As the Gaza ceasefire talks stall yet again, some analysts argue that Donald Trump’s inauguration could be the key. However, the prospects for ending the war are dependent upon a variety of other factors that are making an Israeli victory impossible.
Despite the recent progress towards securing a ceasefire in the Gaza Strip, the Zionist regime has again employed its delaying tactics in order to find the opportune moment. While the Resistance in Gaza has proven flexible on the fine details of a prisoner exchange and cessation of hostilities, it has also proven steadfast on the battlefield, making an Israeli victory declaration implausible.
The popularly accepted analysis at this stage is that with the start of Donald Trump’s second term in office, the possibility of a Gaza ceasefire will increase greatly. It is believed that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu could even present the implementation of such a deal as a gift to Trump; kick-starting his Presidency with a diplomatic breakthrough.
It is also true that the Zionist Entity’s richest billionaire, Miriam Adelson, had pledged 100 million dollars to the Trump campaign, with the quid pro quo that in return for bankrolling his presidential bid, he would permit an Israeli annexation of the occupied West Bank.
What Could Make or Break A Gaza Ceasefire
The reality that must be accepted when it comes to the Israeli approach to a Gaza ceasefire/prisoner exchange agreement is that the United States will not use its leverage to secure one and instead only seeks to support the Zionist entity towards securing the best possible deal. Therefore, arguments presented about the possibility of the Trump administration actually using Washington’s leverage are ludicrous and should be discarded as fanciful.
The reason why Donald Trump could make a difference in this case comes down to two major factors: His support within the Zionist regime and his willingness to permit them to completely crush the idea of a so-called “Two-State solution”.
There is no one that commands quite as much public support amongst Israelis as Donald Trump, in fact, he is more loved by them than his own population in the United States. This means that his word carries weight and him throwing his support behind the Netanyahu-led coalition could force the more fundamentalist elements of his government to fall into line. In addition to this, there will be no hesitancy when it comes to permitting an Israeli annexation of the occupied West Bank.
These two components are essential for ensuring that a Gaza deal will not collapse the current Israeli coalition. If the Israeli PM is going to secure the support he needs for such a ceasefire, he needs the extremists on his side and can only do this by fulfilling the pledge to annex the West Bank.
Another major issue, besides the domestic Israeli political divisions is the activity and risk of battle across a variety of fronts. In order to annex the West Bank, the Israeli military will need to deploy enormous numbers of soldiers, private security forces and occupation police into the territory. In the event of mass civil unrest, or even a worse scenario for them like the collapse of the Palestinian Authority, they will need to send a force that could amount to hundreds of thousands of fighters, into the territory in order to control the situation.
Already the Zionist military is in a State of exhaustion, with many of its soldiers refusing to show back up when called upon to redeploy into the Gaza Strip. They have tens of thousands of wounded fighters and countless others suffering from psychological disorders, all of which place a burden on the regime alone. There’s also a deficit that has to be filled in the rank and file that the Israelis need in order for their military to function at proper capacity, which has led to desperate attempts to draw in new reserve soldiers and force the Ultra-Orthodox population to draft their young.
In the best case scenario for the Israelis – when carrying out their annexation – they will still need to dedicate a tremendous amount of resources and manpower to fulfilling the task properly. This is essential to understanding why the annexation will prove extremely difficult in the event that one of the various war fronts expands, particularly the Lebanon or Syria fronts.
While the future of resistance inside Syrian territory is unclear and not certain, if such a force does manage to rise and challenge the occupation of their territory in the south, it will require major investments to combat it and will be greatly draining for the Zionist armed forces. Although this appears to be the least likely of the fronts to again deteriorate into war, it is certainly still a question mark.
Then we have Lebanon. The Israelis have not respected the ceasefire for a single day since its announcement, committing hundreds of violations. The Zionist regime is not only continuing to maintain its presence in southern Lebanon, but has even penetrated further into the country during this period, forcing their way into territories that they couldn’t reach due to the fierce resistance against them.
The Israelis now discuss re-occupying southern Lebanon, blow up homes, mosques and other infrastructure daily, murder civilians, bomb targets deeper into the country and provocatively fly their flags in the south. Such a situation has not occurred since Hezbollah kicked the Zionist regime out of their nation in 2000, battering the Israelis again in 2006 and liberating their land. There is no conceivable way that the situation in Lebanon can remain like this, either the Israelis decide to leave the country altogether, or they will eventually face a response from Hezbollah.
If these fronts ignite, or tensions escalate with Iran, annexation will prove a difficult task for the decision makers in “Tel Aviv”, as they will be faced with a potentially dangerous predicament. Again, without the annexation of the West Bank, it is hard to imagine the Zionist regime being able to conclude a Gaza ceasefire.
On top of this, the Palestinian Resistance in Gaza has shocked everyone and is not only continuing to fight, it still possesses the rocket capabilities to strike occupied Jerusalem and Tel Aviv. In fact, the last burst of long-range rockets from the Gaza Strip towards occupied Jerusalem were fired from Beit Hanoun, an area in the besieged enclave that the Israelis have been stationed in throughout almost the entirety of the war.
Palestinian Resistance fighters continue to kill and injure Israeli soldiers, destroy and damage their military vehicles, while also firing rockets and drones. This is happening almost 15 months into the fighting and with no known supply lines to Gaza. Yet, the people continue to remain steadfast, while the resistance continues to recruit more fighters and manufacture new weapons.
Because of the refusal of the people of Gaza to lessen their cause, they have thwarted several attempts to impose a new rule upon them. Despite suffering through a Genocide and losing everything around them, they have not allowed for a foreign regime and fighters to be imposed. Also, the Zionists have not come up with any valid strategy to allow for a takeover of the Palestinian territory, having failed to destroy Hamas.
This is another issue that rears its head, what will the day after look like? There is no clear answer to this question yet and none of the proposals on the table will give the Zionists the image of a full victory that they have proposed from the start.
Many analysts will be wondering what Trump will do about Russian sanctions when gets into the Oval office, although there is some optimism that he will try and reverse them. He is cautious not to get into a debate about this subject, which leads me to suspect that this will be one of the bombshells he will drop on the Biden administration which left him the small gift of signing off over a billion dollars of military aid to Ukraine. What almost no Americans understand though, which is largely the fault of mainstream media, is that these military spending sprees are really all about feeding a dual-purpose racket which really has nothing to do with the actual war in Ukraine, which everyone now admits Russia is winning. On one hand, it is of course pumping hundreds of millions of dollars into the 5 main arms manufacturers in the U.S. in a move which could arguably be called illegal state aid; on the other hand the kit which is sent to Ukraine from the U.S. – and the UK – is mainly being sold on a number of black markets, with only about 30 percent or thereabouts actually reaching Ukrainian troops. My own investigation has proved that the Zelensky cabal are selling off the heavy equipment like armoured personal carriers (APCs) and lorry loads of American made assault rifles to dealers in the international arms bizarre of Libya – where Middle Eastern terrorists, or their affiliates in the Sahel buy it at bargain prices.
And Trump certainly understands the racket and will want to stop it. Dropping the mother of all bombshells on the Biden legacy by scrapping the sanctions and blocking any more aid would be an effective way to do that.
But it’s the sanctions on Russia media which he should also give priority to, given that, with the state of western media being such a shambles, we had to rely on RT for example, in the UK and U.S., to ask the difficult questions and hold our administrations to account.
The recent news at the end of December that the EU is cracking down even further on Russia media and individuals who are active within it – journalists and others – is another parting shot which smacks of desperation. The West is under no illusions privately that it is losing the war in Ukraine and is wondering how it can tell a fairy tale story to its own voters so as to deflect blame with the sole purpose of staying in power. This is really what media sanctions are all about. Shutting down any narrative that could possibly hold you to account and expose the tawdry reality of the mess the West has made in Ukraine based on the military industrial complex gaining too much power and eating up elites in its path. The Biden administration will be remembered for this. A new dawn in just how much power these arms manufacturers have and what lengths they can go to, to get the big contracts. This will all come out in the Trump administration with documentaries about Biden and his son’s laptop and how Ukraine was a holiday camp for them to go to with empty suitcases and return with a few million dollars. Like a cash machine which keeps churning out cash due to a computer glitch. The lure of Ukraine and corrupt western elites is nothing new. But during Trump’s first term citizens of the West are going to see the dark side to the events which led up to Russia’s invasion. And it stinks.
Part of that racket, going back even to 2013 or 2014 was to try and shut down Russian media. In reality, it was simply RT which elites noticed was gaining popularity in many European countries from people who had lost all faith in their own media which had fallen into the grubby hands of the powerful elites and their dirty games long ago. It used to be the case that in Brussels, the hold that the powerful institutions had on journalists was so strong in such an abusive relationship that what we saw each day on TV and in the newspapers was pure EU propaganda on a scale that even the Soviet Union could not muster. There used to be however the contrast between Brussels and member states where the media were more robust and anti-establishment. But no more. Now the political journalists along with the defence correspondent in the UK for example are practically government propaganda agents who probably think they were journalists once. Their work is to keep the lies about Ukraine, as one example, flowing so that the public are distracted and can’t focus on what is under their nose. Sometimes the plain truth is so close to the person looking for it, that it can’t be seen. Distance is required. When RT operated in the UK, there was this certain environment which questioned more and provided an alternative viewpoint which was needed in any functioning democracy. Trump’s priority should be to finish the sanctions and adopt a more grown-up approach to resolving Ukraine as the Russians want a longer-term solution rather than quick fix buggerydoo. Ending the sanctions on Russian media would be a good message to western elites that have fed from the trough for so long with the lies which have been created that their time is up. Trump’s back.
US Senator Bernie Sanders has taken a swipe at Elon Musk over his defense of the H-1B immigration program, arguing that it only helps enrich billionaires who rely on cheap foreign labor while undermining ordinary Americans.
The H-1B visa program allows US companies to employ foreign workers in fields requiring advanced skills in fields such as technology, engineering, and medicine. It has been described as the only significant channel for foreign graduates to enter the US workforce, with the vast majority of approved petitions going to Indian nationals in recent years.
Both Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, who US President-elect Donald Trump picked to lead his proposed ‘Department of Government Efficiency’ initiative (DOGE), have spoken out in support of the program. Musk, reportedly a former H-1B recipient, suggested that this type of visa “made America strong” by attracting foreign talent, while vowing to “go to war on this issue the likes of which you cannot possibly comprehend.”
Musk’s critics say the H-1B program has been of great benefit to his own companies – Tesla and SpaceX – as well as other big US corporations.
Writing on X on Thursday, Sanders, a self-described democratic socialist, joined the critics.
“Elon Musk is wrong. The main function of the H-1B visa program is not to hire ‘the best and the brightest,’ but rather to replace good-paying American jobs with low-wage indentured servants from abroad. The cheaper the labor they hire, the more money the billionaires make,” he wrote.
Sanders noted that from 2022 to 2023, the top 30 largest US companies using the program hired over 34,000 new employees under H-1B, while laying off at least 85,000 American workers.
“The H-1B program must be ended. Bottom line. It should never be cheaper for a corporation to hire a guest worker from overseas than an American worker,” he said.
In 2016, Trump, who is known for his hardline stance on immigration, called the scheme “very unfair” to American workers and said it should be ended.
In late December, however, Trump appeared to have changed his mind and expressed support for the program.
“I have many H-1B visas on my properties. I’ve been a believer in H-1B. I have used it many times. It’s a great program,” he said. Asked about the apparent flip-flop, Trump denied that he ever changed his mind, the New York Times reported.
Some of Trump’s biggest supporters, however, are critical of H-1B. Steve Bannon, a former White House chief strategist under Trump, called the program a “scam” that benefits “Silicon Valley’s sociopathic overlords.”
“It’s disgusting to talk about ‘high-skilled foreign workers’ while bringing in slave labor,” he said.
The Freedom Party of Austria (FPÖ) has demanded the immediate resignation of Chancellor Karl Nehammer, accusing him of clinging to a chancellorship that the electorate rejected in last September’s federal elections.
Michael Schnedlitz, the party’s General Secretary and a member of the National Council, claimed that Nehammer’s refusal to step aside poses a serious threat to the country’s political stability.
Speaking from Vienna, Schnedlitz decried what he characterized as an ongoing attempt by legacy parties to exclude the FPÖ — despite its first-place finish — from forming the next government.
Tensions reached a breaking point when the liberal NEOS party withdrew from the so-called “loser traffic light coalition” negotiations with Nehammer’s Austrian People’s Party (ÖVP) and the Social Democratic Party of Austria (SPÖ) on Friday.
After nearly 100 days of discussions, NEOS leader Beate Meinl-Reisinger announced that key differences between the ÖVP and SPÖ — reportedly the SPÖ’s aggressive tax policy — had made any workable agreement impossible. She stated that there was “no breakthrough” on important issues, adding that NEOS refused to think only as far as the “next election day.”
The collapse of these talks leaves Karl Nehammer’s claim to the chancellorship in jeopardy. Schnedlitz slammed Nehammer for, in his words, ignoring the FPÖ’s warnings about constructing a German-style “loser traffic light” government that, from the beginning, was destined to fail. Schnedlitz insisted that every hour Nehammer remains in office generates additional damage, calling upon him to face citizens immediately and to recognize that what truly motivates him is his own political survival.
“Should the Chancellor actor, who is on the ropes, now play even more games to form an unstable loser variant — either a two-way model with the SPÖ or a new loser traffic light with the Greens instead of NEOS — then I would like to make it clear to him: The people are fed up! It’s time for you to resign, Mr. Nehammer!” said Schnedlitz.
With the FPÖ currently polling at 35 percent and growing, there is a palpable sense that voters could severely punish the traditional parties if Austria heads back to the polls.
President Alexander Van der Bellen, too, has come under fire from Schnedlitz, who accused him of disregarding the popular vote by granting Nehammer the mandate to form a government. It was the Freedom Party that received the largest share of votes, yet Van der Bellen gave no invitation to FPÖ leader Herbert Kickl, claiming it was futile as the other parties had announced they would not entertain the idea of him leading the country.
The question that now hangs over Austrian politics is whether the president will persist in supporting Nehammer’s faltering attempts at coalition-building or open the door for the FPÖ, which by every indication would be willing — if not eager — to try forming a government.
The abrupt exit of the NEOS, which many believed was the linchpin of a viable coalition excluding the FPÖ, has sparked a number of possible scenarios. Some think the ÖVP and SPÖ might attempt to forge a grand coalition, though that razor-thin majority would lack resilience.
Others suggest a second traffic light, this time involving the Greens instead of the NEOS, might keep the FPÖ from governing but struggle to bridge ideological divides.
A third possibility, if Van der Bellen changes course, would invite Herbert Kickl to conduct coalition talks. Or, failing that, fresh elections may become unavoidable — an outcome that could see the Freedom Party bolster its support at the expense of the parties that kept it out.
Recent revelations prove the primary reason for America’s 2003 unprovoked invasion of Iraq was because Israel wanted seven Muslim nations destroyed to allow for its expansion. This war was part of a plan for Greater Israel. This Zionist plan to massively expand Israel was ignored by sane people for decades because it is unrealistic and would require the ethnic cleansing of tens of millions of native Arabs.
The key proponent of this plan is long-time Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. There is no doubt that he is mostly responsible for the 2003 American invasion of Iraq. Netanyahu is now demanding the corrupt American government make Greater Israel possible by helping destroy Lebanon and Iran.
“One way to counter Iran’s aggression. Change the map of the Middle East”; Fox News Opinion; Michael Makovsky; December 28, 2017; https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/one-w…
“Worth the Price?” New Film Shows How Biden Played Leading Role in Push for U.S. to Invade Iraq; Democracy Now; February 18, 2020; • “Worth the Price?” New Film Shows How…
President Trump has been very busy lately, driving leftist and Liberal Canadians utterly out of their minds by wickedly and hilariously trolling Prime Minister Justin Trudeau while simultaneously threatening a massive 25% tariff on the Canadian auto industry. With a solitary few taps of fingers on his phone, Trump cornered Canada by brewing an artisan Trumpian “threat to start some conversation” online. It went something like this: “Nice auto industry you got there. Would be a real shame if something happened to it!”
This “conversation starter,” which could also be rightly characterized as an existential death blow to the Canadian auto industry, forced Prime Minister Trudeau to hastily jet down to Mar-a-Lago. There, he unceremoniously flopped in his mission to mitigate damages, which has since been followed by the pilgrimage of several other notable Trudeau lightweights to continue the conversation. Maybe Mr. Wonderful will have better luck.
You could be forgiven if you thought the main lessons learned from this episode are that Canadians have a very fragile sense of humor, and that they bristle at being reminded how fully dependent the Canadian economy is on America. All of that is, of course, true. But if you thought that was the main event, you’d be wrong. The two main takeaways are that any industry that is being protected will, at some point, have an economic and policy moment of reckoning, along the lines of Herbert Stein: If something cannot go on forever, it will stop. And the second lesson is that it will likely play out in part, in real time on X. The Trump-Trudeau show, however, is just a shiny bauble. The real policy landmine in America is immigration, both legal and illegal.
This brings us to the H-1B visa issue in America, which is currently being “debated,” right in front of our eyes on X. On the surface, it seems to be a relatively simple philosophical debate; are you in favor of bringing in foreign workers for the jobs that Americans allegedly cannot do? Or do you favor policies that incentivize hiring Americans? Battle lines are even being drawn among conservative thought leaders and MAGA-adjacent personalities like Elon Musk, Vivek Ramaswamy, and others.
Bingo. And this is where it behooves the Trump administration to learn from the failed Canadian experience with our H-1B visa equivalent: the Temporary Resident Permit or TRP.
Officially, the TRP gives status to non-citizens or permanent residents (the last step before citizenship) to be legally in Canada for a temporary purpose. This can include international students, tourists, or foreign workers. (The TRP does not apply to visa-exempt countries.)
The final, glaring issue with both the H-1B and TRP is the undeniable fact that they are gateways to North America’s robust anchor baby (“birth tourism”) industry. In Canada, birth tourism, aided and abetted by almost nonexistent enforcement has added extra layers of stress to Canada’s already fiscally unsustainable socialized medical system.
“Temporary” programs in both Canada and America rarely benefit their existing populaces. More often than not, they habitually displace and punish the middle class. That’s a feature and not a bug. The H-1B acts in a similar fashion for skilled, white-collar workers. Moreover, as Milton Friedman famously said, “There is nothing more permanent than a temporary government program.” Here’s hoping the incoming Trump administration takes heed of Canada’s abject failure to rein in its permanent “temporary” population and reigns in the policies that more often than not, discriminate, decimate, and impoverish the native citizenry.
The Palestinian Authority cannot help making a fool of itself. Its recent decision to suspend Al Jazeera’s broadcasts, ostensibly because the news outlet was “broadcasting inciteful content, spreading misinformation, and interfering in internal Palestinian affairs,” is an example of the scale of the repression of his own people which PA leader Mahmoud Abbas wishes to conceal from the rest of the world. While Palestinians in Gaza have been facing genocide, Palestinians in the occupied West Bank – Jenin being just one major example – have been subjected to ongoing raids by Israel occupation forces and their collaborators, the Palestinian Authority security services.
A weakened authoritarian and illegitimate rule cannot extend its stranglehold except by force. In recent years, however, the PA’s collaboration and complicity with Israel has been recognised openly as yet another part of the framework against which anti-colonial resistance is necessary. The PA only had two platforms to stand on when it came to the Palestinian people: subjugation through force and exploitation of the Palestinian anti-colonial resistance to score occasional points when necessary. Both are crumbling fast.
Abbas only made Gaza relevant in terms of the PA’s hypothetical return to the enclave. Other than that, over a year of genocide only elicited very weak occasional statements. Hunting down the Palestinians involved in resistance in the occupied West Bank, on the other hand, was imparted as security and stability, even though the PA knowns it can offer neither, not for the Palestinians nor for itself. Palestinians have been tortured by the PA’s security services in the name of restoring law and order. The PA tramples on the law in order to preserve it.
The minute that Israel decides that it doesn’t need the PA any longer, Abbas and his inner circle will have nothing to stand on.
Whatever illusion of power the PA thinks may materialise, it is far more likely that the opposite will happen. And the PA will have contributed to any impending violence by fragmenting the Palestinian anti-colonial struggle in several ways: maintaining the purported ideological divide between Gaza and the occupied West Bank; clinging to the international imposition of the two-state compromise even as genocide rages on; and accepting the parameters of illusory state-building even as Israel continues to colonise what remains of Palestinian territory and Ramallah looks on impotently, wasting both time and Palestinian lives.
Banning Al Jazeera, therefore, will not solve the PA’s dilemma of wanting to engage in violence while retaining a diplomatic veneer.
The PA has, after all, been stepping up its oppression of the Palestinians ever since the murder of Basel Al-Araj by PA security agents in March 2017 and, a few months later, the issue of the cybercrime law that targeted journalists.
The PA’s raids, separate from those conducted by Israel, reported Al Jazeera, have killed Palestinians in Jenin. If the PA is so certain of its role in maintaining security in the occupied West Bank, why not let a news outlet report the details? If the PA treats legitimate anti-colonial resistance as “terrorism” and “lawlessness”, surely it can only be a feather in its cap that it complies with the mainstream narrative when it comes to the Palestinian struggle?
And what does the PA think it will achieve by suspending Al Jazeera when so many Palestinians are eyewitnesses to Ramallah’s brutality? It wants its repression to be hidden in plain sight.
All the masks have fallen; the PA’s attempt to cling to power by withholding the right to information only exposes its fragility. There is no bigger incitement against Palestinians than the one that comes from within, and Ramallah’s incitement is no exception.
Israeli troops advanced into and heavily attacked the southern Lebanese village of Beit Lif on 2 January, in violation of the fragile ceasefire that Tel Aviv has been continuously breaching since it took effect in late November last year.
“The Roumieh area between Beit Lif and Yater was subjected to enemy artillery shelling,” Lebanon’s National News Agency (NNA) reported on Thursday afternoon, coming as Israeli forces entered and searched homes in the area.
According to Al Manar’s correspondent in the south, the Israeli army pushed into Beit Lif with several Merkava tanks, military hummers, a bulldozer, and infantry forces and began demolitions in the town. The sounds of heavy explosions and gunfire were heard.
Earlier on Thursday, an Israeli drone targeted the vicinity of a farm between the towns of Beit Lif and Yater with two missiles.
The new ceasefire violations occurred a day after the Israeli military set fire to homes in the Aitaroun-Bint Jbeil district.
In accordance with the ceasefire agreement, the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) entered the towns of Shamaa and Al-Bayada on 1 January. The two towns are among those that witnessed fierce clashes between the Lebanese resistance and the Israeli army during Tel Aviv’s failed ground operation in Lebanon, which began in early October and ended with the ceasefire on 27 November.
Al-Bayada and Shamaa were also heavily bombarded throughout the war that began in October last year.
NNAreported massive destruction of infrastructure – with entire neighborhoods and even the electricity network ravaged. “Everything was razed to the ground.”
Israel has violated the ceasefire – which is based on the implementation of UN Resolution 1701 – over 100 times since it took effect with deadly airstrikes, arrests of Lebanese citizens, troop advancements, and mass detonation campaigns in southern villages. Entire villages have been wiped out as a result of the demolition campaign.
Tel Aviv claims to be targeting Hezbollah infrastructure in the south, which the LAF was tasked to dismantle as per the agreement.
Israeli troops are required to withdraw from Lebanon within 60 days of the ceasefire’s announcement. So far, it has been over four weeks, leaving less than a month before the Israeli army must retreat, according to the agreement.
Security sources in Lebanon told The Cradle on 23 December that the Israeli army is unhappy with the LAF’s efforts to implement the ceasefire and is planning to maintain a presence in the south past the 60-day implementation period.
“Now is the opportunity for the Lebanese state to prove itself through political action,” Hezbollah’s Secretary-General Naim Qassem said in a speech on Wednesday, echoing recent comments by the resistance group’s MPs and officials.
Hezbollah officials have recently said that the current period represents a test for the Lebanese state regarding whether or not it will be able to protect the south from Israeli attacks and violations once the resistance is no longer present south of the Litani River.
“If the occupation takes any steps against Lebanon from the eastern front due to its expansion in Syria, we will carry out our national duty … anyone who believes that the resistance in Lebanon has weakened is deluded … We possess the resources and intellect to be in a position to confront the occupation. On the 61st day after the ceasefire, we will be in a position to make the Israeli enemy taste our wrath,” Hezbollah MP Ihab Hamadeh toldAl Mayadeen on Wednesday.
The Ministry of Education in Syria announced on 1 January a series of new reforms to the country’s previously secular nationwide curriculum, which has sparked controversy and outrage.
The changes will affect all levels of education and include significant amendments to religious and historical studies – namely, the removal of important events in Syrian history and the erasure of content about Syria’s historical connection to polytheistic civilizations and empires.
The ministry confirmed textbooks will undergo large-scale editing to delete and rephrase passages, alter and delete images, and eliminate any material linked to the former government of Bashar al-Assad and his predecessor, Hafez al-Assad.
Some examples of the changes to be made include the removal of the terms “Ottoman injustice,” “brutal Ottoman rule,” and any reference to Ottoman “occupation” in Syria, as well as the deletion of important historical events that took place during the Ottoman Empire’s reign in the country.
References to the “Martyrs of May 6” – which relate to the Muslim-Christian Arab nationalists who were executed by Ottoman ruler Jamal Pasha in 1916 in Beirut and Damascus – will be removed.
Entire segments of Syrian history will also be scratched – including the period between the end of the Ottoman Empire and the election of Shukri Quwaitli as president in 1943. The term “1973 Liberation War,” referring to the 1973 Arab–Israeli war, was replaced with just “1973 war.”
The new curriculum will also exclude all references to pagan gods and goddesses in ancient Syrian civilizations, including Canaanite entities and deities of other empires and civilizations.
Studies on Chinese philosophical thought are also excluded, as well as scientific studies relating to the theory of evolution and brain development.
References to female monarchs, such as Queen Zenobia of Palmyra, have been erased. Khawla bint al-Azwar, a Muslim warrior described as one of the greatest female soldiers in history, was labeled as a fictional character.
The meaning of the word “martyr” will be altered from someone who is killed “in defense of the homeland” to someone who is killed “to uphold the word of God.”
The term “those who have incurred wrath” will be changed to “those who have gone astray from the path of goodness,” specifying Christians and Jews.
Entire segments of the curriculum that were unspecified by the ministry will also be taken out.
“The curricula in all Syrian schools are still in place until specialized committees are formed to review and audit the curricula,” newly appointed Syrian Minister of Education Nazir al-Qadri said on Thursday.
“We adopted images of the Syrian Revolution flag in all school books, and we corrected some incorrect information in the Islamic Education curriculum, such as explaining some Quranic verses in an incorrect way, and we adopted their correct explanation as stated in the interpretation books for all educational levels,” he added, seemingly downplaying the alterations which are set to be made.
Syrians have reportedly called for nationwide protests and the dismissal of the education minister.
“After reviewing the amendments, it’s clear that, aside from removing signs of the criminal Assad regime, the rest changes have a distinct religious tone,” said journalist Hussam Hammoud.
Academic and Syria commentator Joshua Landis said Syrian textbooks “are moving from a nationalist to Islamist interpretation” of history.
“Israel” capitalized on the fall of the Syrian regime on the 8th of this month, launching a wide-scale operation to destroy the qualitative capabilities of the Syrian Arab Army. The operation targeted missile weapons stores, manufacturing and development sites, air force facilities, air defense systems, radar installations, research centers, and naval combat assets. Israeli warplanes are still freely parading in Syrian airspace, with Syrian citizens always hearing the sounds of Israeli reconnaissance planes overhead.
In this scenario, the Syrian Arab Army would have lost the majority of its weaponry. If reconstituted, it would become a fragile and symbolic army force, incapable of effectively facing an overwhelming, American-backed Israeli military that occupies whatever land it wants, and bombs whatever it wants, whenever it wants.
While the head of the new Syrian administration, Ahmad al-Sharaa, (formerly Abu Muhammad al-Julani), was busy receiving political and security delegations from various countries, “Israel” initiated a large-scale ground incursion into southern Syria. This action was justified by the new governor of Damascus who stated, “Recently, Israel might have felt afraid, so it advanced a little and bombed a little. These fears are natural, but Syria’s problem is not with Israel, and we do not wish to tamper with Israel’s security.”
In full view of the UN Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF) posts, Israeli forces violated the 1974 agreement and took control of more than 10 Syrian villages, covering an area of more than 20,000 km²,
Abu Muhammad, a resident of the Quneitra countryside, told Al Mayadeen English what happened:
“The Israeli forces raised their flag on the Quneitra Governorate building, and destroyed numerous houses in the surrounding countryside, along with small farms in various towns. They bulldozed lands and farms and uprooted trees, and erected earthen barriers and fortifications around the Mantara Dam, Syria’s second-largest dam, cutting off our water supply. Additionally, they installed extensive surveillance cameras and communication devices. When civilians protested against their actions, the Israeli forces fired live ammunition directly at them, resulting in numerous injuries.”
Security forces led by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) launched search operations throughout Syria’s central governorate of Homs on 2 January, targeting “war criminals” affiliated with the former government’s armed forces, Syrian state media reported.
“The Ministry of Interior, in cooperation with the Military Operations Department, begins a wide-scale combing operation in the neighborhoods of Homs city,” state media outlet SANA reported, citing a security official.
The official added that the security forces are targeting “war criminals and those involved in crimes who refused to hand over their weapons and go to the settlement centers,” as well as “fugitives from justice, in addition to hidden ammunition and weapons.”
“We ask our civilian people to cooperate with our forces to find these criminals who keep weapons and ammunition among you, and refuse to settle and hand over these weapons,” the security official went on to say.
A curfew has been imposed on several neighborhoods in Homs city. As security forces entered and searched homes in Homs, residents told Sputnik that “fear and panic” have overtaken the streets and that “heavy gunfire” is being heard.
The search operations coincide with fierce clashes between Syria’s new authorities and remnants of the Syrian Arab Army (SAA).
Ambushes and attacks have recently targeted HTS patrols and positions in the western Latakia and Tartous governorates and other areas across the country. SANA reported over the weekend that former members of the SAA were refusing to hand over their weapons, and that this was the reason operations were continuing.
The HTS-led Military Operations Command in Syria has set up “reconciliation centers” for former government personnel to surrender weapons and receive temporary IDs, but reports indicate that numerous individuals have been abducted and found dead, even after having given up their weapons.
The UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR) has documented at least 85 murder crimes across Syria that have led to 144 fatalities in recent weeks.
While the new government has vowed to protect minorities, there have been numerous instances of attacks on Christian and Alawite holy sites and symbols. Executions of Alawite civilians and former government soldiers have been widely reported.
A large number of Christians are fleeing the ancient Christian town of Maaloula in southwestern Syria, where Aramaic, the ancient language of Jesus, is still spoken.
A new group called the Syrian Resistance in Al-Sahel announced late last month that massacres committed by the HTS-led “terrorist administration” will be met with attacks on “elements and leaders” of the new government.
“We are still waiting for the bloodshed to stop so that it is not said that we are the instigators of sedition. We only want Syria to be Arab and independent, as it was for all components of our people,” the group added.
Donald Trump will be back in the White House in less than three weeks. While he’s expressed opposition to regime change in Iran, and pride in being the first president in decades not to start any new wars during his first term, his adamant support for Israel, and the tapping of hawks for his new administration have sparked fears of US aggression.
The United States “should give diplomacy a final shot – while preparing to use military force” against Iran to destroy its nuclear program, prominent Iran sanctions cheerleader and former State Department deputy special envoy Richard Nephew has suggested.
In a new piece for Foreign Affairs magazine, Nephew argues that while there are plenty of “good reasons not to bomb Iran,” like engulfing the Middle East in even greater turmoil and “undermin[ing] US credibility if the attacks don’t succeed,” the “case against military action is not so neat,” given Washington’s paranoia about ‘Iranian nuclear weapons’, and the limited prospects for sanctioning Tehran into submission given its newfound economic and security partnerships with BRICS allies.
Unless the Trump administration is “prepared to live in the world that Iranian nuclear weapons would create, it may have little choice but to attack Iran – and soon,” Nephew claims, even while admitting that “Iranian nuclear weapons would not present a near-term existential threat” to the US as much as it would its regional “partners” (i.e. Israel).
Nephew isn’t the first to float an attack on Iran following Trump’s reelection in November, with DC Beltway media running opinion pieces like “Israel should strike Iran now, paving way for Trump 2.0,” and sources telling the Wall Street Journal that Trump’s transition team is weighing an attack on Iran’s nuclear program. In November, former CIA chief Leon Panetta warned that Trump could give Israel a “blank check” on Iran and ultimately spark a war between the regional powers.
The brainstorming about a direct attack on Iran comes in the wake of the abject failure of the US’s 40+ year strategy of crushing the Islamic Republic through sanctions, saber-rattling and attempts at regime change, which have pushed the country to strive for economic and military self-sufficiency, and to expand its strategic footprint regionally.
Will Trump Attack Iran?
Trump is a well-known Iran hawk, pulling the US out of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action nuclear deal in 2018 at Israel’s behest, and expressing full-throated support for Tel Aviv amid its conflict with the Iran-led Axis of Resistance over the past 15 months. He’s also staffed his new administration with a number of avowedly pro-Israel Iran hawks, including Marco Rubio and Mike Waltz.
At the same time, Trump’s past frustrations with Benjamin Netanyahu, who rushed to congratulate Joe Biden after the highly contentious 2020 election, combined with resistance to advice from aides to escalate militarily against Iran, and support for initiatives to scale back the US military footprint in the Middle East during his first term, make the future of US policy vis-a-vis Iran and the Middle East region uncertain.
Americans may be surprised to learn from Alan Dershowitz that their constitution is far more intrusive and oppressive than what they and their forefathers have believed for generations. The law ‘scholar’ declared yesterday that “you have no (constitutional) right to not be vaccinated.” … continue
This site is provided as a research and reference tool. Although we make every reasonable effort to ensure that the information and data provided at this site are useful, accurate, and current, we cannot guarantee that the information and data provided here will be error-free. By using this site, you assume all responsibility for and risk arising from your use of and reliance upon the contents of this site.
This site and the information available through it do not, and are not intended to constitute legal advice. Should you require legal advice, you should consult your own attorney.
Nothing within this site or linked to by this site constitutes investment advice or medical advice.
Materials accessible from or added to this site by third parties, such as comments posted, are strictly the responsibility of the third party who added such materials or made them accessible and we neither endorse nor undertake to control, monitor, edit or assume responsibility for any such third-party material.
The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.
The word “alleged” is deemed to occur before the word “fraud.” Since the rule of law still applies. To peasants, at least.
Fair Use
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more info go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
DMCA Contact
This is information for anyone that wishes to challenge our “fair use” of copyrighted material.
If you are a legal copyright holder or a designated agent for such and you believe that content residing on or accessible through our website infringes a copyright and falls outside the boundaries of “Fair Use”, please send a notice of infringement by contacting atheonews@gmail.com.
We will respond and take necessary action immediately.
If notice is given of an alleged copyright violation we will act expeditiously to remove or disable access to the material(s) in question.
All 3rd party material posted on this website is copyright the respective owners / authors. Aletho News makes no claim of copyright on such material.
References to female monarchs, such as Queen Zenobia of Palmyra, have been erased. Khawla bint al-Azwar, a Muslim warrior described as one of the greatest female soldiers in history, was labeled as a fictional character.
Aletho News 