GAZA RIVIERA SEAFRONT PLAN HITS OBSTACLES

On March 2, 2025March 3, 2025 By rebelbreezeIn Capitalism, Cartoon, Current Affairs Comment, Genocide, History, Human Rights, Imperialism, Indigenous or Original People, Massacres, Middle East, Palestine, Political Analysis, US Imperialism, Zionism2 Comments

Diarmuid Breatnach

(Reading time: 11 mins.)

Recently Donald Trump scandalised much of the world with his suggestion that Gaza could be turned into an attractive location after its inhabitants, the Palestinians, were removed.

Was this a serious proposal? If so, could the US and Israel manage it? What are the chances?

Firstly, a quick look at the territory envisaged and its recent history.

GAZA

A strip of land 365 km2 (141 sq mi)¹ on the eastern coast of the Middle Eastern land of Palestine, bordered by the State of ‘Israel’ and the State of Egypt, with an estimated Palestinian population of 2.1 million in 2024 (since hugely depleted by genocide and removal).

Gaza had been settled mainly by Palestinian refugees expelled from Zionist-occupied Palestine in 1948 and by those fleeing Israeli Occupation Force persecution and harassment in the West Bank in subsequent years added to of course by their descendants born and growing up there.

The strip was occupied after the 1967 War by around 5,000 Zionist settlers – illegally even by international law — who took up around 40% of the land there but after the Second Intifada,² left in 2005, as did the Israeli Occupation Army.

In the 2006 elections in Gaza and the West Bank, Hamas won, ousting the Fatah party which had won the previous elections. However, Fatah refused to accept the results and had to be physically removed in Gaza in 2007, though Hamas stepped back from doing the same in the West Bank.

The Western powers, those bastions of the democratic way of doing things, refused to acknowledge the Palestinian popular will and blocked Hamas from all aid, which went instead to the undemocratic Palestinian Authority, which the Fatah party control.

‘Israel’ blockaded Gaza from then onwards, keeping the population at a marginal level of existence and regularly attacked it, what they called “mowing the lawn” in 2008/9, 2012, 2014, 2018/19, 2021 until the Palestinian breakout and counter-attack of October 2023.³

In October 2023 Hamas and Islamic Jihad broke out of their concentration camp, overran the ‘Israeli’ armed forces overseeing them and seized captives to exchange for the many Palestinian captives in ‘Israeli’ jails. Other groups and individuals also poured through the gaps in the wall.

The IOF besieged Gaza, cutting off its supplies of food, clean water and other supplies. It dropped 85,000 tonnes of explosives⁴ on that highly-concentrated population, killing an estimated 46,000 (with another 10,000 buried in rubble)⁵ and injuring at least 110,265 (one in every 20).⁶

The IOF destroyed nearly all wells and rooftop water tanks, along with desalination plants,⁷ destroyed totally or in part 90% of residential buildings,⁸ at least 27 hospitals and 12 other medical centres,⁹ along with schools, higher education buildings, mosques and churches.

Some 1.9 million people have been displaced, 90% of the population, with many of them forced to move repeatedly.¹⁰ “Nearly 1.9 million people in Gaza are internally displaced, of which nearly 80 percent are living in makeshift shelters without adequate clothing or protection from the cold.

“UN agencies estimated that nearly half a million are in flood-prone areas. Authorities in Gaza said about 110,000 of the 135,000 tents being used as shelters in the Gaza Strip are worn out and not fit for use.”¹¹

PROPOSERS OF ETHNIC CLEANSING

The USA – In March 2024 Jared Kushner, property developer, senior policy adviser and son-in-law of Donald Trump (then former US President and now President again) commented that Gaza after the removal of the Palestinians would make a great site for a beach-front property development.¹²

Donald Trump, after being re-elected, commented in somewhat similar lines and bluntly proposed the expulsion (‘voluntary relocation’) of Palestinians from Gaza. But to where? Well, to Jordan and Egypt in particular, whose ruling regimes would accept them, he assured.¹³

The Democratic Party wing of the US imperialist ruling class expressed horror at such crass statements of ethnic cleansing but had supported the ‘Israeli’ state in maintaining the siege, periodic bombing attacks and in demonising Hamas along with the whole Palestinian resistance.¹⁴

‘Israel’: Prime Minister Netanyahu and a number of his cabinet made statements supporting the plan.

REACTION OF ARAB & IRANIAN STATE LEADERS

The leaders of Arab states and of Iran have opposed the ethnic cleansing plan, all of them concerned at further destabilisation of the Middle East (and threat to their regimes). Most (excepting Yemen and Iran), advocating instead Gaza as part of a Palestinian state (sic) alongside the ‘Israeli’ one.¹⁵

WHAT EUROPEAN STATE LEADERS SAY

All of the leaders of European states that have commented have opposed the plan, all of them concerned at further destabilisation of the Middle East and, with regard to Palestine, advocating instead Gaza as part of a Palestinian state (sic) alongside the ‘Israeli’ one.¹⁶

All of the main political parties in the European states have also opposed the ethnic cleansing and advocate the “two state solution” (sic).

RUSSIA & CHINA also oppose Trump’s plan as do many states in AFRICA and in LATIN AMERICA. The top levels of the United Nations also oppose Trump’s idea.

WHY MOST STATES OPPOSE THE PLAN

Those objecting to the ethnic cleansing of Gaza and transporting Palestinians to other destinations may well have moral objections to that plan but their political and practical reasons for objecting are much stronger.

Lebanon already has a Palestinian refugee population of 60% and in 1975-’90 a war there saw fascist Lebanese forces combined with the IOF fight Palestinian and Druze forces with massacres of refugees as “Beirut” became a byword in urban destruction, invasion and ethnic conflict.

The Jordanian regime is heavily foreign-dependent and vulnerable to imperialist pressure but it also knows that it walks a tightrope and can’t afford to add to the economic, social and political pressures by taking in a large influx of Palestinians forced out of Gaza.

Nearly 25% of Jordan’s population is composed of Palestinian refugees and their descendants.¹⁷

The King of Jordan, an imperialist stooge trained in the UK, nervously attended the meeting with the real king, Trump, to which he was summoned, evidencing his unease with a nervous tic taking over his face. He agreed to take 2,000 injured children, not at all the same thing as Trump wanted.

Egypt, a bigger power though also US-dependent (especially its military) has its own economic, social and political reasons for rejecting a proposal to integrate a large population of forced Palestinian refugees into its society and economy and declined an invitation to meet Trump.

US ally Saudi Arabia, which has not been pressured to the degree of Egypt and Lebanon, nevertheless has reasons to reject the plan and that is the de-stabilization of the whole Middle East by a further expansion of the Zionist State and growing population of stateless refugees.

That is the other and fundamental reason why the Saudi ruling class is opposed to the expulsion of Palestinians and they have stated it in terms of the need for a ‘Palestinian state’ – within the framework of a two-state ‘solution’ (i.e. a partitioned Palestine with about 20% for Palestinians).

The Saudis have also proposed to rebuild and set up Gaza with the Palestinians remaining there but in the course of which they intend to have somebody other than Hamas – whom the people elected, let’s not forget – administer the area.

The Palestinian Authority (sic) despite its role as proxy policeman for the Zionist State and US Imperialism, would not welcome the loss of a large part of its possible fiefdom and certainly could not politically afford to agree to the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.

Macron, for the French imperialist ruling class, has welcomed the Saudi proposal. It is not beyond possibility that the US ruling class will approve and it may even have been part of its plan to frighten everyone and make such ‘solutions’ as that of the Saudis more generally accepted.

UAE is not vulnerable internally to anything like the degree of Egypt and Jordan and on the other hand is at times in contention with Saudi Arabia for influence in the region but also ally of the USA is nevertheless opposed the Trump ethnic cleansing process.

Qatar, home of Al-Jazeera news channel and much more in contention with Saudi Arabia and also the UAE, is also an ally of the USA but opposed to removing the Palestinians from Gaza.

The elites of the Western European states, from imperialist to lesser capitalist states wishing to coexist with imperialism, including the colonial and neo-colonial states of Ireland all oppose the ethnic cleansing of Gaza, saying it threatens the ‘two state option’.

That option would copper-fasten Israeli occupation of around 80% of Palestine and control over the remaining 20% as a client state. They would hope to isolate the Palestinian resistance under collaborator rule and help and assist in the stabilisation under imperialism of the Middle East.

A DIFFERENT BASIS FOR OPPOSITION

The ruling elites of IRAN and YEMEN¹⁸ see ‘Israel’ as an important foothold for US and other Western imperialism in the Middle East and also as an aggressive colonial force in its own right. Therefore they are fundamentally hostile to any kind of ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.

That too is the position of Hezbollah, a major political and military force in Lebanon.

IS THE ZIONIST ARMY CAPABLE OF ETHNICALLY CLEANSING GAZA?

The Israeli Occupation Army is unlikely to welcome being sent back into Gaza to fight the Palestinian resistance there once again. And signalling that, rather than an inadvertent slip, may have caused the admission of very high combat fatality figures by the IOF’s commander.¹⁹

Eyal Zamir, ‘Israel’s’ new Chief of Staff, referred in a recent interview to the “5,942 of bereaved families”²⁰ since October 2023, terminology only used by the IOF to refer to the families of their soldiers killed and also noted that some families likely lost more than one member.

Those numbers, apart from being around six times those previously admitted by the IOF, are not such that can be replaced in the short term.

Furthermore, the Palestinian resistance in Gaza (and presumably Hezbollah in Lebanon) targeted officers whenever they could resulting in a high attrition rate among higher ranks engaged in combat. These take longer to replace due to their experience, training and skills.

It has long been suspected in many quarters that Israel was concealing its war casualty numbers by imposing press censorship, installing IOF officers to answer queries at hospitals and issuing untrue statistics for foreign and home consumption.

Zamir also stated that 15,000 soldiers were suffering from physical or mental injuries.²¹ As early as December 2023, the ‘Israeli’ publication Haartez, quoted their Health Ministry figures of a staggering 10,548 injured as opposed to the 1,593 stated by the IOF.²²

“In October 2024, Haaretz also reported that around 1,000 wounded soldiers were admitted to rehabilitation centres each month, along with new injury claims associated with past incidents.

“The report stated that the rehabilitation division estimates that by 2030, around 100,000 Israeli soldiers will be classed as disabled, and almost half also experience some form of psychological challenge.”²³

Statistics show a military age population in ‘Israel’, male and female, of around three million²⁴ of which some are already serving, many exempt from recruitment due to specific occupation or studies, pregnancy, general health or ability, criminal status or psychological unfitness.

This is without taking into account the Haredi, formerly exempt from service due to religious studies but since June last year eligible to call-up. However this has led to Haredi protests and only 10% of those called actually presenting for service — and also strains Netanyahu’s coalition.²⁵

On the other hand, there is general agreement among commentators that the Resistance, in particular Al-Qassam Brigades (Hamas military wing) have already replaced their fallen across the ranks. The survivors are likely to be for the most part battle-hardened, motivated and confident.

‘Israel’ fought the war in Gaza largely from the air through bombing and missile strikes along with artillery at a distance or a little closer by tanks. The IOF Merkava tanks have been severely depleted due to roadside IEDs (bombs) and Resistance-developed or modified RPGs.

The IOF generally did not take the Resistance on in soldier-to-soldier combat and when they did, were generally defeated. IOF snipers were often themselves sniped or they and their spy-posts eliminated by a rocket with thermobaric warhead.

Gaza still contains a vast network of sophisticated tunnels of which the IOF know very little nor, when an entrance is discovered, do the IOF go in there to fight. The IOF-created rubble landscape with rarely any building for the IOF to hole up but no way of spotting tunnel exits.

As demonstrated in the prisoner handover events, Hamas is not short of weapons, though level of ammunition stores is an unknown factor. Given the huge amount of unexploded bombs dropped by the IOF, possibly as high as 15% the Resistance will not be short of explosives either.²⁶

CONCLUSION

Whether Trump was serious about the plan to ethnically cleanse Gaza or was merely soft-soaping Netanyahu and his most fascist Zionist supporters remains to be seen. Equally, the US may have wanted to scare Palestinian Arab neighbours to step forward to police Gaza for them.

Let us not forget that Brett McGurk under Biden’s administration discussed the need to consider how to manage Gaza “the day after” the war there ended and that a revamped Palestinian Authority might be able to do the job²⁷ – Abbas rushing to assure his masters that the PA was indeed ready!

Proving themselves ready for Gaza management was probably the reason for the PA’s siege of Jenin and then participating in attacks upon the Resistance there alongside the IOF. However, it is unlikely that the imperialists have much faith in the corrupt PA’s ability to take on running Gaza.

The ethnic cleansing of Gaza, whether it was ever really contemplated by Trump or not, will not happen in the near future because none of the regional stakeholders – other than the blindest fascists of the Israeli Government – can afford to agree with it.

Also because the only ones reasonably available to attack Gaza again, the IOF, got really badly chewed up in their fifteen months of genocidal warfare there. But then perhaps the whole threat was scare-bait to get Arab states to collude even further with ‘Israel’ in managing post-war Gaza.

On the other hand, an unthinkable idea has been thought of and widely publicised. And when the unthinkable becomes part of public discourse, it breaks the taboo around it and makes it easier to put into practice at some point in the future.

Resumption of and constant bombing of Gaza is therefore not totally beyond possibility but it seems unlikely the master, the USA (Trump variety) wants that and, while that is the case, it cannot happen.

End.

Footnotes

1Not very much larger than Dublin city.

2The 2^nd Intifada (uprising) was against the ‘Israeli’ occupation but also against the Oslo Accords, the perceived sell-out by the ruling Fatah party of Palestinian self-determination and the right of return for Palestinian refugees.

3A very biased source nevertheless gives the dates and some statistics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza%E2%80%93Israel_conflict

4 https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/1/15/the-human-toll-of-israels-war-on-gaza-by-the-numbers#:~:text=46%2C707%20Palestinians%20killed,number%20killed%20is%20far%20higher.

5 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jan/15/the-devastating-impact-of-15-months-of-war-on-gaza

6 https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/1/15/the-human-toll-of-israels-war-on-gaza-by-the-numbers

7 https://www.oxfamamerica.org/press/less-than-seven-percent-of-pre-conflict-water-levels-available-to-rafah-and-north-gaza-worsening-a-health-catastrophe/ and (from para 8 in) https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/aug/22/israel-palestine-gaza-water, not only by the IOF but also in attacks by Zionist settlers.

8 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jan/15/the-devastating-impact-of-15-months-of-war-on-gaza

9Quoted in this anti-Hamas report .https://reliefweb.int/report/occupied-palestinian-territory/israels-attacks-have-devastating-impact-gazas-hospitals-turk-tells-security-council

10 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jan/15/the-devastating-impact-of-15-months-of-war-on-gaza

11 https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/1/15/the-human-toll-of-israels-war-on-gaza-by-the-numbers

12 https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/mar/19/jared-kushner-gaza-waterfront-property-israel-negev

13 https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trumps-gaza-riviera-echoes-kushner-waterfront-property-dreams-2025-02-05/

14Since the IOF pulled out of Gaza and the election of Hamas by the people, five US Presidencies have supported ‘Israel’s’ actions and supplied them with the financial and military means to carry them out: George Bush Jnr, Barrack Obama, Donald Trump, Joe Biden, Donald Trump (again). Two individual Presidents have been Democrats, two Republican; two Presidencies have been Democratic and three Republican.

15 https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2025/02/05/world-reactions-to-trump-s-proposal-for-us-to-take-over-gaza-strip_6737820_4.html

16 https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2025/02/05/world-reactions-to-trump-s-proposal-for-us-to-take-over-gaza-strip_6737820_4.html

17 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinians_in_Jordan

18And seems to reflect the opinion of their countries’ masses also.

19Given the secrecy around the real statistics he may have been not only signalling disapproval of resuming the war in Gaza but also feeding information ammunition to others who might also be opposed to that return.

20 https://www.newarab.com/news/israeli-new-army-chief-admits-gaza-losses-higher-reported

21Ibid

22Ibid

23Ibid.

24 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_global_manpower_fit_for_military_service Some of those may have left ‘Israel’ without intention to return in the short term (“manpower” is a misnomer since female figures are also included)..

25 https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israel-supreme-court-rules-religious-seminary-students-must-be-drafted-military-2024-06-25/

26 https://www.timesofisrael.com/much-of-hamas-explosives-comes-from-idf-fire-that-failed-to-detonate-report/

27Also a suggestion of Borrell’s, Foreign Affairs Minister of the EU: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/nov/27/corrupt-discredited-could-a-reformed-palestinian-authority-run-gaza

Sources

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trumps-gaza-riviera-echoes-kushner-waterfront-property-dreams-2025-02-05/

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4gw89x8x11o

Roundup of reaction of states and major organisations to Trump’s ethnic cleansing words: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/2/5/world-reaction-to-trumps-comments-on-ethnic-cleansing-in-gaza

The St. Patrick’s Day Blood Fest Comes Round Again

On February 24, 2025February 25, 2025 By rebelbreezeIn Current Affairs Comment, Imperialism, Ireland, Massacres, Middle East, National Liberation, Palestine, US Imperialism, ZionismLeave a comment

Gearóid Ó Loingsigh Feb. 23
NB: Edited by Rebel Breeze for formatting purposes

(Reading time: 5 mins.)

When the genocide in Gaza began, no one thought it would go on for so long.

But it has, and along the road many challenges have come up for governments, social movements, Arab countries and political parties and nearly all of them have been found wanting on the issue.

In Ireland the annual cringe fest that is St. Patrick’s Day in Washington threw up a problem for Sinn Féin last year. Should they go or not go?

Last year the Irish Palestinian Solidarity Campaign issued a call for all political parties, including government parties, not to go.

Sinn Féin broke that call for a boycott and were swiftly pardoned by the IPSC which swiftly invited them to address a Palestinian solidarity rally in Belfast one day before Mary Lou McDonald and Michelle O’Neill First Minister of Northern Ireland set off for the USA.

There they swanned around with Biden, imbibing of whatever liquor was on offer on the day. Supping the devil’s buttermilk as some of their unionist colleagues might put it.

At the time Sinn Féin said it was going, as it was important and that they would raise the issue of Palestine with Biden. One month before flying out to Washington a Sinn Féin spokesperson stated:

We will use every political and diplomatic opportunity and influence that we have to be a voice for Palestine, to demand an end to the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, for Palestinian statehood and for a permanent ceasefire now.[1]

In the end they did no such thing. In fact, the then Irish Taoiseach (Prime Minister) Leo Varadkar was more forceful than Mary Lou or Michelle who made even more tepid statements and quaffed what was put in front of them and enjoyed the jollies.

They could have been forgiven for thinking that it would be all over by 2025 and this situation would not arise again. Well, we should be gentle on them, many of us underestimated the Israeli bloodlust. But here we are again.

Trump continues with Biden’s genocide and announces his intention to commit two war crimes e.g. the mass expulsion of Palestinians from Gaza, a war crime under Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention and profit from the looting of their assets a further war crime under Article 33 of the same convention.[2]

The SDLP was the first out of the hatches saying it would not go, reaffirming their position of the previous year.

It is ironic that Sinn Féin supporters used to refer to the SDLP as the Stoops, a play on their initials, Stoop Down Low Party, which probably means Sinn Féin (SF) should now be known as the Stoop Further.

As is common with the Stoop Further, they are fond of speaking out both sides of their mouths. They announced that they would not go this year, though not official invite has been issued to them, and at the same time urged the Irish government to go.

A case of wanting to have their cake and eat it too.

Mary Lou McDonald stated Trump’s plan “represents a marked escalation in the very complex conflict situation for the Palestinian people.”[3] Really? Expulsion is an escalation from genocide?

To be very clear, there is a specific genocide convention and genocide is a Crime Against Humanity, under that convention, and is so at all times and in all circumstances.[4] There are no ifs or buts to that.

Expulsion and profiteering are war crimes. In legal terms, they are egregious crimes but less so than genocide. There is no escalation here. Both Biden and Trump have been complicit in the genocide, Trump however has put the blood-soaked icing on the cake with his proposal.

*Donald Trump US President in what is no doubt one of his favourite photos* (Photo sourced: *Internet*)

Except it is not his proposal. It has been official US and Israeli policy since 2007.[5]

In other words, a plan that began under Bush and continued during the eight years of Obama’s presidency when Biden was the Vice-President, Trump’s first presidency and of course Biden’s four demented years as President.

Mary Lou McDonald seeks to draw a line under her support for the US. There is some mythical line in the sand between the Democrats support for murder, genocide, torture and Trump’s.

In refusing to go to the Blood Fest in Washington she stated that Sinn Féin would not be in a position to challenge Trump’s statements at the Blood Fest (she doesn’t describe it as such, to be clear that is my accurate description).

This is surprising as last year, she said that they would challenge Biden on his support for Israel.

Before they went off on their junket last year, two days before the St Patrick’s Blood Fest they issued a tame communiqué asking Biden to play a more “constructive role” in Palestine,[6] whatever that is supposed to mean.

In fact, part of their public rationale for going was that they could influence US government policy. So, what is different now? Have they concluded that their junket last year did not produce the results they hoped for?

Well, they had no expectations that Biden would end US complicity in the genocide and as I already pointed out, when they went their statements were way weaker than the Irish government’s official statements. So, the answer is no.

This year they have said they won’t go, but have said the Taoiseach should go.

We absolutely believe that he needs to go and, furthermore, when there, set out unambiguously the Irish position in respect to all of these matters and to push back directly against any threat or goal for the mass expulsion of Palestinians from the Gaza Strip, the annexation of that land.[7]

If, as last year under Biden, they believed they could influence policy in the same way they now expect the southern Irish government to do, why don’t they go? The answer is one of political expediency.

They have calculated that this time round there is no political cost amongst their reactionary base in the USA to boycotting a Trump event and by calling on the Irish government to go, they continue to signal that they are a “reasonable partner” that the Irish state and Trump can do business with.

Michelle O’Neill stated that she couldn’t go this year because

I couldn’t in all conscience make that trip at this time. I just think that there are times whenever we’ll all reflect, and certainly whenever my grandchildren ask me, what did I do whenever the Palestinian people were suffering, I could say that I stood on the side of humanity.[8]

Except of course, she didn’t. Whilst Biden gladly and gaily supplied Israel with all the military hardware required to carry out a genocide, she did not nothing.

In the waning days of Biden’s support for genocide, on January 4th of this year he notified Congress of an additional US $8 billion arms sale to Israel.[9] Yeah, Michelle can tell her grandchildren what she likes, but she supped with the Devil.

She took part in a genocide through her endorsement of Biden. Her sudden hypocritical distancing from the same policies under Trump is meaningless.

It is not an ethical position; it is not one based on some internationalist concept of solidarity with the oppressed or even a liberal opposition to genocide and war crimes as they have previously shown no such solidarity or real opposition to such acts when Biden was the war criminal in charge.

No matter how low you think Sinn Féin can stoop, they will always surprise you and Stoop Further.

End.

NB: For more articles by Gearóid see https://gearoidloingsigh.substack.com

NOTES

[1] The Irish News (23/02/2024) Protests at east Belfast arms manufacturer as city council’s largest parties accused of ‘vetoing’ PBP Gaza ceasefire motion. John Manley. https://www.irishnews.com/news/northern-ireland/protests-at-east-belfast-arms-manufacturer-as-city-councils-largest-parties-accused-of-vetoing-pbp-gaza-ceasefire-motion-BO4VAMQCYVF37BOSCHVPPNLACY/

[2] The Geneva Conventions can be consulted at https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties

[3] Irish Independent (22/02/2025) Sinn Féin may be boycotting White House for St Patrick’s Day, but Mary Lou McDonald is imploring Taoiseach to attend and confront Trump. Tabitha Monahan and Senan Molony. https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/sinn-fein-may-be-boycotting-white-house-for-st-patricks-day-but-mary-lou-mcdonald-is-imploring-taoiseach-to-attend-and-confront-trump/a52621936.html

[4] To consult the Genocide Convention see https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/genocide-conv-1948

[5] Jonathan Cook (14/02/2025) Trump didn’t invent the Gaza ethnic cleansing plan. It’s been US policy since 2007.

Jonathan Cook

Trump didn’t invent the Gaza ethnic cleansing plan. It’s been US policy since 2007

Covert Crusade: Washington’s $600m digital war on Iran

On February 21, 2025February 21, 2025 By rebelbreezeIn Current Affairs Comment, Imperialismo, US ImperialismLeave a comment

For over a decade, the US State Department’s NERD fund has covertly funnelled hundreds of millions into regime-change efforts in Iran, disguising digital warfare and opposition funding as ‘democracy promotion’ – but a sudden funding freeze has thrown these operations into chaos.

Kit Klarenberg FEB 21, 2025
(Reprinted with kind permission of author from https://thecradle.co/articles/covert-crusade-washingtons-600m-digital-war-on-iran)

(Reading time: 6 mins.)

Earlier this month, The Cradle exposed how in 2023, the US State Department’s shadowy Near East Regional Democracy (NERD) fund earmarked $55 million to stoke unrest in Iran during the following year’s elections.

This was part of a wider US campaign of interference designed to disrupt and destabilize the Islamic Republic.

As that investigation noted, details on where this money goes – and who benefits – are strictly confidential as a matter of policy. Still, there are clues in the public domain pointing to at least some recipients.

Regime change by another name

As a US Congressional Research Service report records, due to hostile US–Iran relations, and Tehran’s well-founded view of NERD “as a means of financing regime change,” its programs rely on “third-country training” as well as “online training and media content.”

The report further confirms that despite NERD being Washington’s primary “foreign assistance channel” for projects targeting Iran, “activities, grantees, [and] beneficiaries” are not advertised “due to the security risks posed by the Iranian government.”

It continues:

“NERD was created in 2009 as a ‘line item for Iran democracy’ but was not (and is still not) technically Iran-specific … For 2024, the Biden Administration requested $65 million for NERD … to ‘foster a vibrant civil society, increase the free flow of information, and promote the exercise of human rights,’ including at least $16.75 million for internet freedom.”

What was unstated in the report is that NERD represents a simple rebranding of the Iran Democracy Fund, created by former president George W. Bush in 2006 with the explicit goal of toppling the Islamic Republic.

The initiative was ostensibly shut down under Barack Obama three years later, eliciting bitter condemnation from much of the western media, neoconservative pundits, and lawmakers.

However, as the BBC acknowledged at the time, the move was in fact “welcomed by Iranian human rights and pro-democracy activists”:

“These US funds are going to people who have very little to do with the real struggle for democracy in Iran and our civil society activists never received such funds,” a Tehran-based human rights lawyer told the British state broadcaster.

“The end to this program will have no impact on our activities whatsoever.”

Internet interference

In reality, the program never ended – it was merely repackaged. White House officials maintained the fiction that NERD was focused on democratization rather than regime change, a claim undermined by a June 2011 New York Times exposé.

That investigation revealed the Obama administration’s so-called “Internet Freedom” initiative aimed to “deploy ‘shadow’ internet and mobile phone systems dissidents can use to communicate outside the reach of governments in countries like Iran, Syria, and Libya.”

In other words, Washington sought to build a covert legion of regime change operatives in Tehran, and provide them with the technology to coordinate in secret. It is clear from the Congressional report’s marked reference to “internet freedom” that these machinations continue today.

Moreover, as a 2020 report by the DC-based Project on Middle East Democracy noted, organizations genuinely committed to advancing Iranian rights still steer well clear of NERD. An anonymous NGO worker described its “style” as “aggressive.”

Another implied NERD is engaged in deeply dirty work:

“We choose not to apply for NERD grants because we do not want to get pulled into [anything] crazy.”

‘Non-Iranian’

The same year, the Financial Times (FT) reported how NERD efforts had become turbocharged under US President Donald Trump’s administration, explicitly to facilitate and encourage “anti-Tehran protests.”

This included “providing apps, servers, and other technology to help people communicate, visit banned websites, install anti-tracking software,” and more in the Islamic Republic, in order to offer “Iranians more options on how they communicate with each other and the outside world.”

Curiously, while portraying Iran as a digital prison, the FT admitted that major western social networks remain accessible in the country, and Iranians can easily view western media.

As usual, recipients of NERD funds remained unnamed – except for Psiphon, a VPN provider long-associated with discredited exiled Iranian opposition figures and, by then, controlled by the Open Technology Fund (OTF).

The FT estimated that just three million Iranians used Psiphon, less than four percent of the population.

OTF was an “Internet Freedom” product – one of its board members has openly admitted the Fund’s agenda is “regime change.”

Fast forward to September 2024; as former US president Joe Biden’s administration was seeking increased funds for NERD – mere months after the $55 million invested the previous year failed to produce desired mass unrest and upheaval around that year’s elections in Iran – a White House meeting was convened with major tech giants, encouraging them to offer more “digital bandwidth” for OTF-bankrolled apps and tools.

As fund chief Laura Cunningham explained, a “sizeable chunk” of OTF’s budget was taken up by the cost of hosting all the network traffic generated by its vast array of digital destabilization apps, which included Signal and Tor.

While OTF sought to support “additional users” of these products, it lacked resources to keep up with “surging demand.” What came of this meeting, which was attended by representatives of Amazon, Cloudflare, Google, and Microsoft, is not clear.

Yet, if further “digital bandwidth” was granted to OTF, it is clear the Trump administration’s “pause” in overseas aid funding has thrown all NERD’s meddling efforts in Iran into total – and potentially permanent – disarray.

A 27 January report in the Saudi-funded, anti-Islamic Republic Iran International quoted numerous anonymous beneficiaries of US financing bemoaning how grantees, including foreign-run Persian-language media outlets and organizations documenting purported “abuses” to keep the Islamic Republic “accountable,” had been abruptly shuttered.

An anonymous “human rights activist” told the outlet Washington’s freeze on aid spending “(will) impose restrictions on projects that address human rights violations or investigate governmental and military corruption which have impacted Iran’s economy and social conditions in favor of foreign terrorist activities and money laundering.”

They said “several non-Iranian American institutions [emphasis added] have been using these funds to investigate corruption and money laundering.” Now though, “these organizations will be forced to halt their activities.”

‘Severe implications’

US-supplied Virtual Private Network (VPN) services also loomed large among the malign resources impacted by the aid “pause.” A nameless “activist” told Iran International that 20 million Iranians used such tools “to bypass Tehran’s internet curbs.”

The outlet further quoted an article published by Human Rights Activists in Iran, a US-funded NGO not based in the Islamic Republic, but Virginia, near the CIA’s Langley headquarters: “In today’s Iran, the internet has no meaning without VPNs.”

Such dire warnings were echoed by Ahmad Ahmadian, head of California-based tech firm Holistic Resilience, which “aims to advance internet freedom and privacy by developing and researching censorship circumvention.”

An Iranian expat and alumni of Tehran University, Ahmadian warned major US tech firms “may not be willing or able to continue their support for providing anti-censorship tools” without government support.

Such remarks highlight how these supposedly popular resources lack grassroots backing or financing, being wholly dependent on Washington’s sponsorship to operate:

“The leadership of the US government has been crucial in urging big tech companies to provide public services. Without the encouragement of the US government, these companies wouldn’t take the initiative on their own.”

Other unnamed activists further warned Iran International, “the consequences of Trump’s executive order will not remain limited to internet censorship circumvention tools.”

They believe that if NERD’s activities “do not receive an exemption within the next month” – by the end of February – “they will either collapse entirely or be deeply curtailed.”

One declared, “the impact of this freeze might not be immediately noticeable, but its severe implications will become evident over time.”

Meanwhile, “internet experts” cautioned that “even if US aid starts again” after the 90-day pause, “the damage is irreversible since many people … might never fully return to using US-backed secure services.”

As The Cradle noted on 11 February, Washington’s forced withdrawal from meddling in Iran could create fresh opportunities for genuine diplomatic engagement between the two long-time adversaries.

But another possibility looms: after spending $600 million over a decade with little success, the US may simply be preparing to test out new, potentially more malign regime-change strategies.

End.

PALESTINE SOLIDARITY: NO PRESSURE ON AUTHORITIES FROM IPSC

On February 18, 2025 By rebelbreezeIn Civil Rights, Current Affairs Comment, Imperialism, Internationalist Solidarity, Ireland, Israeli Zionism, Massacres, National Liberation, Palestine, Political Analysis, US ImperialismLeave a comment

Diarmuid Breatnach

(Reading time main text: 4 mins.)

Last Saturday’s IPSC “Hands Off Gaza” march, advertised as being to the US Embassy, reached a new low in compliance with the wishes of the Irish ruling class not to embarrass the USA, currently the world boss.

The IPSC led the march from Baggot Street through residential roads and streets to reach not the front of the US Embassy but near its side, far from the main road (where a small group of non-compliant people lifted Palestinian flags to the view and often beeps of support of passing traffic).

*Section of the IPSC march – some of those carrying big printed placards joined a smaller group of protesters in front of the main entrance of the US Embassy.* (Photo cred: *IPSC*)

The IPSC agree their march routes and rally locations with the Gardaí in advance, a different process than merely informing them in the interests of safe traffic management.¹ The extent to which the IPSC leadership integrates with Gardaí wishes is not required by Irish State law.²

The understanding is that the Gardaí don’t want a large protest at the main entrance of the Embassy and beside the main road and those who did gather there were approached by Gardaí with the suggestion that they move down to the IPSC rally, which suggestion was declined.

No doubt the leadership of the IPSC considers that by compliance with the desires of the Gardaí, by not offending the authorities or frightening them, their organisation is regarded by the ruling circles as “responsible” and therefore placed in the best position to influence policy on Palestine.

Could they be right? Well, let’s check the actual concrete gains from their “responsible” leadership. Has the Irish Government barred Irish airspace to flights of US/Israeli munitions to fuel the Zionist genocide of Palestinians? Are US planes being checked at Shannon airport for military contents?

Has the Irish Government adopted a policy of Boycott, Disinvestment and Sanctions towards the genocidal state? Has the Occupied Territories Bill, a relatively mild piece of legislation entirely in line with international law and UN resolutions, though approved in 2018/ 2019 been enacted?³

The answer to all those questions is a resounding NO. Well then, what has this “responsible leadership” actually achieved in changing Government policy? The answer is simply Nothing. The IPSC however have brought thousands on to the streets to demonstrate solidarity with Palestine.

And that would be a great achievement if it were to employ those numbers in a way that exerted real pressure on the Government and the ruling class it represents. How far the IPSC leadership is from any such intention is demonstrated by their shameful capitulation around the US Embassy.

As most people in Ireland are aware, the USA is not only the biggest backer of the genocidal Zionist state but its essential backer, its very life-pump. Without the backing of the USA, the European colonist settler state of Israel could not have survived as long as it has.

*Photo of the distant IPSC rally taken from in front of the US Embassy’s main entrance.* (Photo cred: *Rebel Breeze*)

The IOF could not sustain its level of genocidal bombing of Palestinians for more than a week without USA supplies of bombs, shells and missiles. The ‘Israeli’ economy would long ago have collapsed without US financial support.

Politically the USA has used its veto in the UN Security Council, that undemocratic supreme ruler of the United Nations,⁴ against motions calling for a halt in the genocide. The US also employs its considerable economic pressure on other states not to oppose the Zionist genocidal state.

In view of the crucial role of the USA in maintaining not only the source of Zionist genocide but in its essential weekly supplies, one would imagine that US institutions and businesses in Ireland would be subjected to strong pressure from the Palestine solidarity movement.

That has not largely been the case and its symbolic representation, the US Embassy in Dublin, has been the target of large demonstrations led by the IPSC only twice in over fifteen months of genocide. And on each occasion in a side street, away from the main road.⁵

*Rear view of the IPSC rally stage facing the marchers, photo taken with the US Embassy main entrance some distance up the residential street behind the photographer.* (Photo cred: *IPSC*)

All of the main Irish political parties, those in coalition government and those aspiring to government, maintain cordial relations with the ruling circles of the USA and even formally celebrate the Irish national day with them in the USA on US Government premises.

Do the thousands up and down the country who march every couple of weeks or demonstrate weekly do so in order merely to feel good about themselves? I would submit that the majority desperately want to give real assistance to the Palestinians – to make a difference.

Those people are not getting any leadership from the IPSC. And though even at this late stage the IPSC could supply that, the indications are that it won’t.

The general attitude of the public within the Irish state is in solidarity with Palestine to a huge extent bemoaned by a number of ‘Israeli’ Zionist Ambassadors and Government ministers but that Irish feeling of Palestine solidarity does not generally translate into practical measures.

There have been some practical results in Palestine solidarity in divestment and boycott but these have been achieved, for the most part, by direct actions in occupations of college and commercial buildings not led by the IPSC and in most cases not even supported by them,.

Meanwhile, the State employs its repression on those who do dare to step beyond the “responsible leadership” of the IPSC, for example arrested in demonstrations at Shannon Airport and in actions in Dublin. The compliance of the IPSC leadership makes that repression easier for the State.

End.

*Section of small crowd that gathered in front of the US Embassy main gate and by the side of the main road (instead of at the IPSC rally); around four people at first and then more joined them.* (Photo cred: *Rebel Breeze*)

APPENDIX

Now Irishmen, forget the past!
And think of the time that’s coming fast.
When we shall all be civilized,
Neat and clean and well-advised.
And won’t Mother England be surprised?
Whack fol the diddle all the di do day. ⁶

In May 2021 the Gardaí rewarded IPSC’s consultative approach with a ban on a march to the Israeli Embassy, quoting Covid-19 legislation, with which the IPSC complied under protest. It fell to another organisation to announce the march and to ahead with it, in the event without arrests.⁷

In October 2003 the IPSC pulled back from calling for the expulsion of the Israeli Ambassador to Ireland (which in fact they had called for years earlier) and at the same time the Sinn Féin leadership was also pulling back from similar calls of the past.

The party was abstaining from such motions in councils and voting along with the Irish Government in Leinster House.

A speaker at the IPSC rally in the side street to the US Embassy in October 2023 (the only other IPSC one there in the current genocide phase) was asked by the IPSC not to call for the expulsion of the Israeli Ambassador in order not to embarrass a SF speaker. She correctly declined.⁸

Some IPSC stewards on that march were positioned near people calling for that expulsion in order to drown them out with non-stop leading of the more ‘acceptable’ slogans.

Shortly thereafter a rebellion of SF’s rank-and-file obliged the SF leadership to restore their original position of calling for the expulsion and the IPSC leadership returned to endorsing it too.⁹

Footnotes

1Some of their arrangements can actually cause higher risk of mischance, as when they pack large numbers tightly on the central pedestrian reservation in O’Connell Street, with a Luas tram line on one side and passing traffic on both sides. On one occasion I and some others with banners and flags on the west side, with the GPO behind us, were informed by Gardaí that we should join the packed crowd on the pedestrian reservation as that was what “our leaders” had agreed with the Gardaí. We had to insist that we were breaking no law and within our rights before they reluctantly went away.

2The Constitution guarantees the right to demonstrate, picket etc and the role of the police is supposedly essentially to facilitate that. Giving the police the power to decide on routes and even a veto on a destination not required by law is to collude in undermining civil rights and even encouraging further undemocratic restrictions. See also Appendix.

3An effort coordinated by Sadaka, passed by the Seanad in 2018 and voted with large majority in the lower house in 2019 https://www.sadaka.ie/the-occupied-territories-bill/

4Only votes of the UN Security Council are binding. It has a revolving membership but only five permanent members, any one of which can veto a proposal even if supported by the majority. The five Permanent Members are UK, France, USA, Russia and China.

5 https://rebelbreeze.com/2023/10/29/as-dublin-marches-again-for-palestine-where-are-the-protests-going/

6Whack Fol the Diddle by Peader Kearney, published 1917 (according to NLI). I don’t think Mother England would be surprised, nor yet father Gombeen Ireland – for are not the likes of these their very creations?

7 https://www.thejournal.ie/rally-palestine-dublin-5435406-May2021/

8 https://rebelbreeze.com/2023/10/29/as-dublin-marches-again-for-palestine-where-are-the-protests-going/

9Ibid.

Sources & Further Reading

The Occupied Territories Bill

What you need to know about the Occupied Territories Bill

AS DUBLIN MARCHES AGAIN FOR PALESTINE – WHERE ARE THE PROTESTS GOING?

USAID, Friend or Foe?

On February 18, 2025 By rebelbreezeIn Capitalism, Current Affairs Comment, Imperialism, Political Analysis, US ImperialismLeave a comment

Gearóid Ó Loingsigh Feb 7 (Reading time: 7 mins.)

NB: Edited by RB from original article for formatting purposes

Trump’s decision to suspend funding of USAID (United States Agency for International Development) provoked the ire of many liberals.

Trump took the decision for all the wrong reasons; he is not very intelligent nor is he analytical and is incapable of understanding the big picture — and the liberals who were horrified and criticised his actions also did so for all the wrong reasons.

They came out in defence of the agency stating that all the dictators in the world will be happy,[1] ignoring that USAID has throughout its history financed projects for dictatorial or authoritarian regimes.

They even went as far as the stupidity of saying that Elon Musk wanted this as vengeance against USAID for its role in defeating Apartheid.[2] Nothing could be further from the truth.

What little role it played in the country was to ensure that capitalism would be safe, but it did not bring an end to Apartheid.

The US government and all its agencies supported the racist regime, just like they supported the new “black” capitalism as an integral part of the usual “white” capitalism, as capitalism really doesn’t have a colour.

So, what is the agency? And what role does it play in the world? These are questions that have prefabricated answers from those who have remained silent in the face of many of the US’ barbarities. There are exceptions of course.

Mehdi Hasan is a journalist who is now famous worldwide for his positions on the genocide in Gaza, but in general, all those who answer those two questions positively, answer questions on the role of the US positively, even in the case of Palestine.

Firstly, we should be clear about how the agency defines itself and how it has been seen by successive US governments. In 2002, George Bush described foreign aid as the third pillar of US national security, along with defence and diplomacy.[3]

The same document Foreign Aid in the National Interest explains various lines of work of the agency such as financing the “development” of agriculture etc. They demand changes and reforms in the countries they “help”, just as does the World Bank.

When they clash with governments that are not given to implement the reforms they seek, they bluntly state that they will give funds to functionaries, ministers and others in the country to promote their agenda for change.

That is even if at that precise moment the beneficiaries of the programmes have no political power to implement such changes.[4] They play the long game. They openly state that they have to finance NGOs that promote “democracy”.[5]

This is what is nowadays called Colour Revolutions i.e. where through an NGO a situation of instability is generated in a country against a government or regime, whether it be democratic or authoritarian.

What is important is whether its economic and foreign policy coincide with Washington’s interests or not.

Colombia, for example, has always been a recipient of USAID’s programmes despite the murders of journalists, social leaders, opposition politicians, such as the Patriotic Union, trade unionists etc.

Not in the worst years of the bloodbath was it proposed to limit the aid or even pressure the government to introduce democratic reforms. Colombia has always served US interests.

In the case of Colombia, the negative impacts of the supposed North American aid can be clearly seen. In 1961, Kennedy announced a new programme for Latin America, the Alliance for Progress and he also set up USAID.

As part of that programme wheat was donated to certain countries, amongst them Colombia, but it was no favour. In 1961 there were 160,000 hectares of wheat in the country with a crop of 142,100 tonnes.

The following year the area sown fell to 150,000 hectares and so it went every year until in 2023 there were barely 3,000 hectares of wheat with a crop of 9,354 tonnes. They collapsed the production of a basic crop in the Colombian diet.

In reality, USAID is prohibited by law from financing crops and other economic activities that compete with US companies. They were always going to collapse wheat production.

They did similar things in other parts of the world, collapsing local markets, though they always say that it is not their intention.

Biden and Harris announced a new USAID pilot programme to supply emergency food and it consisted of sending one billion in food to 18 countries, all of them in Africa with the exceptions of Haiti, Yemen and Bangladesh.

Amongst the products to be exported were “wheat, rice, sorghum, lentils, chickpeas, dry peas, vegetable oil, cornmeal, navy beans, pinto beans and kidney beans – commodities that align with traditional USAID international food assistance programming.” [6]

It is nothing more than a subsidy to the cereal sector in the US dominated by just four large companies (Cargill, Cenex Harvest States, Archer Daniels Midland ([ADM] and General Mills), who get rid of their surpluses this way.

Looking at the list one sees that it includes countries with high levels of food insecurity, but they are not the worst in the world. Five of them are amongst the top ten countries with people suffering food insecurity in terms of absolute numbers of people suffering food insecurity.

In terms of percentages, just three of them are in the top ten countries with a percentage in excess of 30%. Afghanistan was not selected by the USA as they are no longer interested in the country, despite 46% of the population suffering from food insecurity, i.e. 19.9 million people.

Neither did they select Syria with 55% where they were only interested in replacing the Ba’athist regime with ISIS, which they achieved this year.

The causes of this insecurity are varied. In twelve countries it was due to weather extremes, affecting 56.8 million people and in another 27 countries economic shocks affecting 83.9 million people. And lastly 117.1 million people affected by conflicts in 19 countries.

It is worth pointing out that two of those countries were Syria and Ukraine, both of them conflicts in which the USA and Europe play a deciding role, not just in the start of the conflict but also in its course and duration.[7]

In the case of Ukraine the war had a dramatic effect on the price and supply of cereals in many parts.

USAID’s initial work consisted of economic aid programmes that included promoting US companies and so-called free enterprise. Later in the 2000s it allied itself more closely with US companies, giving them contracts to benefit themselves and not the countries.

Dupont, one of the companies that most pollutes water in the US, won a contract to supply drinking water to Ethiopia! The jokes write themselves.

An opportunity is never lost for multinational capital. Before the war with Iraq had even begun, USAID was signing contracts for the reconstruction of the country once the war was over.

One of the beneficiaries was Bechtel, a company that drummed up public support for the war and obtained one billion in contracts after the war.[8] USAID is an arm of the US government and its policies and contacts always favour their interests and never anyone else’s.

As for the threat that this represents to freedom of the press and expression etc. the mainstream press has raised an outcry.

It is true that for the moment the USA will have to look to another agency to help foment discontent and carry out the so-called Colour Revolutions and other coups d’etat. The CIA will have to finance those organisations directly and not through USAID as they have done up till now.

It has to be said that many of the regimes overthrown were not a bit progressive but neither were those who replaced them. The US supported them because they were useful to their interests, and nothing more.

Assad in Syria was replaced by Jolani from ISIS and in the ex-soviet republics, all of those governments have dubious human rights records. USAID never financed opposition groups, nor alternative press in Colombia despite its human rights record.

It never financed those that sought to overthrow the dictator Pinochet in Chile, nor in Bolsonaro’s Brazil, nor currently in Milei’s Argentina.

Now, various NGOs around the world, including Colombia, weep. They are organisations that are only interested in their own slice of the cake. We lose nothing with them. The sooner they go bankrupt the better.

They will say that there are good projects that USAID finances and they are right. Of course there are.

The soft power of a country cannot be 100% Machiavellian, not everything is absolute greed and power. In order for the US soft power to work there must be modicum of projects that are good in and of themselves or at least not as evidently open to criticism. That is what it is about.

These projects serve to generate an atmosphere conducive to US activities and give it the right to opine on internal policies and present itself as a friend of the government — or the people when it wants to carry out a coup d’etat.

Neither Trump nor Musk understand this. They are not intelligent people; their abilities have always been to take advantage of what others build.

Thus, they have no ability to think about what soft power means as a tool of real domination in other countries, nor as a means to justify the hard power of a coup or colour revolution. The closure of USAID is an own goal of imperialism.

Elon Musk stated in Twitter that the agency was a nest of anti-American Marxist vipers. The Indian Marxist Vijay Prashad replied that Marxists such as him detested USAID as it was a nest of liberal imperialists. Prashad is right, so the answer to the headline question of this article is clear.

USAID is the foe, and no one on the left should mourn its passing. Good riddance. And those who mourn it, run to get your thirty pieces of silver whilst they are still signing cheques.

End.

NB: For more articles by Gearóid see https://gearoidloingsigh.substack.com

NOTES

[1] The Guardian (06/02/2025) Authoritarian regimes around the world cheer dismantling of USAid. Joseph Gedeon. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/feb/06/authoritarian-usaid-elon-musk
[2] The Ink (03/02/2025) USAID fought Apartheid. Musk is killing it.
The.Ink
USAID fought apartheid. Musk is killing it
As we speak, an unelected billionaire, born in South Africa, is staging an unconstitutional coup in the United States, shutting down an agency that happened to fight the apartheid regime he and his family thrived under as rich whites…
Read more
14 days ago · 222 likes · 29 comments · The Ink

[3] USAID (2002) Foreign Aid in the National Interest. USAID. Washington D.C. pIV https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GOVPUB-S18-PURL-LPS46120/pdf/GOVPUB-S18-PURL-LPS46120.pdf
[4] Ibíd., P.51
[5] Ibíd., P.44
[6] USDA (18/04/2024) USDA, USAID Deploy $1 Billion for Emergency Food Assistance. https://www.usda.gov/about-usda/news/press-releases/2024/04/18/usda-usaid-deploy-1-billion-emergency-food-assistance
[7] Statistics taken from Global Report on Food Crises 2023, https://www.fsinplatform.org/report/global-report-food-crises-2023/
[8] Current Affairs (10/03/2021) Aid for Profit: The Dark History of USAID. Saheli Khastagir. https://www.currentaffairs.org/news/2021/03/aid-for-profit-the-dark-history-of-usaid

PALESTINE SUPPORTERS SCORN SIDE STREET TO DENOUNCE US EMBASSY AT ITS FRONT

On February 17, 2025February 18, 2025 By rebelbreezeIn Current Affairs Comment, Current Event Report, Genocide, Imperialism, Internationalist Solidarity, Ireland, Israeli Zionism, Middle East, US Imperialism, ZionismLeave a comment

Clive Sulish

(Reading time: 2 mins.)

Many who supported Saturday’s march of the Ireland Palestine Solidarity Campaign advertised as going to protest at the US Embassy found themselves led to a rally in a residential street bordering the Embassy and far from the main road.

The IPSC march had gathered at the Department of Foreign Affairs on Stephens Green and proceeded from there to Ballsbridge, the last section passing through quiet residential streets to hold the rally in Elgin Road, some distance from and hardly visible from the main road.

*Section of the IPSC march on Saturday* (Photo cred: *IPSC*)

Before the arrival of the IPSC march a handful of people gathered near the main road, displaying Palestine national colours to acclamation from passing motorists. As the IPSC march arrived nearby some others with flags, banner and placards joined them near the front entrance of the Embassy.

From that position one could see the IPSC rally taking place quite some distance down the quiet street, distant enough that speeches could not be heard, though chants from the crowd were audible.

Earlier in the day the Palestinian resistance had released three of their prisoners in good health while the Palestinian prisoners of ‘Israel’ were beaten and insulted as they were leaving and made to wear special demeaning clothes (which they burned). Four had to be rushed to hospital after release.

Long before Trump’s proposal of ethnically cleansing Gaza of Palestinians, it is important to understand that Israel’s genocide could not have been sustained for more than a week without funding and munitions supply by the USA, which also supported them politically.

In the sixteen-plus months of the current phase of Israeli genocide, the IPSC has led a march to the ‘Israeli’ Embassy only a few times and to the US Embassy exactly twice, each time to the side road (though the stage of the first one was closer to the Embassy’s main entrance than was today’s).

*The front of the IPSC march at its destination at the rally on Saturday*. (Photo cred: *IPSC*).

*The IPSC rally in the distance, taken from in front of the US Embassy main entrance.* (Credit photo: *Rebel Breeze*)

A police officer approached the early demonstrators near the Embassy main entrance to encourage them to move down to the location of the IPSC rally but they politely declined. One of the IPSC’s committee members also wandered by to see who these mavericks could be.

A Zionist passing by claimed the demonstrators should be ashamed but they told him it was he who should feel shame, supporting genocide. Anger soared when he called for killing more Palestinians – including children– until some began to suspect he was provoking an assault leading to arrest.

Certainly he felt safe enough with Gardaí close by.

As the group consolidated a woman began to lead call-and-answer chants which were taken up: Saoirse – don Phalaistín! Resistance is an obligation- in the face of occupation! 1, 2, 3, 4 – Occupation no more! 5, 6, 7, 8 – Israel is a terrorist state! Free, free – Palestine!

*Section of those who chose to stand near the US Embassy main entrance (out of shot to the right of photo) and in full view of passing traffic on the main road (just out of view to left of photo).* (Photo credit: *Rebel Breeze*)

Also From the river to the sea – Palestine will be free! From Ireland to Palestine – Occupation is a crime! Car horns of passing motorists joined in, beeping in solidarity.

It began to rain heavily and the protesters endured it for a while before heading for shelter.

End.

Policing Palestine Solidarity

On January 18, 2025 By rebelbreezeIn Britain, British imperialism, Current Affairs Comment, Imperialism, Indigenous or Original People, Internationalist Solidarity, Israeli Zionism, Journalism, Middle East, National Liberation, Palestine, Political Analysis, Political Prisoners, US ImperialismLeave a comment

By Nicki Jameson 13 January 2025 (Reading time: 12 mins.)

(NB: An unconnected article with very similar title about the Irish organisation IPSC, rather than the English one as this is, was published on this blog in December 2023)

The below speech was delivered by Nicki Jameson at a Revolutionary Communist Group public meeting in London on 12 December 2024 titled ‘Defend the right to defend Palestine: fight back against state repression and media lies’. It is reprinted here from its publication in the RCG’s Fight Racism Fight Imperialism newspaper with permission and reformatted by RB for publication.

The genocidal Zionist onslaught which followed the 7 October 2023 Al Aqsa Flood operation caused a crisis for the imperialist ruling class. In both the US and Britain this was reflected in election results, for example.

Whatever now happens in the aftermath of this week’s events in Syria, and what splits in the solidarity movement this may lead to, it remains the case that international support for the resilient Palestinian struggle is widespread and not diminishing.

In this context, the British government, both under the previous Conservative administration and now under Labour, has sought to contain and limit the effectiveness of the protest movement.

It does not want to be seen to ban protests entirely, but it has aimed to render them impotent and tokenistic.

While it would, of course deny this, the role of the national Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC) is to facilitate this limitation.

It does this by ensuring that anger against the Zionist genocide is channelled into ‘safe’ slogans such as the demand for a ceasefire, and formulaic A to B marches, organised on terms dictated by the police, culminating with a passive crowd listening to anodyne speeches from the usual suspects.

Contained as they are, that PSC marches nonetheless constitute a regular expression of solidarity with the Palestinian struggle by a significant section of the British public is way too much for some in the political establishment.

And also for the vocal cohort of Zionists whose angry social media presence is used to decry ‘hate marches’ and demand greater policing and more arrests.

The police themselves vacillate between different approaches, dependent on the whims of the Home Secretary of the moment and Zionist political pressure.

Palestine protests

The very first protests in early October 2023 after the AAF operation were lightly policed. On 9 October we stood directly outside the Israeli embassy with no conditions or attempt to prevent the demo.

Within a very short period of time this had changed dramatically and the then weekly protests organised by PSC were subject to heavy policing.

Zionist keyboard warriors on twitter began immediately to play a role in fingering people, posting video footage of alleged crimes, with the demand that people be arrested. The police duly obliged.

While total overall arrest figures seem hard to track down, between October 2023 and March 2024 there were 305 arrests under the Metropolitan Police’s Operation Brocks – the policing operation related to Palestine protests in London.

This included 89 far-right counter protesters arrested on Remembrance Day, when – riled up by then Home Secretary Suella Braverman – they came to ‘defend the cenotaph’ from a non-existent attack.

During this period eight people were arrested on FRFI contingents in London. Their experience is fairly typical of those targeted at the time.

London police making an arrest on Palestine solidarity march 13 January 2024 (Photo cred: FRFI)

In the main they were profiled by Zionists on twitter, who flagged up to the compliant police that the comrades either had placards bearing the words ‘Victory to the Intifada’ or were using that slogan.

A young person was also arrested on the spurious pretext that he was wearing a symbol of a proscribed organisation, although the PFLP is not in fact proscribed in this country. He was subsequently de-arrested but not before those who came to his aid were also swept up.

Of this eight, only one person was charged. This was subsequently thrown out of court. Of the others, all but one have been definitively told they will not be charged.

A ninth comrade, arrested in a dawn-raid on their home remains on bail under the Terrorism Act in relation to a speech made 15 months ago.

It was clear from police interviews, that the cops in Operation Brocks had no idea what Intifada actually meant and had been given a script by their political masters.

We take the exoneration of those arrested to mean that VICTORY TO THE INTIFADA, a call for solidarity with the uprisings of Palestinians against Zionist oppression, is entirely legitimate and in no way criminal.

Spurious arrests continue to take place, using the now tried and tested process of Zionist twitter posts highlighting the offensive words or item, prompting either immediate arrest or the publishing of a police ‘wanted’ notice.

Following the lack of any prosecution for slogans such as ‘From the river to the sea’ or ‘Victory to the Intifada’, the most common ‘crime’ is comparison of Israeli genocide to the Nazi holocaust.

Although no-one has been successfully prosecuted along these lines, Zionists continue to claim it is an anti-Semitic hate crime.

Many of these arrests are farcical.

People will remember the arrest, charging, trial and not guilty verdict of Marieha Hussain, who had depicted Conservative politicians Rishi Sunak and Suella Braverman as coconuts on a homemade placard she took to a protest on 11 November 2023.

In May 2024, four activists from Camden Friends of Palestine were arrested under the Terrorism Act for holding a banner depicting a dove flying through the Israeli apartheid wall.

Police claimed that as the banner depicted ‘a clear blue sky with no clouds’ and there had been similar weather on 7 October, this showed obvious support for Hamas. After 3 months on bail they were told that there would be no charges.

A tremendous amount of police time and money is being spent on this process with what would appear to be no tangible reward in terms of convictions or imprisonment.

However, what simply looking at the charge or conviction rates fails to show is the way these arrests are used as harassment and interference both in people’s ability to protest and their everyday lives.

Those described here have had bail conditions which specified variously that they could not enter the borough of Westminster, could not enter university premises other than for study and must surrender their passports and not leave the country.

Arrestees from the CPGB-ML were banned for the duration of their bail from attending protests and distributing literature. People flagged for arrest by Zionist twitter have also been reported to their employers, professional bodies and universities in an attempt to ruin their ability to work or study.

While most early arrests were under Public Order police powers, there is increasing use of the Terrorism Act (TA) 2003 to criminalise solidarity with Palestine, targeting both protesters on the streets and what people say on line.

Journalists and youtubers, such as Richard Medhurst, Sarah Wilkinson and Asa Winstanley have been subject to arrests and house raids.

The TA was brought in by the last Labour government at a time when Keir Starmer was Director of Public Prosecutions.

On 27 November, the Met Police used the TA to raid the premises of the Kurdish Community Centre in Haringey, north London, arresting six people and placing the centre under siege.

Anti-Zionist blogger/activist Tony Greenstein will be in court next week on a charge under section 12 of the TA, for responding over a year ago to a Zionist tweet accusing him of being a Hamas supporter with the words: ‘I support the Palestinians, that is enough and I support Hamas against the Israeli army.’

*Anti-imperialist Jewish and Palestine Solidarity activist Tony Greenstein, who is being persecuted by the British police.* (Photo sourced: *Internet*)

The aim is to create a climate of fear in which people become scared to attend even the most peaceful and routine of protests, where we censor our own slogans, placards and behaviour in order to evade the eyes of the on-line harassers and the police.

Palestine Action and Elbit

Alongside all this has run another process in which the brave participants show no fear in the way they exercise their solidarity with the Palestinian struggle.

Palestine Action was set up in 2020 by activists who were frustrated by the PSC’s lack of direct action to enforce BDS – Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions.

Since then it has primarily targeted the British operation of Israeli arms company, Elbit Systems, as well as other companies collaborating with Elbit or are otherwise implicated in the arming of the Zionist war machine or sale of its ‘battle tested’ technology to other countries’ militaries.

*Daily Stop Arming Genocide banner outside Houses of Parliament, Westminster, London.* (Source photo: *Internet*)

Palestine Action’s tactics mainly consist of occupations, blockades and drenching premises in red paint to symbolise the blood on the hands of these profiteering companies.

Until recently, although a lot of these actions led to arrests, very few Palestine Action activists ended up behind bars. This has changed since Keir Starmer’s Labour government came to power. There are currently 18 Palestine Action activists in prison in England, along with 2 in Scotland.

One of the Scottish prisoners is the last of the group known as the Thales 5, who were convicted of occupying the roof of the Glasgow premises of French company Thales in 2022. Thales was working with Elbit to produce Watchkeeper drones for the British military.

The prisoners in England have not been convicted and are all held on remand, having been refused bail by the courts. The majority were arrested in relation to actions against the Filton arms factory in Bristol. Ten people were remanded in August and a further eight in November.

Although none have been charged with terrorism offences, the TA was used to effect their arrests, allowing the police more powers to detain pre-charge, raid homes and generally act in a heavy-handed manner.

In the latest arrests in November, flatmates and families were evicted from their homes, sometimes for several days while the police searched premises. In one raid, the mother and younger brother of the person arrested were both handcuffed, despite not being accused of any offence.

In prison, those on remand for pro-Palestine direct action have come in for special scrutiny and additional intrusive measures on top of those which all prisoners are forced to deal with.

The six women detained in Bronzefield prison in August were all allocated to separate wings and deliberately prevented from associating with one another. Their mail has been heavily censored.

Four male prisoners in Wormwood Scrubs, although not subject to the same separation regime, have also had their correspondence held up, censored and returned to sender, with supporters being served with notices to the effect that no communication between them is permitted.

FRFI successfully appealed against such a notice in relation to our sending the paper to the prisoners, although the prison claims it still has a right to withhold the paper or other publications if the censors decide they are ‘inappropriate for a prison setting’.

The purpose of all this is clearly to scare those it is directly targeting it and to deter others from coming forward to join Palestine Action’s activities.

As Palestine Action carries out more actions against Elbit, including repeatedly blockading the UAV Engines site at Shenstone in the Midlands, which manufactures engines for Elbit, it is clear that the repression is not succeeding.

*Palestine solidarity demonstration Downing Street 14 December 2024.* (Source photo: *Internet*)

Kitson methodology

General Sir Frank Edward Kitson died on 2 January 2024, aged 97, after a long and illustrious career as a dedicated servant of British imperialism.

In addition to the litany of his war crimes, he will be remembered for authoring the text book Low Intensity Operations – Subversion, Insurgency and Peace-keeping (1971), a manual for dealing with subversive and recalcitrant populations, both at home and abroad.

Kitson’s work continues to form a central plank of British strategy for policing dissent and his disciples are clearly leading policing operations against pro-Palestine protesters.

In Kitson’s book, he details how ‘psychological operations’ should be used to isolate ‘subversives’ from the people while building links with and strengthening support for moderate elements who do not oppose the state but disagree on certain policies.

This technique was used both abroad in Britain’s colonies, and at home to police, for example, the Irish solidarity movement of the 1970s-80s.

Today’s ‘moderates’ take the form of the PSC, Stop the War and similar organisations. PSC marches are negotiated with the police, with strict conditions imposed on the protests.

The PSC has provided no support for people arrested on its demonstrations, citing the low arrest rates as proof of how respectable their protests are, while distancing itself from those who have been targeted.

While the PSC opposes Zionist massacres of the Palestinian people, it does not support the resistance of those under attack.

Consequently it does not complain when the British police uses Terrorism Act powers to criminalise people for supporting the right of Palestinians to resist their oppressors through armed struggle.

This treachery puts the PSC on the wrong side of international law – oppressed nations successfully fought for the right to self-defence by means of armed struggle to be enshrined in UN resolutions in 1974 and 1982.

Fighting back, building solidarity

For some of us, the culture around supporting our arrested comrades was drilled into us many years ago. A whole new generation has had to learn these lessons.

It is positive to see that, although the PSC and such organisations continue not to want to get their hands dirty with supporting anyone targeted by the police, a different attitude is also widespread and ‘arrestee support’, prison solidarity letter-writing etc are common currency among activists.

At the same time there is an element of this solidarity which is depoliticised. For example, the provision of a constant presence at a police station to monitor things and be there when arrestees are released is a good thing and the support organisations which provide this do an invaluable job.

However, when we have comrades under arrest, we want to do more than legal monitoring and instead turn the police station into a focus for protest. The same with courts and prisons.

It’s very positive to see Palestine Action, the SOAS encampment and others also doing this to great effect, thus ensuring that the focus is not just on the Israeli companies who are their principle targets, but also on the British criminal justice machinery which is being marshalled against those who take a stand.

Our task, as always, here in the belly of the imperialist beast, remains to protest against the British government and British corporations’ complicity in the Zionist genocide.

And to show unconditional solidarity with those who fight back against the Zionist war machine by whatever means are at their disposal.

Supporting the resistance and opposing the British state cannot fail to bring us into conflict with that same state and we must continue to stand alongside everyone who is criminalised for their solidarity.

End.

SOURCE

Policing Palestine solidarity

ISRAEL AND USA TRY TO DETERMINE INTERNAL LEBANESE POLITICS

On January 14, 2025 By rebelbreezeIn Current Affairs Comment, French Colonialism & Neo-Colonialism, Imperialism, Middle East, National Liberation, Political Analysis, US Imperialism, ZionismLeave a comment

Qassam Muaddi (Reprinted from Mondoweiss 12/ 11/ 2024) with current introduction by Diarmuid Breatnach)

(Reading time: 7 mins.)

INTRODUCTION:

Imperialist and Zionist intervention in Lebanon continues after the recent war as it did before, although the IOF failed thoroughly in its attempted invasion before the truce (if we can call it that, with near 500 recorded IOF ceasefire violations to date).

The USA’s envoy Hochstein’s claims the IOF will pull out at the fast approaching 60-day date stipulated in the ceasefire agreement.

Apart from decoupling Hezbollah from active support for the Resistance in Gaza, where the genocidal war may continue and possibly even intensify, the war against Lebanese sovereignty will continue, albeit in the shadows.

When the victorious powers in the imperialist World War I sat down to divide up the spoils, chiefly between the UK and France, the latter’s share included what is now Lebanon and Syria. The present constitution of the Lebanese state bears an unmistakeable French imprint.

The ‘international’ negotiators of the ceasefire sought by Israel therefore, France and USA, were the old French colonial imperialists of the region and their new supplanters, the US imperialists.¹ These will continue their efforts to bring Lebanon firmly under imperialist control.

And ‘Israel’ will assist them in particular through its intelligence services: recall Netanyahu’s public attempt on 8^th October to encourage political forces hostile to Hezbollah in Lebanon to rise up against the Resistance while simultaneously the IOF bombed Lebanese civilians!

The cavalier attitude of the head of Lebanon’s army, Josef Aoun, towards the Lebanese parliament last November seemed an early indication of this shadows war and, considering the importance of the Army in Lebanese politics, may bode ill for the future.²

*New President of Lebanon, Michel Aoun (incorrectly elected while still head of the Army), reviewing troops as formal inauguration procedure.* (Photo sourced: *Internet*)

In his first speech as the new Secretary General of Hezbollah, Naim Qassem said that the US Ambassador to Lebanon had been meeting leaders of Lebanese political parties opposed to Hezbollah.

According to Qassem, the Ambassador was trying to convince them that Hezbollah’s collapse in the face of Israel’s offensive was imminent, urging the Lebanese parties to oppose Hezbollah.

Two weeks earlier, a group of anti-Hezbollah parties gathered in the town of Maarab in Mount Lebanon, the headquarters of the “Lebanese Forces” — a far-right Christian party headed by its chairman, Samir Geagea.

The parties in attendance issued a joint statement that indirectly blamed Iran for pushing Lebanon into a war it had no stake in, hijacking the decision of peace and war in Lebanon, and recruiting Lebanese citizens and using them as soldiers and “human shields.”

The latter phrase was a veiled reference to Hezbollah, its social support base, and the people of southern Lebanon in general. The parties in Maarab also called for the election of a new president to the country.

Heading the meeting was Samir Geagea, a Maronite Christian known for his brutal suppression of Palestinian and Lebanese adversaries, including Christian rivals, during the Lebanese Civil War that took place between 1975 and 1989.

*Samir Geagea, Lebanese anti-Hezbollah politician, photographed in days of membership of the fascist Christian Lebanese militia, proxy of the Israeli occupation of Lebanon.* (Photo sourced: *Internet*)

He is also known for his collaboration with Israeli occupation forces in Lebanon after 1982 and for having spent 12 years in a Syrian prison on charges of collaboration with Israel.

Geagea has also been openly voicing his will to run for the Presidency of Lebanon, which under the Lebanese constitution must be held by a Christian Maronite. The president’s chair has been vacant for two years now, as the opposing political forces have failed to agree on a candidate.

The president in Lebanon is elected by the parliament and thus needs a degree of consensus between represented parties, which has been absent since the latest president, Michel Aoun, finished his term in October 2022.

*Former Lebanon President Michel Aoun, ally of Hezbollah*. (Photo sourced: *Internet*)

Michel Aoun was an ally of Hezbollah and represented an important trend of Christian community support for the resistance group in Lebanese politics since 2008.

During his presidency, Hezbollah’s adversaries in Lebanon, like Geagea, continued to accuse the resistance group of taking over the state, especially during the height of the Syrian Civil War, in which Hezbollah was actively involved in defending the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Asad.

After Michel Aoun’s presidency, several political parties were unwilling to accept a president close to Hezbollah and its allies, entailing a vacancy to the recent election when Hezbollah’s preferred candidate Frangieh pulled out of the contest and endorsed Josef Aoun⁴‘s successful candidacy.

Diarmuid Breatnach

Why the Lebanese presidency is important for Israel

When Israel began its offensive on Lebanon with the exploding pager and electronics attacks in mid-September, some Lebanese politicians seemed to have sensed that the influential role of Hezbollah in Lebanese politics was approaching its end.

Calls to elect a new president increased, as the U.S. envoy, Amos Hochstein, brought his plan for a ceasefire.

Hochstein’s proposal included the retreat of Hezbollah’s fighting units north of the Litani River, essentially clearing Hezbollah’s stronghold in the south, and deploying more Lebanese army forces along the provisional border between Israel and Lebanon.

*Plotting on the dining terrace: US Ambassador Lebanon Dorothy Shea and White House Adviser Amos Hochstein in Beirut on 30 August 2023.* (Photo cred: *Cradle @ amos hochstein*)

Hochstein’s plan, however, included another component — he called for electing a new president for Lebanon, even considering it a priority before a ceasefire with Israel.

The president in Lebanon is also the commander-in-chief of the army, which is why many army chiefs of staff were elected to the presidency in the past.

Historically, the president’s relationship with the army’s command influenced the role played by the armed forces, and this relationship has been especially crucial in the case of Hezbollah.

In the last years of Hezbollah’s guerrilla campaign against the Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon between 1998 and 2000, the Lebanese army played a role in covering safe routes for Hezbollah’s fighters in and out of the occupied area and in holding key positions.

This support by the army to Hezbollah’s resistance was the result of the direction and influence of the country’s President, Emile Lahoud, who had served as Chief of Staff of the army a few years earlier and refused to obey orders to clash with and disarm Hezbollah’s fighters.

The position of the Lebanese president, his influence on the army’s performance, and his relationship with the resistance have always been at the heart of Israeli and U.S. attempts to intervene in Lebanese politics.

It is not the first time that the U.S. and Israel have pressured for the election of a new Lebanese president as it is under Israeli attack. The presidency ploy is a worn U.S. tool for attempting to change Lebanon’s political landscape and to make it more Israel-friendly.

When Israel invaded Lebanon in 1982 and occupied its capital, Beirut, after the withdrawal of the Palestine Liberation Organization, the Lebanese parliament met to elect a new president — quite literally, under the watchful eye of Israeli tanks.

The parliament building was non-functional, and the Lebanese representatives had to meet with an incomplete quorum in the building of the military school to elect Bashir Gemayel as president.

Gemayel was the leader of the far-right anti-Palestinian Phalange party, or Kataeb. The Phalangists had helped Israel plan the invasion of Lebanon and fought on Israel’s side in the 1982 war.

Pierre Gemayel, strong man of the fascist Lebanese Christian sector and ally of Israel, elected by inquorate parliament literally under Israeli tank guns, whose assassination halted the slide towards Lebanese alliance with (under) Israel. (Photo sourced: *Internet*)

Gemayel had travelled to Israel several times to meet with Israeli leaders and committed to signing a peace treaty with Israel as soon as he became president.

Gemayel was the strongman of the anti-Palestinian Lebanese Right, and he was the only leader with enough support and force to carry out Israel’s strategy in Lebanon.

His assassination 22 days after his election and before he was sworn in was one of the most devastating blows to Israel’s plans to bring Lebanon under Israeli influence.

In revenge for Gemayel’s death, the Phalangist militias entered the Palestinian refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila in the periphery of Beirut under Israeli cover. There, they committed the now infamous Sabra and Shatilla Massacre, slaughtering between 2,000 and 3,500 Palestinian refugees.³

Following the end of the Lebanese Civil War in 1989, the parties who had fought against each other entered into a power-sharing arrangement.

Meanwhile, the nascent Lebanese resistance group, Hezbollah — which started as an offshoot of the Shiite Amal militia during an episode of violence called the War of the Camps — increased its popularity and political influence.

This influence grew exponentially after Israel’s withdrawal from the occupied Lebanese south, which marked the first victory of an Arab resistance force against Israeli occupation.

By the beginning of the 2000s, Hezbollah had become a political party that ran for elections, secured parliamentary representation, and forged alliances with other Lebanese forces.

Political divisions in Lebanon began to appear once again on both sides of the question of the resistance, often attributed by its antagonists to Syrian, and later Iranian, influence in the region.

The identity of Lebanon’s president became a central issue again, especially after the 2006 Israeli war on Lebanon, during which Emile Lahoud’s presidency provided strong political support for Hezbollah. Lahoud finished his term the following year amid strong political division.

The state of fragmentation in Lebanese politics was so endemic that the president’s chair remained vacant for an entire year. The crisis was partially resolved with the election of the army’s chief of staff, Michael Suleiman, in 2008, who remained neutral.

Forty-two years after the first election of a Lebanese president at the behest of Israel, not much has changed. Lebanon is again under attack, and the resistance continues to be a central point of division over the future of the country and its position in the broader region.

Although Hezbollah insists that its resistance is tied to the genocidal Israeli war on Gaza, both Israel and the U.S. continue to look for ways to neutralize Lebanon through internal divisions and political disagreements.

As Israeli army officials begin to voice their demands to end the war — a war that was hitting a wall in the villages and mountains of southern Lebanon — it seems that Hezbollah’s adversaries continue to bet on Israel’s military capacity to bring about a “day after Hezbollah.”

Perhaps more confidently than Israel itself.

Qassam Muaddi

FOOTNOTES:

1 The condemnation by the USA of the UK/ France/ Israel attack on Nasser’s Egypt in 1956 was clearly an admonition that the old colonial rulers of the Middle East (and of much of the World) now had to give way to the new ruler – US imperialism — and the old ways of gunboats and invasion had to be replaced by suborning the local middle classes and control through finance and trade. Of course as time went on the USA too resorted to invasions and gunboats (or at least aircraft carriers). — DB

2 See https://thecradle.co/articles/beirut-in-the-dark-about-lebanese-armys-deployment-plan-for-south-lebanon-report

3 16–18 September 1982, its anniversary is not long past – RB.

4 ¹Not a close relation of Michel Aoun.

SOURCES:

Naim Qassem’s first speech as leader Hezbollah, November 2025: https://www.palestinechronicle.com/hezbollahs-new-leader-made-first-speech-today-this-is-what-he-said/

Israel ceasefire violations: https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/-lebanon-reports-4-more-israeli-violations-of-cease-fire-deal/3448885

Hezbollah’s preferred candidate Frangieh endorsed Josef Aoun: https://www.breakingnews.ie/world/lebanese-parliament-tries-for-12th-time-to-elect-new-president-1715733.html²Hezbollah’s preferred candidate Frangieh endorsed Josef Aoun: https://www.breakingnews.ie/world/lebanese-parliament-tries-for-12th-time-to-elect-new-president-1715733.html

Manufacturing Rebels: How the US and UK empowered HTS

On December 27, 2024 By rebelbreezeIn British imperialism, Current Affairs Comment, Imperialism, Middle East, Political Analysis, US ImperialismLeave a comment

by Kit Klarenberg (republished and somewhat reformatted with kind permission from his article in The Cradle) https://thecradle.co/articles/manufacturing-rebels-how-the-uk-and-us-empowered-hts
(Reading time: 7 mins.)

On 18 December, The Telegraph published an extraordinary investigation into how the UK and US trained and “prepared” fighters in the Revolutionary Commando Army (RCA).

This was a “rebel” force that collaborated with Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) in the mass offensive toppling of Syrian president Bashar al-Assad weeks earlier.

In an unprecedented disclosure, the outlet revealed that Washington not only “knew about the offensive” well in advance, but also had “precise intelligence about its scale.”

Washington’s now-confirmed “effective alliance” with HTS was described as “one of many ironies” emerging from the decade-and-a-half-long proxy war.

The Telegraph suggested this collaboration was inadvertent – simply a symptom of how Syria’s grinding, protracted civil war gave birth to “a bewildering array of militias and alliances, most of them backed by foreign powers.”

US support of HTS: A ‘necessary’ alliance

Alliances were fluid, with groups often splintering, merging, and shifting allegiances. Fighters frequently found themselves switching sides, blurring lines between factions.

Yet, ample evidence indicates the UK and the US maintained deliberate, long-standing ties with the dominant rebels of HTS.

For instance, in March 2021, President-elect Donald Trump’s former lead Syria envoy, James Jeffrey, gave a revealing interview to PBS, during which he disclosed that Washington secured a specific “waiver” from then-secretary of state Mike Pompeo to assist HTS.

While this did not permit direct funding or arming of the UN/US-designated terrorist organization, the waiver ensured that if US-supplied resources “somehow” ended up with HTS, western actors “[could not] be blamed.”

The fungibility of weapons on the Syrian battlefield was something Washington counted on heavily.

In a 2015 interview, CENTCOM spokesman Lieutenant Commander Kyle Raines was quizzed about why Pentagon-vetted fighters’ weapons were showing up in the hands of the Nusra Front (precursor to HTS).

Raines responded: “We don’t ‘command and control’ these forces – we only ‘train and enable’ them. Who they say they’re allying with, that’s their business.”

This legal loophole enabled Washington to “indirectly” support HTS, ensuring the group did not collapse while maintaining its designation as a terrorist organization.

This status was complete with a now-rescinded $10 million bounty on leader Abu Mohammad al-Julani, who now goes by his real name Ahmad al-Sharaa.

Jeffrey rationalized this strategy, calling HTS “the least bad option” for preserving “a US-managed security system in the region,” and thus worth “[leaving] alone.” HTS’s dominance, in turn, gave Turkiye a platform to operate in Idlib.

Meanwhile, HTS sent unmistakable messages to their US patrons, pleading:

“We want to be your friend. We’re not terrorists. We’re just fighting Assad.”

‘Safe haven’

Since Assad’s fall, officials in London have markedly taken the lead in legitimizing the HTS-led interim administration as Syria’s new government.

The group was added to the UK’s list of proscribed terrorist organizations in 2017, its entry stating HTS should be considered among “alternative names” for the long-banned Al-Qaeda.

While UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer declared it “too early” to rescind the group’s designation, British officials met HTS representatives on 16 December – despite the illegality of such meetings.

This likely signals an impending, highly politicized western rehabilitation of HTS. Throughout Syria’s dirty war, UK intelligence waged extensive psychological operations to promote “moderate rebels,” crafting atrocity propaganda and human-interest stories.

These efforts were ostensibly aimed at undermining groups like HTS, ISIS, and Al-Qaeda. Yet leaked documents from UK intelligence reveal how HTS remained intertwined with Al-Qaeda post-2016, directly contradicting media narratives.

In other words, throughout the decade-and-a-half-long crisis, HTS was officially considered on par with the most fundamentalist, genocidal elements in the country.

British documents also make a total mockery of the common refrain that HTS severed all ties with Al-Qaeda in 2016. A 2020 file described how Al-Qaeda “co-exists” with HTS in occupied Syrian territory, using it as a launchpad for transnational attacks.

The document warned that HTS’s domination created a “safe haven” for Al-Qaeda to train and expand, fueled by instability. British psyops against HTS spanned years but ultimately failed.

Instead, leaked files lament HTS’s growing influence, territorial gains, and re-branding as an alternative government.

“[Al-Qaeda] remains an explicitly Salafi-Jihadist transnational group with objectives and targets which extend outside Syria’s borders. [Al-Qaeda’s] priority is to maintain an instability fuelled safe haven in Syria, from which they are able to train and prepare for future expansion. HTS domination of north west Syria provides space for [Al-Qaeda] aligned groups and individuals to exist.”

British-backed propaganda benefiting HTS

British intelligence psyops attempting to hinder HTS were in operation from the group’s founding until recently.

Yet, they appear to have achieved nothing. Numerous leaked files reviewed by The Cradle bemoan how HTS’s “influence and territorial control” had “dramatically grown” over the years.

Its successes allowed the extremist group “to consolidate its position, neutralize opponents, and position itself as a key actor in northern Syria.” But HTS’s “domination” was secured in part by the group re-branding itself as an alternative government.

HTS-occupied territory was home to a variety of parallel service providers and institutions, including hospitals, law enforcement, schools, and courts.

The group’s domestic and international propaganda specifically promoted these resources as a demonstration of an “alternative” Syria awaiting roll-out across the entire country.

Ironically, many of these structures and organizations – such as the infamous White Helmets, who also operated in ISIS-run territories – were direct products of British intelligence, created for regime change propaganda purposes.

Moreover, they were aggressively promoted by London at enormous expense.

Repeated references are made in leaked UK intelligence documents to the importance of “[raising] awareness of moderate opposition service provision,” and providing domestic and international audiences with “compelling narratives and demonstrations of a credible alternative to the [Assad] regime.”

There is no consideration evident in the files that these efforts might be assisting HTS greatly in its own efforts to present itself as a “credible alternative” to Assad.

Nonetheless, it is acknowledged that Syrians in occupied territory would accommodate HTS “particularly if [they are] receiving services from it.”

Even more eerily, the documents note, “HTS and other extremist armed groups are significantly less likely to attack opposition entities that are receiving support” from the UK government’s Conflict, Stability, and Security Fund (CSSF).

This was the mechanism through which Britain’s Syrian propaganda war and organizations like the White Helmets and extremist-linked Free Syrian Police were financed.

These UK-run governance structures and opposition elements, which were allegedly intended to “undermine” HTS, operated in areas controlled by the group safe from violent reprisals for their foreign-funded work, as they “demonstrably provide key services” to residents of occupied territory.

There is also the darker prospect that HTS was well aware these “opposition entities” were bankrolled by British intelligence, and they were unmolested on that very basis.

Coordinated offensive

As The Telegraph‘s report explains, “the first indication that Washington had prior knowledge” of HTS’s offensive was when its RCA proxies were given a rousing pep talk by their US handlers three weeks prior.

At a secret meeting at the US-controlled Al-Tanf air base close to the borders of Jordan and Iraq, the militants were told to scale up their forces and “be ready” for an attack that “could lead to the end” of Assad. A quoted RCA captain told the outlet:

“They did not tell us how it would happen. We were just told: ‘Everything is about to change. This is your moment. Either Assad will fall, or you will fall.’ But they did not say when or where, they just told us to be ready.”

This followed US officers at the base, swelling the RCA’s ranks by unifying the group with other UK/US-trained, funded, and directed Sunni desert units and rebel units operating out of Al-Tanf under joint command.

According to The Telegraph, “RCA and the fighters of HTS … were cooperating, and communication between the two forces was being coordinated by the Americans.”

This collaboration proved to be of devastating effect in the “lightning offensive,” with RCA rapidly seizing key territory across the country upon explicit US orders.

RCA even joined forces with another rebel faction in the southern city of Deraa, which reached Damascus before HTS. RCA now occupies roughly one-fifth of the country, pockets of territory in Damascus, and the ancient city of Palmyra.

Hitherto “heavily defended” by Russia and Hezbollah, Moscow’s local base has now been taken over by RCA. “All members of the force continued to be armed by the US,” receiving salaries of $400 monthly, nearly 12 times what Syrian Arab Army (SAA) soldiers were paid.

It is uncertain whether this direct financing of the RCA and other extremist militias that toppled the Assad government continues today. What is clear, though, is that the UK and US supported HTS from the group’s inception, even if “indirectly.”

In turn, this covert backing played a pivotal role in positioning HTS financially, geopolitically, materially, and militarily for its “lightning” swoop on Damascus and assumption of government today.

Reinforcing the interpretation that this was the objective of London and Washington all along, following Assad’s ouster, Starmer promptly declared that the UK would “play a more present and consistent role” in West Asia as a result.

While western and certain regional capitals may celebrate the apparent success of their lavishly funded, blood-soaked campaign to dismantle decades of Baathism, British intelligence had long cautioned that the outcome would grant Al-Qaeda an even larger “instability-fueled safe haven” for “future expansion.”

ZIONIST DUBLIN EMBASSY CLOSES TO REGRETS AND CELEBRATIONS

On December 19, 2024December 23, 2024 By rebelbreezeIn British imperialism, Current Affairs Comment, Imperialism, Indigenous or Original People, Internationalist Solidarity, Ireland, Middle East, National Liberation, Palestine, Political Prisoners, US Imperialism, Zionism1 Comment

Diarmuid Breatnach

(Reading time: 3 mins.)

The Zionist state announced the closure of its embassy in Dublin, accusing the Irish Government of being anti-Israel.¹ The broad Palestine solidarity movement celebrated the announcement while Harris for the Irish Government expressed regret.

The Zionist Embassy at 28 Shelbourne Road, Ballsbridge, Dublin has been without an Ambassador since she left Ireland last May in protest after the Irish Government, along with the Spanish and Norwegian governments, officially recognised the state of Palestine.²

D.B cartoon drawing of celebrations outside the block in which the Zionist Embassy was located (and under 24-hour Garda protection). Many of the other users of the building will be relieved at the departure also.

However the Irish State’s recent decision to join South Africa’s case against Israel at the International Court of Justice³ seems to have prompted the closure of the Embassy and led once again to allegations of “anti-semitism” in Ireland which the President called a “gross slander”.⁴

Simon Harris, Taoiseach (prime minister equivalent) of the outgoing Irish Government⁵ expressed his regret at the ‘Israeli’ decision while at the same time rejecting vigorously the allegation that the Government is anti-Israel. He is absolutely correct in doing so.

Irish Governments have consistently been pro-Israel and colluding with Zionism, in contradiction to Irish popular opinion. The outgoing government⁶ has allowed military supplies for ‘Israel’ to fly through Irish airspace and the US military to land and depart from Shannon Airport.

*One of the participants outside the Israeli Embassy yesterday celebrating its imminent departure.* (Photo: *D.Breatnach*)

The Irish Government has also held up for years the relatively mild UN-compliant Occupied Territories Bill. These points were well made in an Al Jazeera Inside Story⁷ program by Mícheál Mac Donncha, Sinn Féin Dublin City Councillor and by Zoe Lawlor, IPSC⁸ Chairperson.

Both did well outlining the general attitude of the Irish people to which the government was – to an extent – responding and in refuting the slur of anti-semitism on the Irish people. Lawlor pointed to the Irish history of resistance as a motivator but appears unaware that we once supported Israel.

This is important (and I have written about it⁹) because it shows that we are capable of changing our position to a better one when presented with the evidence of the need to do so, which task the Zionist themselves carried out for us.

However both speakers failed to answer the interviewer’s question of why the Irish government did not go further.

This is an essential question for us and the answer makes sense of the current political landscape with crucial import beyond the issues of Palestine and Zionism. Mac Donncha seemed to avoid the question entirely and chose instead to talk about actions that the Government should take.

The interviewer however put it bluntly to Lawlor that the reason was a reluctance to offend the USA, though presenting it as a fear of putting off US corporations’ investments. Lawlor correctly replied that corporations make decisions based on profit but avoided giving the political answer.

The Irish ruling class is a neo-colonial one and responds to requirements of its masters. These have been firstly the UK, followed by the US and more recently the EU. All of these are imperialist states and bound up with the interests of the colonial fort in the Middle East which is the Zionist State.

I am sure that Mac Donncha is aware of those facts and pretty sure that Lawlor is too but both declined to provide the explanation being asked for. One must suspect in Mac Donncha’s case the reason is that his party, Sinn Féin, is busily making itself acceptable to that very ruling class.

And Lawlor probably wants to keep the clean image for the ruling class which the IPSC leadership has been at pains to develop, particularly during this current genocidal offensive.

While the IPSC leadership has played an important role in mobilising national demonstrations much of the activism has been and continues to be by organisations on the ground. The Embassy itself was invaded some time back by such groups and has seen militant blockades.

Jimi Cullen yesterday performing his composition “We Are All Palestinians” during a modest celebration outside the Zionist Embassy. Cullen has been performing outside there for an hour every Wednesday afternoon for 41 weeks. (Photo D.Breatnach)

Axa Insurance has been picketed frequently and occupied at least once and the Foreign Affairs Department was splattered with red paint while the Department of Transport was occupied. The US Embassy was picketed for three days in a row by organisations from Galway without IPSC support.

Only one IPSC march since October last year had the US Embassy as destination and on that occasion the march was led up quiet suburban streets to the stage set up next to police barricades blocking access to the Embassy gates and the main road into Dublin.

Section of the crowd yesterday afternoon celebrating its imminent departure outside the Zionist Embassy. (*Photo D.Breatnach*)

The general Irish public and in particular of course the activists in solidarity with Palestine can justly celebrate the departure of the Zionist Embassy. It is their symbolic victory.

However, there is no doubt that the Irish ruling class needs to be put under much heavier pressure than has heretofore been the case, if we are to shut down the collusion of the Irish Gombeen state with the Zionist genocide of Palestinians.

*Outside the Zionist Embassy yesterday, an Irish healthworker calls for more effective solidarity with the Palestinians, in particular with the healthworkers being targeted by the IOF in Gaza.* (Photo: *D.Breatnach*)

End.

FOOTNOTES

1 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/dec/15/israel-to-close-dublin-embassy-after-ireland-supports-icj-genocide-petition

2 https://www.gov.ie/en/press-release/71936-ireland-recognises-the-state-of-palestine. While the decision of those states has enraged the Zionist state, it is not as progressive as may seem at first glance. The ‘state’ that is being recognised is a) in addition to the state of Israel, i.e “the two-state solution” (sic); b) grants the Palestinians around 20% of Palestine which would be under the constant eyes and guns of the Zionists and c) is widely considered not realisable due to the proliferation of Zionist settlements and their special roads connecting them. Currently the only ‘government’ of such a state is the undemocratic, repressive and corrupt Fatah-controlled Palestinian Authority.

3Again this decision too has its deeply negative side since the Attorney General of the Irish State in his submission to the Preliminary Hearings on Genocide at the ICJ repeated the many times debunked Zionist propaganda of “mass rape by Hamas” during its breakout attack on October 7^th.

4See Sources for link to the report,

5The elections of 29 November did not return any party with an absolute majority and discussions on forming a coalition government have been ongoing since the election results were confirmed.

6And many previous Irish governments too.

7See Sources for link to the program.

8Ireland Palestine Solidarity Campaign.

9 https://villagemagazine.ie/opinion-ireland-and-palestine-a-late-love-affair/

SOURCES

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/dec/15/israel-to-close-dublin-embassy-after-ireland-supports-icj-genocide-petition

https://www.aljazeera.com/program/inside-story/2024/12/16/why-is-israel-shutting-its-embassy-in-ireland

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/politics/arid-41538359.html