In Iran, elements from within the regime are reportedly offering a €760,000 reward for the assassination of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak because of his opposition to Hamas in the Gaza Strip.
In Lebanon, the leader of Hezbollah, backed by Iran and Syria, merely calls for the Egyptian government's overthrow.
In response to this, Tariq Alhomayed, a Saudi who is editor-in-chief of the newspaper Al-Sharq al-Awsat, describes Hamas as Iran's tool, and argues that "Iran is a real threat to Arab security".
Egypt's foreign minister, Ahmed Aboul Gheit, agrees - and he is not alone.
In Lebanon, the leader of Hezbollah, backed by Iran and Syria, merely calls for the Egyptian government's overthrow.
In response to this, Tariq Alhomayed, a Saudi who is editor-in-chief of the newspaper Al-Sharq al-Awsat, describes Hamas as Iran's tool, and argues that "Iran is a real threat to Arab security".
Egypt's foreign minister, Ahmed Aboul Gheit, agrees - and he is not alone.
When Arab states met to discuss the Gaza crisis, Saudi Arabia vetoed any action. Even the Palestinian Authority (PA) blames Hamas for the fighting. Activists in Fatah, Hamas's nationalist rival which runs the PA, make no secret of their hope that Hamas loses the war.
Welcome to the new Middle East, characterised no longer by the Arab-Israeli conflict, but by an Arab nationalist - Islamist conflict. Recognising this reality, virtually all Arab states - other than Iran's ally, Syria - and the PA want to see Hamas defeated in the Gaza Strip.
Given their strong self-interest in thwarting Islamist revolutionary groups, especially those aligned with Iran, they are not inclined to listen to the "Arab street" - which is far quieter than it was during previous conflicts, such as the 1991 war in Kuwait, the 2000-2004 Palestinian uprising, or the 2006 Israel-Hezbollah war.
Today's Middle East is very different from the old one in many significant ways.
First, the internal politics of every Arab country revolves around a battle between Arab nationalist rulers and an Islamist opposition. In other words, Hamas's allies are the regimes' enemies. An Islamist state in the Gaza Strip would encourage those who seek to create similar entities in Egypt, Jordan, and every other Arab country.
Already, a tremendous price has been paid in lives and treasure for this conflict. The violence has included civil wars among Palestinians and Algerians; the bloodshed in Iraq; and terrorist campaigns in Egypt and Saudi Arabia.
In the Palestinian case, after winning an election victory and making a deal with Fatah for a coalition government, Hamas turned on its nationalist rivals and drove them out of Gaza by force. In return, the PA has been repressing Hamas in the West Bank. In Lebanon, Hezbollah has been trying to bully its more moderate Sunni Muslim, Christian, and Druze rivals into submission.
Second, because Arab states confront an Iran-Syria alliance that includes Hamas and Hezbollah, in addition to internal conflicts, there is a regional battle between these two blocs. An aspect of this is that the largely Sunni Muslim-led states face a largely Shia Muslim-led competitor for regional hegemony...[>>>cititi aici continuarea articolului Hamas's real enemies by Barry Rubin, Reuters 16th January 2009]
Welcome to the new Middle East, characterised no longer by the Arab-Israeli conflict, but by an Arab nationalist - Islamist conflict. Recognising this reality, virtually all Arab states - other than Iran's ally, Syria - and the PA want to see Hamas defeated in the Gaza Strip.
Given their strong self-interest in thwarting Islamist revolutionary groups, especially those aligned with Iran, they are not inclined to listen to the "Arab street" - which is far quieter than it was during previous conflicts, such as the 1991 war in Kuwait, the 2000-2004 Palestinian uprising, or the 2006 Israel-Hezbollah war.
Today's Middle East is very different from the old one in many significant ways.
First, the internal politics of every Arab country revolves around a battle between Arab nationalist rulers and an Islamist opposition. In other words, Hamas's allies are the regimes' enemies. An Islamist state in the Gaza Strip would encourage those who seek to create similar entities in Egypt, Jordan, and every other Arab country.
Already, a tremendous price has been paid in lives and treasure for this conflict. The violence has included civil wars among Palestinians and Algerians; the bloodshed in Iraq; and terrorist campaigns in Egypt and Saudi Arabia.
In the Palestinian case, after winning an election victory and making a deal with Fatah for a coalition government, Hamas turned on its nationalist rivals and drove them out of Gaza by force. In return, the PA has been repressing Hamas in the West Bank. In Lebanon, Hezbollah has been trying to bully its more moderate Sunni Muslim, Christian, and Druze rivals into submission.
Second, because Arab states confront an Iran-Syria alliance that includes Hamas and Hezbollah, in addition to internal conflicts, there is a regional battle between these two blocs. An aspect of this is that the largely Sunni Muslim-led states face a largely Shia Muslim-led competitor for regional hegemony...[>>>cititi aici continuarea articolului Hamas's real enemies by Barry Rubin, Reuters 16th January 2009]
10 comments:
Iata ce zice unul, care e anti-ISRAEL, insa in acelasi timp anti-HAMAS ... Acest ziarist (Hassan Haidar) sustine ca Israel i-a prins pe prostii de Hamas in capcana:
"The Israelis waited for Hamas to unilaterally announce the end of the Egyptian-brokered truce, the only practical hindrance to the Israeli strike under an unequal military balance.
They concluded that Hamas' refusal to take part in the Egyptian-mediated Palestinian national dialogue is a sign that Hamas is likely heading - as they wish - for confrontation.
It is also clear that Hamas was surprised by the magnitude of the response, as it did not take the Israeli threats seriously.
Despite its decision to resume rocket attacks, it did not take any extraordinary precautions, such as evacuating its security headquarters and equipping hospitals and the civil defense forces. This explains the large number of casualties and the lack of appropriate treatment.
One day prior to the bloody offensive, the situation on both sides was as follows:
On the one hand, Hamas thought it could improve its negotiating position with Israel which has repeatedly violated the truce, benefiting from the divergent Israeli positions in the run-up to the general elections with the rivals competing within the government, and Livni and Barack attempting to pull the rug each to his side.
In addition, Hamas assumed that a relative and limited security trouble in Gaza will strengthen its internal Palestinian cards and prompt the authority to respond to its demands, namely cease its negotiations with Israel on the basis of Annapolis. Syria and Iran too encouraged the movement to break its ties with the Arab moderate camp represented by Egypt and Saudi Arabia."
in acelasi articol (din Dec.28,2008)...
ziaristul Hassan Haidar ... (ati auzit de el ???) prezinta:
(A)>>> strategia si MOTIVATIILE statului Israel,
(... fara sa vrea, complimentind de fapt Israelul pentru inteligentele miscari de shah)
"On the other hand, Israel was trying - according to statements by its military chiefs - to regain a very important deterrent card, based on an enormous military superiority. It knew in advance that Hamas' regional commitments will make the movement - sooner or later - abandon the Egyptian umbrella and revoke the truce. Thus, it seized the opportunity to launch a very painful strike, while at the same time addressing a message to Hamas' allies, particularly in Lebanon, that a new war with Israel will be unaffordable."
(B)>>> de asemeni, ziaristul prezinta si unicele LOZINCI si ACTIUNI care le-au mai ramas lui HAMAS pentru a-si mentine fatzada, in acest conflict perdant in care s-au bagat, ... sacrificind populatia palestiniana civila:
"Today, the Islamic movement stresses that it will not succumb even if Gaza was entirely annihilated ...
Demonstrations may be also staged.
But the ONLY solution is to restore truce with Israel under an Egyptian mediation ratified by all Arabs, especially that a military solution is unlikely and the confrontations will fail to change the balance of power and - most importantly - because the sides inciting Hamas will not open their military fronts, even if Gaza was wiped off the map."
(intreg articolul>>> "The Israeli Trap"...)
Intr`un alt articol, acelasi ziarist Hassan Haidar ...,
sustine ca HAMASUL poarta simultan TREI RAZBOAIE :
"The first war is the bloody one against Israel ...
The second war waged by the Hamas movement is one that affects the Palestinians themselves, starting with the bloody coup in Gaza, and up to the present ...
Hamas's third war is the war of regional coalitions. Indeed, the Hamas movement, that represents part of the Palestinian people, has chosen to join the Syrian-Iranian coalition in the face of the forces of Arab moderation ...
Hamas insists on pursuing its three wars indefinitely and at any cost, in a manner that resembles suicide, which does not disagree with its ideology...
However, such a decision involves the fate of an entire people, whether they are disaster-stricken in Gaza or besieged in the West Bank, ..."
(intreg articolul>>> "Hamas's Wars Are Greater than Itself", 16 January 2009)
Nu stiu cine este acest Haidar insa spune prostii.
In primul rand, noi, israelienii stim foarte bine cine a incalcat armistitziul. Este Hamasul si acolitzii sai din Gaza, care au tras in timpul armistitziului zeci de rachete. Din sase luni de armistitziu, au fost linistite numai 2-3 luni.
In al doilea rand prezinta actuala confrontare ca o cursa initzata de Israel Hamasului.
Ori, Hamasul a fost avertizat de zeci de ore ca se apropie operatziunaea cea mare. aceste avertismente au venit dupa fiecare bombardament cu rachete si de atatea ori ca ne plictisisem sa le auzim.
Dovada ca nu a fost o cursa o reprezinta insusi faptul ca partidele de stanga (Meretz si elementele "pacifiste" din Partidul Muncii) au tacut malc aproband prin tacere operatziunea care era singura posibilitate de a reda securitatea oraselor din apropierea fasiei Gaza.
In fine, cel care a impiedecat puternic ca operatziunea sa inceapa a fost Ehud Barak, care insa dupa ziua record in care s-au tras 70 de rachete pur si simplu nu a mai avut ce sa faca in fatza furiei populatziei.
Nu a fost nimic dictat de alegeri.
In concluzie: ziaristul lui peste.
mai mult ma intereseaza pozitia lui fatza de HAMAS ...
se pare ca Egiptul nu e prea multumit, ca Israel a luat intreg tortul de sub cireasa ...
Egypt: "We expected Israel to act differently"
extrem de nostim ...
Pezevenghiul asta de Mubarak, care poarta o buna parte din vina razboiului, mai are si pretentzii!
Cred ca l-au avut pe Moroianu profesor la matematica...
Hamas reveals death toll
"Palestinian militant group Hamas has issued its first statement on losses suffered during the Gaza offensive.
A spokesman said 1,200 Palestinians
-half of them civilians - had died along with 48 fighters, far less than the hundreds that Israel had claimed.
Hamas claimed it had inflicted heavy losses on Israeli forces and killed 80 soldiers, but Israel said just five troops died in fighting."
Articole post-Gaza...
despre DEATH TOLL:
Israel disputes Gaza death toll
Report: Hamas Lied About Gaza Casualties;
Palestinians confirm Hamas war crimes, refute Gaza death toll
despre FRATRICIDUL arab, care are loc ACUM in Gaza:
Hamas executes suspected Fatah traitors in Gaza
Hamas admits killing 'Israeli collaborators'
Nu am citit un articol mai caraghios, ... ce bilci, ce babilonie:
Jan 23, 2009 PARIS (AP) —
"French troops, Turkish monitors, British ships, German tunnel detectors, European radar equipment — officials say all these options are being weighed as they try to cement the cease-fire between Israel and Hamas.
The key to a solution is finding a way to choke off smuggling through tunnels under the slender border between Gaza and Egypt while opening the aboveground crossings to travel and trade. The eight-mile frontier is at the heart of secretive diplomacy across Europe and the Middle East this week...."
(ce urmeaza... e si mai hilar !!!)
Post a Comment