Category: US Imperialism

Policing Palestine Solidarity

On 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 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 8th 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 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.

(Photo cred: The Cradle)

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 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.

(Photo: D.Breatnach)

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

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

2https://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 7th.

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.

9https://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

SCRAPPING CARRIERS SINKS BRITISH WORLD POLICEMAN PLAN

On By rebelbreezeIn Britain, British imperialism, Current Affairs Comment, Imperialism, NATO, Political Analysis, US ImperialismLeave a comment

Kit Klarenberg (republished with author’s kind permission from Al Mayadeen)

(Reading time: 6 mins.)

On November 15th, The Times published a remarkable report, revealing serious “questions” are being asked about the viability of Britain’s two flagship aircraft carriers, at the highest levels of London’s defence establishment.

Such perspectives would have been unreportable mere months ago. Yet, subsequent reporting seemingly confirms the vessels are for the chop.

Should that come to pass, it will represent an absolutely crushing, historic defeat for the Royal Navy – and the US Empire in turn – without a single shot fired.

The HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales first set sail in 2017 and 2019 respectively, after 20 years in development.

HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales in dock and at anchor.

The former arrived at the Royal Navy’s historic Portsmouth base with considerable fanfare, a Ministry of Defence press release boasting that the carrier would be deployed “in every ocean around the world over the next five decades.”

The pair were and remain the biggest and most expensive ships built in British history, costing close to $8 billion combined. Ongoing operational costs are likewise vast.

Fast forward to today however, and British ministers and military chiefs are, per The Times, “under immense pressure to make billions of pounds’ worth of savings,” with major “casualties” certain.

Resultantly, senior Ministry of Defence and Treasury officials are considering scrapping at least one of the carriers, if not both.

The reason is simple – “in most war games, the carriers get sunk,” and are “particularly vulnerable to missiles.” As such, the pair are now widely perceived as the “Royal Navy’s weak link.” 

Matthew Savill of British state-tied Royal United Services Institute told The Times that missile technology is developing “at such a pace” that carriers are rapidly becoming easy for Britain’s adversaries to “locate and track”, then neutralise.

“In particular,” he cautioned, China is increasing the range of its ballistic and supersonic anti-ship missiles.

Meanwhile, Beijing’s “hypersonic glide vehicle”, the DF-17, “can evade existing missile defence systems,” its “range, speed and manoeuvrability” making it a “formidable weapon” neither Britain nor the US can adequately counter.

Savill advocated “cutting one or both of the carriers,” as this “would free up people and running costs and those could be reinvested in the running costs of the rest of the fleet and easing the stresses on personnel”.

Nonetheless, he warned that scrapping the carriers would be a “big deal for a navy that has designed itself around those carriers…and that the £6.2 billion paid for them would be a sunk cost.”

That the Royal Navy has “designed itself” around the two carriers is an understatement.

For just one to set sail, it must be supported by a strike group consisting of two Type 45 destroyers for air defence, two Type 23 frigates for anti-submarine warfare, a submarine, a fleet tanker and a support ship.

British aircraft carrier as part of allegedly “strike force” but in reality sailing with its necessary escorts. (Photo sourced: Internet)

This “full-fat protective approach”, Savill lamented, means “most of the deployable Royal Navy” must accompany a single carrier at any given time:

‘You can protect the carriers, but then the Navy has put all of its eggs in a particularly large and expensive basket.’

‘National Embarrassment’

March 2021 saw the publication of a long-awaited report, Global Britain in a Competitive Age – “a comprehensive articulation” of London’s “national security and international policy,” intended to “[shape] the open international order of the future.”

The two aircraft carriers loomed large in its contents. One passage referred to how HMS Queen Elizabeth would soon lead Britain’s “most ambitious global deployment for two decades, visiting the Mediterranean, the Middle East and the Indo-Pacific”:

“She will demonstrate our interoperability with allies and partners – in particular the US – and our ability to project cutting-edge military power in support of NATO and international maritime security.

Her deployment will also help the government to deepen our diplomatic and prosperity links with allies and partners worldwide.”

Such bombast directly echoed the bold wording of a July 1998 strategic defence review, initiated a year earlier by then-prime minister Tony Blair.

As world naval policeman: HMS Queen Elizabeth aircraft carrier docked in Cyprus (where the UK has two military bases)

Its findings kickstarted London’s quest to acquire world-leading aircraft carriers, which culminated with the birth of HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales.

Britain’s explicit objective, directly inspired by the US Empire’s dependence on carriers to belligerently project its diplomatic, economic, military and political interests abroad, was to recover London’s role as world police officer, and audaciously assert herself overseas: 

“In the post-Cold War world, we must be prepared to go to the crisis, rather than have the crisis come to us. So we plan to buy two new larger aircraft carriers to project power more flexibly around the world…

This will give us a fully independent ability to deploy a powerful combat force to potential trouble spots without waiting for basing agreements on other countries’ territory. We will…be poised in international waters and most effectively back up diplomacy with the threat of force.”

Blair’s reverie appeared to finally come to pass in May 2021, when HMS Queen Elizabeth set off on a grand tour of the world’s oceans, escorted by a vast carrier strike group.

Over the next six months, the vessel engaged in a large number of widely-publicised exercises with foreign navies, including NATO allies, and docked in dozens of countries. Press coverage was universally fawning.

Yet, in November, as the excursion was nearing its end, an F-35 fighter launched from the carrier unceremoniously crashed. 

The F-35’s myriad issues were by that point well-established. The jet, which has cost US taxpayers close to $2 trillion, entered into active service in 2006 while still under development. It quickly gained a reputation for hazardous unreliability.

In 2015, a Pentagon report acknowledged its severe structural issues, limited service life and low flight-time capacity.

Two years later, the Department of Defense quietly admitted the US Joint Program Office had been secretly recategorising F-35 failure incidents to make the plane appear safe to fly. 

Despite this, the HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales were specifically designed to transport the F-35, to the exclusion of all other fighter jets.

However, Britain has all along struggled to source usable F-35s, which produces the ludicrous situation of the two carriers almost invariably patrolling seas with few if any fighters aboard at all, therefore invalidating their entire raison d’être.

In November 2023, the Daily Telegraph dubbed these regular “jet-less” forays a “national embarrassment”.

‘Carrier Gap’

An even graver embarrassment, rarely discussed with any seriousness by the British media, is that the two aircraft carriers have been plagued with endless technical and mechanical issues as long as they’ve been in service.

Flooding, mid-operation breakdowns, onboard fires, and engine leaks are routine. Both vessels have spent
 considerably more time docked and under repair than at sea over their brief lifetimes. In 2020, an entire HMS Prince of Wales crew accommodation block collapsed, for reasons unclear.

As the elite US foreign policy journal National Interest acknowledged in March 2024, “the Royal Navy remains unable to adequately defend or operate” its two carriers “independently” – code for the Empire being consistently compelled to deploy its own naval and air assets to support the pair.

This is quite some failure, given British officials originally intended for the vessels to not only lead NATO exercises and deployments, but “slot into” US navy operations wherever and whenever necessary.

The Empire’s inability to outsource its hegemonic duties to Britain has created a critical “carrier gap”.

Despite maintaining an 11-strong fleet, Washington cannot deploy the vessels to every global flashpoint at once, grievously undermining her power and influence at a time of tremendous upheaval worldwide.

In a bitter irony, by encouraging and facilitating London’s emulation of its own flawed and outdated reliance on aircraft carriers, the US has inadvertently birthed yet another needy imperial dependent, further draining its already fatally overstretched military resources. 

Frame 2 of a DB cartoon depicting US Navy aircraft carrier sailing to teach Ansar Allah (‘Houthis’) a lesson but instead getting chased out of the Arabian Sea by Yemeni missiles in June this year. (Image source: DB cartoons)

Several Royal Navy destroyers were originally part of abortive US-led Operation Prosperity Guardian, launched in late 2023 to smash Ansar Allah’s righteous anti-genocide Red Sea blockade.

Almost immediately, it became apparent the British lacked any ability to fire on land targets, therefore rendering their participation completely useless.

Subsequently, photos emerged of areas on Britain’s ships where land attack cruise missiles should’ve been situated. Instead, the spaces were occupied by humble treadmills, for use as on-board gyms.

It transpired that the appropriate weapons hadn’t been purchased, due to a lack of funds – the money having of course been spent instead on constructing barely operable aircraft carriers, which now face summary defenestration.

By investing incalculable time, energy, and money in pursuing the mythological greatness associated with carrier capability, Britain – just like the US Empire – now finds itself unable to meet modern warfare’s most basic challenges.

Meanwhile, its adversaries near and far have remorselessly innovated, equipping themselves for 21st century battle.

Days after The Times portended the impending death of London’s aircraft carriers, mainstream media became awash with reports of savage cutbacks in Britain’s military capabilities, in advance of a new strategic defence review.

Potentially a huge pile of scrap or to be dumped on an ally …

Five Royal Navy warships, all of which had lain disused due to staffing issues and structural decay for some time, were among the first announced “casualties”. What if anything will replace these losses isn’t certain, although it likely won’t be an aircraft carrier.

End.

Source: https://english.almayadeen.net/articles/analysis/collapsing-empire–rip-royal-navy

IRAN – WILL IT OR WON’T IT?­

On By rebelbreezeIn Current Affairs Comment, Genocide, Imperialism, Indigenous or Original People, Massacres, Middle East, National Liberation, Palestine, Political Analysis, US Imperialism, ZionismLeave a comment

Diarmuid Breatnach

(Reading time: 5 mins.)

Opinions seem divided on whether ‘Israel’s’ recent attack on Iran did much damage and whether Iran will retaliate. On the first, the Zionist Government and its allies claim great success while Iran claimed most missiles shot down and minimal damage.

One takes it for granted that all sides in a war will have an eye to useful propaganda. During the attack, while Zionist and western mass media were claiming numerous ‘Israeli’ strikes on Iran, allegedly real time videos of a quiet Tehran were being posted on line.

It must be said that no satellite photos of any real damage to Iranian installations have been posted on the internet and one of a military facility seeming to show a huge crater appeared later intact on the Internet with a claim that the earlier photo had merely shown a shadow.1

The Iranian authorities did admit to the deaths of four soldiers and a little minor damage, the latter quickly repaired, according to their updates. They also claimed to have shot down all but a few of the incoming missiles.

It seems that none of the manned Zionist aircraft entered Iranian airspace but a few approached the border from Iraq in order to launch their missiles from there, which raises another issue regarding the violation of Iraqi sovereignty by the US military.

According to Alastair Crooke, commentator on Middle East affairs, former British diplomat (then probably MI6 asset) on Judge Napolitano’s Youtube site,2 the first of three planned ‘Israeli’ attack waves encountered something unexpected in the Iranian air defence and the rest of the attack was aborted.

Narratives from each side would be tailored to suit their own propaganda needs but even some of the ‘Israeli’ media and other commentators were critical of the effectiveness of the attack, some saying Iran was hardly damaged while others said economic targets should have been included.

It also does seem that the Zionist attack was unusually restrained in restricting its targeting to military installations.

The speculation has been that the reason for that restraint was the US being quite firm with Netanyahu that the oil etc. installations were not to be hit as Iran’s retaliation would have engulfed not only the Zionist colony but wider western interests in the region and the world economy.

Whichever side is correct in its damage estimation may be relevant or may not. Iran has reiterated its right to defend itself but seemed not to be saying that it would definitely retaliate.

But on Wednesday Admiral Ali Fadavi, Commander-in-Chief of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps of Iran was quoted in some media stating that his country’s military will retaliate, stating that such “is inevitable”, today backed by the Director of the Supreme Leader’s Office.

Michael Jansen, a correspondent on the Middle East in the Irish Times wrote that because Iran was allegedly hard hit in the ‘Israeli’ attack, it will not retaliate and claims that Iran’s previous retaliation was a flop. If that is Jansen’s main basis for her opinion, it is to my mind an unsafe foundation.

In the past I’ve had respect for Jansen’s analysis of the war in Syria and the positions of different factions but this time I think she is very wide of the mark. The previous Iranian retaliations swamped the Zionist air defence system3 with cheap drones but hit many targets with missiles.

It seems to me that Iran WILL retaliate and the only thing that might hold that off or at least moderate the strength of its attack would be if the ‘Israeli’ Government ties up a peace deal with the Palestinian Resistance, led by Hamas. And that looks extremely unlikely, for a number of reasons.

The Resistance is sticking to the terms that were announced by Biden back in May, which he claimed were the ‘Israeli’ Government’s and to which the Resistance agreed, only to see the talks sabotaged again and again by Netanyahu in proposing additions and deletions.

The basics of the Resistance position are:

  • Immediate end to the ‘Israeli’ attacks now and in future
  • Total withdrawal of the IOF from Gaza (including the Nezarim Corridor and Rafah)
  • Total removal of all obstacles to arrival of humanitarian food, medicine etc. supplies
  • Return of all displaced from parts of Gaza as they wish
  • Exchange of prisoners (including bodies of dead Israelis and to include Palestinians nominated by the Resistance, without Israeli veto)
  • Reconstruction of infrastructures and buildings: housing, medical, educational, social, commercial

None of those terms except the exchange of prisoners has been agreed and even there, Netanyahu wanted to exclude some Palestinian prisoners from the exchange. Most fundamentally, he insists on the IOF staying in Gaza, in particular in the “Nezarim corridor”.

It is frequently commented that Netanyahu cannot afford personally to end the attacks in defeat as a postponed court case for alleged fraud and bribery awaits him and, without a victory in his belt, his political fascist friends would abandon him to be savaged by his enemies in the Zionist entity.

However, the continuing Zionist massacres of civilians and wide-scale urban destruction is intended in large part to force the Resistance to accept terms with which the Zionist state agrees, to gain in negotiations what it has been unable to win on the battlefield against the Resistance fighters.

No doubt there are some who think that the Resistance should abandon its demand about total IOF Gaza withdrawal, just to end the massacres. That kind of thinking results in a partial peace to which the enemy will return again and again with violence.

The Palestinian Resistance has clearly decided that they will tough this out in the sacrifice of their people, fighters and leaders in order to get a more stable position for the Palestinian nation, from which to go forward to self-determination – and peace, should that be obtainable.4

US Imperialism in the form of Bill Clinton supervises handshake between Yitzhak Rabin, Prime Minister of US proxy’Israel’ and Yasser Arafat, then leader of Fatah in control of the PLO at the conclusion of the Oslo pacification process. The Agreement spawned the Zionist-colluding and repressive Palestinian Authority but never gained the Palestinians anything. (Image sourced: Internet)

The last time the Resistance caved in to Zionist and imperialist demands was with the Oslo Accords in 1993, signed for the Fatah leadership by Yasser Arafat. Since then not only did the Palestinians not make any advances but additional Zionist settlements have grown apace.

And every few years have seen new genocidal attacks on the Palestinian people.

The Axis of Resistance considers the Zionist State to be a constant threat to the Arab states and indigenous people of the Middle East, in addition to the Islamic Republic of Iran. The history of the Zionist state’s wars with its neighbours and its backing by imperialism seems to bear that out.

Looked at soberly, the Palestinian Resistance has inflicted a huge defeat on the IOF and the Zionist military mystique on October 7th and, notwithstanding daily genocidal massacres, the Resistance has gone on for a year to deny the IOF a victory in Gaza or on the West Bank.

Hezbollah’s bombardments have cleared much of north Palestine of settlers in addition to hitting targets in central ‘Israel’ and they’ve also fought the IOF to a standstill on Lebanon’s borders. Missiles and drones of the Iraqi Resistance and the Yemeni State have also hit the Zionist State.

The balance of battlefield supremacy is tilting against Israel, thanks to the adaptability, courage and sacrifice of in particular the Palestinian people but now also the Lebanese — and world popular opinion is against the Zionist European settler project as never before.

Iranian drones, one launching, Iran 4 October 2023 (Photo cred: Reuters)

It is necessary to continue the process both to inflict an unmistakeable defeat on the Zionist State and to win substantial advances for the Palestinian people and, incidentally, for the people of the Middle East. These advances entail in addition setbacks for US and western imperialism.

It is important to hammer that nail home, lest it works itself loose before long. I think that at some point Iran will likely retaliate against the Zionist state for its own dignity and defence but also as part of the Axis of Resistance, striving to rid the area of an extremely dangerous infestation.

End.

FOOTNOTES

SOURCES

1The imperialists have Iran constantly under satellite surveillance and it beggars belief they would not have posted photos of significant damage were such to exist.

2Crooke claims that the first wave was to destroy the air defences but failed and encountered something which put all the rest of the attack in danger so they called the attack off and then claimed a victory. Crooke is speculating up to a point about the reasons but claims the facts about the attack are from ‘Israeli’ sources. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txkNk76E3SI

3Both ground-based, as with Iron Dome and David’s Sling but also airborne with US and European allied aircraft.

4A similar position was outlined with respect to Hezbollah by Sheikh Naim Qassem in his first speech on Wednesday since his election to the General Secretaryship of the organisation.

Ta-Nehisi Coates – A Zionist Repents

On By rebelbreezeIn Book Review, Current Affairs Comment, Genocide, Human Rights, Imperialism, Indigenous or Original People, Middle East, Palestine, Political Analysis, US Imperialism, ZionismLeave a comment

Gearóid Ó Loingsigh (21/10/2024)

(Reading time: 6 mins.)

A number of years ago I read Ta-Nehisi Coates’ book We Were Eight Years in Power, which was a eulogy to the Obama era and people like himself who had done well out of that period in the US. 

It was a terrible book, rightly slated by many and led to black academic and activist Cornel West describing him as the neoliberal wing of the black freedom struggle.[1] The book was so bad, I barely got half way through it and put it down never to pick it up again. 

Cornel West (left) described Ta-Nehisi Coates (right) as the neo-liberal wing of the black freedom struggle.

I never thought I would read another of his books, though I have read some articles of his.  Then came his new book The Message and the criticism from the Right on his comments on Palestine.  So, I surrendered and read it.  This time in its entirety. 

It is an easy well-written read.

As with all his books, this is very much about him.  His preferred pronouns are definitely I and My (yes, I know My is not a pronoun, but none of this pronoun nonsense obeys the rules of grammar in any case). 

It deals with three trips he made and how he felt about them and the issues that arose.  Given the CBS interview I fully expected to find some hard critique of the US, Israel and Apartheid, though that is not his style. 

Instead, he relates stories about his experiences in Palestine, talking to Palestinians and also to Israeli settlers.  That is it.  The Israelis obviously do not come out well in the book.  How could they? 

Coates likens his experiences in Palestine to Jim Crow in the US and Apartheid in South Africa.  They are the comments and observations on what he saw, and pretty much middle of the road. 

He is no Norman Finkelstein with his searing condemnations of Israeli massacres and Apartheid.  It says more about the US media that Coates’ interesting, but in no way extreme comments, have provoked such fury.

This part of the book, is partly a Mea Culpa for previous articles he had written in which he praises Israel, chief among them, apparently, is his essay published in The Atlantic, The Case for Reparations. 


Ta-Nehisi Coates

In the essay, he liberally and uncritically quotes terrorists and murderers such as David Ben-Gurion and Menachem Begin.[2] He has much to apologise for in that essay. 

The essay starts off with a biblical epigraph from the book of Deuteronomy and also an anonymous quote from 1861 “By our unpaid labor and suffering, we have earned the right to the soil, many times over and over, and now we are determined to have it.” 

Except the land in question, that which Lincoln promised to give to freed slaves was land that had or would be stolen from native American Indians, who do not figure in his case for reparations, just like Palestinians didn’t exist for him. 

It is a thoroughly vile, though well researched piece, that I have criticised previously in an essay entitled Reparations Without Talking About Capitalism[3] and won’t go into again here. 

He now says that he is ashamed of some of the things he said in that essay, which he mentions in his book.  He does not mention an earlier essay which leaves no doubt as to where his loyalty and politics lies:  The Negro Sings of Zionism.[4] 

In it he compares Zionism to Black Nationalism, Theodore Herzl, the founder of the Zionist movement to Huey Newton and even Malcolm X!  This essay was written only months before Obama, his hero, came to power and was in the throes of his election campaign.

Obama was and, like Kamala Harris, still is an ardent supporter of Israeli atrocity.  Coates was not going to challenge Obama on this point, ever. 

And even now in the midst of the genocide in Gaza he has publicly called for people to vote for Kamala Harris, saying that sometimes the choices are bad.[5] 

And further, he says a Kamala presidency which supports “apartheid and genocide” would be nightmare scenario “of being the first Black woman president and having 2,000-pound bombs with your name on them dropping on Gaza.”[6]   

Except it is not.  It is business as usual. The only nightmare is for the Palestinians, not for him or the rest of the liberals who will vote for Harris. 

Under Obama, the US bombed at least six countries, Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Somalia, Syria, Yemen, where the Houthis are actually challenging both the US and Israel and of course Libya

where the toppling of Gaddafi led to the reintroduction of open-air slave markets where black Africans were once again for sale.  Not a minor point you would think for a black identitarian. 

In 2016 alone, Obama in his final year of his presidency dropped a staggering 26,171 bombs i.e. three bombs every hour, every day of the year.[7]  Meanwhile Coates was waxing lyrical about how he and others like him had spent eight years in power. 

He should own it! That was on Coates as well.  He doesn’t get to wash his hands now.

Sometimes the choices are bad, he claims.  But would he tolerate a white person voting for a racist politician on the grounds that they had good positions on other issues, such as abortion?  I think not. 

His arrogance leads him to think he and Harris deserve a pass on this now.  He doesn’t, nobody does.  Neither does the hypothetical white voter who wants to vote for some racist who has good positions on other issues.

The level of ignorance that Coates claims for himself is hard to fathom and even harder to believe.  He claims to not be sure when exactly in his visit to Palestine he first heard the term Nakba. 

He also states that “For as sure as my ancestors were born into a country where none of them was the equal of any white man, Israel was revealing itself to be a country where no Palestinian is ever the equal of any Jewish person anywhere.” 

Revealing itself?  Under which rock had Coates been hiding?  Had he not heard of Operation Cast Lead? 

It was launched in the same year he sang his hymn to Zionism.  It resulted in around 1,500 Palestinian deaths, mainly civilians and the displacement of 100,000 people.  Did he never hear of the Goldstone Report on that operation? 

And the scandal when Goldstone was forced to recant?  It was one of many such assaults on Gaza.  All of this and other incursions have been well documented.

Writers write.  Everyone knows that, it is their art, their trade.  But more than write, they read.  All writers read, even the bad ones have to read something occasionally.  Coates’ ignorance is not credible. 

When he researched his essays praising Zionism, did he not come across a single solitary article to give him some pause for thought?  Any piece by Finkelstein, Ilán Pappé, Chomsky, anyone at all?  His feigned ignorance is not plausible.

In his song to Zionism, Coates looked at the conflict through his identitarian eyes, and chose a side that he thought was closest to his own identity.  His “repentance” is a similar process.  He now sees the Palestinians through those eyes. 

We have no idea how far he will go with this and when he will backtrack.  Like many writers he can read the room and probably feels now is a good moment to be on the Palestinian side.  But his repentance only goes so far. 

If Harris wins the election, he will at some point write Another Eight Years in Power.  Or if she loses, The Land of Milk and Honey We Were Deprived of.

He states early on his book that “we could never practice writing solely for the craft itself, but must necessarily believe our practice to be in service of that larger emancipatory mandate.”  Like Gandhi said of British civilisation, it would be a good idea. 

But what is that mandate? Abortion rights in the US, but genocide in Palestine?

He has little understanding or willingness to deal with issues of capitalism, imperialism, or his own role in it all.  The book will through its anecdotes prove interesting to many and he has an easy-to-read style.  You could read this book in one sitting.

Just don’t expect any deep analysis or understanding, there isn’t any.  I have said nothing of the other two parts to the book, which almost deserve a critique of their own, though it would be more favourable than I have been thus far on his coverage of Palestine. 

Borrow it, don’t buy it.  Money is hard to come by, Coates is not short of a bob or two and there are better things to spend your money on.

End.

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

[1] The Guardian (17/12/2017) Ta-Nehisi Coates is the neoliberal face of the black freedom struggle.  Cornel West. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/dec/17/ta-nehisi-coates-neoliberal-black-struggle-cornel-west

[2] The Atlantic (06/2014) THE CASE FOR REPARATIONS. Ta-Nehisi Coates. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/06/the-case-for-reparations/361631/

[3] Ó Loingsigh, G. (18/08/2020) Reparations Without Talking About Capitalism.  https://www.academia.edu/124919533/Reparations_Without_Talking_About_Capitalism

[4] The Atlantic (13/05/2008) The Negro Sings of Zionism.  Ta-Nehisi Coates. https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2008/05/the-negro-sings-of-zionism/5201/

[5] Des Moines Register (15/10/2024) Ta-Nehisi Coates says he’ll likely vote for Kamala Harris. ‘Sometimes, the choices are bad’. F. Amanda Tugade. https://eu.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/local/des-moines/2024/10/15/ta-nehisi-coates-says-he-has-a-responsibility-to-people-in-new-book-the-message-kamala-harris/75673159007/

[6] Forward (10/10/2024) Ta-Nehisi Coates says Harris funding Gaza war as first Black female president would be ‘nightmare’. https://forward.com/fast-forward/663139/ta-nehisi-coates-harris-gaza/

[7] The Guardian (09/01/2024) America dropped 26,171 bombs in 2016. What a bloody end to Obama’s reign.  Medea Benjamin.https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/09/america-dropped-26171-bombs-2016-obama-legacy

THE MYSTERY OF THE NORD STREAM 2 EXPLOSION SOLVED?

On By rebelbreezeIn Anti-War, Current Affairs Comment, Environmental, Imperialism, NATO, Political Analysis, US ImperialismLeave a comment

Clive Sulish

(Reading time: 6 mins.)

On 26 September 2022, an explosion blew a section of the Nord Stream 2 gas supply pipeline from Russia to Germany, incidentally causing an environmental disaster for sea-life in the area. Investigations confirmed that it was an act of sabotage.1

Amidst accusations and theories,2 no perpetrator was conclusively identified.

But two years later, in September 2024, an important item of previously-suppressed information came to light in a Danish newspaper. It was not however picked up by the mainstream western media, despite its potentially crucial contribution to solving the mystery.

Alternative sources however alighted on it and it is now coming into the public light.

In any investigation of culpability for a human action, one of the first established principles to investigate is – and targets of investigation should be — cui bono? (in Latin, who benefits?). Next, Qui habet potestatem? — Who has the means? Finally, Who had the opportunity?

Map of route of the Nord Stream pipelines showing neighbouring state. (Source image: Financial Times)

Potentially, any in the anti-Russian coalition around NATO stood to benefit by harming not only a Russian installation but also a major source of financial benefit to Russia, i.e of sales of gas to Germany. Many eyes turned towards Russia’s opponent in the Ukraine, the Zelensky regime.

However, neither Russia nor any other serious commentators ever considered that NATO proxy to be the culprit. Russia and others stated that the operation required a major state, both in the depths concerned, in surface support needed and in the explosive type and detonation system.

A number of commentators pointed the finger at the USA, which denied any involvement. Well, the USA is a major state and certainly had the motive, as Russia was and remains its major target in the Ukraine war and it also had the potential technical and personnel means.

It would also of course, as an enemy of Russia, benefit from harm to its opponent. It would benefit the USA financially too, though that was yet to become clear.

From whom would Germany buy its power to warm its population and production through the winter as an alternative to Russian gas? That new source would turn out to be – yes, the USA.

OK, so suspicion should fall heavily on the USA, leader of NATO and chief among the enemies of Russia. But did it have the opportunity?

Since there was no record of a US naval presence in the area at the time of the explosion (even though they had been there previously in one of those major joint exercises they like to carry out to bring their allies closer and intimidate their opponents), the media investigation floundered.

Russia asked at the UN Security Council for an investigation, which was rejected. No decision of the Council can be made against a veto of even one of the five Permanent Members, of which three are part of the NATO coalition (USA, UK and France).

A number of alternative theories began to be put around, including mention of large yacht in the area and a Ukrainian oligarch financier. Official investigations were launched by two states in whose economic zone the operation must have taken place: Denmark and Sweden.3

Both regimes are part of the US/NATO/EU coalition and there may have been suspicions that their investigations might not be sufficiently thorough. In any case, in February this year both states closed their investigations without having identified the perpetrator.

Germany’s investigation is ongoing and it issued an arrest warrant for a Ukrainian oligarch who fled to NATO proxy Ukraine with assistance of NATO member Poland. However Russia and serious commentators have always said that a major state, something Ukraine is not, was culpable.

On 17 July 2024, the German government refused to publish the preliminary results of the investigation after the Alternative für Deutschland (AFD) party asked for it, or to comment about the possible involvement of American intelligence services or Ukraine in the pipeline attack.4

In October 2024, the Swiss newspaper Die Weltwoche wrote an article based on an interview given to Danish Politiken by John Anker Nielsen, the harbourmaster of Christianso in Denmark on the day of the two-year-anniversary of the Nord Stream pipelines sabotage.

Back in September 2023, the Christianso harbourmaster detected the presence of ships in the area with their transponders, equipment identifying the ship and its course, silent. Assuming some kind of accident, Nielsen sailed out to investigate, finding US Navy there.

With no evidence of disaster and a request that he leave, Nielsen turned for home. (Suppose that information had been included in the Danish investigation, would the fingers pointing at the USA not have multiplied?)

Nielsen says he was told to keep quiet about what he knew but decided to end his silence in September and his story was published in a local newspaper. Later alternative commentators such as Glen Greenwald and others on X picked up on it and now it’s finding its way into wider media.

The Swiss newspaper article went on to note that the USS Keararge three months earlier had participated in the BALTOPS 2022 exercise that included unmanned underwater vehicles suitable for demining and other underwater operations.5

Such vessels as those could transport explosive charges suitable for blowing the Nord Stream pipelines. The Swiss newspaper claimed this new information calls into question the assumption that a Ukrainian group was responsible for the sabotage and that investigations are continuing.6

OUTCOMES

The outcomes to date are that Russia has received heavy financial damage, both in the cost of the pipe and any repair costs but also through loss of a customer who might well have resumed its purchase of gas from Russia in preference to dearer fuel from elsewhere.

Carlos Latuff cartoon outlining the major suspicions at the time.

The USA has benefited financially because it is also an energy exporter, including to Germany, where Russia was its main competitor.

In 2022, Germany imported 44.65 million tonnes of hard coal. Its leading coal suppliers were Russia (29.2%), the United States (20.8%) and Colombia (16.3%).7 So in the event of any embargo on Russian hard coal, the US stands to benefit enormously.

But what about natural gas, formerly supplying 55% of Germany’s power supply, no longer possible from Russia through the Nord Stream 2 pipeline? About 45% …. comes from Norway through pipelines, 4% from the Netherlands, 5% domestic production … the rest from western neighbours.8

Norway and the United States were the top suppliers of gas to the EU in 2023. Norway provided almost 30% of all gas imports. But the actual origin of those supplies is not so easy to identify and reports even estimate that a small percentage of the EU’s supply is actually Russian.

Although additional suppliers include North African countries, the UK and Qatar, in 2023, the United States was the largest LNG supplier to the EU, representing almost 50% of total LNG imports. In 2023, comparing to 2021, imports from the US almost tripled.9

It seemed likely that some at least – and perhaps a lot – of Germany’s current LNG supply, though perhaps through another country, would actually be of US origin. And it turns out that the US has been the dominant LNG supplier to Germany since 2022 at 82% of total imports.10

IN CONCLUSION

While the USA has benefited significantly financially from the pipeline explosion and strategically through damaging an opponent, Germany has at the same time suffered a loss in having to buy more expensive fuel (from the USA).11 But Germany is an ally of the USA and a prominent one in NATO.

This episode demonstrates that 1) the USA, in advancing its own interests, is prepared to break the law and to see an ally suffer but also that 2) a major European capitalist power has surrendered a substantial portion of its own interests for the benefit of the USA, as a price of membership of the NATO club.

Germany, though an enthusiastic supporter of NATO, due to its dependence on natural Russian gas, had been reluctant to engage fully in the economic sanctions against Russia proposed by NATO. The blowing up of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline removed that dependence, transferring it to the USA.

The USA benefited, both politically/ militarily in hurting its opponent and in increasing the dependence of an ally. It also benefited subsequently financially, in gaining a major customer market share. The USA had more than enough Motive to carry out the sabotage.

It also had the Means (the capability) and now, as we know, the Opportunity also! Circumstantial? Sure but a mountain of evidence nevertheless.

End.

FOOTNOTES

MAIN SOURCES (see also Footnotes)

https://english.almayadeen.net/news/politics/us-navy-was-at-scene-of-nord-stream-blasts–danish-media
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nord_Stream_pipelines_sabotage

Unlikelihood of Ukraine culpability: https://ukraineworld.org/en/articles/analysis/wrong-allegations-against-ukraine

1https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nord_Stream_pipelines_sabotage

2Including an unbelievable one that Russia had done it themselves in order to blame the USA.

3https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nord_Stream_pipelines_sabotage

4Receiving the answer: “after careful consideration, the Federal Government has come to the conclusion that the question cannot be answered for reasons of public interest”.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nord_Stream_pipelines_sabotage

5https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nord_Stream_pipelines_sabotage

6Ibid.

7https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/germanys-dependence-imported-fossil-fuels

8https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/germany-have-two-more-floating-lng-import-terminals-operation-winter-operator

9https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/infographics/eu-gas-supply

10https://www.spglobal.com/commodityinsights/en/market-insights/latest-news/natural-gas/013024-german-gas-industry-group-slams-us-pause-on-new-lng-export-permits

11https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/nord-stream-insurers-say-policies-did-not-cover-war-risks-kommersant-reports-2024-04-18/

DUBLIN RALLY HONOURS THE MARTYRED PALESTINE RESISTANCE LEADER

On By rebelbreezeIn Current Event Report, Indigenous or Original People, Internationalist Solidarity, Ireland, Middle East, National Liberation, Palestine, US Imperialism, ZionismLeave a comment

Clive Sulish

(Reading time: 3 mins.)

People with Palestinian flags including one containing a slogan in Irish, flags of Palestinian resistance factions and holding portraits of Ismail Haniyeh and Nasrallah rallied on Sunday evening outside Dublin’s General Post Office.

(Photo cred: Rebel Breeze)

The Action for Palestine organisation had advertised the solidarity and honouring event at short notice. Originally planned to take place on O’Connell Bridge, the storm conditions1 made that venue unsuitable and the GPO2 was chosen as an appropriate alternative.

Calling and replying to solidarity chants, the crowd of Irish people and others from the Middle East also listened to four speakers, two Irish and two Palestinian, while two plain-clothes Special Branch Gardaí photographed them from east side of the street.

(Photo cred: Rebel Breeze)

One passing Zionist sympathiser insulted the gathering, giving rise to a wave of chants in solidarity with the Palestinian Resistance. On the other hand, many pedestrian passers-by congratulated demonstrators and some stopped to join or pressed horns on their vehicles.

The speakers referred to the horrors of the genocide being inflicted upon the Palestinian people in particular in North Gaza3 at this time by the IOF, the armed forces of the Zionist state, backed up and supplied by the USA and a number of European states.

(Photo cred: Rebel Breeze)

They spoke also to praise the resistance of all kinds of the Palestinian people, including armed resistance and at all levels up to leadership, who are assassinated and replaced, always under threat of death.

One speaker also spoke about the need to also support the resistance struggles and the prisoners as a result of resistance too. “It is not required of us that we agree with everything they say or do but it is required of us that we support the resistance”, he said.

Among the slogans chanted were Long live the Intifada! There is only one solution – intifada revolution! From the River to the Sea – Palestine will be free! Resistance is an obligation – in the face of occupation! Saoirse – don Phalaistín!

(Photo cred: Rebel Breeze)

From Ireland to Palestine – Occupation is a crime! From the Sea to the River – Palestine will live forever! In our thousands, in our millions – we are all Palestinians! Free, free Palestine! Netanyahu you can’t hide – you’re committing genocide! (Repeated also for Joe Biden).

A speaker also reminded the crowd of the long resistance to occupation of the Irish people, against Vikings and English occupation and the need to support the resistance of people around the world. “Resistance is everything”, he said and referred to the heroic resistance of the Palestinian people.

To conclude an organiser thanked all for their attendance at short notice and promised other actions in future, then encouraged those who wished to gather for a photo in front of the statue to “our hero in Irish myth, Cú Chullainn”,4 which stands in the central front window of the GPO building.5

Some gathered for a photo in front of the representation of the Irish mythological hero Cú Chulainn statue in the display window of the GPO. (Photo sourced: Action For Palestine)

While they were doing so, another reminded them that in the epic legend, Cú Chulainn’s enemies dared not approach him while he was alive and only finally did so when they saw a carrion crow or raven alight on his shoulder to reassure them that he was dead.

“Yahya Sinwar’s enemies did not face him while he was alive either. They fired a tank shell into the building where they believed the fighters were, retreating when grenades were tossed at them, firing another shell into the building and even then only dared send a spy drone in.

“When they saw on their monitor the badly-injured Sinwar throw a stick at the drone, they fired yet another shell into the building, finally killing him.”

End.

View of the Cú Chullainn statue in the GPO window on a working day (Photo cred: Cambridge University)
Far distant from any kind of heroism or solidarity, two plainclothes members of the political police, the Special Branch of the Gardaí, surveilling the participants. (Photo cred: Rebel Breeze)

Footnotes

1Storm Yellow level https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-41499104.html

2Also a central location, i.e on Dublin’s main city centre street but also the HQ of the 1916 Rising against British rule.

3Some Palestinian commentators have called this phase the worst of all in the intensified genocide since October last year. Constant aerial strikes on buildings and tent encampments, shooting at people, besieging hospitals and blocking food or fuel from entering and constantly insisting that the people move out in ethnically cleansing.

4The hero is a central figure in the epic of the Táin Bó Cuailgne (The Cattle Raid of Cooley), along with back and after-stories, in the Ulster Cycle of Irish myths and legends. The sculpture, cast in bronze, is by Oliver Sheppard.

5The sculpture by Oliver Sheppard was later dedicated to the martyrs of the 1916 Rising.

IOF INVASION FAILS TO PENETRATE HEZBOLLAH DEFENCE

On By rebelbreezeIn Anti-War, Current Affairs Comment, Genocide, Imperialism, Indigenous or Original People, Israeli Zionism, Middle East, National Liberation, Political Analysis, US ImperialismLeave a comment

Diarmuid Breatnach

(Reading time: 7 mins.)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

IOF INVASION PROGRESS?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

REASON

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

For the next war.

End.

Footnotes

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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