Al Ahram Weekly
Azza Radwan Sedky
Tuesday 21 Jan 2025
Which of new US President Donald Trump’s land-grabbing proposals should be taken seriously, asks Azza Radwan Sedky
Even before his inauguration as 47th president of the United States on 20 January, an emboldened and galvanised President-elect Donald Trump had spoken of acquiring Greenland and the Panama Canal and making Canada the 51st US state, among other bizarre proposals.
Winning the presidential race seemingly strengthened Trump’s resolve and saw him strive for many unrealistic acquisitions. Some are bizarre, while others are downright colonial expansions. Is Trump determined to act on these would-be acquisitions, or are they merely attention-grabbing tactics?
One of Trump’s proposals is to change the name of the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America. He linked the idea to immigration. “Mexico has to stop allowing millions of people to pour into our country,” Trump said, something that is quite unrelated to the name of the Gulf of Mexico.
Immediately, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum shrugged off his proposal and suggested that North America be called “America Mexicana” instead.
President-elect Trump had vouched that “all hell will break out” if the Israeli hostages were not released by his inauguration. It was a strange threat, for how much more “hell” could Gaza have faced aside from the one that it has already been facing?
No one knew how far Trump would go on Gaza. Had he said that a “ceasefire deal” must be reached by the set date, it would have been more comprehensible since then the threat would have been balanced between Israel and Hamas.
Lopsided wording or not, a ceasefire deal was reached five days before Trump’s inauguration. Both outgoing US President Joe Biden and Trump have claimed the credit for achieving the deal. Biden said that the new deal mirrored the one he had proposed in May last year. Trump said that “this EPIC ceasefire agreement could have only happened as a result of our Historic Victory in November.”
Trump’s proposals to acquire the Panama Canal and Greenland and annex Canada as the 51st US state are signs of an American territorial expansion strategy that will antagonise the three parties involved and irk the world at large. As US author Ian Bremmer has said on social media, “American colonialism is so back” as a result of Trump’s proposals.
Trump wants to retake the Panama Canal, since it “was built for our military.” He also said that late president Carter’s return of control of the canal to Panama was a bad idea. “He was a very fine person, but that was a big mistake. It cost us the equivalent of a trillion dollars,” he added.
Panama reacted as expected to Trump’s proposal. Panama’s Foreign Minister Javier Martínez-Acha, said that “the sovereignty of our canal is non-negotiable and is part of our history of struggle and an irreversible conquest. The only hands that control the canal are Panamanian and will remain so.”
Among the reasons Trump said he wants to retake the Panama Canal is because it is “run by China” and because US ships are charged more than others for using it, both false claims on his part. In fact, the Panama Canal Authority (PCA), which operates the waterway, has said it does not discriminate against any nation on charges. Tariffs for crossing the canal are determined by the size and type of ship regardless of ownership, it said.
Trump said he would not rule out taking the Panama Canal by force. The reaction around the world was one of outrage. “Trump can’t bully the entire world… loudly making threats doesn’t amount to a foreign policy,” said commentator Stephen M Walt in the US magazine Foreign Policy.
Greenland, another target of Trump’s threats, is an autonomous territory of the Kingdom of Denmark, and its citizens are citizens of Denmark. Trump said that he wants to buy Greenland. Denmark should give up Greenland to “protect the free world,” he said, in what amounts to a farcical proposal.
“We need Greenland for national security purposes,” Trump said, which may make one wonder whether others will also be encouraged to give up assets for US national security.
If Denmark does not comply with his demands, Trump’s plan is to impose high tariffs on Danish imports into the US. When asked if he would use military force to accomplish his goal, he refused to rule it out. At the same time, Donald Trump Jr flew to Greenland, though he told the reporters waiting for him at the airport that he was visiting as a tourist.
Denmark rejected Trump’s call, saying that Greenland is part of Denmark and that the issue is not up for discussion. Prime Minister of Greenland Mute B Egede also rejected Trump’s calls. “Greenland belongs to the people of Greenland,” he said. “Our future and fight for independence is our business.”
Now we come to Canada, where Trump has suggested that it become the 51st state of the US. He has reiterated the idea several times and also posted maps on social media showing Canada as part of the US. Though he has said that he will not use military force to annex Canada, he has threatened to use economic pressure to make Canada comply. He believes that by cutting back on US purchases of Canadian products, Canada will be forced to succumb to his bizarre demands.
Outgoing Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau responded to Trump’s statements in a post on X, writing that “there isn’t a snowball’s chance in hell that Canada would become part of the United States.” In an article in the Canadian newspaper the Globe and Mail, Jean Chrétien, a former Canadian prime minister, gave Trump some sobering counsel.
“Give your head a shake,” he said, adding that Trump’s remarks amounted to “totally unacceptable insults and unprecedented threats.”
Trump’s proposals are unsubtle and bombastic, and their consequences will put him in a hostile spot with friends and foes alike. Favouring war and territorial expansion will not make the US great again. They will turn it into a colonial aggressor.
Trump has flippantly suggested proposals that could make or break nations. How far will he go in realising his threats and offensive proposals? We will have to wait to see whether Trump will implement his aspirations.
The writer is a former professor of communication who is based in Vancouver, Canada.
* A version of this article appears in print in the 23 January, 2025 edition of Al-Ahram Weekly
Short link:
01/21/2025
Trump’s mystifying proposals
| | | |
|
01/19/2025
المعارضة والموالاة.. صناعة الإعلام الغربى
الاهرام
المعارضة والموالاة.. صناعة الإعلام الغربى
مثل الدمى المتحركة التى يتم التعامل معها من أعلى بالخيوط، نحن نخضع لسيطرة وسائل الإعلام خاصة وسائل الإعلام الغربية. تشكل وسائل الإعلام تفكيرنا وتحيزنا، وتؤطِّر القصص بالطريقة التى تريدها. تطالبنا بالتصديق وتَقبل صيغة معينة، وتطلب منا الرفض وتجاهل صيغة أخرى. فى نفس الوقت فإن وسائل الإعلام الغربية هى صورة ومرآة لرؤية الحكومات الغربية وحلفائها
سأعود إلى ما يقرب من 14 عاما، إلى مظاهرات ميدان التحرير عام 2011. إذا شاهدت قناة الجزيرة أو سى إن إن أو بى بى سى، لوجدت ليس فقط الآلاف من المتظاهرين المصريين يطالبون بالتغيير، ولكن أيضًا أجندة إعلامية تهدف إلى استغلال المصريين وتوجيه مسارهم
خلال المظاهرات، حثّت قنوات الإعلام الغربى المصريين على التظاهر، وكأن الإطاحة بالرئيس مبارك أمر مسلم به، تحدثت مع المعارضة، ومع القادة المحتملين مثل البرادعى أو عمرو موسى، ومع المتظاهرين. وتحدثت عن عِلل الرئيس مبارك وحددت المسار المستقبلى من دونه. كما ركزت على نقص الخبز والغاز والسجائر، وهو نقص غريب لم يكن واضحًا. وكانت مصرة على عدم إظهار المواطن المصرى الذى كان قلقًا مما ستؤدى إليه الفوضى وكيف ستؤثر على حياته، وذلك الذى سئم الفوضى وحاول العودة إلى الحياة الطبيعية
القول المصرى المأثور: «عايز جنازة يشبع فيها لطم» ينطبق على أسلوب الاعلام الغربى،والمعنى واضح: وسائل الإعلام ركزت على السلبى لإشعال الغضب؛ وبحثت عن المشاكل لتعزيزها
هل تلاعب الإعلام آنذاك بالمصريين؟ هل كانت وسائل الإعلام تعمل على تأجيج الثورة وتلعب دوراً حاسماً فى اتخاذ القرارات التى يمكن أن تؤدى بالفعل إلى بناء الدولة أو انهيارها؟ وهل كان الإعلام لديه أجندات خفية؟
وكنا آنذاك كما نحن الآن تحت رحمة الإعلام. اعتمادًا على من نشاهد أو نقرأ أو نستمع إليه، يتغير جوهر الحدث. نفس التواء الأحداث وتأرجحها موجود اليوم
واجهت سوريا أحداثا استثنائية، لكن الطريقة التى صوّرت بها وسائل الإعلام الغربية سقوط دمشق أمر محير للعقل. صُوَّرت سوريا وكأنها على وشك إصلاح شامل وإعادة تأهيل، وجُسِّدت عن طريق الإعلام الغربى. وكما لو كانت تجّهز الجولانى للفوز، أجرت شبكة سى إن إن مقابلة معه حتى قبل رحيل الأسد. ولم تشكك وسائل الإعلام الغربية قط فى نية الجولانى، لكنها أخذت على عاتقها تنقيح جوهره
زعم الجولانى أنه تغير. قام بقص لحيته الشعثاء وارتدى الملابس الأوروبية. وقال: «الشخص فى العشرينيات من عمره ستكون له شخصية مختلفة عن شخص فى الثلاثينيات أو الأربعينيات من عمره... هذه هى الطبيعة البشرية.» كما عزز صورة الاعتدال والشمولية
ومع ذلك، فإن الجولانى هو نفس الشخص الذى قال فى عام 2014 للأمريكيين والأوروبيين: «إن قادتكم لن يدفعوا ثمن الحرب وحدهم، بل ستدفعون الثمن الأعلى»، وإن تنظيم القاعدة «سينقل المعركة إلى منازلكم
الغرب راضٍ بالتغيير، ووسائل إعلامه تعمل على رفعة شأن الجولانى وصورته. منذ اليوم الأول، وقبل أن تتاح له الفرصة لإثبات نفسه، اعتبره الاعلام الغربى «مناهضاً»، وليس جهادياً أو متطرفاً. واختفى الاسم الحركى للجولانى، وأصبح يسمى باسمه الأصلى أحمد الشرع
هذه الصورة التى يحاول الإعلام الغربى استحضارها للجولانى غير واقعية، فقبوله كان متعمدا وجاء بسرعة كبيرة جدا، ولكن كما نرى فإن الجولانى والغرب يتفقان
إعلام مصر يشك فى هذا الاستحواذ. ومع سقوط سوريا فى أيدى إسرائيل وتحرير الشام، تبنت مصر نهج الانتظار والترقب، ولم تتم أى زيارة رسمية
ووسائل الإعلام المصرية، التى أدركت الحقيقة، عكست الصورة وأوضحت المخاطر التى تجاهلتها وسائل الإعلام الغربية. ومثال على ذلك ما عبر عنه الإعلامى إبراهيم عيسى واصفا الوضع فى سوريا بإيجاز، قائلا: ترويج الفصائل السورية المسلحة على أنها معتدلة جريمة بحق سوريا
وأعرب الإعلامى عمرو أديب عن دهشته: «دخلت فى نوبة من الضحك بسبب البيان الأمريكى. قالوا إنهم لم يكونوا على علم بالانتفاضة فى سوريا. ألم تشاهد الأقمار الصناعية الأمريكية أو الفرنسية أو البريطانية تجمعات هيئة تحرير الشام قبل الهجوم؟
وأثارت صورة الجولانى مع محمود فتحى غضب وسائل الإعلام المصرية. محمود فتحى، مصرى، أُدين فى عدة قضايا تتعلق بأنشطة إرهابية، وحُكم عليه بالإعدام فى قضية مقتل النائب العام المصرى هشام بركات. وبلقاء فتحى، اتضح ولاء الجولانى للفصائل المسلحة
وسائل الإعلام الغربية محكومة من قبل حكوماتها. وهذا ليس بالأمر الجديد، ولكن علينا أن نحذر وننتبه إلى تكتيكاتهم. ليس كل ما نقرأ منطقيًا وليس كل ما نراه هو الحقيقة
لمزيد من مقالات د. عزة رضوان صدقى
| | | |
|
01/07/2025
Manufacturing consent and dissent
Al Ahram Weekly
Azza Radwan Sedky
Tuesday 7 Jan 2025
Like marionettes, puppet figures handled from above by strings, we are controlled and manipulated by the media as it manufactures consent and dissent, writes Azza Radwan Sedky
The media moulds our thinking and frames stories the way it wants. It tells us to believe and accept certain formulas, while asking us to disapprove and disregard others. At the same time, the Western media in particular is the mirror image of how Western governments and their allies see matters or how they want them to be seen.
Almost 14 years ago during the Tahrir Square protests in Egypt in 2011, if you watched the CNN, BBC, or Aljazeera TV networks you would have witnessed not only thousands of Egyptian protestors standing their ground and calling for change but also a media agenda that was intent on exploiting them and directing their course.
During the protests, CNN and Aljazeera stirred up the protestors and egged them on. Very early on, as though then President Hosni Mubarak’s ousting had been settled in advance, it spoke to the opposition, including possible would-be leaders such as Mohamed Al-Baradei or Amr Moussa, and with the protestors in Tahrir Square.
It spoke of president Mubarak’s ills and defined a future course without him. It focused on shortages of bread, petrol, and, of all things, cigarettes — a peculiar shortage that was not evident to many. It was adamant about not showing ordinary Egyptians on screen, those who were worried about where the mayhem would lead and who were fed up with the chaos and wanted to return to normality.
There is an Egyptian saying that goes “John Doe wants a funeral where he can scream and vent.” I heard this many times from Egyptians when they were describing Aljazeera, CNN, and other channels in 2011. The meaning of the saying is obvious: the media outlets focus on the negative to ignite anger, and they look for trouble only to enhance it — in other words normality does not sell or bring in viewers. It doesn’t have a return. If this is the norm for the media, in 2011 it was particularly vividly expressed.
Did the media manipulate the protestors? Was the media fanning a revolt and aiming to take fundamental decisions that could indeed make or break a country? Did the Egyptians at that time take the premeditated Western media expectations as a given or with a grain of salt? Did some channels, Aljazeera and CNN for instance, have hidden agendas?
We were then, as we are now, at the mercy of the media. We are retold events in various ways, and, depending on what we watch, read, or listen to, the core of the events changes.
The same twisting of events exists today. Syria, for example, has been caught up in an upheaval, but how the Western media portrayed the fall of Damascus was mindboggling.
Syria is now presented as though it is on the verge of complete reform and rehabilitation, an image promoted by the Western media. CNN, almost as though it was betting on Hayat Tahrir Al-Sham (HTC) leader Mohamed Al-Golani to win the conflict, interviewed him even before he could claim victory. The Western media never questioned his intentions but took it upon itself to rebrand him.
From the very first day, before he was even given a chance to prove himself, he was considered a “rebel” by the Western media, not a terrorist, Jihadist, or extremist. Al-Golani’s nom de guerre then vanished, and he started to be called by his real name. A BBC headline read, “Syria not a threat to world, rebel leader Ahmed Al-Sharaa tells BBC.”
Al-Golani was alleged to have changed. He was presented with a trimmed beard and wearing regular European-style attire. “A person in their twenties will have a different personality than someone in their thirties or forties and certainly someone in their fifties. This is human nature,” he said. He played up an image of moderation and inclusivity as he sought to reassure the world.
Yet, Al-Golani is the same person who in 2014 told the Americans and Europeans that “your leaders will not pay the price for the war alone; you will pay the higher price” and that Al-Qaeda “will transfer the battle to your very homes.” How can we forgive and forget if we don’t know how many people he killed as an Al-Qaeda commander and the acts for which he was never charged?
The West is content with the change occurring in Syria, and its media is effectively developing it. The Western media presents it confidently and continues to elevate al-Golani. The image that the Western media is trying to present of Al-Golani is unrealistic, for his acceptance was pre-meditated and deliberate, and it also came about much too fast. However, Al-Golani and the West see eye to eye.
In Egypt, scepticism and doubt prevail as far as the future of Syria is concerned. During the downfall of Syria, falling into the hands of Israel, Turkey, and Hayat Tahrir Al-Sham, Egypt adopted a wait-and-see approach, and no official visits have taken place. President Abdel-Fattah Al-Sisi has warned that “their mission in Syria is complete… They have already destroyed Syria.”
The Egyptian media, realising the truth of the situation, has explicitly explained the dangers, those that the Western media has ignored. A case in point is the statement made by Egyptian journalist Ibrahim Eissa, who described the situation by saying that “promoting the Syrian armed factions as moderate is a crime against Syria.” He also said, “Anyone who bets on Ahmed Al-Sharaa, aka al-Golani, will lose his bet. History is a witness.”
Expressing his astonishment at the presentation of the Syrian crisis in the Western media, Amr Adeeb, an Egyptian media personality, said that “I burst out laughing when I heard the American statement that they weren’t aware of the uprising in Syria ahead of time.” Had US, French, or British satellites not seen Hayat Tahrir Al-Sham forces gathering before the attacks?
A photograph of Al-Golani with Mahmoud Fathy has sparked fury in the Egyptian media. Fathy, an Egyptian, has been convicted for terrorist activities in Egypt and sentenced to death in the case of the murder of Egyptian Attorney-General Hisham Barakat. Al-Golani’s decision to meet and be photographed with Fathy shows his allegiance to terrorist factions.
The Western media is governed and misled by the Western Governments and their allies. This is nothing new, but we, even if helpless marionettes, must heed their tactics. Not everything we read is logical. Not everything we see is the truth.
The writer is a former professor of communication who is based in Vancouver, Canada.
* A version of this article appears in print in the 9 January, 2025 edition of Al-Ahram Weekly
| | | |
|
01/05/2025
حرب سوريا...من الرابح ومن الخاسر
الاهرام
حرب سوريا.. من الرابح ومن الخاسر؟
بالنسبة للمراقبين السياسيين فإن أحداث سوريا لأمر مُحير. بسرعة البرق، سيطر «الثوار»، كما سماهم الإعلام الغربى، على سوريا بدون عناء، فوجب السؤال: كيف استحوذت جبهة تحرير الشام على سوريا فى أيام معدودة، ولماذا هذا التوقيت لشن هجوم على نظام الأسد؟ هذا وكانت قد صُنِّفت جبهة تحرير الشام، أو جبهة النصرة، على أنها جماعة إرهابية لكونها الجناح الرسمى لتنظيم القاعدة فى الحرب السورية حتى عام 2016
بسرعة فائقة تحركت تحرير الشام من إدلب إلى حلب وحمص وحماة، ثم إلى دمشق. وبدون إشعار آخر، تخلى بشار الأسد عن السلطة وغادر سوريا إلى روسيا. قُدِّر أعضاء الجبهة بنحو 6000 إلى 15000 مقاتل. الرقم الدقيق لأفراد القوات المسلحة السورية غير معروف، لكن فى عام 2022، قُدِّر بنحو 269 ألف فرد، ومع ذلك الجيش السورى لم يبدِ أى مقاومة مما سمح لـتحرير الشام بالتحرك لتنفيذ مخططها دون مقاومة
بماذا توّعدوا للأسد حتى يختار مغادرة سوريا بعد أن قاوم 13 عاماً؟ كيف تناسى الغرب طبيعة زعيم تحرير الشام أبومحمد الجولانى بهذه السرعة؟ يبدو أن قوى خارجية لها يد فعّالة وبذلت مجهودا مكثفا خلف أبواب مغلقة لتبرم اتفاقيات استثنائية ولتحقق هذا الإنجاز. ويبدو أيضا أن خطوة الجولانى كانت معروفة لكثيرين، وتم إعدادها وتوقيتها بشكل مثالى. فكما قالت التليجراف الإنجليزية: الولايات المتحدة جهزت الجماعة السورية المتمردة للمساعدة فى الإطاحة ببشار الأسد. فهل هناك شك فى توّرط أطراف معينة فى أحداث سوريا؟
الإعلام الموجّة يلبى متطلبات حكوماته، فلندقق سويا فى انحياز وسائل الإعلام الغربية اللافت لأحداث سوريا. أصر الإعلام الغربى على تسمية فصائل تحرير الشام بالثوار، وليس بالإرهابيين أو المتطرفين أو الجهاديين، حتى إن دولا كثيرة كانت تعتبر تحرير الشام جماعة إرهابية إلى ذلك الحين. وحصلت سى إن إن على شرف التحدث مع الجولانى فى بداية الصراع وقبل فرار الأسد، وتم تصويره كثورىٍ معتدلٍ وسلطت الضوء على استقامة ومُحيّا تاريخه السابق، وظهر كزعيم تقدمى يستخدم اسمه الأصلى، أحمد الشرع،وليس اسمه الحركى، هذا مع التشهير بنظام الأسد والتهليل للنظام الجديد. وبعد دقائق من سقوط دمشق فى قبضة الفصائل، جاب مراسلو شبكة سى إن إن المدينة، واثقين من سلامتهم ومطمئنين على أنفسهم، ليعرضوا قصة إنجاز. وجدوا شوارع دمشق هادئة، والعلم السورى ممزقا على الأرض ودخلت مراسلة السى إن إن السجون والمشارح لتثبت أحقية الجولانى وإجرام الأسد. وفقا لهم فقد وصل السلام أخيرا إلى دمشق
ما شاهده الإعلام الغربى قد يكون حقيقيا، لكنه تجاهل المخاطر المقبلة، والارتباط مع تنظيم القاعدة، وسيطرة المتطرفين الإسلاميين السُنَّة على السلطة، وتوسع الهجمات الإسرائيلية، وهلّل للجبهة الجديدة كما لو كانوا أبطالًا. إذن، من الرابح والخاسر من وراء إسقاط نظام الأسد؟
على الرغم مما يظنه السوريون، فإن سوريا الخاسرة الكبرى، فالمستقبل غامض. جماعات عرقية عديدة موجودة على أراضيها وإسرائيل والولايات المتحدة يأملون فى تقسيم سوريا إلى جزيئات وإسرائيل تتحرك للحصول على المزيد من الأراضى السورية. كما يتمتع الجولانى بجذور جهادية. فهل سيستمر مظهره الحالى أم أنه مجرد واجهة، وسيفرض قوانين صارمة على الأقليات الأخرى مثل العلويين، داعمى الأسد، والأكراد، والدروز؟ وهل سيُثقل ويُفرض على السوريين حكومة إسلامية مثل الحكومة الأفغانية؟ لكن لأسباب غامضة يسانده الغرب وأزالت الولايات المتحدة المكافأة على القبض عليه
وتخسر إيران هذه الجولة. لقد استخدمت إيران سوريا لتزويد حزب الله وحماس بالأسلحة، لكن دورها فى سوريا سوف يتضاءل. موقف روسيا غير مفهوم إلا إذا استنتجنا أن هناك صفقات جانبية. فلم تقف روسيا مع الأسد، بل كان هناك توجه لتسليم سوريا تسليما كاملا ربما للحصول على مكاسب أخرى ستُعرف فيما بعد
إسرائيل هى الفائز الأكبر. كما لو كانت إسرائيل على دراية بالإطاحة بنظام الأسد، فقامت فورا بقصف سوريا وسحق طريق الإمداد من سوريا. نفذت إسرائيل مئات الغارات الجوية على سوريا وضربت أهدافًا عسكرية وقضت على الأسطول البحرى والجوى السورى. ثم تقدمت بعملية توغل فى جنوب سوريا إلى مسافة نحو 25 كيلومتراً. وهى غير قلقة من الجولانى وجماعته. غضّ الجولانى الطرف عن الضربات الإسرائيلية ولم يعلق على توغلها ولم يتورط قط فى حرب غزة أو لبنان أو حتى فى مرتفعات الجولان المحتلة
إذا كنا نعتقد أن للرهائن أى دور فيما يُرتكب فى حق الشعوب اليوم، فلابد أننا من كوكب آخر. وبينما تغذى وسائل الإعلام الغربية أتباعها بهذا الواقع الجديد، سيظن العالم أنه حصل على القصة الحقيقية والكاملة
لمزيد من مقالات د. عزة رضوان صدقى
| | | |
|
12/23/2024
ازدواج المعايير.. القانون الرسمى للغرب
الاهرام
ازدواج المعايير.. القانون الرسمى للغرب
لقد ثبت أن الغرب بشكل عام، والولايات المتحدة بشكل خاص، يعتقدان أن القانون الدولى لا ينطبق على مجتمعاتهم وقراراتهم، ويعتبران أن ثقافة الغرب هى التى تملى القواعد لتضع الغرب فوق الجميع
وفقاً لوزارة الخارجية الأمريكية، فإن «الولايات المتحدة تعتقد أن القانون الدولى ذو أهمية. وتقول «نحن نساعد فى تطويره، ونعتمد عليه، ونلتزم به، وله – على عكس بعض الانطباعات – دور مهم فى دستور أمتنا وقانونها الداخلى.» وعلى الرغم من هذا الفكر، يبدو أن الولايات المتحدة غير راغبة فى الالتزام بالقانون الدولى. وبناء على ذلك، إذا عارضت الولايات المتحدة أو حلفاؤها قضية ما، فيُنتهك القانون الدولى بشكل صارخ؛ وتتخذ الولايات المتحدة موقفا غافلا تماما عن قواعد الإنصاف والحق
توازن القوى يتغير. ومع خلوها من أى التزام تجاه الغرب، بدأ العديد من الجبهات والأطراف الأخرى فى ترسيخ أنفسها، حيث تقف روسيا والصين وأعضاء آخرون فى مجموعة البريكس، وعدد كبير من بلدان عدم الانحياز النامية، وقفة مختلفة ضد الغرب
وبما أن الغرب كان يمارس دائما الهيمنة على العالم، حيث يملى ما هو صواب وما هو خطأ وفقا لتفضيلاته، فإن المشرعين فى الغرب يغضبون عندما تتعارض قضية ما مع المسار المحدد، وآنذاك تنكشف معاييرهم المزدوجة. ومن الأمثلة على الطريقة التى يتجاهل بها المشرعون الأمريكيون القانون الدولى ويعتبرون الولايات المتحدة وحلفاءها، خاصة إسرائيل، فوق القانون القانون الذى صدر فى سبتمبر 2024 المسمى «قانون الإجراءات المضادة لعدم الشرعية». يهدف هذا القانون إلى فرض عقوبات على أولئك الذين يستهدفون الولايات المتحدة وإسرائيل ويفرض عقوبات على الذين يطبقون قرارات المحكمة الجنائية الدولية ويشاركون أى جهد للتحقيق أو اعتقال أو احتجاز أو محاكمة أى شخص محمىٌّ من قبل الولايات المتحدة وحلفائها
ليندسى جراهام، عضو مجلس الشيوخ الأمريكى عن ولاية كارولينا الشمالية، يقود مجموعة المفكرين المتحيزين. وبعد أن أصدرت المحكمة الجنائية الدولية مذكرة اعتقال بحق رئيس الوزراء نيتانياهو ووزير الدفاع السابق جالانت، هدد جراهام بفرض عقوبات على كل من ينفذ أوامر الاعتقال حتى الحلفاء منهم، ومحاصرتهم اقتصاديا إذا امتثلوا لهذه الأوامر وتعدوا على أفراد بعينهم. وقال أيضًا:إن قرارات المحكمة الدولية لا تنطبق على إسرائيل، أو الولايات المتحدة، أو فرنسا، أو ألمانيا، أو بريطانيا العظمى، لأنه لم يتم صنعها لملاحقتنا نحن
أعضاء آخرون فى الكونجرس ثاروا بالمثل من اتهام حليف للولايات المتحدة بارتكاب أعمال إجرامية. أحدهم قال: «الولايات المتحدة تقف بحزم إلى جانب إسرائيل وترفض السماح للبيروقراطيين الدوليين بإصدار أوامر اعتقال بلا أساس للقيادة الإسرائيلية بتهمة ارتكاب جرائم كاذبة» وآخر قال: المحكمة الجنائية الدولية هى محكمة صورية وكريم خان متعصب مختل. الويل له ولكل من يحاول تنفيذ هذه الأوامر الخارجة على القانون
يعنى هذا أن حلفاء الولايات المتحدة معصومون من الخطأ، ويعنى أيضا أن الولايات المتحدة تشوِّه صورتها بعدم تطبيق القوانين التى سخرتها لهدم الآخرين. اعتبرت الولايات المتحدة نفسها دائمًا منقذ العالم، أفعالها جميعها صحيحة، ولا تخطئ أبدًا، وتلتزم تمامًا بالقانون، وهذه الصورة تتآكل ببطء
هذا يعنى أيضًا أن العالم مرغم على أن يتبع المبادئ التوجيهية التى وضعها الغرب بدون حق. وتعتقد الولايات المتحدة أيضا أن قيمها قادرة على جعل العالم مكاناً أفضل، ولكن عندما تفشل الولايات المتحدة فى الالتزام بالمبادئ التوجيهية التى تضعها للآخرين، فإنها تفقد تفوقها ومصداقيتها وهيبتها العالمية
ومع عدم توافق العالم مع كل ما تحرض عليه الولايات المتحدة أو تدعو إليه، تصبح صورة الولايات المتحدة ملطخة، وتتشوه مكانتها
إن الاتساق فى السياسة الخارجية يشكل أهمية بالغة إذا كان الغرب راغبا فى الظهور بمظهر القوة الرائدة. إن المعايير المزدوجة تقوِّض القانون الدولى وجميع الدول التى تلتزم به. إن المبادئ التوجيهية التى يتوقع الغرب من روسيا أن تتبعها فيما يتعلق بأوكرانيا لابد أن تكون نفس المبادئ التوجيهية التى من المتوقع أن تتبعها إسرائيل ومؤيدوها فيما يتعلق بغزة. إذا صدرت مذكرة اعتقال للرئيس بوتين، فيجب أن يحصل نيتانياهو وجالانت على نفس المعاملة
فماذا يتعين على الولايات المتحدة والغرب أن يفعلاه للتغلب على هذه المعضلة؟ أولاً، يجب عليهم أن يطبقوا المبادئ التوجيهية التى وضعوها فى الأصل للعالم على أنفسهم. ثانياً، يجب على الغرب أن يتجنب المعايير المزدوجة لأن المعايير المزدوجة تعنى عالماً بلا معايير على الإطلاق. ثالثاً، يتعين على الغرب أن يتخلى عن سلطته غير الملزمة بالقانون الدولى؛ القوانين هى قوانين، وهى تنطبق على الجميع
سوف يتقبل الغرب عند نقطة معينة موجة التغيير الحالية
لمزيد من مقالات د. عزة رضوان صدقى
| | | |
|
12/20/2024
US ‘prepared Syrian rebel group to help topple Bashar al-Assad’
The Telegraph
Fighters funded and trained by America and Britain tell The Telegraph they had advance warning regime would be overthrown
The United States prepared a rebel force to join the offensive that overthrew the regime of Bashar al-Assad, fighters have claimed.
British and American-trained fighters in the Revolutionary Commando Army (RCA), a group aligned against Islamic State, were told “this is your moment” in a briefing by US Special Forces before Assad was ousted.
In the first indication that Washington had prior knowledge of the offensive, the RCA revealed it had been told to scale-up its forces and “be ready” for an attack that could lead to the end of the Assad regime.
“They did not tell us how it would happen,” Capt Bashar al-Mashadani, an RCA commander, told The Telegraph from a former Syrian army air base used by Russia on the outskirts of the city of Palmyra.
“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.”
Having worked with the RCA to dismantle the Islamic State’s Syrian caliphate, the US still pays its fighters a salary to prevent the terror group’s resurgence.
In the weeks before the briefing at the US-controlled Al-Tanf air base on the border of Iraq, according to Capt Mashadani, the RCA’s ranks were swollen by smaller freelance units like his brought under its command.
As the main rebel force swept south to Damascus in a lightning offensive towards the end of last month, the RCA advanced out of Al Tanf and now occupies roughly one fifth of the country, including pockets of territory in the north of the capital.
US military commanders in Syria ordered the advance to prevent remnants of Isis – which occupied much of the north-east of the country until its defeat in 2019, taking advantage of a power vacuum if Assad fell – senior RCA officers said.
It indicates not only that Washington knew about the offensive led by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), which toppled the Assad regime on Dec 8, but that it had precise intelligence about its scale.
Among the chief targets of the US-backed operation was Palmyra, fabled for its Greco-Roman ruins, which was occupied by Isis between 2015 and 2017.
The ancient desert town 150 miles north-west of Damascus is considered a vital bridgehead against Isis and was heavily defended by Russia and Iran-backed militias, including the Lebanese group Hezbollah, until Assad’s fall.
RCA fighters who captured the Russian-controlled Syrian air base on the outskirts of the town last week said they had been told to prepare for Assad’s possible fall in early November, nearly three weeks before the offensive began.
Until one month earlier, Capt Mashadani had been second-in-command of the Abu Khatab brigade. This small unit of 150 men was created by US Special Forces and trained by their British counterparts in Jordan until 2016, to hunt down Isis fighters near Deir ez-Zor, a city in eastern Syria.
There were several such Sunni desert units operating out of Al Tanf. They fought separately from the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), the Kurdish-led militia that controls much of the country’s north-east.
But, in early October, Capt Mashadani and his fellow commanders said, American officers at Al Tanf brought the Abu Khatab brigade and other units under the joint command of the RCA.
The RCA’s ranks grew from about 800 to as many as 3,000 as a result, he said. All members of the force continued to be armed by the US and to receive their salary of $400 (£315) a month, nearly 12 times what the soldiers in the now defunct Syrian army were paid.
As the offensive began, RCA forces fanned out across the eastern desert, taking control of key roads. They also joined up with a rebel faction in the southern city of Dera’a that reached Damascus before HTS.
Capt Mashadani said the RCA and the fighters of HTS, which is led by Syria’s interim leader Mohammed al-Jolani, were co-operating, and communication between the two forces was being co-ordinated by the Americans at Al-Tanf.
As Syria’s 13-year civil war ground on, it threw up a bewildering array of militias and alliances, most of them backed by foreign powers.
It would therefore be only one of many ironies if the US has been in an effective alliance with a group like HTS, which was al-Qaeda’s affiliate in Syria until it broke away in 2017.
It is equally ironic that rebel factions supported by the US are co-operating with those backed by Turkey in places like Palmyra, while fighting against each other elsewhere in the country.
While Turkey opposed the US-supported Kurds in Syria, it was in full agreement about the threat posed by Isis.
In recent days, the US has carried out dozens of air strikes on Isis positions even as its Kurdish allies have come under sustained attack from Syrian factions supported by Turkey.
The Isis threat is clear in the town of Palmyra, which was largely destroyed in the Russian-led battle to recapture it in 2017 and remains mostly abandoned.
Isis fighters are positioned in the hills to the south-west of the town and have effective control of parts of the highway to Damascus, said Abdulrazzaq Abu Khatib, a commander in the Turkey-backed Falcons of the Levant Brigade, which controls central Palmyra.
The Falcons led the offensive that captured Palmyra, with casualties suffered both by his men and by Hezbollah, Mr Khatib said. Another five of his men died on Tuesday while trying to clear a building booby-trapped by the retreating Russians, he added.
An offensive against Isis in the area was likely to begin next month once Palmyra was fully secured, Mr Khatib said.
| | | |
|
12/17/2024
Why Syria and why now?
Al Ahram Weekly
Azza Radwan Sedky
Tuesday 17 Dec 2024
The picture depicted by Western media may be true, but the fact that these media outlets ignored the dangers ahead, the link with Al-Qaeda, and the Islamist links, together with the Israeli air strikes on Syria, and cheered the incoming faction as though it was made up of heroes was mystifying and suspicious.
To outside observers, the turmoil in Syria is puzzling. With lightening speed, rebel groups, as the Western media now calls them, seized control of Syria. Though I can fathom the reasons behind the armed factions choosing this month to launch an attack against the regime of former Syrian president Bashar Al-Assad, I am also deeply worried about where Syria is heading.
Hayat Tahrir Al-Sham (HTS), previously known as the Jabhat Al-Nusra, Al-Qaeda’s official wing in the Syrian war until the breaking of ties in 2016, has been designated as a terrorist group. Today, it has seized control of Syria. It moved swiftly from Idlib to Aleppo, Homs, and Hama, and then into Damascus. Al-Assad abdicated power and left for Russia.
In 2022, HTS had an estimated 6,000 to 15,000 members. For this faction to morph into a power capable of defeating the Syrian Army, even if it had consolidated with other factions, is bewildering. The exact figure of Syrian armed forces personnel is unknown, but in 2022, it was estimated to be 269,000. It does not seem as if Syrian troops were even deployed in the events earlier this month, leaving HTS to move in briskly and effortlessly.
Why didn’t the Syrian Army resist? What was Al-Assad told that had him choose to flee when he had resisted for 13 years? How can the West forgive and forget the true nature of HTS leader Mohamed Al-Golani? It appears that agreements behind closed doors took place.
The Western media have chosen to depict HTS and Al-Golani in a constructive but striking fashion. First, it has insisted on calling the HTS factions rebels and not terrorists, extremists, or jihadists even though they are still considered to be terrorists by the UN and the US.
One media source said that “Syria topples Al-Assad,” claiming that all of Syria had unified itself behind Al-Golani to rid itself of Al-Assad. Even more bizarre, according to the UK newspaper the Guardian, the US and the UK are considering removing HTS from the terror list “to deepen contact” with the Al-Qaeda offshoot.
Once allied with Al-Qaeda, Al-Golani is now being portrayed in the Western media as a redeemed, legitimate, and moderate rebel. While the Western media brand him as having evolved into a positive and less brutal person, we must wait to see if the shift is genuine or merely strategic.
The US network CNN, not Aljazeera or any other Arab media outlet, was given the privilege of speaking to Al-Golani during the conflict. It also had him use his real name for the first time, Ahmed Al-Sharaa, instead of the nom de guerre he has been known by. There was nothing dismissive about the portrayal; quite the contrary, his salient characteristics were highlighted and his previous history erased. In fact, in the interview he came across as a progressive leader and not a barbaric emir.
Minutes after Damascus had fallen into the grip of HTS on 8 December, CNN reporters roamed the city, confident in their own safety and projecting a jubilant and glorious story. According to CNN, the streets were calm, and the flags of the Al-Assad regime lay torn on the ground. According to CNN, peace had finally arrived in Damascus.
This may be true, but the fact that Western media outlets ignored the dangers ahead, the link with Al-Qaeda, and the Islamist links, together with the Israeli air strikes on Syria, and cheered the incoming faction as though it was made up of heroes was mystifying and suspicious.
Timing is of the essence. The US wants to come across as though it was not involved and will not get involved, but it does have over 900 armed personnel in Syria, which raises the question of how informed the US was of the developments?
As the HTS gained ground and entered Damascus, the US utilised the moment to carry out a major round of airstrikes on Islamic State group targets. In a sense, it was supporting Al-Golani in his effort to take over Syria. No comment came from him or the HTS.
Again, timing is of the essence. Only days after the ceasefire in Lebanon was implemented, Israel carried out hundreds of air strikes across Syria, striking military targets such as weapons facilities and missile arsenals. It also wiped out the Syrian Navy. Israel said that its aim was to stop weapons falling into the hands of extremists, a flimsy excuse to wipe out the Syrian Army.
Israel also went further. An incursion into southern Syria advanced to about 25 km southwest of Damascus, destroying strategic targets as it went. However, according to the US network ABC News, “there was no immediate comment from the insurgent groups, led by Hayat Tahrir Al-Sham, or HTS, that have taken control of Damascus.”
While the US and the UN special envoy for Syria called on Israel to halt its bombardments and movements inside the country, the Syrian media said that Syria’s new leader “is focused on the political transition for now.”
It seems obvious that Al-Golani’s gutsy move was known to many others and was prepared for and timed perfectly. So, who are the winners and the losers behind the overthrow of the Al-Assad regime?
Despite what the Western media have claimed, and despite what some Syrians themselves presume, Syria has not gained much. Quite the contrary: the future is gloomy and sombre. Too many opposing groups already exist on its soil, some jihadists and others ethnic such as the Kurds. Many states such as Russia, Turkey, Iran, Israel, and the US have splintered Syria into fragments. I doubt that all these groups will leave Syria in peace.
Then there is Israel. Israel is already on the move to gain more Syrian territory and utilise the present circumstances to its benefit. It may take over areas beyond the buffer zone in the south of the country, and it may continue its strikes on Syria, leaving it powerless.
Besides, the HTS and Al-Golani have deep jihadist roots. Will their current “new look” persist, or is it a mere façade, and will the HTS impose stringent Islamic laws over all the minority groups in Syria, such as the Alawites, who supported Al-Assad, and the Armenians and Druze, amongst others? Given its Islamist roots, will it saddle the Syrians with an Islamic government like the one in Afghanistan?
Iran and Russia have lost this round, a rather anticipated loss if Israel and its allies win. Both backed the ousted Syrian regime. I doubt that the new regime in Syria will seek to bolster its relationship with either of these countries. Iran used Syria to replenish Hizbullah and Hamas with weapons. Its role in Syria will definitely diminish.
Israel is the most important winner. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned Al-Assad before the HTS push started that he was “playing with fire” by allowing the transfer of weapons to Hizbullah through Syria, and soon afterwards he gloated about the regime change in Syria, calling it a “historic day.”
Once the dust had cleared, Israel pounded Syria immediately, succeeding in eliminating another thorn in its side by squashing the supply route to Hizbullah from Syria. If you think that the Israeli hostages in Gaza are of any consequence in what Israel is reaping today, you must be from another planet.
Should Israel worry about Al-Golani and his Islamist group that has taken over Syria? I doubt it, since Al-Golani has said that his concern now is the Iranian and Hizbullah militias. At the same time, Israel has not been after Al-Golani’s troops, and Al-Golani and his group have turned a blind eye to Israel’s strikes on Syria. HTS has never got involved in the Gaza or Lebanon war, or even the Occupied Golan Heights, and it is now watching as Israel does what it wants.
Craig Murray, a Scottish author, human rights campaigner, and former diplomat, has said on X that “Israel has just taken land in Syria up to twice the size of the Gaza Strip, and Israeli tanks are within 30 miles of Damascus and possibly closer. Yet, HTS has not fired one single shot at an Israeli soldier. If that doesn’t make you understand what happened, nothing will.”
As the Western media feed its followers this new reality, the world may well think that it is being told the true story. It may take years for observers to get to the honest truth.
* The writer is a former professor of communication who is based in Vancouver, Canada.
* A version of this article appears in print in the 19 December, 2024 edition of Al-Ahram Weekly
Short link:
| | | |
|
12/10/2024
The ‘liberal West’ and the ‘illiberal rest’
Al Ahram Weekly
Azza Radwan Sedky
Tuesday 10 Dec 2024
The West must abandon its double standards in the application of international law if it wants to regain its credibility with the rest of the world, writes Azza Radwan Sedky
It has been shown that the West in general and the US in particular consider international law to be inconsequential and something that does not apply to them. In general, the West’s culture of supremacy dictates the rules and puts the “liberal West” above the “illiberal rest.”
The phrase “illiberalism,” meaning the opposition to liberal principles, is quite new, but commentator Tanja A. Börzel has taken it further by drawing attention to the “illiberal rest,” which she also calls the “dirty rest.” The phrase is intended to identify a Western mindset that believes that the West is superior to the Global South.
According to the US State Department, “the US does believe that international law matters. We help develop it, rely on it, abide by it, and, contrary to some impressions, it has an important role in our nation’s constitution and domestic law.”
However, the US appears unwilling to be bound by international law. If the US or its allies are opposed to an issue, international law will be grossly flouted, and the US will take a stand that is totally oblivious to the rules of international law and to fairness and justice more generally.
Change is taking place around the world today, and the balance of power is shifting. Many other blocs are establishing themselves, including those involving Russia, China, and other members of the BRICS group of countries. There are also the many nonaligned and developing countries. These countries see the world differently to the West, and their views are affecting the global legal order as the West perceives it.
Since the West has long practised hegemony over the rest of the world, dictating what is right or wrong according to its own preferences, its governments become enraged when an issue goes against the path that they set for it. In the process, their double standards are exposed.
A case in point is how US lawmakers ignore international law. They consider the US and its allies, particularly Israel, to be above the law. In September, a US bill called the Illegitimate Counter Action Act that aimed to sanction anyone perceived to be against the US and Israel was passed in the US Congress. This is “an Act to impose sanctions with respect to the International Criminal Court engaged in any effort to investigate, arrest, detain, or prosecute any protected person of the United States and its allies.”
Lindsey Graham, a Senator for North Carolina, leads the pack of intolerant and prejudiced US lawmakers. After the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued an arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former minister of Defence Yoav Gallant in November, Graham threatened to sanction US allies enforcing the ICC warrants and reduce them to “economic oblivion” if they complied with them.
“The Rome Statute [that founded the ICC] doesn’t apply to Israel, or the United States, or France, or Germany, or Great Britain, because it wasn’t conceived of to come after us,” he said. On the other hand, Graham supported the ICC warrant issued to arrest Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Other members of Congress have been similarly outraged that a US ally could be prosecuted for committing criminal acts under international law. Speaker of the House Mike Johnson said that “the US firmly stands with Israel and refuses to allow international bureaucrats to baselessly issue arrest warrants to the Israeli leadership for false crimes.”
Senator Tom Cotton said, threateningly, that “the ICC is a kangaroo court and [Prosecutor] Karim Khan is a deranged fanatic. Woe to him and anyone who tries to enforce these outlaw warrants. Let me give them all a friendly reminder: the American law on the ICC is known as The Hague Invasion Act for a reason. Think about it.”
US President-elect Donald Trump has said there will be “all hell to pay in the Middle East if [the Israeli] hostages are not released by January 20.” Has he looked at the atrocities committed by Israel day in and day out over the last 400 days in Gaza and taken them into account? The double standards are glaring.
What this means is that the US is dismantling itself with the very tools that it had earlier harnessed. The US has always considered itself to be the world’s saviour, doing everything right, never erring, and in absolute conformity with the law. That image is slowly but surely eroding.
It also means that the only right way of dealing with issues around the world is to follow the guidelines set by the West, since the West often considers non-Western countries to be unequal. The US believes its values can make the world a better place, but when the US fails to adhere to the guidelines it sets for others, it loses its superiority, credibility, and global prestige.
As the world begins not to see eye-to-eye with everything that the US calls for, the country’s image becomes stained and its standing tarnished.
Consistency in foreign policy is vital if the West wants to come across as the world’s leading power. Double standards undermine international law and all countries that adhere to it. The rules that the West expects Russia to follow in Ukraine should be the same as those that Israel and its supporters should follow in Gaza. If Putin is to be arrested under an ICC warrant, then Netanyahu and Gallant should get the same treatment.
What should the US and the West do to overcome the problems of credibility they face today? First, they should apply the rules they originally set for the rest of the world to themselves as well. Second, they should avoid double standards since these entail a world with no standards at all. Third, the West should abandon its cherry-picking of international law. Laws are laws, and they should apply to everyone.
The writer is a former professor of communication who is based in Vancouver, Canada.
* A version of this article appears in print in the 12 December, 2024 edition of Al-Ahram Weekly
Short link:
| | | |
|
12/08/2024
إسرائيل والولايات المتحدة.. رفاق ضد العالم
الاهرام
هناك سؤال خطير يدور فى أذهان الحكماء ويجسد جوهر العلاقة بين الولايات المتحدة وإسرائيل. ماذا يحدث بين الرفاق عندما يرتكب أحدهم خطأ فاحشا؟ هل ينتهى التعاون المتبادل أو على الأقل يطلب من المسيء التراجع عن الإجراءات المتخذة؟ وهل غض البصر عن تصرفات الآخر يعتبر تواطؤا؟
إن ما نراه فى العلاقة بين الولايات المتحدة وإسرائيل هو اقتران يتحدى العالم. لقد ثبت طوال الأشهر الخمسة عشر الماضية أن إسرائيل، وفقا للولايات المتحدة، معصومة من الخطأ. ومهما تكن بشاعة التصرفات الإسرائيلية، فإن الولايات المتحدة تقف إلى جانب إسرائيل. لا شىء مما تفعله إسرائيل يستحق اللوم أو العقاب، وتظل الولايات المتحدة إلى الأبد داعمًا ثابتًا لإسرائيل
ورغم أن الولايات المتحدة تتهاون عن أعمال الإبادة الجماعية التى ترتكبها إسرائيل، فقد أدرك العالم أخيرا بشاعة ما يحدث. لقد أعربت الدول فى جميع أنحاء العالم عن سخطها ضد إسرائيل، ودعونا لا ننسى الملايين من المواطنين العاديين الذين انضموا إلى الاحتجاجات المؤيدة لوقف إطلاق النار حيث دعت المنظمات الدولية والمنظمات الطلابية وآلاف البشر إلى وقف إطلاق النار
وقطع العديد من الدول علاقاتها الدبلوماسية مع إسرائيل، بما فى ذلك بليز وبوليفيا وكولومبيا وهندوراس ونيكاراجوا. واستدعى آخرون سفراءهم مثل الأردن والبحرين وتركيا وجنوب إفريقيا. واعترفت أيرلندا والنرويج وإسبانيا وبلجيكا بالدولة الفلسطينية
وذهب آخرون أبعد من ذلك. رفعت جنوب إفريقيا قضية أمام محكمة العدل الدولية، وهى أعلى محكمة فى الأمم المتحدة، ومن خلال الأدلة التى قدمتها جنوب إفريقيا، قيَّمت أعمال إسرائيل فى غزة بمثابة إبادة جماعية
أدانت ماليزيا بشكل لا لبس فيه عدوان إسرائيل الوحشى المستمر على غزة ولبنان. وسعت إلى طرد إسرائيل من الأمم المتحدة لرفضها تزويد غزة بالمساعدات الإنسانية وتحظر الأونروا، المنظمة التى تدعم جهود الإغاثة للفلسطينيين
وتواصل دول عديدة الإعراب عن قلقها والدعوة إلى وقف إطلاق النار. منذ الهجوم على غزة، توترت العلاقات بين أيرلندا وإسرائيل، وأصبحت أيرلندا العضو الأكثر مناهضة لإسرائيل ومؤيدة لفلسطين فى الاتحاد الأوروبى. وقال رئيس الوزراء الأيرلندى سيمون هاريس: «لا يمكن أن يكون هناك سلام فى الشرق الأوسط إذا لم يكن هناك اعتراف بفلسطين
وكانت إسبانيا صريحة للغاية فى دفاعها عن الفلسطينيين، وألغت صفقة ذخيرة بملايين الدولارات مع إسرائيل. بينما دعمت الصين الأونروا ودعت أيضًا إلى إنشاء دولة فلسطينية مستقلة والاعتراف بها
لكن اليوم الذى أصدرت فيه المحكمة الجنائية الدولية مذكرة اعتقال بحق نيتانياهو بتهمة ارتكاب جرائم حرب، كان اليوم الذى قال فيه الرئيس المنتخب ترامب إنه سيرفع جميع القيود العسكرية المفروضة على إسرائيل فى أول يوم له فى منصبه. وهدد السيناتور الأمريكى ليندسى جراهام حلفاء الولايات المتحدة إن هم ساعدوا على اعتقال نيتانياهو. وأدانت الولايات المتحدة مذكرة الاعتقال، وبدأت حشدا دوليا لمنع تنفيذ القرار. يرى العالم الأمور بطريقة، وإسرائيل والولايات المتحدة تراها بشكل آخر
ورغم وجهة نظر العالم للحرب، تظل الولايات المتحدة ثابتة فى دعمها لإسرائيل سياسيا وماديا وعسكريا. لدى الولايات المتحدة تاريخ طويل فى استخدام حق النقض (الفيتو) فى مجلس الأمن لدعم إسرائيل. فى كل مشروع قرار ضد إسرائيل، صوتت الولايات المتحدة ضده، واستخدمت حق النقض (الفيتو) فى مجلس الأمن التابع للأمم المتحدة 42 مرة ضد القرارات التى تدين إسرائيل
كما تقدم الولايات المتحدة مساعدات مالية باهظة لإسرائيل. حزم مساعدات بمليارات الدولارات تسلم لإسرائيل بسرعة وبشكل متكرر. وهددت الولايات المتحدة إسرائيل بوقف المساعدات العسكرية لها إذا استمرت فى حظر المساعدات الإنسانية لغزة، لكنها بعد شهر المهلة الذى أعطته الولايات المتحدة لإسرائيل للامتثال، تراجعت الولايات المتحدة عن تهديدها رغم فشل إسرائيل فى تحقيق الرغبة الأمريكية المتمثلة فى السماح بدخول المزيد من المساعدات الإنسانية إلى غزة
يعنى كل هذا أن الولايات المتحدة ستضع دائمًا مصالح إسرائيل أولا، وأن لا شىء تفعله إسرائيل يمكن أن يغير تفانى الولايات المتحدة والتزامها تجاه إسرائيل
ومع ذلك، دعونا نسمى الأشياء بأسمائها الحقيقية. هذا الدعم الصارخ لإسرائيل يؤثر على صورة الولايات المتحدة ويضر بمكانتها العالمية. ويقول معهد كاتو الأمريكى: «إسرائيل مسئولية استراتيجية للولايات المتحدة. إن العلاقة الخاصة لا تفيد واشنطن وتعرض المصالح الأمريكية فى جميع أنحاء العالم للخطر«. لسوء الحظ، تتمسك الولايات المتحدة بالمفاهيم الأساسية لحقوق الإنسان والقانون الدولى،لكنها لا تطبقها على إسرائيل
لن تتخلى الولايات المتحدة يوما عن موقفها مع إسرائيل. إسرائيل والولايات المتحدة لا تهتمان بما يظنه العالم، ويعملون بأسلوب كما لو كانت إسرائيل هى الأعظم
لمزيد من مقالات د. عزة رضوان صدقى
| | | |
|
11/26/2024
Israel and the US against the world
Al Ahram Weekly
Azza Sedky, Tuesday 26 Nov 2024The relationship between the United States and Israel is a bond that defies the rest of the world, as has been shown during Israel’s war on Gaza, writes Azza Sedky
A question on the minds of the wise captures the essence of the relationship between the US and Israel: what happens between comrades when one of them, embodying evil spiritedness, errs big time? Does the relationship end as a sense of justice prevails?
Does the presumedly virtuous one terminate the mutual collaboration or at least ask the evil-spirited one to renege on any actions taken? Does turning a blind eye to the other’s actions mean complicity in them?
The relationship between the United States and Israel is a bond that defies the world. It has been shown over the past 14 months that according to the US Israel is infallible. No matter how horrendous Israel’s actions are, the US stands by Israel. Indeed, nothing Israel does deserves reprimand, according to the US, and the US remains a steadfast supporter of Israel.
Although the US remains oblivious to Israel’s genocidal acts in Gaza, the world has finally realised what is happening and is acting on it. All over the world countries have voiced their indignation with Israel, and let’s not forget the millions of ordinary citizens who have joined pro-ceasefire protests as international organisations, student organisations, and charities worldwide have all called for a ceasefire to the Israeli war on Gaza.
Many countries have severed diplomatic ties with Israel, including Belize, Bolivia, Colombia, Honduras, and Nicaragua. Others have recalled their ambassadors, such as Jordan, Bahrain, Turkey, and South Africa. Ireland, Norway, and Spain have recognised a Palestinian state.
Others have gone further still. South Africa filed an ongoing case before the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the UN’s top court, in December 2023. According to the evidence submitted by South Africa, Israel’s acts in Gaza are genocidal.
Malaysia has unequivocally condemned Israel’s aggression and the atrocities being carried out by its Zionist regime across Gaza, the West Bank, and Lebanon. It has sought to expel Israel from the UN, as Israel refuses to supply Gaza with humanitarian aid and is banning the UN Palestinian refugee agency UNRWA from continuing its relief efforts for the Palestinians.
Many countries have continued to voice their concerns and have called for a ceasefire in the war. Since the attack on Gaza began last October, Ireland’s relations with Israel have become strained, making it the most pro-Palestine member of the European Union. Irish Prime Minister Simon Harris said “there cannot be peace in the Middle East if there is no recognition” of Palestine.
Spain has been vocal in its defence of the Palestinians and has cancelled a multimillion ammunition deal with Israel. China has backed UNRWA and has also called for the establishment and recognition of an independent Palestinian state.
But on the very day that the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued warrants for the arrest of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant for war crimes in Gaza, US President-elect Donald Trump said he would lift all military restrictions on Israel on his first day in office in January next year. The world sees matters one way, and Israel and the US see them in another.
Despite the world’s perspective on the war, the US remains steadfast in its support for Israel politically, financially, and militarily. It has a long history of using its veto in the UN Security Council to support Israel. The US has voted against every draft resolution coming before the Council that criticises Israel, sometimes alone against all other Security Council members. It has used its veto power 42 times against Draft UN Security Council Resolutions condemning Israel.
The US provides more financial aid to Israel than any other country. The American Jewish Committee Global Voice commented on one package of US aid for Israel in September that “Israel announced an $8.7 billion aid package from the US, including $3.5 billion for wartime procurement and $5.2 billion for air-defence systems like Iron Dome and David's Sling.” Similar packages are delivered speedily and repeatedly.
Israel is literally starving the population of Gaza to death. Even US Secretary of State Antony Blinken has said that “according to the most respected measures of things, 100 per cent of the population in Gaza is at severe levels of acute food security. That’s the first time an entire population has been so classified. We also see again, according to, in this case, the United Nations, 100 per cent – the totality of the population – is in need of humanitarian assistance.”
Blinken’s words have not been followed up with action. The US earlier threatened that it would withhold military aid to Israel if the latter continued to prohibit the passage of humanitarian aid to Gaza, but it then deployed troops and an anti-missile system to Israel. After the month that the US gave Israel to comply with its demand that Israel allow in humanitarian aid, the US backed off despite humanitarian aid groups verifying that Israel had failed to meet the US goals of allowing humanitarian aid into Gaza.
At the same that the Biden Administration has stood with Israel, it has enabled Israel to kill over 40,000 Palestinians and leave thousands of others with severe burns and amputations. Thousands more unidentified victims are lying under the rubble. The same thing is being carried out as Israel annihilates Lebanese villages and bombs the capital Beirut.
What does all this mean? It means that the US will always put Israel’s interests first, that nothing that Israel does can change the US’s dedication and commitment to Israel.
However, this ironclad and unwavering support of Israel affects the US’s image and damages its global standing. The Cato Institute, a US think tank, has said that “Israel is a strategic liability for the United States. The special relationship does not benefit Washington and is endangering US interests across the globe.”
The US says it aims to implement basics notions of human rights and international law, but it does not apply them to Israel.
Will the US ever waver in its ironclad support for Israel? I doubt it, since Israel has the power to dictate US foreign policy.
* A version of this article appears in print in the 28 November, 2024 edition of Al-Ahram Weekly
Short link:
| | | |
|
Recent Posts
- Trump’s mystifying proposals
- المعارضة والموالاة.. صناعة الإعلام الغربى
- Manufacturing consent and dissent
- حرب سوريا...من الرابح ومن الخاسر
- ازدواج المعايير.. القانون الرسمى للغرب
- US ‘prepared Syrian rebel group to help topple Bashar al-Assad’
- Why Syria and why now?
- The ‘liberal West’ and the ‘illiberal rest’
- إسرائيل والولايات المتحدة.. رفاق ضد العالم
- Israel and the US against the world