Following the 08.08.08 war between Georgia and Russia and the crushing military defeat of the US-backed Saakashvili regime I wrote the following in this blog:
The ugly attack by Washington's Georgian puppet on the Russian peacekeepers combined with the absolutely amazing hypocrisy of the Western media and politicians who all fully sided with the aggressor turned into something of a “last straw” for Russia. This seemingly marginal development, at least when assessed quantitatively (“what else is new?”) ended up making a huge qualitative difference: it brought up a new Russian resolve to deal with, to use a favorite Neocon expression, an existential threat represented by the Western Empire. It will take a long while for the West to realize what has really happened and the most obtuse of pundits and politicians will probably hang on to their usual self-righteous rhetoric forever, but historians will probably look back at the month of August 2008 as the moment when Russia decided to strike back at the Empire for the first time.
Something very similar has, I strongly believe, happened again, but this time in Libya and, even more so, in Syria. Again what we saw was "an ugly attack by Washington's puppets" and, again, the Western media and politicians fully sided with the aggressor. The images of NATO unleashing a full-scale bombing campaign against Libya under the pretext of "protecting civilians" and the images of Gaddafi lynched by a mob of thugs who jammed a knife in his anus while screaming that "God is great" also infuriated the Russian political leadership and public opinion. This anger combined with the shameful realization that Russia did carry a large portion of the guilt for what happened in Libya (through its monumentally stupid abstention at the UNSC), explains why there was a total consensus in Russia not to have the same thing happen in Syria. The big difference with Russia's response in 2008 is primarily geographical: Syria is not on the Russian border and Russian peacekeepers were not attacked. Besides, it is one thing take on the US-backed but fundamentally inept Georgian military and quite another to take military action against the combined might of CENTOM/NATO and the US. So the Russian reaction had to be of a non-military nature. It now appears that Russia did two thing:
Russia gave full and uncompromising diplomatic backing to Syria at the UN and on the international political scene.
It carefully coordinated with Iran and Hezbollah a covert military support plan.
I already wrote about the 2nd component, so I will not return to this here, but I do want to return to the first, political, part of the Russian response. Primarily, I want to do this because I am amazed to see that, at least as far as I know, no commentator or analyst has truly understood its importance. So let's look a little deeper into this. First, Russia was not alone. China took exactly the same stance. In fact, both Russian and Chinese diplomats confirmed that the level of political coordination and cooperation between Russia and China were "unprecedented". What does that mean? Nobody denies that in the Syrian conflict Russia is the primary player. China is hardly mentioned and, when it is, it is only in passing. And in this case, this focus on Russia is the result of the undeniable fact that Russia is in charge of the "Syrian dossier" while China is backing Russia. You want proof? Look at where all the Western politicians go to try to get Moscow and Beijing to desist from their current stance: Russia. Nobody travels to Beijing to try to argue with the Chinese. To say that is in no way a criticism of China. If the issue was something of primarily Chinese interest, say the Spratly Islands, China would be at the front of the struggle and Russia in the back seat. What this means for Russia is that it is taking far more "heat" for its stance than China and yet, very little credit is given to it for this. Most pro-Syrian commentators want Russia to do even more, primarily because they don't understand how much Russia has already done. Let me ask you this: when is the last time that you remember a Russian or even Soviet leader openly standing up and defying the combined power of the entire Western world? The answer depends on your criteria I guess, but I would submit that in my opinion the last Russian/Soviet leader who dared to truly stand up to the West was Stalin during WWII. Krushchev waved his shoe, but eventually backed down, Brezhnev really did not take any strong positions on anything, Andropov soon died, Chernenko got into power half-dead already, while Gorbachev, Eltsin and Medvedev really were "yes men" towards the West. Putin in contrast not only dared to openly defy the other G8 leaders who were united against him and dead set into making him comply, he actually forced them to comply to his terms. I cannot recall the last time when the combined power of the Western diplomacy was so completely routed. The G8 leaders, who used to look down on Russia and who all thought of themselves as G7+1 (not only that idiot Harper) suddenly found themselves in a situation I called "Putin and the Seven Dwarfs":
How did that happen? Why is it that in an organization which presumably represents the eight largest economies on the planet (it does not: Brazil, India and China are missing) a country like Russia, with a comparatively tiny economy, small military and very few other assets, could turn giants into dwarfs? Surely not because of Russian nukes (which the US, UK and France also have) or the Russian veto power at the UN (which the US, UK, France and China also have). Something much more complex happened here. For the first time in many decades a country made a comprehensive moral and legal argument. Russia openly told the West that what it was doing was wrong on moral and on legal grounds and that what was at stake at this point was much more than Syria, it was the kind of international system the entire planet has to live in. To put it more directly and in simple and non-diplomatic turn, Russia called the West a hypocritical thug and it rejected the right of the hypocritical thugs to lead anything, much less so a military intervention against a sovereign nation. While this moral and legal stance absolutely enraged the Western political elites and corporate Zio-media, it deeply "resonated" in the world public opinion. And here, we see something very typically Russian which a lot of Russian leaders have done in history and which Putin has already done twice: he bypassed the elites and appealed directly to the of people. Putin is doing that right now in Russia (all his recent political moves as based on mass popular support and his All-Russia People's Front is fully centered on this method) and Putin is also doing that in his foreign policy. And just as the pro-Western political elites in Russia are shamed and rendered flaccid by the political climate in Russia, so are the Western political leaders who simply do not have the political courage to openly start yet another illegal war in support of organ-eating religious crazies. I personally believe that if historians look back at August 2008 as "the moment when Russia decided to strike back at the Empire for the first time" they will also come to realize that June 2013 is the moment when Russia decided to strike back at the Empire for the second time. The first strike was a local military strike while the second strike was a planetary, global, moral and political strike and I am aghast at the fact that nobody seems to realize that this is truly a huge development. The current Anglo Empire stands on two key pillars: its willingness to bully and terrorize the planet with violence (military or covert) and its amazing ability to carefully frame the international public discourse in such a manner as to make the most obnoxious and brazen example of double-standards and hypocrisy appear fully logical and consistent with values of democracy, international law and humanitarian concerns. And, of course, this has been denounced by many people worldwide, but it has never been so openly and directly challenged by a top world leader. Make no mistake - Putin did not only challenge the Empire's right to overthrow Assad, he really challenged the very nature of the Anglo-dominated international system since semi-covertly 1945 and openly since 1995 (Anglo aggression on the Serb nation in Bosnia). The Russian military victory in 08.08.08 did not mark the end of what is really a struggle for national liberation of Russia from the Anglo Empire. Far from it. Nor will the Russian diplomatic victory at the recent G8 summit in Ireland mark the end of this long process. But with each such Russian counter-strike against the Empire the Anglo domination over the planet is getting weaker and weaker while it becomes easier for other nations to find a voice and maybe even dare to have an opinion? In the Western cultural "heartland" (US and EU) there is gradually more and more hell to pay for politicians who dare to ignore their own public opinion. Look what happened recently to a Russian TV crew in Paris which was making a report on the daily protests against the laws adopted by the French parliament which now makes it legal for homosexuals to adopt children:
They were literally mobbed by a crowd chanting "La Russie avec nous! La Russie avec nous!" (Russia with us! Russia with us!). You might wonder what the link is between 08.08.08 and Syria on one hand, and homopolitics in France on the other, but I would suggest that the link is obvious: in the process of its struggle for national liberation from the Anglo Empire Russia is also positioning itself as an alternative civilizational model. So its not only about respect for international law or the rejection of the Western "turbocapitalist" model, it is also about the determined defense of the traditional family structure, about the categorical rejection of sexual psychopathologies or the respect of national traditions (try having a "gay pride parade" in downtown Grozny!). Of course, countries like Iran have been doing that for years, but being Muslim and very different historically and culturally, the Iranian model has very little "traction" in Europe. Not that the "Russian model" (which really is only under development to begin with!) has a much bigger potential: in reality Russia is as different a civilization from the West as Iran, but being being geographically closer and politically and historically more connected, Russia has just barely enough "traction" to be noted by those who Europeans who are already alienated from their own political elites. Let's face it - Ahmadinejad and Putin can say the exact same thins about sexual psychopathologies, but it is much harder to ignore Putin, in particular when he speaks in Germany, Holland or the UK (as he did recently). Still, savvy political dissidents in France, like Alain Soral, always mention Russia and Iran. In economic terms, the alternative civilizational model being developed is, of course, the BRICS model (and, maybe, its junior Latin-American counterpart, the ALBA). In military terms, the alternative model being worked on is the SCO with the CSTO as its current military "core" (this could dramatically change if China decided to enter into a formal defense treaty, but that is unlikely). The G8 summit at Lough Erne showed that the Anglo Empire is not nearly as powerful as most people thought. This, however, does not at all mean that it is weak, not by a long shot. The Empire will adapt, it will come to terms with new, more difficult, circumstances, and it will still remain the foremost planetary power for the foreseeable future. But the overall trend, I believe, clear. And this is why the corporate Zio-media made as little as possible from the comprehensive defeat of the Western diplomacy in Lough Erne. There will be throwbacks, disappointments and even defeats in the future, but at the very least we have good reasons to continue hoping for an eventual victory. The Saker
Remember how first it was absolutely totally undeniably clearly proven beyond any possible doubt that these evil Syrians had murdered Rafik Hariri and then, as soon as the Syrians left Lebanon, we were told that it was absolutely totally undeniably clearly proven beyond any possible doubt again that it was actually Hezbollah? Folks - they are it again. After telling us that Assad has used chemical weapons against the opposition they came up with this one:
The major organization of Syrian rebels, the Free Syrian Army, announced Wednesday that forces affiliated with Bashar Assad's regime and Hezbollah fighters employed chemical weapons in battles at the outskirts of Damascus, according to Alarabiya network.
That's from - can you guess? - Ynet news quoting al-Arabiya, aka "the Zionists quoting the Saudi Wahabis". I wonder how many people are going to believe this latest crap... As Dubya so eloquently put it: "There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in
Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me —
you can't get fooled again."
Full text here. This is the section on Syria: (my comments in blue - The Saker)
We are determined to work together to stop the bloodshed and loss of life in Syria and to support the Syrian people to establish peace and stability through political means (in other words, regime change, in particular by means of armed insurrection is not acceptable). We are gravely concerned at the appalling human tragedy that the UN estimates has cost the lives of over 93,000 people and led to 4.2 million internally displaced persons and 1.6 million refugees. We acknowledge the vital humanitarian role played by neighbouring countries hosting Syrian refugees, above all Lebanon and Jordan, in dealing with the significant economic and security pressures they are facing as a result of the conflict and refugee influx. Given the extraordinary humanitarian need as reflected in the latest UN appeal for $5.2 billion in 2013, we are resolved to make exceptional contributions commensurate with the scale of the problem. At this meeting G8 Leaders confirmed additional contributions of almost $1.5 billion to meet humanitarian needs in Syria and its neighbours. We recognise that further contributions will be needed given the scale of the challenge. We urge other countries and organisations to make similar commitments. We call for aid agencies to be given immediate access to provide humanitarian assistance to all civilians in need, in accordance with humanitarian principles and international law, particularly in the worst affected areas such as Qusayr. We remain committed to achieving a political solution to the crisis based on a vision for a united, inclusive and democratic Syria (that is clearly a condemnation of the sectarian Takfiri ideology of the insurgency) We strongly endorse the decision to hold as soon as possible the Geneva Conference on Syria to implement fully the Geneva Communiqué of 30 June 2012, which sets out a number of key steps beginning with agreement on a transitional governing body with full executive powers, formed by mutual consent (here again, not a word about Assad having to leave). As the Geneva Communiqué says, the public services must be preserved or restored. This includes the military forces and security services. However all governmental institutions and state offices must perform according to professional and human rights standards, operating under a top leadership that inspires public confidence,under the control of the transitional governing body. Both sides at the Conference must engage seriously and constructively. They should be fully representative of the Syrian people and committed to the implementation of the Geneva Communiqué and to the achievement of stability and reconciliation. We will engage actively with the parties in order to achieve successful outcomes. We are deeply concerned by the growing threat from terrorism and extremism in Syria,and also by the increasingly sectarian nature of the conflict. Syria must belong to all Syrians, including its minorities and all religious groups. We call on the Syrian authorities and opposition at the Geneva Conference jointly to commit to destroying and expelling from Syria all organisations and individuals affiliated to Al Qaeda, and any other non-state actors linked to terrorism (amazing sentence! The insurgency and the government of Syria are called upon to JOINTLY *destroy* the very forces which the USA wants to arm? That the government would be more than happy to destroy or expel al-Nusra is clear, but the FSA? Is the G8 really calling for a civil war inside the insurgency!?). We will support UN planning for Syria’s transition,recovery, and reconstruction needs, in particular by maintaining continuity of state institutions during transition and helping to ensure that the security forces are effective, accountable and able to deal with the threat of terrorism and extremism. We condemn any use of chemical weapons in Syria and call on all parties to the conflict(yeah, considering that the first party who had requested such an investigation was the Syrian government, and that the only evidence available of anybody having chemical weapons are the al-Nusra linked folks arrested in Turkey, I say that this sentence puts to rest the recent US nonsense about having proof that the government made limited use of chemical weapons) to allow access to the UN investigating team mandated by the UN Secretary-General,and drawing on the expertise of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) and World Health Organisation (WHO), in order to conduct an objective investigation(as opposed to the recent US accusations it appears) into reports of use of chemical weapons. The UN team should make their report and deliver it to the UN Security Council for their assessment. We are determined that those who may be found responsible for the use of chemical weapons will be held accountable. We emphasise the need for the secure and safe storage of all chemical weapons in Syria, pending their destruction under international verification. We also condemn in the strongest possible terms all human rights violations and abuses in Syria, committed by anyone, including indiscriminate attacks on civilians. We call on all sides to respect international humanitarian and human rights laws, noting the particular responsibility of the Syrian authorities in this regard.
Even though the Canadian Prime Minister claimed the exactly opposite, I would say that Putin brilliantly succeeded in making the entire "G7" back down and bow to Russian pressure. What this G8 communique shows is a complete collapse of Western diplomacy in the Syrian war, no doubt triggered by the realization that the recent Iranian move of Pasdaran forces into Syria meant that the game was essentially over. There is no formal alliance between Russia and Iran. But for all practical purposes what we are seeing here is a perfectly coordinated "one, two" move in which changes on the ground are supported by skillful diplomatic maneuvers to jointly achieve the desired outcome. And to think that Russia and Iran could achieve this wonderful move while both being in a position of great weakness (at least when compared to the "G7" potential power!) is quite amazing. Still, again and again I will repeat that none of this would have been possible without the absolutely remarkable courage and skills of the Syrian military whose recent series of victories created the conditions for Russia and Iran to take action outside the war zone proper. No wonder Obama had a tired and sour facial expression yesterday. He knew that he had presided over yet another strategic defeat for the USA (he was the prime architect of the now long forgotten "surge" in Afghanistan which also ended up backfiring). I would like to come back to this amazing section of the G8 final communique were the G8 countries are actually asking the insurgency and the government to "jointly commit to destroy and expel all organizations and individuals linked to al-Qaeda" and ask a possibly very naive question here: Is there any possibility, any possibility at all, that some of the more sane elements of the insurgency might actually agree to do just that, and to destroy and expel all the al-Nusra Takfiri times in coordination with the government forces? Could the designation of a common enemy of the entire Syrian nation not also favor the opening of a real, substantive, and direct dialog between the insurgency and a regime which must know that reforms are absolutely needed to achieve any lasting peace? Is there any hope at all that both sides would accept and admit that mistakes have been made on all sides and that each sides has to set aside its ideology and replace it with some basic but much needed patriotism? After all, it is the presence of the Takfiri crazies, and the West's stubborn insistence on denying the importance of this presence in the insurgency, which unified the pro-regime forces and which ended up badly hurting the insurgency on a political level. I bet you that there is going to be a lot of finger pointing not only between Western powers but even more so inside the insurgency itself which must now come to terms with the reality that is massively miscalculated its moves. And, God willing, there should be hell to pay for those Arab regimes who supported these Takfiris, and I am not only referring to the KSA and Qatar here, but also to all those in the Arab League and Organization of Islamic Cooperation who showed a comprehensive absence of honor or judgement, for that matter. And, lastly, there is the painful subject of the abject disgrace of the Palestinian elites who, yet again, committed a strategic miscalculation of immense proportion in betraying their Syrian brothers. It is one thing to support that idiot Saddam against the Kuwaitis. It is quite another to backstab a government and nation which have always supported the Palestinian cause! In their blind opportunism, the Palestinians have fallen so low as to dare to slander even Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, without doubt the greatest Arab leader of modern times. The disgrace which such narrow-minded opportunism brings upon the entire Palestinian people will take a long, long time to be washed away. If some good can come from such a calamity as this war, it is that it showed the true face of many actors. This war has shown that there is no such thing as an "Arab nation" as Arabs happily betray each other, nor this there such thing as a Muslim umma, as most Sunni reflexively turn against the Shia minority as soon as the sectarian partisanship is exited. This war has shown that the real friends of the Syrian people are first and foremost the Persian Shia and that modern alliances are not based on ethnicity, religion or ideology, but on common values: on one hand, the Anglos joined the Takfiris and the Zionists, while on the other the Syrians were supported by the Persians, Hezbollah, the Russians and the Chinese. Amazing, no? In the past few days, the very nature and quality of the war on Syria has fundamentally shifted and this shift will have far reaching consequences not only in the Middle-East but worldwide. Nevertheless, this war is far from over, if only because there is a lot of political and military "momentum" or "inertia" left out there. Still, barring some very unexpected disaster, it has now become possible to start seeing the contours of an end to this tragedy. Hopefully, the Western powers and the insurgency will come to accept the fact that they have lost this war and that they need to settle for some mutually acceptable and reasonable compromise at the Geneva II conference. Any other moves would only be uselessly delaying the inevitable. The Saker
And so once the "shock and awe" phase has failed to produce any signs of shock or of awe - what happens next? (...) an Anglo invasion
of Syria might well trigger an influx of Shia volunteers from Iran,
Iraq and Lebanon; that would also offer Iran the perfect opportunity to
"send in volunteers" (remember that the students who took over the US
embassy in Tehran were also 'volunteer civilian students' and that the
revolutionary government denied having any control over them) (...) consider the
following: the fact that the US or NATO cannot send troops hardly
means that the Iranians, the Iraqis or Hezbollah could not do that. In
fact, what could the US do if, say, Moqtada al-Sadr decided to send some
of his followers to fight the Takfiris in Syria? Protest and threaten,
but there is really nothing much else they could do (...) This is the huge
weakness in the US/NATO posture: while the US/NATO/CENTCOM capabilities
to engage in a massive bombing and cruise missile strikes are truly
formidable, they have nothing else to follow up with. Everybody
in the Middle-East knows that the Americans do not have what it takes
to go tow-to-toe against an insurgency. These are the folks who used
B-2 stealth bombers over Afghanistan but who a full decade later failed
to even control most of Kabul in daytime.
As is so often the case, the events on the ground actually developed even much faster than I thought. I can confirm on the basis of information received from three different sources that the Iranians have begun moving a large military force into Syria. One of these sources I can quote: Robert Fisk who wrote the article "Iran to Send 4,000 Troops to Aid President Assad Forces in Syria" for the Independent. There is also evidence of volunteers from Lebanon. I think that we can safely make the assumption that the 4000 Iranians sent to Syria are just a beginning and that Tehran can send as many
soldiers as needed. I can also add here that we are not talking about well-meaning civilians here, but highly trained Pasdars - you can think of them as "the people who trained Hezbollah". One of my best sources tells me that this entire operations is closely coordinated with Russian specialists while another source even mentions Russians on the ground with the Iranians. It therefore appears that Tehran has decided to preempt a US/NATO attack on Syria by moving in forces even before the shooting start. I have to sincerely say that this is nothing short of a brilliant move as there is nothing at all the Anglo Empire can do to stop this at this point in time and once the full force is in place it will be impossible to target it separately. I can add here that the idea of sending in "international brigades" has been discussed in specific Russian and Ukrainian military circles, but that it is likely that the Russian authorities want to keep the visible presence of ethnic Russian to a minimum. What they can do is send it Russian ethnic groups which do not externally appear as Slavs. I am thinking, believe it or not, of anti-Wahabi Chechens who are fully integrated into the Russian military intelligence service GRU (the Russians already did something similar once in Lebanon). Both Russian and Iranian sources confirm that the two government are very closely cooperating on this entire operation and that uninterrupted close consultations are taking place.
In the meantime, most Hezbollah units are withdrawn from Syria and repositioned to defend Lebanon from a possible Israeli attack. Bottom line: it is already becoming clear that Barak Obama made a huge - strategic - mistake with his "crossing the red line" nonsense about a "limited use of chemical weapons" by the government forces. Obama probably wanted to give the insurgency a better bargaining position for the Geneva II negotiations, but all he succeeded in doing is fundamentally changing the strategic balance on the ground. It is one thing to fight the Syrian military, it is a qualitatively other one to fight the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps. By committing these forces already now, the Iranians are sending a chilling message to Washington: "we do not fear you, and our commitment to Syria is open ended". As a military analyst specializing in strategic analysis I have to marvel at the superb elegance of the Iranian move because it essentially checkmates the USA's entire strategic plan for the Middle-East. When I wrote that there is no way the US would put any boots on the ground, I assumed that they would not dare to do that against the Syrians. But, at least, some really naive Americans could have hoped that with enough bombing of Syrian civilians (a la Kosovo) the regime would eventually have to give in. With thousands of Iranian Pasdars on the ground this is categorically not an option. This development, apparently only noticed by Robert Fisk, is really a game changer. What this means for the USA/NATO/CENTCOM/Israel/al-Qaeda is this: "GAME OVER!". The Russian/Iranian alliance has done what it does best: it has responded asymmetrically to the US moves. While the entire world was focusing on S-300s deliveries and Russian Navy moves, it essentially negated the entire US strategy by qualitatively changing the facts on the ground before the US could even react. US options at this point are extremely limited. Yes, it can still engage in an orgy of civilian killings just to punish the Syrians and prevent elections. It can also denounce the Iranian intervention, but since the entire planet by now knows that the insurgency is largely foreign and supported by the USA's own admission (!), this would be rather hollow. It can also do the wise thing and strenuously look away from the Iranian presence on the ground and pretend like nothing happened. If it decided to do that, it could even try to get some kind of face saving deal at Geneva II. Attacking Iran is not an option (even less so after the beautiful elections the Iranians just had). Blaming Russia is not an option either as there is exactly zero proof of Russian involvement. The war itself is, of course, not quite over yet. This will all take time to play itself out. But yes, this is most definitely the beginning of the end. To the disgraceful defeats in Afghanistan and Iraq the US can now add a no less disgraceful defeat in Syria. Good. The Saker
I have been following US-Soviet and US-Russian relations since at least age 5, and professionally most of my adult life, and I have never seen two leaders so obviously hating each other as Putin and Obama. I just watched their joint press conference at the G8 summit in Northern Ireland and I am truly left speechless: the mood was clearly so ice cold that one could almost visualize frost building around (and even on) the two leaders. Just look at this screenshot:
Some facial expression and body language, no? Putin actually went as far as thanking Obama for a "frank exchange of views" which, in diplomatic language, is tantamount to an admission of a verbal fist fight. I am not surprised by that. Putin probably despises Obama for being the spineless prostitute that he is, whereas Obama probably hates and fears Putin for daring to say "no" to the Anglo Empire. But the fact that both of these men made only a modicum of efforts to conceal their intense dislike for each other really amazes me. We are far from the skillfully orchestrated love fest between Kerry and Lavrov. I know, one should not judge on appearance. But I will do that anyway. I feel that 4 decades of careful observation of such meetings grant me that right. And here is what I read into this: Putin comprehensively rejected everything Obama wanted from him. The pretense is now over - Russia and the USA are on a clear collision course. The Saker
I take refuge in Allah from the stoned devil. In the Name of Allah, The Compassionate, The Most Merciful. Peace be on the Seal of prophets, our Master and Prophet, Abi Al Qassem Mohammad and on his chaste and pure Household and on his chosen companions and on all messengers and prophets.
Dear Scholars! Brothers and sisters! Peace be upon you and Allah's mercy and blessings.
On this blessed day and dear ceremony – The Injured Fighter Day – and in the occasion of the blessed, dear, and nice ceremonies, I would like first to thank you all for your honored attendance in the various places whether in Dahiyeh, Baalbeck, Nabatiyeh, or in Deir Qanoun.
I also felicitate you on the fragranced occasions of the Month of Shaaban – the anniversary of the birthday of the Grandson of the Prophet of Allah (Peace be upon him) – the Master of the men of Heaven Imam Abi Abdullah Al Hussein Bin Ali (Peace be upon him), the anniversary of the birthday of Imam Zein Al Aabideen Ali Bin Al Hussein (Peace be upon him), and the anniversary of the birthday of the resisting martyr – the title of our day – Abi Al Fadl Al Abbass Bin Ali Bin Abi Taleb (Peace be upon them all). We also felicitate you on the occasion that will come on the days to come, the birthday of the Lord of our Time, Baqiyet Allah in this world, Imam Mahdi (Our souls are at the sacrifice of his reappearance).
It goes without saying that first our speech will tackle the person we are honoring today – Abi Al Fadl Al Abbass whose birthday was rightfully chosen to be the day of the resisting, sacrifice-offering injured fighter. It is the day of our wounded brethrens and sisters who are sharing in our meeting and others who are sharing us via their TV screens at their homes or in hospitals.
As usual, I will make an outline for my speech. First, I would like to give a word on the occasion. I have a word on the Lebanese affair, a word on the Syrian affair and the current atmospheres – the post-Qusair era and the reactions. However, first, I would like to thank all the injured brothers and sisters whether those present here in the meeting or those in hospitals now or at home but were not able to show up and join us. I address them with the most sublime feelings of gratitude and thankfulness for the favors, jihad, and wounds they offered for us, our people, our country, our homeland, and our sanctities. I also laud their sacrifice-offering and honorable families, mothers, fathers, and wives who are bearing heavy loads in this perspective.
We must also thank all the medical staff who followed up our wounded from the very first moment – from the first aids to the continuous care. Moreover, we must salute all the brothers and sisters in The Injured Fighter Institution and all those who work in the various social bodies and institutions whom Allah Al Mighty honored by serving the injured and the families of these injured.
Though it is The Injured Fighter Day – the day of the alive martyrs -, we must salute all the families of all the martyrs who offered their sons and dear ones in this path and for the sake of these holy goals. I must also offer special salutations to the families of the martyrs of the recent confrontations who have shown a high degree of insight, faith, and steadfastness, as I have said in more than one occasion.
Brothers and sisters! Al Abbass Bin Ali Bin Abi Taleb (Peace be upon them) is that handsome young man who was nicknamed as the Moon of Hachem Clan. This thirty-four-year-man was the leader of the camp of Al Hussein (Peace be upon him) in Karbala. His faith, biography, and jihad made him a great title and a symbol for loyalty and insight. Imam Sadeq (Peace be upon him) says in his visit to Abi Al Fadl Al Abbass (Peace be upon him) that Al Abbass was a title for certitude, courage, chivalry, altruism, patience, faithfulness, admission, obedience, and steadfastness on one's position until martyrdom. Thus he became the ideal to be followed by the mujahedeen who are not halted by their severe wounds from continuing in their mission towards reaching the goal. We all know the story. When Al Abbass (Peace be upon him) headed towards Euphrates shore, he was performing a definite mission which is providing the women, the children, the orphans, the rest of the army, and Imam Hussein (Peace be upon him) with water. Thus he set to his mission. On his way back, his right hand was severed; he carried on in his mission. The entire hand was cut; the wounds were grave. Then the left hand was cut. Still he carried on in his mission. He embraced the jar of water with what was left of his hands, chest, and head. On his way, his hand was hit with an arrow. He did not stop and carried on until he died and met Allah Al Mighty and thus was his martyrdom.
Thus Al Abbass (Peace be upon him) is a moral, a symbol, and a title for all the mujahedeen who are carrying on in their struggle despite severe wounds. They carry on exploiting all their powers in performing the mission that serves the goal.
His birthday is the day of our injured. It is rather the day for every resisting fighting injured. He is the day of our injured in Lebanon since the launch of the resistance in 1982. He is the ideal for the faithful mujahedeen – the people of insight, certitude, courage, altruism, patience, obedience, and steadfastness on one's position in the various fields without ever changing their position. Here they are today among you in these halls and everywhere asserting their steadfastness, commitment, presence, and carrying on in this path. They have practiced potentiality and action to offer their souls and blood, and it was Allah's will that they stay alive – that they remain the alive martyrs and hold their wounds, the pain of their wounds, the patience on their wounds and to face this trial with patience and steadfastness.
My injured brother and sisters! Today your wounds are a continuous alive testimony. Allah Al Mighty wanted these wounds in these days as in the past stages to be a continuous alive testimony for the present and future generations on historic events, on field facts, and on events that took place on the near past and in modern history at least since 1982. So they are not events that took place 50, 100, or 500 years ago. We are talking about events that many of the living people today have experienced them, suffered from them, and followed them up. However, many of the young men and women and the generations who were born after these events might not know anything about these events and these facts. Some want this history and this stage in the near past to be scattered away. Some work at falsifying these facts and turning them upside-down.
Brothers and sisters! The wounds of everyone of you have a story. Where was the hand of this wounded severed? Where was the leg of that wounded cut off? Where did that wounded lose his sight? Where was this wounded semi-paralyzed or totally-paralyzed? Where was that wounded hit in this side of his body and that wounded afflicted in that side of his body? Each of your wounds has a story and narrates a story of a bursting into a position here or defending or confronting an aggression in a village there, a bomb here or an ambush there, a martyrdom attack here or an attempt to save a wounded who fell in the battle field there.
These events and stories must be inked and must be inherited by generations. Your wounds remind us of the heroism of the resistance men in the events and confrontations of July 1993 with the Israeli enemy which were called by the enemy the Settlement Operation. Your wounds remind us of the heroism of the resistance fighters in the confrontations which the enemy called "The Grapes of Wrath" in the war of April 1996. Your wounds recall the heroism of our fighters and people in the liberation that took place in May 2000 and the historic epic of 2006 until our day. The resistance men with their martyrs and wounded and heroes make epics and victories.
These wounds narrate the story of the resistance in Lebanon - the story of its people, men, women, audience, supporters, and adorers. This resistance has owned sufficient awareness and clear vision. Since the very beginning, there was clarity. There was awareness of the risks of remaining silent on the Israeli occupation and the US and multinational occupation of Lebanon in 1982, and the risks and repercussions of the silence and coexistence with the US hegemony project on Lebanon and the region in 1982. Besides awareness, vision, and insight, this resistance owned the will to fight to liberate despite the rarity of supporters and the abandonment of the Arabs and the silence of the Arab and Islamic worlds – except for Iran and Syria – and the abundance of the enemy and the accomplice of the Lebanese internal. This resistance – whom you are its wounded who offered sacrifice – has fought for long years and offered martyrs and wounded, and thousands of its dear men and women have entered prisons and detention centers. Houses were demolished and fields were blazed. People were displaced from their villages and towns in the framework of the jihad and sacrifices of this resistance. This resistance with this enormous magnitude of sacrifices liberated Lebanon from occupation.
If today there is a country in Lebanon, if there is liberation and freedom, if there is an entity, a state and pride, if there is dignity, economy, wealth, and water, if there is someone able to search for oil and gas in the Lebanese waters, if there is someone able to protect the waters, oil, and resources, if there is anything in this country, it is thanks to all the resistance fighters, the resistance factions, and the sacrifices of the resistance fighters, martyrs, wounded, and prisoners.
Following our praise to Allah, our thanks are only for the resistance or else the Lebanese region would have still been a place for Israeli settlements; our waters would have been passed on to the settlements while the original residents would have been denied this water as is the case today in the West Bank; our discovered gas and oil would have been adjoined to Tamar Oil Field; our government would have been a mere administrative autonomy and an authority annexed to the Israeli occupation, and we would have been ruled by an Israeli military governor as we were ruled in Tyr, Sidon, Beirut, Mount Liban, West Bekaa, and Rashaya.
Who expelled these military governors from our towns and from controlling our country and people?
After all, it was this resistance which toppled all the projects of hegemony and occupation. It guarded this Lebanon. This near continuing past must not be forgotten. It must not be forgotten brothers and sisters, Lebanese, Arabs, and Muslims. Some are working to eliminate this history and this past. No! This near past must not be forgotten because this battle is a continuation for this past, for the struggle of this past, for the battle of this past, and because the ongoing battle aims at making all the achievements and sacrifices of this near past vulnerable.
Our generations must know everything about this decisive historic stage in the history of Lebanon and the region. All the generations must know about that stage. Who conspired? Who abandoned? Who resisted? Who offered sacrifices? Who tolerated losses and who was gaining spoils? Who fought? Who remained silent? Who was national? Who collaborated? Who fought the occupier? Who shook hands with the occupier? Who was killed so as not to shake hands with the occupier? These things must be known so that things won't become confused and so that the national remains national and so that the resistance man does not become a highwayman or a robber, and so that the collaborator does not turn to be a national man who gives certificates in nationality!
This is the responsibility of everyone – elites, the educated, scholars, authors, artists, and all people in all domains. Even the injured must narrate to their children, neighbors must tell their neighbors…. Well, yes we are confronting a very vast media confrontation which is trying to falsify this history.
Here off I usher into the Lebanese situation and from it we will move to the Syrian situation.
Brothers and sisters! Let's set the bases. We are a primary part in this country, this nation, and this land. We are part of the structure of this dear and noble Lebanese people who offered great and massive sacrifices. I am not giving this prelude to talk history. I am setting the bases for the present.
We have offered sacrifices from among our people, children, dear ones, wealth, houses, pains, hardships, efforts, and patience. We do not begrudge anyone anything. This was for our Hereafter and for the pride and dignity of our life. This was also for our country, people, nation, and sanctities. That means that we are among those people who are most careful about Lebanon and its security, sanctity, civil peace, unity, state, entity, and existence. The popular proverb applies here: Whatever you pay much for – what you tire for and what you offer blood for - is not similar to what you get for free. There is a big difference.
The easiest thing for some people in Lebanon when facing difficulties, calamities, challengers, and risks is to pack and leave and travel abroad so as to live in peace and serenity. We are not as such.
Similar to what I usually used to talk about in the occasions of martyrs and the various occasions, let me talk a bit about this Resistance and about this party in particular. We do not have two nationalities. We have one nationality – the Lebanese nationality. We are Lebanese not for more than ten years but rather for hundreds of years. Some among us are even Lebanese for thousands of years. We do not have houses outside Lebanon. We do not have money outside Lebanon. We do not have projects outside Lebanon. Well some Lebanese emigrants - May Allah bless them – were obliged by circumstances to leave. However, in Hezbollah we do not have anything. We are here. I used always to say and here I am saying again: We are here. We were born here. We live here. We grew up here. We will stay here. We will die here. We will be martyred here. We will be buried here. This is our land and country. No one can uproot us from our land and country. This is to those who talk about uprooting.
The most powerful army in the Middle East and one of the main armies in the world, namely the Israeli Army, was crushed under the feet of our fighters in Bint Jbeil, Aita Al Shaab, and Maroon Al Ras. Stupid are those who talk about uprooting here and uprooting there.
Well, we have paid costly for this country to stay and we will stay in it; for its dignity, and in it we will remain dignified; for its freedom and in it we will remain free; for its pride and we will remain proud in it. We will remain ready to pay great and high prices for this target and this goal.
Based on this, let me tackle a couple of points quickly concerning the Lebanese situation because we have a couple of words to say about the Syrian situation.
Concerning the Lebanese situation, it goes without saying that I can't talk about everything. So let no one ask why I did not talk about this point or that I forgot that point or left that point. The limited time does not give us the opportunity to elaborate…. However, there are some points which I believe are a bit sensitive. Thus we will tackle them.
The first point is concerning politics. In brief, everyone is waiting to see the result of the challenge against the constitutional council to know whether they will extend to the council or we will go for elections. On the light of that, the time and track of the future government will be determined. We are with the Lebanese who are waiting and Allah likes those who wait. We have nothing new in this perspective.
However, in this framework, we condemn the intervention of the US Embassy which is rejected in this sovereign or constitutional affair or the Lebanese electoral affair. It is also rejected that they practice threat - even if indirectly - on the Lebanese to push things in a definite track. This is just a little or the mounting US intervention in Lebanon, the countries of the region, and the world.
Second: Concerning the security situation, first we call for the highest degree of self-restraint. We are all in the atmosphere. No one is living in a villa in a far away isolated island. After all, what is taking place in Syria, what is taking place in the entire region is reflected on Lebanon. Well apart from what is taking place in the region, Lebanon is already suffering from crises at least since 2005. In the latest stage, there have been media pressure, political pressure, and accusations.
That has led to agitation in the street and agitation among people. At times people lose their temper and mind and thus might undertake inappropriate, incorrect, illegitimate, and illegal acts what might lead – especially in extraordinary conditions – to dangers risks.
We call for the highest degree of self-restraint and for avoiding any form of tension or clashes. Here we are making a call on all the Lebanese and all the people over the Lebanese territories whether Lebanese, Syrians, Palestinians or others. However, I want to make a special address to the resistance audience and more precisely the people who if they say anything or do anything, we usually will be held responsible. Thus we stress that it is imperative to practice self control whether in states of grief, anger, or happiness. That's because any practice or conduct even if trivial or minor in such tense atmospheres may lead to inappropriate repercussions on Lebanon, on the people, on security, on stability, and on all of us.
Self control must be practiced even in personal disputes. Well, at times the judicial authorities do not tackle all causes or at times some cases might take long time. Thus disputes whether financial, persona, or business occur among people. This takes place in Lebanon since a long time. This is not something new – kidnapping, aggressions, shooting…. Well in principle this must not take place. Moreover in this stage, we call for more patience even in personal cases and personal rights. That's because any personal dispute which takes place in any region is instantly given factional dimension, sectarian dimension, party dimension and political dimension due to the political and media mobilization and conspiracy. Thus we would be somewhere and then find ourselves somewhere else.
Second, amid this speech let's make a kind of self-criticism. There is a phenomenon in Lebanon and not only among our audience. It is rather among the Lebanese in general or among many or the Lebanese and not all of them. It is the phenomenon of opening fire in the air in every occasion. Lately this phenomenon has increased in an offensive way.
Well nowadays in holiday people open fire; in political occasions, they open fire; in funerals of martyrs, they open fire. Soon academic results will be announced. They will rejoice for whoever passes in the brevet class with firing in the air. They will rejoice for whoever passes in the "baccalaureate" with firing in the air. Firing in the air seems to be nonstop. Whenever any of the politicians – including me - show up, people start firing in the air. I am not talking about anyone else. I am talking, above all, about myself.
Well, we have tackled this point in the past. We made a wish, and we talked about this point. However, today I will say more following discussions we made with religious scholars. Though the idea is clear, we were obliged to send written requests for several major religious authorities whether in Iran or in Iraq. So we did not only contact authorities in Iran, but rather in Iran and Iraq so that people won't say we contacted only the so and so authority whose requests we do not follow. Now if we tell people that opening fire in the air is forbidden, they will ask where we got this request from. Thus we resorted to our religion and asked our scholars, authorities and jurists. That's because talking rationally did not lead anywhere, talking legally did not yield any result, and talking morally did not work too. On the contrary, some people believe that they are showing lofty morals when they open fire heavily in the air.
Thus we asked the following question: In Lebanon, fire is opened in the air. What is the result? People are terrified and intimidated. So in case those who open fire are not aware, let them know. In all villages, towns, and neighborhoods, people are horrified by the sound of bullets. Some people might believe there is a clash or fighting in the neighborhood when they hear the sound of bullets shot.
So people are horrified. At times, people are killed or injured. At times properties are burnt. Is this permissible? Is it permissible to open fire in the air? Well at times, a person who thinks himself knowledgeable might say the arms are his and the bullets are his, and people have control over their money and possessions; thus he is free to open fire in the air. So what do you have to do with him?
No, we owe him many things. After all where is he living? He lives among us. So the answer of the grand authorities – May Allah protect them all – is: No doubt this act is forbidden. I required a written answer so that no one says this is permissible or forbidden. So the answer is written and sealed. Scholars know the story. The answer is written and sealed.
This issue is forbidden. Whoever is careful for his religion and his Hereafter must be aware. Moreover, this is more forbidden when the arms are ours and the bullets are ours. Hezbollah does not allow that its arms and bullets are used as such. Thus authorities have answered that in case anyone opened fire and killed or wounded others or burnt properties, the person who opened fire would be held liable. So he has to pay blood money. He must compensate or else he will be held even more responsible on Doom's Day.
Well, some brethrens told me that we don't need to go that far as far as this issue concerned. Well no! We must go that far because this phenomenon has become very dangerous.
I address everyone and call on everyone from a rational, religious, and moral perspective and for the sake of the people, love, security of people, and stability of people to put an absolute end to this phenomenon. Whoever can't guard his ammunition and leave it at home let him give it to us as we need it. Let him donate it to the resistance. By Allah that is better for him as he will be rewarded. That will be better for him in this world and in the Hereafter. In this world, we defend him, and in the Hereafter, he will be rewarded.
Third, in the region of Baalbeck-Hermel particularly, the situation is sensitive and needs special care. You know that at times events take place in the region including the fall of rockets on some towns and cities in Bekaa (Baalbeck-Hermel).
Let's take for example what took place that day in Arsal when the Syrian Army shelled this town. Everyone started to talk about who had to take a position and how the state has to act. When rockets are shelled by armed groups, who has to take a stance or not, this is another issue.
The sensitive point that I want to tackle is that rumors are being circulated in the region of Bekaa, and some media outlets unfortunately promote these rumors and tell our people in that region that the rockets are being launched from Arsal, the town or Arsal and from the surroundings of Arsal.
Indeed, the brothers in the region know and the rest of the Lebanese know. Well we are talking about a Sunnite town in an environment with an overwhelming Shiite majority. These rumors accuse a Sunnite town of launching Katusha rockets or 107 rockets on towns and cities resided by Shiite Lebanese.
So what are they telling the residents of the region? They are telling them that these rockets are being launched from here; so go and address you problem here. On the other hand, we all know that in the region of Bekaa, personal events take place. There are problems: smuggling, disputes…. This is well known.
If someone from Arsal was aggressed against or killed, politicians or people from Arsal would accuse Hezbollah or the Shiites of killing. If there is a personal dispute, let's interrogate and investigate. Let's not be hasty in our accusations.
There is a sensitive situation there. Indeed rumors and some media outlets are working intensively in this domain. At times there are lies. At times, someone is killed, and they accuse others of killing him. But at other times, no one would be killed or kidnapped, but they circulate that 48 hours ago so and so from the such and such tribe was kidnapped. Why do they trouble people in such a way?
In this point, I want to tell our brethrens in Bekaa and the residents of Arsal that we must verify every story or given.
I assert for our people that the rockets which fell on Hermel, Baalbeck, Sirain, and Nabi Sheath so far were not launched from Arsal. They were rather launched by the armed forces from within the Syrian territories. We must find a solution for this case, and we will find a solution Inshallah.
We must be aware of the rumors, and I have focused on this example because events happen daily or almost daily, and there is media and intelligence act to cause sedition between Sunnites and Shiites in Baalbeck-Hermel in particular especially that there are different political stances whether in Arsal or in other towns. So they are trying to make use of the difference – meaning that we belong to two different sects though we are followers of one religion. We are both Muslims but we are Shiites and Sunnites, and we differ in our political stance. Incidents are taking place in our region. Thus we must be very careful.
We have a call too from Hezbollah to all the rational in Baalbeck-Hermel and they are numerous: the scholars, the wise and the dignitaries. They have already started taking some steps and working industriously to block any dangerous attempt or ordeal that some are trying to transfer to the region.
I come to the last point concerning the Lebanese situation. Today in the country there is an atmosphere of intimidation, and this is part of the general atmosphere in the region. Today there is a project rushing upon the region which I will refer to when tackling the Syrian issue by the current project in Syria and in the region backed – or rather led by – the US, Europe, and many of the Arab states, a number of Gulf countries, and enormously financed media outlets – radio and TV stations, satellites, websites, newspapers, magazines. People are ready to write 10 articles of abuse and insult daily. Moreover, on the ground there is intimidation. This is the general atmosphere. I have a stance and you have a stance. Some people think a thousand times before expressing their private stance. Here I am telling you that the atmosphere of intimidation does not prevail in Lebanon only. It prevails in the entire Arab world. When there is an opportunity, many of the leaderships, personalities, scholars, currents, and parties in the Arab and Islamic world express their true stance. However many are silent because of this stance of intimidation and because instantly fatwas of takfir, killing and even butchering are being issued against them. Fatwas of slaughtering were issued in the past; currently fatwas of butchering are being issued. Some people now want to enjoy butchering people.
In such an atmosphere, how are you to articulate a word or an idea or take a position? If I express my political stance or this scholar or that sheikh, this Sayyed or that politician, this deputy or that journalist or that person expresses his political stance, he will be faced by fatwas of takfir, killing, slaughtering, butchering, assassination attempts, and even physical aggressions.
In Lebanon, lately regions are being penalized due to their political affiliation or political stance. I do not want to go into details because there are sensitivities. However there is another detail which I must tackle: scholars were being assaulted as well as journalists and families from the honorable Sunnite sect because of their political stance.
Why? That's because of this atmosphere of intimidation. Some days ago, His Eminence dear brethren Sheikh Maher Hammoud was subject to an assassination attempt. Is this a simple incident? Are its indications simple? Allah Al Mighty saved him.
His Eminence Sheikh Maher Hammoud is a well known personality. He has his stances concerning various issues. At times he criticizes us openly; at others he sends messages to us and to me personally. At times he gives open counsels; at others he gives covert counsels. He criticizes us, and he criticizes you. He has a stance, and he has a vision.
Why is the owner of a stance addressed by opening fire on him while going to morning prayers? Fire was also opened on the car and the house of His Eminence Sheikh Ibrahim Baridi in Qib Elias. Other scholars were being assaulted, and they did not say a word. Some people were threatened, and they did not say a word. Centers for Islamic communities in the Sunnite milieu were assaulted, and they did not say a word. Why? They just are seeking being spared in such an atmosphere.
We are accused while the other viewpoint is being respected. Let's talk at least since 2005 up till now. We usually talk since before 2005. However, let's keep this era aside. Well we are a side that since 2005 up till this day and especially in the recent years has been subject to a 24-hour-daily-stream – so it is not a weekly but rather a daily stream that begins at the morning and does not end by night – not of scientific, objective arguments or intellectual and political criticism but rather of true insult, offenses, and curses to our personalities, scholars, women, honor, parties, sects, ideologies, and ideas. Indeed you are following that on TV channels and platforms. Well did we do anything? Aren't we able to do anything? No let no one say the Sayyed is begrudging us doing nothing. No! Our religion prevents us as well as our mind. Well, we tolerate the other opinion. Some might say that among the Shiite sect even, you do not tolerate the other. However, no one remained from within the Shiite sect who did not show up in TV channels in the recent weeks and held interviews and wrote articles of insults, offenses, treacheries, and accusations. They live among us. Did anyone tell them a single word? No one did.
Well, yes an incident took place in front of the Iranian Embassy. Here I am telling you that it is a rejected, unacceptable, condemned incident. Indeed it was an involuntary incident. In this incident, a dear person was killed. Here I am telling you that he was oppressively killed whoever his killer was. This issue is being investigated, and rights must not be lost. Still people tell us that we do not tolerate the other opinion. For eight years you have been abusing us. Now and precisely as I am giving my speech, there are abuses, offences, and insults for dignities, honors, and persons on TV channels. We are not doing anything. Here I am in the first clause saying to all of our brothers, sisters, people, audience, and supporters of the resistance: We want self control, patience, and tolerance whether in states of grief, anger or rejoice.
It is you who do not tolerate the other opinion. Let the people express their opinions frankly. These are with Syria, and the others are against it. What is the problem in that?
As for this atmosphere of intimidation, here I am telling you that it will not lead anywhere. If you think that fatwas of takfir and killing, disgracing others, and political and media attacks may change our stance, you are totally mistaken.
You are totally mistaken. Here I ushered into the Syrian issue. On the contrary, when we take a vision or a stance concerning the Syrian and the Lebanese issue or any other issue and you confront me with fatwas of takfir, killing, slaughtering, and butchering and accuses and abuses, you are making us more convinced in what we believe in. We become more convinced in our vision, stance, conduct, and field performance. We become more convinced that our choice is true. However, on the contrary, the outcome would be negative and not positive. Some people believe that in such a way, they can attack others and intimidate them so that they become frightened and thus retreat. However, this does not apply on us.
For long years, the resistance fought the Israeli enemy along with the entire world. The whole world – except for a few - was with Israel. In July War, Russia was with Israel. China was with Israel. All of that did not make us afraid or pushed us to succumb, become weak, or retreat. Buildings were collapsing on our heads. That's not to forget the fatwas, accusations of being adventurers and unbelievers, and calls of not deserving supplications. Well today the situation is much better. At least half of the world is with us or we are with half of the world. Isn't that so? In July War, we were alone. Only Iran and Syria were with us. Others were here and there.
Here I reached the Syrian affair and I will tackle it with a couple of words.
First, when we decided to intervene, our intervention came late contrary to the political stance which was taken since the early weeks. In the first or second weeks, we did not talk. We were observing and contemplating. Afterwards, as a result of discussions, the given and the true vision, we took a political stance which we articulated in more than one occasion. We started expressing our stance two years ago as I still remember. It was during the anniversary of the martyrdom of Sayyed Abbass, Sheikh Ragheb, and Hajj Imad in Nabi Sheath. We interpreted our stance and viewpoints which I do not want to reiterate. We set the pillars for our stances from Libya, Tunisia, Egypt, and Yemen. Based on these very pillars and norms, we took our stance from Syria.
Well, we took a decision – though it was a late one – to have field intervention. Here I will talk with transparency and frankness. We took a decision of field intervention to confront the ongoing project over the Syrian territories. So the decision was not taken instantly. What does that mean? That means that it started to be formed and with time it gained maturity. The vision became clear concerning the nature of the ongoing project and its goals, and in case it worked out – and even before gaining success – if it was allowed to carry on, its repercussions and risks on Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, the region, the peoples of the region, Muslims, Christians, Sunnites, Shiites, Druze, Alawis, Ismaelites, Zaidis, and on everyone would be massive. However above all, it has its repercussions on Sunnites. This is what we said before and now we must say too. Thus we are starting from a vision and not from an emotional reaction or agitation.
The moral factor exists. Yes, it is a matter of loyalty and this factor is essential in our decision. However, the issue is not a moral issue. The issue is based on understanding and viewing the ongoing project and its risks, goals, and repercussions on the states, the peoples, and the entities. Thus we say from now on that if we were present in our position and we are fighting from our position, we would be defending Syria and the Syrian people; we would be defending Lebanon and the Lebanese people; we would be defending this state, this entity, this economy, this country, and this land. Second, pursuant to our follow up, we saw who is involved in the ongoing battle inside Syria. As for the story of people and regime, this story has been over a long time ago. There is popular division. There is a great section of the Syrian people with the regime, and there is a great part against the regime. So let no one tell us that we are with the regime against the Syrian people as his logic goes. There is a great part of the Syrian people with the regime. We are with this great part. We are with the second part as far as reform is concerned; however, we are not with it in destroying Syria. We are also with the regime in making reforms, and we are not with it in destroying Syria.
So let's keep the issue of the people and the regime aside. The scene in Syria might be "an armed Syrian opposition fighting a regime". At times the scene is not as such. There is an armed Syrian opposition and tens of thousands of armed men – here I am saying tens of thousands; but Allah only knows how many armed men there are. Perhaps they are 100 thousands or more by now – who came or were brought along from all over the world. Now some are trying to convince us that Arab states and countries from the Islamic world where there are no elections, democracy, or even a constitution or institutions are dispatching their citizens and providing them with money, facilities, and guarantees to go to Syria in order to have democratic elections and reform! Or is there another story? If such a scene exists, the whole world has then gone to Syria to fight this regime and this part of the Syrian people. The world is fighting them with their money, arms, and media. Even arming the opposition is a lie. Arming has been taking place since a long time. Well, we scrutinized the issue and found out after two years – more or less – that some people are insisting and are still moving on in this battle even if that is meant to destroy Syria or to slaughter the Syrian people. What is important is that the regime is toppled and that Syria's political and regional position changes. The regime which is meant to assume power is not a political regime. The alternative is rather chaos and the rule of groups which butcher, slaughter, and kill. Well, before this status quo, a universal war is taking place.
I address the people who were agitated because Hezbollah intervened. We were the last to get involved. They preceded us. The Future Movement and other Lebanese parties and Lebanese forces which I do not want to name, and states, groups, parties, organizations and bodies intervened before us. We were the last to get involved. I will go back to the campaign of sanctions and terrorist lists that was waged against us for intervening. Well I have a question here. Were we to intervene in Syria with the opposition, our intervention would have been blessed and welcomed. We would have become the true Hezbollah for the entire world to see. Our flags and banners would have been raised in several Arab capitals, and many Arab satellites would have let go of us. Isn't that so? Can anyone say anything else? The issue is not that of intervention. The story is not that of two states, violation of sovereignty, and Baabda Declaration.
No the story is that some people intervened along the side which the entire world wants to topple – along a side the US-Israeli-Takfiri project want to topple. If you intervened along this side, the whole world would raise against you. This is natural. This is very natural and very logical.
We go back to the very point we are talking about. It became clear to us that before this universal attack, our participation – though humble – would be helpful. Well, yes in Syria, the Syrian army is fighting all over the Syrian territories. Now did they seriously see that Hezbollah is fighting in the Provinces of Daraa, Quneytra, Hasaka, Riqqa, Deir Zour, Idlib, Tartous, and Laziqiyeh? No it is not so. We have considerable and good capabilities, and we also said we will have our coordinated, thoughtful participation. Thus we assume a part of the responsibility in confronting the grave universal project which has goals that do not stop at Syria as it targets Lebanon, the people of Lebanon, the peoples of the region, and the governments of the region. So it wants Syria and the entire region to fall and not only Syria. In the past, I used to say Syria. Now I say they also want Lebanon, Iraq, Jordan, and the whole region to fall in the hand of the US-Israeli-Takfiri project.
We took this choice and we went for it. Why? That's because we are convinced that this participation is fruitful. The story is not that of being loyal only. No! For us this participation is fruitful. This has been verified so far. In fact, I do not want to talk about this. In brief, this participation is fruitful whether before or after Qusair and whether in politics, media, and the international, regional, or local levels.
Moreover, we did not go and hide. Some people reproached us. Well, if you want to fight in Syria do so; but why did you announce that?
Frankly speaking, we do not send our young men to fight in Syria and say we are delivering milk and blankets, and in case they were killed, we bury them in Syria and silent their parents in Lebanon. Never! When we go to any battle or to any place to fight, it will be pursuant to a legitimate responsibility, a vision, and a clear mission. We believe that we will be asked about that in Doom's Day and we have to answer. So if there is a battle, we have to go there whether we liked it or not. This is our obligation. We do not like this battle at all. We like that battle with Israel. However, when we fight we do not hide. When our martyrs fall, we do not feel ashamed of them. We hold their funerals in daylight, and we partake in their funerals. Indeed we do not open fire. Thus we talked openly about the cause of these martyrs and injured. Some of these injured are partaking in the festival and others are in hospitals and in their homes. They did not hide. They are not robbers or highwaymen. They are fighters and strugglers who have a cause; what is taking place is a battle, and this is the nature of the battle.
This is our stance. We went for it, and we still adhere to this stance. Thus was this uproar. In the past couple of weeks – especially following May 25 – no one spared any offence or abuse. No one spared a TV channel or a website he owns without investing it against us. Some want to put us on the terrorist list. For example, as far as I know, the Gulf Cooperation Council does not have a terrorist list. I don't know if the Arab League has a terrorist list. Now it is required that we be put on the terrorist list. The Europeans have been discussing this issue for a long time ago. Moreover, we are proud of being placed on the US terrorist list since the very beginning. We have taken into consideration all what we heard and what was said would be done in the past weeks and we were not surprised by it at all. I mean in specific that soon threats will be issued against the Lebanese living in the Gulf countries. I would like to tell you that we do not have followers of Hezbollah in the Gulf countries. After all, do you believe that a follower of Hezbollah may be allowed to live in Gulf countries? There is not anything of this sort. We do not have projects in the Gulf or in any other place. However, this is a way to threaten the Lebanese and their families.
On May 25th, I clearly said that we are going to a place and we know all its repercussions and we are ready to tolerate all its repercussions. I want to clarify this point a little bit. We are facing a project that is rushing upon the region, Lebanon, living in Lebanon, and the people in Lebanon – all the people in Lebanon. Go and ask in Syria. Go and ask the Sunnites in Syria who are not with them. Go and ask the Christians, the Druze, the Shiites, the Alawis, the Ismaelites, the Abadis, and the Zaidis. Ask them all: Do they have a place in the future of Syria with these fatwas of takfir and acts of killing which exist and which started with the Sunnites who are not with them namely His Eminence Sheikh Bouti and the prayers in Iman Mosque, the Syrian scholars who were killed because of their political stance or at times because of their political silence – meaning that they don't want to back the armed groups? When you want to confront such a project, you offer sacrifices to confront and topple such a project whether these sacrifices are martyrs, injured, or rockets that fall on our heads in Bekaa and Dahiyeh or whether some people from among us are oppressively being killed or people are treated aggressively in this Gulf state or that Arab country because of our stance of confrontation.
Here I am telling you that toppling this project which is extremely dangerous on our homelands, sanctities, and peoples is much more solemn than any sacrifices which might offer. Thus we must tolerate these sacrifices and these repercussions. So anyone who believes that putting us on the terrorist lists or threatening us with the Lebanese living in the Gulf countries or staging aggressions of any kind locally or abroad may make us change our stance is mistaken. On the contrary, similar to the stream of offences and abuses, that makes us more convinced that our stance, our track, our vision, and our position are right and deserve these sacrifices.
However the worst thing that took place in the past few weeks is a continuation of what has been taking place since years; it is the resort to sectarian speech. This is weak evidence. We would be watching a dialogue on TV channels and satellites when suddenly the dialogists start cursing each other. When someone resorts to abuses that means he is not being logical and he has no evidence or proof. Whoever has logic, evidence, and proof does not curse. Cursing and abusing are the weapon of the weak and the powerless. Here I will tell you more. We all understand the atmosphere that prevailed in the past few weeks especially in some Arab and Gulf milieus. We can understand this anger, wrath, and agitation. Why? That's because there is a project which they sponsor, they paid for billions of dollars, they invested their political ties for, and they took a suicidal inclination in it and took the adventure. In fact, they are making an adventure and nobody knows what will take place. Now they believe that the project is being defeated. I am not saying a decisive victory took place in Syria. The project has started to be defeated or is in the path of being defeated or that force balances are changing. Thus they turned pale. Well, let's understand their state. Let them go on cursing, abusing and attacking because this is the current status quo.
I will go back to the very topic in this track. It is the sectarian topic. Yes, this is the worst and most dangerous thing that is taking place. The dispute in Syria is between two fronts, two axes, two projects, and not between Shiites and Sunnites. It is not between two sects. So why do you want to make it between two sects?
Is Sheikh Bouti a Shiite? Are the Syrian scholars who back this stance Shiites?
Is the Syrian Arab Army which is fighting with tens of thousands of soldiers who are present in the battle fields Shiite or even Alawi? Why are you making the struggle in Syria a sectarian struggle? It is not sectarian and you are labeling it sectarian because you are weak, powerless and failing. All the rational Shiites, Sunnites, Muslims, and Christians must exert all their efforts to prevent turning the conflict to a sectarian conflict. The easiest thing for any side is to turn the conflict into a sectarian conflict.
I personally am glad with the Shiite stances that are opposite to our stance. What is the problem in that? Let them oppose, criticize and take a different position without resorting to cursing, and there would be no problem in that. On the contrary, this is helpful because it means that the conflict is not a Sunni-Shiite conflict as there are Shiites and Sunnites in this side and Sunnites and Shiites in the other side – as what we used to say when talking about March 14 and March 8 Blocs.
Well lately things went far enough to resorting to false data – if I am to have good opinion, I will say wrong data and if I am to think ill at the time of ill-thinking, I will say false data.
What took place in Qusair is that some men got excited and from their own mind ascended one of the mosques of the city of Qusair and put a black banner with the word; O Hussein. Now whether this is right or wrong is another point. This was viewed on websites and broadcasted by Al Arabiya and Al Jazira – these two channels which believe they are respectful and important political channels – besides other Arab satellites and websites. Now how did they report this piece of news? They said that men from Hezbollah ascended the minaret of the mosque – claiming that this mosque is the Mosque of Caliph Omar Bin Al Khattab – and raised on it the banner of Al Hussein. For a week until yesterday – I don't know if today too – they interviewed scholars, muftis, and personalities who said what they had to say: Qusair is being announced a Shiite city! O Islam! O people of Sunna and Jamaa'… Is this a rational conduct! Suppose that the story is true. Is this a rational conduct or a responsible conduct? Shiite and Sunni Muslims are found all around the Globe and not only in the Islamic world. Do we instigate them in such a way? If this is true, they must say that this is a condemned, wrong conduct, and let them condemn us too. Why do you present the issue as a Shiite-Sunni issue?
Notice that this piece of information is false and not only wrong. Today, the brethrens in the media relations will circulate a CD on media outlets. I hope that the media outlets will deal with this issue seriously. Sorry for going into details but for a week long, the most important Arab satellites have been exploiting this issue to cause instigations. In the city of Qusair, there is a number of Mosques. These stupid people do not know that in Qusair there are Shiites – Syrian Shiites. They are natives since tens or hundreds of years. They have a neighborhood, houses and a mosque. This mosque was built ten years ago. The name of the Mosque is Hassan Al Mujtaba (Peace be upon him). A sheikh leads collective prayers in that mosque. Well some young men – whether that is right or wrong – ascended the minaret and hang that banner on top of the minaret of the Mosque of Imam Hassan Mujtaba (Peace be upon him). As for the Mosque of Caliph Omar Bin Al Khattab, it is several kilometers away from this mosque. No one approached this mosque or ascended its minaret, and no one raised a banner there. The CD which will be distributed is from the city of Qusair. It shows the minaret with the banner and the Mosque of Imam Hassan Mujtaba (Peace be upon him) and the Mosque of Caliph Omar Bin Al Khattab. It shows the structure of the minaret of this mosque and the structure of the minaret of that mosque. We reached a state in which we are to handle such details! However, we are obliged to handle these details. Why? That's because through these details a factional war is being made in the region. This is falsehood. This is fabrication. Moreover, is Imam Hussein (Peace be upon him) the Imam of Shiites only? Imam Hussein (Peace be upon him) is for all Muslims.
The worst thing is that people go for sectarianism in such a way and that the most important Arab satellites exploit it claiming they are objectively presenting one viewpoint and the other viewpoint. If you want to know more, what are you to know? You know lies, misleading, and fabrications. This is what is taking place.
Here I add saying – as I do in every clause I list – that if anyone believes that by presenting the battle as sectarian or factional or that through fabrications, lies, falsehood, and through threats of takfir and killing we will change our mind, we will not change our mind. Now the post Qusair era is similar to the pre-Qusair era according to us. Nothing changed. Did the project change? Is the scene understood in a different way? Did convictions in the targets of the project change? Has the given changed? On the contrary, the other project is showing more insistence on getting along and developing the confrontation. We will be where we are supposed to be. We will resume assuming the responsibility which we assumed, and we don't need to go more into details.
Well in this framework, there are Islamic forces and Islamic parties which are contacting us and offering us ideas and initiatives. Here I am telling you, we are open to any discussion on the stance in Syria. However in the past couple of days some ideas and initiatives were made. I can't comment on them now because that needs further discussion with the leadership of Hezbollah. However, at this moment, the scene is still the very scene, the evaluation is the very evaluation; the vision is the very vision; the understanding is the very understanding; and the stance is the very stance. As for details, that comes pursuant to the needs of the field.
We are all living a decisive, critical historic stage in which everyone assumes responsibility and bears the consequences of this responsibility. We ask Allah to grant us a good ending in our religion, in this world, and in the Hereafter.
Finally, I salute again with utmost esteem, respect and reverence all our dear injured brothers and sisters.
I must also express your and my felicitations today to His Eminence Sayyed Khamenai (May long he lives) and to the dear Iranian people for this great extraordinary democratic festival which is unprecedented in the third world. This high public turnout which was reported by foreign news agencies since the early morning has exceeded all expectations. As His Eminence the leader (May Allah guard him) said every vote in the ballot boxes today is a renovation and a new expression of trust in the regime of the Islamic Republic in Iran which some want to label it an enemy or fight or present as an enemy for Arabs and Muslims while forgetting Israel, Al Qods, the US project….
Today Iran is presenting for everyone and especially for the Islamic world an example in popular participation, presence, and elections. Imagine this scene that took place today. The Leader, the Wali Al Faqih – this is to those who do not know the powers of the Wali Al Faqih and view that some Arab kings, princes or presidents have hundreds more powers – made one vote just as any Iranian peasant or Iranian Muslim or Christian or Armenian, or Sunni, or Persian, or Arab, or Kurd, or Turkmen. Like them, he made just one vote in the elections that will decide the president of the republic – the head of the executive power who has very vast powers in Iran.
We hope these democratic popular festivals prevail in all our countries in the Arab and Islamic world. I salute the injured on their day again. Peace be upon you and Allah's mercy and blessings.
First, go to Amazon.com (not Amazon.co.uk or Amazon.fr or any other Amazon site) Then click on "Gift Card" on the top of the page Then click on "Email" at the "Ways to Send" menu Finally, choose a card and amount. That's it!
Cash by snail mail:
The Saker PO Box 711 Edgewater, FL 32132-0711 USA
Free Novels (PDF) for Saker Blog Supporters
e-book in *PDF* format - not paperback!
How to contact me:
Main email address: vineyardsaker@gmail.com (for example to be included in the "Saker's friends" low volume mailing list) Alternative/backup emails: vineyardsaker@mail.ru thesaker@unseen.is
Fear them not therefore: for there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; and hid, that shall not be known. If ye continue in My word, then are ye My disciples indeed; and ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free
Holy Gospel according to Saint Matthew (10:26) and Saint John (8:32)
Trust not in princes, nor in the children of men, in whom there is no safety. His breath shall go forth, and he shall return to his earth; in that day all his thoughts shall perish.
Holy Prophet and King David (Psalm 145:3-4 according to the LXX)
To love. To be loved. To never forget your own insignificance. To never get used to the unspeakable violence and the vulgar disparity of life around you. To seek joy in the saddest places. To pursue beauty to its lair. To never simplify what is complicated or complicate what is simple. To respect strength, never power. Above all, to watch. To try and understand. To never look away. And never, never to forget.
Arundhati Roy
Thou shalt not be a victim. Thou shalt not be a perpetrator. And above all, Thou shalt not be a bystander
Yehuda Bauer
In a world of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act
George Orwell
Each small candle lights a corner of the dark
Roger Waters
I am prepared to die, but there is no cause for which I am prepared to kill. I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent. Strength does not come from physical capacity. It comes from an indomitable will.
Mahatma Gandhi
I am for truth, no matter who tells it.
Malcolm X
Globalize the Intifada!
Lowkey
I am a pessimist by nature. Many people can only keep on fighting when they expect to win. I'm not like that, I always expect to lose. I fight anyway, and sometimes I win.
Richard Stallman
Truth is treason in the empire of lies.
Ron Paul
Dieu se rit des hommes qui déplorent les effets dont ils chérissent les causes
Protect Freedom - Join the Free Software Foundation!
Quenelle Epaulee
No to Internet censorship!
Save the Internet from corporate greed!
GNU/Linux distributions I recommend:
Debian, the Universal Operating System Mint, the easiest to use distribution Xubuntu, distribution for older hardware Knoppix, general purpose distro on live-CD Puppy, small size distribution and live-CD Tails, the privacy and security oriented distro Ubuntu Studio, distribution for artists Trisquel, the 100% free softwaredistro
