22/724134/62,000-Israeli-settlers-flee-northern-occupied-lands-out-of-fear-of-Hezbollah-strikes–Report

3 16–18 September 1982, killing of between 1,300 and 3,500 civilians—mostly Palestinians and Lebanese Shias.

4Netanyahu has his personal reasons too; the minute the war is over he will face his postponed trial for corruption.

5By pulling back from their borders to make it more difficult for Hezbollah to hit them, ironically.

6From Israeli analysis sources it seems that not only does the IOF not have the necessary tanks (admitted to 500 damaged) or soldiers but even the munitions for a real war against an opposing army (see short discussion on this and the source in Electronic Intifada recently https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=loHMeAfmnxY)

7The name Hezbollah gave the drone – the hoopoe is the national bird of Palestine.

8‘Israeli’ intelligence service.

9https://www.youtube.com/shorts/hnsJ9G_fdOY

10All of the children were of Syrian Druze families in a community in which around 90% have refused to accept citizenship in the state of their armed occupiers, holding on instead to Druze and Arab Syrian identity.

11Israeli Ministers were denounced on their visits to the site with cries translating as “child-killers” and demands they “Get out! Leave!”, Netanyahu having to leave within 15 minutes of his arrival.

SOURCES & FURTHER INFORMATION

https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/war-with-hezbollah-will-be-quick-surprising-and-decisive-israeli-defense-minister/3278153

Hezbollah (a somewhat biased history): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hezbollah

THOUSANDS MARCH THROUGH DUBLIN CITY CENTRE IN SUPPORT OF PALESTINE

Diarmuid Breatnach

(Reading time: 3 mins. Note: Apologies for delay in publishing this report)

On Saturday 20th June the Irish people, despite their Governments once again marched in a national demonstration to show the Irish majority solidarity with Palestine and horror at their continuing genocide by the ‘Israeli’ armed forces.

The march had been convened by the long-standing Ireland Palestine Solidarity Campaign which has branches across Ireland from Cork to Donegal, including in some parts of the British colony (where however the Loyalists are anti-Palestinian).1

Mothers Against Genocide group in Dawson St. (around corner from Molesworth St.) evoking individual children murdered by ‘Israel’. (Photo: D.Breatnach)
Dublin community group that holds Thursday evening vigils in four areas of North Dublin. (Photo: D.Breatnach)
(Photo: D.Breatnach)

The assassinations of resistance leaders were still to come2 but it had been business as usual in Palestine with daily massacres of civilians by the ‘Israeli’ Occupation forces, ongoing starvation, destroyed health service, impending epidemics, prisoners released as ghosts of their former selves.

Also IOF raids and kidnappings3 in the West Bank, at times with Palestinian Authority4 collusion in arrests of activists, confiscation or destruction of Resistance weapons …

(Photo: D.Breatnach)
(Photo: D.Breatnach)
(Photo: D.Breatnach)

To all this the Palestinians in general have responded by helping one another trying to survive, digging people out of bombed rubble, documenting atrocities, burying their dead, trying to feed their children and elderly …

And their Resistance in all factions (and none) threw stones, fired bullets, launched anti-tank rockets, mortars, missiles and blew up bombs against Occupation armour and soldiers. And of course, contributed new names to the long list of martyred resistance fighters and commanders.

The ECJ,5 to howls of protest from the regime had pronounced its verdict that Israel was indeed, as has long been evident, guilty of practising apartheid against the Palestinians. However not one state ceased giving political or financial cover to the Occupation or supplying it with arms as a result.

Irish Healthcare Workers for Palestine. (Photo: D.Breatnach)

(Photo: D.Breatnach)
(Photo: D.Breatnach)

IPSC Police?

Only a few Irish Tricolours were displayed on the march which is visually a political mistake, as I’ve observed earlier and the organisers should state that such are welcome. Not one Starry Plough flag, that of socialist Republicans, could be seen either, despite no doubt there being many such participating.

Irish language placards and banners have been getting rarer, despite a previous welcome upsurge upon which I’ve commented in the past. However there were some to be seen, including a number of Saoirse Don Phalaistín flags and the banner of a Newry group, from Co. Down, under British occupation.

(Photo: D.Breatnach)
(Photo: D.Breatnach)
(Photo: D.Breatnach)

As they filled Molesworth Street towards the IPSC stage and police barriers at the end, facing the Leinster House Irish Parliament building, some marchers already began to leave, having heard speeches before and perhaps heading for their transport back to their earlier points of departure.

The company that erects crowd barriers were ready to install them to cut off a section of Molesworth Street at the intersection of narrow lanes and the Gardaí wanted to cram the crowd in beyond the barriers. IPSC stewards began to usher marchers further into Molesworth street.

One approached a group of marchers telling them what the police wanted to which one of the group replied: “I don’t give a f..k what the police want!” and after the steward’s persistence, accused him of doing the job of the police.

The IPSC stewards have helped the police pack marchers into the stretch of Molesworth Street beyond the intersection (and incidentally leaving any demonstrating in Dawson Street cut off from the main group). (Photo: D.Breatnach)

Aside from the rough language, what were the IPSC stewards doing passing on police orders?

People in the group said that the IPSC stewards have done this before and that furthermore there was no important-through way being cleared,6 the exercise serving no real purpose other than getting the public used to being corralled and that at the least the police should do their own job.

(Photo: D.Breatnach)
(Photo: D.Breatnach)

The main purpose of stewards is to keep the march moving and safely from traffic. The route has been agreed beforehand by the IPSC with the Gardaí which is not a legal requirement in Ireland. Even in that case the stewards should keep a strict separation in functions from the police.

The IPSC does an important job, publishing information and organising events, especially nationally but back in October delayed in even calling for the Zionist Ambassador’s expulsion. Some other groups also organise events and it appears that the IPSC supports some and not others.

Young Palestinian women leading the slogans call-out. (Photo: D.Breatnach)
(Photo: D.Breatnach)

Going forward it seems that the solidarity movement, including of course the IPSC, will need to take into account their meagre effect on the Irish Government, not to speak of upon the genocidal state itself and on its supporting states in the West, in particular the USA, Germany, UK …

Such recognition will call for escalation, for direct action, for different kinds of solidarity action … whether some organisations want to participate or not.

(Photo: D.Breatnach)
(Photo: D.Breatnach)
Some trade union banners on the march (though the unions do little to mobilise support, much less take action against ‘Israeli’ products etc.). (Photo: D.Breatnach)
Front of the march turning into College Street. (Photo: D.Breatnach)

FOOTNOTES

1This could be because they see themselves as ‘British’ settlers, while the ‘Israelis’ are European settlers too but is more likely a knee-jerk reaction to the Palestine solidarity exhibited by Irish nationalists (something like “If they’re for them, we must be against them”.

2Assassinations of leaders of Hamas, Hezbolah and senior officers of Islamic Resistance Iraq.

3The IOF and the Zionist State may call them “arrests” or “detentions” but typically they are random or working off a list without warrants or due process. Former prisoners are re-arrested constantly; family of ‘wanted’ individuals are detained in order to pressure the ‘wanted’ to give themselves up. Typically the detained are served ‘administrative detention’ orders, jailing them for months without trial or evidence. Prisoners are underfed, overcrowded, beaten by guards, have dogs set upon them and medically neglected.

4Unelected, undemocratic, corrupt and zionist-colluding body financed by some Western powers and some colluding Arab states.

5https://palestinecampaign.org/icj-ruling-finds-israel-guilty-of-unlawful-occupation-and-apartheid/

6Furthermore, with no side-streets available in that section beyond the intersection, the police could close that west end of the street should they wish to, ‘kettling’ all the demonstrators between two Garda barriers.

“Long live the Intifada!” in Dublin as ‘Israel’s’ Genocidal War Reaches 300 Days

Clive Sulish

(Reading time:4 mins.)

On Friday 2nd August two events of Palestine solidarity advertised at short notice took place a couple of hundred metres apart in Dublin City centre, attracting up to a couple of thousand participants overall.

The larger event by far was organised by the Ireland Palestine Solidarity Campaign and focused on the 300th day of the Genocidal war on the people of Gaza by the Israeli state. The smaller, approaching a hundred participants, concentrated on the assassination of leaders of the Resistance.

The IPSC-organised vigil on O’Connell Street (Source photo: R.Breeze)

The IPSC occupied the space to which they have become accustomed in front of the GPO, the other, organised by Anti-Imperialism Action and the Saoirse Don Phalaistín coalition, took up position on the west side of O’Connell Bridge, where flags of the PFLP, Hamas and Hezbollah could be seen.

Some carried portraits of martyred Resistance leaders Haniyeh and Fouad; among the usual Palestinian national flags and resistance faction flags, a number of Irish Tricolours could also be seen, along with a green-and-gold Starry Plough.

Close-up section of the AIA-SDP protest on O’Connell Bridge (Source photo: AIA)

Some printed placards stated that Resistance Is Not Terrorism, while a couple of home-made placards stated that ‘Israel’ and US/NATO are the real terrorists! and a home-made banner declared Glory to the Resistance!

An almost constant stream of slogans were called by young people taking turns (one male and two females) and answered by the crowd, “Long live the Intifada” and “In the face of occupation, resistance is an obligation” in particular leaving no doubt where their sympathies lay.

Shot taken early as protest was getting started (Source photo: R.Breeze)

The crowds passing by were either openly supportive or non-committal but a few hostile comments were thrown and one middle-aged man shoved the loudhailer into the mouth of a young Palestinian woman who was calling out slogans for the crowd’s response.

She reacted immediately to the hostile act and was quickly supported by a group of young women who pushed the man away. Three Gardaí who were watching from the central reservation then came across to the group and took the man to one side but also demanded the Palestinian woman’s ID.

One of two placards with the same message displayed on the AIA-SDP protest on O’Connell Bridge. (Source photo: R.Breeze)

Unaware of her rights, she gave them that information. The Gardaí said they had not seen the man’s action, only that of the women pushing him along the Bridge. He claimed that the megaphone had been blaring in his ears but the suspicion is that he had been expressing his hostility to the cause.

The opinion of some people was that there would be no subsequent police action against the woman but some others gave her precautionary advice and also contact numbers for witnesses.

A Garda jeep and number of uniformed Gardaí had taken up station on the east side of the Bridge and a couple of Special Branch (plain-clothes political police) were also noted observing and videoing from the central reservation but none approached the demonstrators.

Two Special Branch officers immediately after their arrival on the central pedestrian reservation on O’Connell Bridge. (Source photo: R.Breeze)

A sinister individual who met the SB men on the central reservation, constantly on his phone and at times directing the SB where to film, may have been Mossad, the ‘Israeli’ foreign secret service, well-known for assassinations such as that of Palestinian Mahmoud Al-Mabhouh in Dubai in 2010.

Possible Zionist agent seen here near the SB officers on the central pedestrian reservation on O’Connell Bridge. (Source photo: AIA)

The photographs of 26 of his suspected assassins and their aliases were circulated by Interpol and Dubai police found that 12 of the suspects used British passports, along with six Irish, four French, one German, and three Australian passports; this causing some diplomatic storm at the time.

Approximately an hour after the start of the event on the Bridge, it was concluded while in front of the GPO, the other event was still continuing.

Section of the IPSC-organised vigil in O’Connell St. (Source photo: R.Breeze)
Close-up of section of the AIA-SDP organised protest on O’Connell Bridge. (Source photo: AIA)

End.

Great Leaders Fall

Diarmuid Breatnach

(Reading time: 5 mins.)

A number of great leaders of Arab resistance to imperialism and zionism have fallen in the last few days. “Those who live by the sword …”, the wise will comment. But they did not die by the sword but rather by long-range missile assassination.

Still, we can take the comment as a metaphor, that those who live by violence die by violence. But do they? Has Genocide Joe Biden died by violence? Sunak? Von der Leyen? Scholz and Merkel? Macron? Netanyahu, Gallant, Smotrich? No, it is clearly not a general rule.

But revolutionary fighters, commanders and leaders – they are killed, again and again. Fighters who become commanders are particularly targeted and, in the Middle East for sure, so are their spouses, their children, their parents … This is the way of Mossad and the IOF but also of the US and UK.

The SAS and MRF units of the British Army did that in the 30 Years’ War in the occupied Six Counties too. Assassinations of leaders are intended to disrupt the revolutionary organisation and demoralise the Resistance.

Sometimes, the intention is to have a revolutionary leader replaced by a traitor or someone who is ideologically pliable but often too the fallen are replaced by others as dedicated and competent, if not more so.

The IOF are accomplished assassins of individuals, also killers of civilians, just not very good at combating armed resistance, particularly in the absence of air cover..

But why shouldn’t revolutionary leaders be felled – don’t they send others out to kill or be killed? Certainly they do and all Arab resistance movement commanders know that they risk assassination, many of the commanders and fighters writing their wills while in active service.

However, visit imperialist war memorials listing the names and ranks of the fallen in war and see how many names of their armies’ generals can be found there. Not many, that’s for sure.

Haniyeh was the chief Resistance representative in the Gaza ceasefire/ peace talks. Prime Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman al-Thani of Qatar, which is mediating the talks, tweeted: “How can mediation succeed when one party assassinates the negotiator on other side?”1

Two revolutionary leaders who fell to assassination so recently were Sayyed Fouad Shukr of Hezbollah in a suburb of Beirut and Ismail Haniye of Hamas in the Iranian capital, Tehran. Each organisation has issued statements that they will not be stopped and that they will claim revenge.

In another assassination strike on Tuesday in Iraq, admitted by the USA, Khateb Hezbollah suffered the loss of martyred leader Abu Hassan Al-Maliki and martyred fighters Ali Al-Moussawi, Hassan Al-Saadi and Hussein Karim Al-Daraji,2 bringing huge crowds out in protest there.

The Iraqi Islamic resistance had begun shelling US Army bases there recently, partly in frustration at the lack of any move to leave the country despite having indicated they would but partly also no doubt in frustration at not contributing to the united effort in solidarity with the Palestinians.

Iran declared furthermore that since the assassination of Ismail Haniyeh took place on their national territory that the obligation of response falls upon them. One imagines that another strike on somewhere in Israel will be considered necessary though the precise target is unknown.

Declarations of condolence, defiance and continuity were also issued by resistance factions in Palestine, Lebanon and Iraq, as well as by the leaderships of Yemen and Tunisia. A general strike was called in the West Bank and marches of defiance and solidarity held in a number of countries.

Confrontations with settlers and with the Occupation army have been taking place in towns across the West Bank and the war in Gaza continues, more or less as normal: daily massacres by the IOF, actions by the Resistance.

Collateral damage’

The strikes on the leaders also claimed other lives: six people including three women and two children, along with Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps member Milad Bedi were killed in the Beirut assassination of Fuad Shukr and 78 injured in the collapsed building.3

Along with Haniyeh in Iran died his bodyguard and veteran Palestinian resistance fighter, Wassim Shabu, with no details of other ‘collateral damage’ from there or from Iraq so far.

According to the rules of war agreed among the imperialists, assassination of commanders, even civilian ones in times of war, is justified. ‘Collateral damage’ to a certain degree is also permitted by those rules but how can the bombing of journalists and killing two in Gaza be justified?

They were at the rubble site of Haniyeh’s former home, perhaps reporting on some kind of event marking the assassination, since they cannot attend the equivalent of a wake or a laying out of the body, the funeral to be held in Iran. How was their killing justifiable by any stretch of rules?

Ismail Al-Ghoul and Ramy Al-Reef were the two press men martyred there. Those two deaths bring the number of journalists killed in Palestine (always by the IOF), to 165, the highest number of journalists killed in any conflict since data began to be collected by the CPJ in 1992.4

Life of revolutionary leaders

The life stories of the martyred leaders are instructive in themselves. Ismail Haniyeh grew up in a refugee camp in Al-Shati in Gaza, son of a community driven out of their home in Jura in Askelan5 in 1948. He graduated with a degree in Arabic Literature from the Gaza University in 1981.

It was in university Haniyeh became politically active, joining the student section of Islamic Bloc (forerunner of Hamas), becoming arrested and detained three times, the final one for three years, after which he was deported to southern Lebanon with other leaders.

Ismail Haniye survived at least four assassination attempts, including in 2003 and in 2006.

Haniyeh led Hamas to victory in the 2006 elections for the legislature of the Palestinian Authority. The Fatah leadership refusing to hand over the administration in Gaza, Hamas removed them in a short struggle,6 then Abbas7 refused to recognise the election results there or in the West Bank.

The Zionist State followed, as did the Western powers and the siege of Gaza began.

Haniyeh’s granddaughter was killed last November in a bombing on a school. Three of his sons and three grandsons were assassinated in an IOF strike on their car in April and last month, 10 of his family, including his sister, were killed in an IOF bombing.

Sayeed Fuad Shukr 62, also known as Al-Hajj Mohsen, was born in the city of Nabatieh in Baalbek in eastern Lebanon, according to the US government’s Rewards for Justice website, which offered up to $5 million for information on Shukr.

He came to political struggle in the resistance to the IOF invasion and occupation of Lebanon which was the spur to the creation of Hezbollah. Fuad Shukr as a fighter rose through the political and military ranks to the Jihad Council fighting the IOF and its Lebanese proxy.

Sayeed also would have been party to the decision to send Hezbollah fighters to assist the Syrian state resist attacks by NATO forces and their proxies and probably also Turkish.

He was married with children; his daughter wrote pieces in particular about martyrs under a pseudonym but just published a piece about her father under her own name on Resistance News Network (on Telegram).

Dying Gaul statue, 1st Century CE, probably Roman sculpture. By his neck ornament, the Gaul appears to be a warrior of high rank. The Gauls were a Celtic culture inhabiting most of modern-day France, Switzerland and parts of Italy; after many wars they were crushed by the Roman Empire. (Source image: Internet)

Great leaders

I commented that they were great leaders. By all accounts they were. They were Muslim revolutionaries and I am an atheist but more to the point their religious belief was an important part of their politico-social ideology, to which my own secular revolutionary ideology is opposed.

But they were revolutionaries non the less, courageously leading their people in struggle against their oppressors, who are very powerful enemies. They had emotion, which they let out in speech. In planning and in response to events however, they thought things through before acting.

Ismail Haniye probably underestimated the extent – in length of time and numbers of dead, in starvation and destruction of all infrastructure — of the ‘Israeli’ genocidal war after October 7th.8 That does not mean however that the breakout and attack was not necessary.

But the resistance was led, day after day, using the tunnels that had been dug through the years of preparation and the weapons researched, developed and produced over that time. In the truce/ ceasefire negotiations, the leadership stuck to the necessary minimum, which must’ve been hard.

Great fighters of the rank and file fall and are constantly being replaced and multiplied. Thousands of civilians have been killed, disabled and traumatised, yet the Palestinian population will recover and rebuild. Great leaders have fallen – let us hope their replacements will be great too.

End.

Footnotes

1https://www.axios.com/2024/07/31/hamas-ismail-haniyeh-killed-iran Just one more proof, in addition to going back on agreements, adding new requirements etc showing that Netanyahu never had any intention of negotiating a genuine ceasefire, exchange of prisoners and withdrawal from Gaza and the Rafah Gate to allow humanitarian aid to enter. Indeed he often said that his chief aim was wiping out Hamas and would not permit self-governance in Gaza – it was only a few of his officials and the US administration which kept pretending otherwise.

2 https://t.me/PalestineResist/50870

3https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/hamas-chief-ismail-haniyeh-killed-iran-hamas-says-statement-2024-07-31

4Committee to Protect Journalists https://cpj.org/

5Now Zionist settler district ‘Ashkelon’.

6This is the reality usually disguised in the western mass media by phrases like “Hamas seized power in Gaza” or “Hamas took control in Gaza”.

7Mahmoud, Fatah’s boss of the PA, widely known for personal corruption and nepotism and also for collusion with the Zionist Occupation.

8Even the most pessimistic could hardly have expected the extent of the genocide or the extent of the collusion or forbearance of the West and most of the Arab states.

Sources

Sayyed Fouad Shukr (but including rubbish about the explosion killing children in the Golan): https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/7/31/who-isfuad-shukr

Iraq assassinations: https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20240731-us-air-strike-in-iraq-as-regional-tensions-worsen/