“Greater Israel” Metastasizes
By Kevin Barrett | American Free Press | December 22, 2024
“Israel is a cancer on the Middle East.” Resistance leaders across the region have used that metaphor for generations. The Zionists who dominate American politics, finance and media have attacked it as inappropriate.
But is the metaphor inaccurate? Cancer occurs when a diseased cell or cells begin uncontrollably expanding at the expense of neighboring cells and organ systems. Israel, a malignant body of extremist fanatics implanted into the heart of the Middle East, keeps mindlessly and voraciously expanding, not unlike a virulent tumor. Such pathological Zionist growth has caused untold pain, suffering, and hardship for the people of Palestine, the region, and the world.
Let’s chart Israel’s malignant growth. The original version of modern Israel, as set forth in the Balfour Declaration (1917) consisted of a mere “Jewish homeland” (not a state) guaranteed not to impinge on the rights of non-Jews—who constituted the vast majority of the population and owned virtually all of the land of historic Palestine. After the invading Jewish terrorists began running amok, as recounted in Thomas Suarez’s magisterial State of Terror: How Terrorism Created Modern Israel, Britain rewarded them with the 1937 Peel Commission partition plan, which would have created Israel on 33% of Palestine, leaving the other 67% for Palestinians.
The Peel Commission plan was outright theft. Palestinians owned well over 90% of the land of Palestine, yet the Commission wanted to steal almost one-third of their land and hand it to Eastern European Jewish terrorist invaders. But even such grand larceny wasn’t enough for the Zionists. They held out for more, and got it in 1948 by bribing US President Truman with a suitcase containing two million dollars in cash (as recounted by John F. Kennedy to Gore Vidal). That bribe, and others like it, produced the UN’s partition plan, which almost doubled the size of the Peel Commission’s Israel.
But even that outrageous robbery did not satisfy the Zionist terrorists, who immediately began massacring Palestinians and invading territory outside their UN borders. When the Nakba (Palestinian Holocaust) was over, untold thousands of Palestinians were dead, and more than 750,000 survivors had been robbed of their land and property and forced into exile as permanent refugees. After perpetrating the 1948 holocaust the Zionists refused to return to their UN-approved borders, which would have given them more than 55% of Palestine, and instead continued occupying almost 80%.
But even that didn’t satisfy them. The Zionist leadership spent the next two decades plotting what would become the 1967 war of aggression, in which they stole another 77,000 square kilometers consisting of the West Bank including Jerusalem, the Gaza Strip, the Golan Heights, and the Sinai Peninsula. Together, those stolen territories are almost four times the size of pre-1967 Israel.
After 1967, Zionist leaders split between those willing to return stolen territory in return for peace, and those dedicated to endless wars of expansion. With the assassination of the land-for-peace Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin in 1995, the issue was definitively settled in favor of the “forever wars” party.
Rabin was an anomaly—a mere speed bump on the road to Greater Israel. The Zionist leadership has always tacitly agreed that Israel will keep expanding to its Biblical mandate and beyond. David Ben-Gurion defined Zionism’s goal as follows: “to create a Jewish state in the whole of the Land of Israel.” That “whole” includes Palestine, Lebanon, Jordan, and part of Egypt, Syria, Iraq, northern Arabia, and arguably Turkey. Such conquests will require genocidal war against those countries and peoples.
2024 will go down in history as the year the Zionist cancer metastasized, sending its toxic tendrils even further into northern Gaza, the West Bank, southern Lebanon, and Syria. Netanyahu’s minister Smotrich is calling for the full annexation of the West Bank and Gaza and the murder or expulsion of all Palestinians from historic Palestine. That process is already underway as northern Gaza is being emptied and Israel has grabbed a full 6000 acres of the West Bank. Meanwhile Israel is violating its ceasefire agreement with Lebanon in an attempt to steal all of south Lebanon up to the Litani River. And in the wake of the US-Turkish-Israeli overthrow of the Syrian government, Israel has massively attacked Syria and grabbed vast swathes of Syrian land.
The ever-expanding cancer of Zionism poses a clear and present danger to the region and the world. The driving force behind Zionism is a virulent version of Jewish messianic millenarianism whose endgame is a Jewish military leader conquering not just the region, but the whole world, and then establishing a Jewish global dictatorship based in Occupied Jerusalem.
First they came for the Palestinians. Israel’s neighbors are next. But this isn’t just a regional problem. Metastasizing Israel threatens all of us.
Hezbollah Secretary General Naim Qassem Assesses Developments in Lebanon and Syria
Speech of Secretary General of Hezbollah, Sheikh Naim Qassem, on December 14, 2024.

Axis of Tabyeen
In the name of God, the Beneficent, the Merciful. All praise is due to God, Lord of the worlds and may peace and blessings be upon the noblest of creation our master Muhammad and upon his pure, immaculate household and his pious, chosen companions and upon all the prophets and righteous ones until the rising of the Day of Resurrection. May the peace, mercy, and blessings of God be upon you.
I will speak about four points. The first point: our assessment of the events and aggression against Lebanon, and our current and future situation. Secondly: what is the future of the Resistance in Lebanon? Thirdly: what is Hezbollah’s plan of action for the upcoming phase? Fourthly: what is the [Resistance’s] stance on the developments in Syria?
I begin with our assessment of the events [concerning Lebanon] and our current and future situation. Supporting Gaza was a noble and lofty act; and it is a duty upon us, in fact, it is a duty upon the entire nation [of Islam], upon all Arabs and all Muslims. And when they [the Arabs and Muslims] did not fulfill their obligations, the Zionists became tyrannical, did what they did, and [became a] Pharoah upon the land. We were expecting that the aggression on Lebanon would occur — the criminal, usurping aggression of “Israel” on Lebanon — at any moment, but we did not know what timing the Zionists would choose for this aggression. This matter was before the Al Aqsa Flood, and continued after the Al Aqsa Flood, so the aggression was in September. We did not know the timing beforehand, however, in reality, this has nothing to do with supporting Gaza. This has to do with the “Israeli” expansionist project. Because the enemy wishes to eliminate any Resistance [movement] that stands in front of its expansionist project across the entire region.
What has the enemy accomplished through its aggression on Lebanon? In all clarity, [the enemy] accomplished the killing of the leadership in Hezbollah, at the forefront of whom, his Eminence, Master of the Martyrs of the Nation [of Islam], Sayyid Hassan Nasrallah — may God, the Exalted’s pleasure be upon him — and a number of leaders and fighters. [The enemy] accomplished breaches of the communications network, and the detonation of the pagers and communication devices. These are among the accomplishments of the enemy, and the toll [it took on us] was great and painful.
However, [the enemy] did not achieve its goals in these operations that occurred towards the end of the month of September. Then, it committed its brutal crimes against [our] civilians, villages, homes, the unarmed, children, and women. The crimes aimed to break the Resistance, but they were unable to do so
despite the great sacrifices [we faced]. Therefore, the “Israeli” crimes are not an achievement. In return, we achieved the prevention of the enemy from [achieving its goal of] eliminating the Resistance and “crushing it”, as it mentioned numerous times that it wanted to end Hezbollah’s existence. The resisting fighters prevented them from advancing in the battlefield [on the Lebanese border], and their rockets reached the internal front (the occupied territories), and we pained them greatly, and we displaced many of the settlers — approximately more than 200,000 settlers. Additionally, the Resistance killed hundreds of [their] soldiers, and wounded hundreds of [their] soldiers also, and caused economic and social damages, and various types of damages within the “Israeli” interior. So, what we achieved was preventing the enemy from accomplishing its goal of crushing the Resistance, and what the enemy achieved was causing us pain by killing our leaders and [targeting our] communications [devices].
We endured, and our people endured great sacrifices to prevent the Resistance from being broken, and here I salute them all — those brave ones who protected the Resistance, and carried it, and considered it to be their sole and fundamental choice in this confrontation and through these sacrifices. They were a support to the resisting, heroic fighters, who stood firm in the battlefield. The alternative to this enduring [of these sacrifices] — to those who say to us, “For what reason did you endure [all of this]?” — the alternative is surrender, and the loss of everything. Far be it [from us] that we surrender, and far be it [from us] that we are humiliated. This is something that is not possible with the Resistance of Hezbollah.
And here, [to] those who consider that the problem which occurred in Lebanon was that the losses were great — [they ask] “O’ Hezbollah, what are you doing with these great losses?” The question [should be], “What are we doing about this great aggression?” The aggression is the problem, the confrontation [of this aggression] is not the problem. [God] the Exalted has said, in His Glorious Book: “Do not weaken or grieve: you shall have the upper hand, should you be faithful. If a wound afflicts you, a like wound has already afflicted those people; and we make such vicissitudes rotate among mankind…” [Quran, 3:139-140]. Praise be to God who [has] steadied us, and praise be to God who has made us [have the] “upper hand”, and praise be to God who enabled us to achieve this confrontation with a true victory.
The “Israeli” enemy realized that the horizon in confronting Hezbollah’s Resistance was closed, so it went towards an agreement to stop the aggression. For the record, the agreement was brought by Hochstein, and it was agreed upon between “Israel” and America. It was presented to us through being presented to the Lebanese state and Mr. [Nabih] Berri. There were remarks from President [of Parliament] Berri, and there were remarks from us. We modified what we could in this agreement. Thus, he (Hochstein) is the one who brought the agreement, and we agreed according to the details we added within the agreement.
What made the enemy move towards [making an] agreement, and stopping this aggression? Three factors of strength and steadfastness [from us] caused the enemy, and those behind it, to despair over continuing [their aggression]. The first factor is the legendary steadfastness of the Resistance fighters on the battlefield. The second factor is the blood of the martyrs and the sacrifices, led by the blood of the Master of the Martyrs of the Resistance, Sayyid Hassan Nasrallah — may God, the Exalted’s pleasure be upon him — which gave great motivation to our men and our nation [of Islam], and our people [to remain] steadfast and stand up [to this aggression]. And the third factor is the comprehensive and effective political and Combat/Resistance-based management of the “Battle of the Mighty Ones” in a manner which led to this outcome. The enemy resorted to a ceasefire due to the factors of [our] strength and steadfastness.
[Now,] what is our assessment? Our assessment is that the Resistance triumphed because the enemy was unable to achieve its central goal, which is the elimination of Hezbollah, and it was unable to return [its] settlers without [coming to] an agreement, and it was unable to enter [its plan of creating] the “New Middle East” through the gate of Lebanon. We were an impenetrable barrier, we prevented it from achieving this goal through the gate of Lebanon. The Resistance remained until the last moment [of the war] on the battlefield, and the fighters continued to resist on the frontline, their heads held high, and in their great might. [Imam] Ali — peace be upon him — has said: “When God observed our truthfulness, He sent down upon our enemy defeat and sent down upon us victory.” [Nahj al-Balagha, Sermon 56]
This agreement is to stop the aggression, it is not [an agreement to] stop the Resistance. This agreement is an executive agreement derived from [U.N.] Resolution 1701 and is only related to the area south of the Litani River, whereby “Israel” withdraws to the Lebanese border, and the Lebanese army spreads [there] as the sole authority carrying arms, so that there are no [other] armed individuals or weapons in this area. The agreement has no relation to the Lebanese interior, the issues of the Lebanese interior, the relationship of the Resistance with the state [of Lebanon] and the army, the presence of weapons [amongst the Resistance], or any other issues that require [internal] dialogue and discussion.
We endured during this period hundreds of “Israeli” violations in order to help the implementation of the agreement and to avoid being an obstacle to it, and to expose the “Israeli” enemy and place all those concerned before their responsibilities. The government is responsible for following up on preventing violations, and the committee assigned to follow up on the agreement is responsible for preventing the “Israeli” violations and implementing the agreement. We as Hezbollah, monitor what is happening and act according to our assessment of what is best in interest. So much for the first point.
The second point: what is the future of the Resistance? It seems that we need to get to know the reality of the Resistance. What is the Resistance? The Resistance is faith and preparation. Faith, in God, the Exalted, and freedom, and dignity, and defending the truth, land, and homeland, “All might belongs to God, and His Apostle, and the faithful…” [Quran, 63:08]. And preparation is the preparation with weapons and resources to protect this faith in the face of the enemies, because the enemies will not stop at a limit. The enemies will always aggress; the enemies will always try to change the doctrine, the opinions, and the convictions; they will steal the blessings and resources. How will you face the enemies? How will you resist them? With words? That is not enough. With complaints? That is not enough. There is no option but to confront them by preparing the appropriate strength.
We have repeatedly said, over and over, and now I say, Palestine is the focal point for its liberation in this region. Why? Because the aggressive “Israel” occupying Palestine takes its aggression against Palestine as a point of focus for occupying the entire region. So, it is better for us to confront this cancerous tumor together in order to prevent its expansion on one hand, and to overthrow its occupation on the other. Everyone according to their capabilities, circumstances, and reality, not to watch and let “Israel” consume us one after the other.
The legitimacy of the Resistance comes from its belief in its cause, no matter the resources, whether they are great or few. When we talk about Resistance, we talk about confrontation, we talk about rights, we talk about land, we talk about a group who want to reclaim what is theirs and face the enemies who want to deprive them of their rights. This is legitimate on the level of faith, on the human level, on the global level, and on all levels.
This Resistance does not win by a knockout blow against its enemy, this Resistance wins by points. The Resistance may continue for ten years, [and] it may continue for 50 years; we do not know. The time period for which the Resistance will continue, to bring down the idol, to bring down the tyrant, and to bring down the occupier. This is Resistance, and thus it wins at times and loses at times. It takes a round and suffers a setback in another round; this is natural in the work of Resistance. What is important is its continuation, and what is important is its continuity in the field, no matter how limited its resources are. When the Resistance offers sacrifices, this does not mean that it has lost, but rather that it has paid the price for its continuity, for sacrifices are what allow the Resistance to take shape, they are what allow it to stand on its feet. When the enemy strikes the Resistance, kills people, and tries to surround it with weapons, force, and resources, what does it want? It wants to weaken the foundations of the Resistance; it wants to weaken the will of the Resistance so that it collapses. Therefore, sacrifices are the natural price for the continuity of the Resistance.
Imam Khomeini has said — may God sanctify his noble soul — “As long as we are upon the truth, then we are victorious.” This is the [true] victory. Victory is that you are not shaken. Victory is that the Resistance remains. Victory is that you do not respond to those discordant voices that live in a state of disappointment, despair, fear, and terror. The important thing is to remain on the truth. “Are we not upon the truth? Then we do not mind dying while being truthful”, as Ali al-Akbar (son of Imam al-Hussain) said in Karbala — may the peace of God, the Exalted be upon him.
Based on what has been said, the Resistance of Hezbollah continues with faith and preparation, and the sacrifices which [only] increase our responsibility in facing this expansionist enemy. This enemy, nothing can restrain it except the Resistance, and the land will not be liberated except by the Resistance. The experiences are present before us: Did Lebanon not get liberated except by the Resistance? Did “Israel” not leave the occupied border strip except through the Resistance? Were we able to stop “Israel” for 17 years, from 2006 until 2023, except through the Resistance? Was the victory in July, which prevented the “New Middle East” in 2006, not due to the Resistance? We are not saying, “Come to the Resistance to establish it.” We are saying, “Come to the Resistance that has been established, [and has] proven its effectiveness, and demonstrated that this enemy will never recede and will never leave the land except through Resistance.”
Therefore, it [the Resistance] is ongoing, and for every stage, [it has] its own methods and approaches. This means that the Resistance does not always have one form of confrontation. [In the case that] by God’s will, developments and certain conditions have occurred; we change some of the methods and approaches. The important thing is that the Resistance remains, but the methods and approaches are related to each stage separately, and this is what we will work on.
Yes, we defended Lebanon. We defended Lebanon because the recent aggression was against Lebanon, it was not just against us, even though we were directly targeted. This aggression against Lebanon, we repelled it and stopped it at the borders through the legendary Resistance of the fighters, their steadfastness, and the support of our people, our loved ones, and the solidarity of all the free people in Lebanon. I consider all the Lebanese people who sheltered, who supported, who wished for the victory of
the Resistance, and opposed “Israel”, to all be partners in the victory process because they supported the Resistance and stood by its side and with it.
If it hadn’t been for the steadfastness of the Resistance fighters on the frontlines, “Israel” would have reached Beirut and begun the following steps, of them: the settlement and colonization in southern Lebanon, weakening Lebanon’s capabilities, and controlling its politics and future. We are not speaking about an unknown enemy, and we are not speaking about ideas that are not applicable. Look at the crimes of this enemy, which have no parallel. Look at what it is doing in Gaza: 150,000 martyrs and wounded, almost complete destruction of Gaza. It [itself] declares, saying, “I do not wish to leave Gaza.” It says that it “wants North Gaza to be a demilitarized zone, devoid of civilian presence, devoid of people, devoid of homes, devoid of life.” It is [the one] thinking of settlement in Gaza. It [is the one that] says “it wants to annex the West Bank,” and it is working toward that with full cover from the greatest criminal, America, which supports it with all its resources. If the defense budget in America is 850 billion dollars, [then] all of it is in the service of “Israel”. If both parties [Democrat and Republican] are at the service of “Israel”, if around 500 planes came to the “Israeli” entity loaded with weapons and ammunition, as well as around 100 ships with the same, this means that the crimes we are seeing are made by America and by America’s decision, which always covers it.
Have you not seen what [has] happened in Syria? They destroyed all the capabilities of the Syrian army under the pretext of preemptive defense, under the pretext of fear for the future, under various titles, and America covers them directly. This is evidence of the expansionist policy, they want to wipe out the entire region, if it were possible for them — at any time possible for them, and in the other Arab countries, one by one — I will not name them now — they would do the same thing. They have their eyes on all Arab countries, the surrounding ones first, and then those further away second. This means that we are facing a dangerous expansionist enemy, which occupied part of the Golan by hundreds of kilometers. What did the world do? Why does [this] occupation happen? What is the “danger” present [for the enemy to carry out these acts]? There is no danger [to justify it], however it has expansionist intentions [and fulfills them at every opportunity].
So, we must continue with the Resistance. Yes, the Resistance, with its people and [the Lebanese] army, prevented it [the enemy] in Lebanon from achieving its expansionist goals. I am not speaking in slogans. Why [do I say] “with its people and army”? Because our army is a national army. Our army paid the price of tens of martyrs because it stands in the field. Our army is the one that will spread in the South to expel “Israel”. Our people are the ones who were cohesive, united, and cooperative until we reached this result.
The conclusion: Hezbollah is strong and recovering from its wounds. Hezbollah continues, and the Resistance continues, and Lebanon, with its elements of strength, continues. Lebanon is strong with its army, its people, and its Resistance, in preventing sedition from spreading within the structure of this trinity [Army-People-Resistance] and within Lebanon. Those who hoped for the end of Hezbollah, their hopes have been disappointed, and those who relied on “Israel” to tip the political balance [in Lebanon] in their favor over others, have failed in their reading [of the situation] and [in] their choices. And those who see Hezbollah as an effective and influential force in political life will see from us a welcome, and cooperation for the benefit of a strong and stable Lebanon, politically, economically, and socially. Lebanon rises with all of its sons and components.
What is Hezbollah’s program of action for the upcoming phase? I will mention them as five brief points. They are the work program that we will work on and [through which we will] be key partners in building the state.
First: implementing the agreement in the south of the Litani River.
Second: reconstruction, with the help of the state responsible for reconstruction, and cooperation with all countries, organizations, brotherly countries, and friends who wish to help Lebanon in [its] reconstruction.
Third: diligent work to elect a president on January 9th to set the wheels of the state in motion.
Fourth: participating through the state in an economic, social, and reform rescue program based on national belonging and equality under the law and the Taif Agreement, while confronting corruption and holding the corrupt accountable.
Fifth: positive dialogue regarding problematic issues.
Naturally, we have several problematic issues, [the matter] requires dialogue. What is Lebanon’s stance on the “Israeli” occupation of its land? We want to engage in dialogue to unify our perspective — how to confront the occupation and liberate the land, without living with the continuation of the occupation. How do we strengthen the Lebanese army to be a pillar of protection for Lebanon? What is Lebanon’s defense strategy to benefit from the Resistance and the people as a support for liberation? These and other questions need dialogue among the Lebanese.
The fourth and final point: we supported Syria because it is in a position of opposition to “Israel” and it contributed to enhancing the Resistance’s capabilities through its lands, for Lebanon and Palestine. However, now the regime has fallen at the hands of new forces. We cannot judge these new forces until they stabilize, take clear positions, and the situation of the regime in Syria becomes organized. From here, we say that some of what we desire we mention as an opinion and a stance.
Firstly, we hope that the choice of the new regime and the Syrian people will be cooperation between the two peoples and between the two governments in Lebanon and Syria on the basis of equality and the exchange of capabilities.
Secondly, we hope that all the parties in Syria, all the sects, and all the components will participate in shaping the new government and in participating in the new government so that the rule in Syria will be on the basis of the Syrian citizen and not on the seat of one group over another.
Thirdly, we also hope that this new ruling side will consider “Israel” as an enemy and not normalize relations with it.
These are the issues that will affect the nature of the relationship between us and Syria. It is the right of the Syrian people to choose their leadership, their rule, their constitution, and their future. We hope they will succeed in making choices that are not controlled by any other countries that have ambitions in Syria and want to serve the “Israeli” enemy. Yes, Hezbollah has lost at this stage the military supply route through Syria, but this loss is [nothing but] a detail in the Resistance’s work. Maybe, this new regime will come and this route may return in a natural manner, and maybe we will search for other routes. The Resistance is flexible, it does not stop at any specific limit; the important thing is the continuity of the Resistance. As for the methods and routes, they can change and shift. And it is upon the Resistance to adapt to the circumstances to strengthen its capabilities — the important thing is that it remains continuous and works on addressing its needs in different ways.
We do not believe that what is happening in Syria will affect Lebanon, but rather, on the contrary, there is now a preoccupation [for the enemy] in Syria, there are specific conditions in Syria, and [we pray that] — God willing — Syria will emerge stable and comfortable, doing what its people want.
The overall situation in the region is, in general, pressing. America and “Israel” control many paths in the region. This means that we are facing great pressure on the level of the entire region. However, we have faith that the active forces in the region will remain present and will move [towards the necessary actions]. And it is upon these active forces to reconsider their calculations and methods of action. It is not right for the active group to stay on tradition, to stay on the previous pattern. Whoever sees that their previous pattern does not produce, let them modify, let them change, and whoever sees that they have gaps, let them address the gaps. It is good to have an analysis after this great development in the region, and — God willing — the results will be positive.
Peace, all peace, to all lovers of freedom and liberation. Peace, all peace, to the noble martyrs. Peace, all peace, to our people who sacrificed, struggled, and gave. And peace to the legendary Resisters who raised our heads high. And the Resistance continues, God willing.
And may the peace, mercy, and blessings of God be upon you.
Edits: Resistance News
Israeli Enemy Procrastinates on Withdrawal from Southern Border Towns

The southern Lebanese town of Adaisseh after the Israeli aggression on Lebanon (December 2024)
Al-Manar | December 17, 2024
The Israeli enemy has been procrastinating on withdrawal from southern border towns, hindering the deployment of the Lebanese Army, Al-Manar correspondent in south Lebanon reported on Tuesday.
Our correspondent said that it was planned that the Israeli enemy forces would withdraw from Al-Hamamis Hill in the border town f Khiam during the first phase of a coordination deal with the UNIFIL peacekeeping force.
“However, the Israeli enemy delayed the withdrawal and the Lebanese Army didn’t manage to enter the area,” Al-Manar’s Ali Shoeib reported.
Meanwhile, the reporter added that the Lebanese Army wasn’t able to enter the border town of Adaisseh in a bid to retrieve the bodies of the martyrs.
He noted that another bid in the town of Taybe was also hindered as the Lebanese Army leadership is waiting for a response from the UNIFIL, which is coordinating these missions with the Israeli enemy.
On the other hand, the Israeli forces repeatedly opened fire at houses in the border town of Naqoura and carried, Shoeb said, adding that the Israeli enemy forces also went ahead with blowing up houses in the border town of Kfar Kila.

The Lebanese border towns were venue of epic battles between Israeli occupation forces and resistance fighters who heroically repelled the Zionist incursion into Lebanon throughout nearly two months (from October 1 till November 27.)
Lebanon has been subjected to brutal Israeli aggression on September 23, that killed more than 4,000 people and injured at least 12,000 others.
HTS officials order Palestinian resistance factions to disarm, close bases in Syria: Report
The Cradle | December 13, 2024
Representatives from Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), the new ruling extremist organization in Damascus, informed the representatives of the Palestinian factions in Syria they would no longer be allowed to possess any weapons, training camps, or military headquarters, Ibrahim Amin of Al-Akhbar reported on 13 December.
Amin further reports that the factions must dissolve their military formations as soon as possible in exchange for political and charitable work under the roof of the new Syrian state.
Palestinian factions, including Fatah, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command (PFLP-GC), the Saiqa, and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) Martyr Ali Aswad Brigad, have had a presence in Syria as guests of the government for decades.
A source in the PFLP-GC revealed to Erem News that the factions were informed of the decision in meeting headed by Ahmed al-Sharaa, also known as Abu Muhammad al-Julani, in the Yarmouk Palestinian refugee camp in the capital, Damascus.
Palestinians came to Syria as refugees during the 1948 Nakba. That year, pre-state Zionist militias ethnically cleansed some 750,000 Palestinians from the land that became the state of Israel, making them refugees in neighboring countries.
Many Palestinian refugees settled in Syria in the Yarmouk Camp on the southern outskirts of Damascus. The camp became the capital of the Palestinian diaspora.
The Palestinian factions formed armed resistance groups and provided manpower for the Palestinian Liberation Army (PLA), which served as an auxiliary to the Syrian Army.
Amin notes that the practical result of these steps taken by HTS, led by former Al-Qaeda leader Abu Mohammad al-Julani, who now goes by his real name Ahmad al-Sharaa, is that the Palestinians are prohibited from using Syria as a headquarters or passage for any activity against Israel.
In 2012, the predecessor to HTS, the Nusra Front, invaded and occupied Yarmouk, seeking to use it as the gateway to conquer Damascus. The camp was largely destroyed over the following years in the course of the fighting. ISIS also occupied the camp and fought against the Syrian army and Palestinian factions there.
Amin says that although the new Syrian government does not talk about establishing relations with Israel, its representatives talk about taking practical steps to prevent any existing or potential resistance against Israel from Syrian territory.
He writes that Israel may seek to force the Lebanese government to take similar actions against Palestinian factions in the refugee camps in Lebanon.
How the US and Israel Destroyed Syria and Called it Peace
By Jeffrey D. Sachs | Common Dreams | December 12, 2024
In the famous lines of Tacitus, Roman historian, “To ravage, to slaughter, to usurp under false titles, they call empire; and where they make a desert, they call it peace.”
In our age, it is Israel and the U.S. that make a desert and call it peace.
The story is simple. In stark violation of international law, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his ministers claim the right to rule over seven million Palestinian Arabs. When Israel’s occupation of Palestinian lands leads to militant resistance, Israel labels the resistance “terrorism” and calls on the U.S. to overthrow the Middle East governments that back the “terrorists.” The U.S., under the sway of the Israel Lobby, goes to war on Israel’s behalf.
The fall of Syria this week is the culmination of the Israel-U.S. campaign against Syria that goes back to 1996 with Netanyahu’s arrival to office as Prime Minister. The Israel-U.S. war on Syria escalated in 2011 and 2012, when Barack Obama covertly tasked the CIA with the overthrow of the Syrian Government in Operation Timber Sycamore. That effort finally came to “fruition” this week, after more than 300,000 deaths in the Syrian war since 2011.
Syria’s fall came swiftly because of more than a decade of crushing economic sanctions, the burdens of war, the U.S. seizure of Syria’s oil, Russia’s priorities regarding the conflict in Ukraine, and most immediately, Israel’s attacks on Hezbollah, which was the key military backstop to the Syrian Government. No doubt Assad often misplayed his own hand and faced severe internal discontent, but his regime was targeted for collapse for decades by the U.S. and Israel.
Before the U.S.-Israel campaign to overthrow Assad began in earnest in 2011, Syria was a functioning, growing middle-income country. In January 2009, the IMF Executive Board had this to say:
Executive Directors welcomed Syria’s strong macroeconomic performance in recent years, as manifested in the rapid non-oil GDP growth, comfortable level of foreign reserves, and low and declining government debt. This performance reflected both robust regional demand and the authorities’ reform efforts to shift toward a more market- based economy.
Since 2011, the Israel-U.S. perpetual war on Syria, including bombing, jihadists, economic sanctions, U.S. seizure of Syria’s oil fields, and more, has sunk the Syrian people into misery.
In the immediate two days following the collapse of the government, Israel conducted about 480 strikes across Syria, and completely destroyed the Syrian fleet in Latakia. Pursuing his expansionist agenda, Prime Minister Netanyahu illegally claimed control over the demilitarized buffer zone in the Golan Heights and declared that the Golan Heights will be a part of the State of Israel “for eternity.”
Netanyahu’s ambition to transform the region through war, which dates back almost three decades, is playing out in front of our eyes. In a press conference on December 9th, the Israeli prime minister boasted of an “absolute victory,” justifying the on-going genocide in Gaza and escalating violence throughout the region:
I ask you, just think, if we had acceded to those who told us time and again: “The war must be stopped”– we would not have entered Rafah, we would not have seized the Philadelphia Corridor, we would not have eliminated Sinwar, we would not have surprised our enemies in Lebanon and the entire world in a daring operation-stratagem, we would not have eliminated Nasrallah, we would not have destroyed Hezbollah’s underground network, and we would not have exposed Iran’s weakness. The operations that we have carried out since the beginning of the war are dismantling the axis brick by brick.
The long history of Israel’s campaign to overthrow the Syrian Government is not widely understood, yet the documentary record is clear. Israel’s war on Syria began with U.S. and Israeli neoconservatives in 1996, who fashioned a “Clean Break” strategy for the Middle East for Netanyahu as he came to office. The core of the “clean break” strategy called for Israel (and the US) to reject “land for peace,” the idea that Israel would withdraw from the occupied Palestinian lands in return for peace. Instead, Israel would retain the occupied Palestinian lands, rule over the Palestinian people in an Apartheid state, step-by-step ethnically cleanse the state, and enforce so-called “peace for peace” by overthrowing neighboring governments that resisted Israel’s land claims.
The Clean Break strategy asserts, “Our claim to the land—to which we have clung for hope for 2000 years—is legitimate and noble,” and goes on to state, “Syria challenges Israel on Lebanese soil. An effective approach, and one with which American can sympathize, would be if Israel seized the strategic initiative along its northern borders by engaging Hizballah, Syria, and Iran, as the principal agents of aggression in Lebanon…”
In his 1996 book Fighting Terrorism, Netanyahu set out the new strategy. Israel would not fight the terrorists; it would fight the states that support the terrorists. More accurately, it would get the US to do Israel’s fighting for it. As he elaborated in 2001:
The first and most crucial thing to understand is this: There is no international terrorism without the support of sovereign states… Take away all this state support, and the entire scaffolding of international terrorism will collapse into dust.
Netanyahu’s strategy was integrated into U.S. foreign policy. Taking out Syria was always a key part of the plan. This was confirmed to General Wesley Clark after 9/11. He was told, during a visit at the Pentagon, that “we’re going to attack and destroy the governments in seven countries in five years—we’re going to start with Iraq, and then we’re going to move to Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran.” Iraq would be first, then Syria, and the rest. (Netanyahu’s campaign for the Iraq War is spelled out in detail in Dennis Fritz’s new book, Deadly Betrayal. The role of the Israel Lobby is spelled out in Ilan Pappé’s new book, Lobbying for Zionism on Both Sides of the Atlantic). The insurgency that hit U.S. troops in Iraq set back the five-year timeline, but did not change the basic strategy.
The U.S. has by now led or sponsored wars against Iraq (invasion in 2003), Lebanon (U.S. funding and arming Israel), Libya (NATO bombing in 2011), Syria (CIA operation during 2010’s), Sudan (supporting rebels to break Sudan apart in 2011), and Somalia (backing Ethiopia’s invasion in 2006). A prospective U.S. war with Iran, ardently sought by Israel, is still pending.
Strange as it might seem, the CIA has repeatedly backed Islamist Jihadists to fight these wars, and jihadists have just toppled the Syrian regime. The CIA, after all, helped to create al-Qaeda in the first place by training, arming, and financing the Mujahideen in Afghanistan from the late 1970s onward. Yes, Osama bin Laden later turned on the U.S., but his movement was a U.S. creation all the same. Ironically, as Seymour Hersh confirms, it was Assad’s intelligence that “tipped off the U.S. to an impending Al Qaeda bombing attack on the headquarters of the U.S. Navy’s Fifth Fleet.”
Operation Timber Sycamore was a billion-dollar CIA covert program launched by Obama to overthrow Bashar al-Assad. The CIA funded, trained, and provided intelligence to radical and extreme Islamist groups. The CIA effort also involved a “rat line” to run weapons from Libya (attacked by NATO in 2011) to the jihadists in Syria. In 2014, Seymour Hersh described the operation in his piece “The Red Line and the Rat Line”:
“A highly classified annex to the report, not made public, described a secret agreement reached in early 2012 between the Obama and Erdoğan administrations. It pertained to the rat line. By the terms of the agreement, funding came from Turkey, as well as Saudi Arabia and Qatar; the CIA, with the support of MI6, was responsible for getting arms from Gaddafi’s arsenals into Syria.”
Soon after the launch of Timber Sycamore, in March 2013, at a joint conference by President Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu at the White House, Obama said: “With respect to Syria, the United States continues to work with allies and friends and the Syrian opposition to hasten the end of Assad’s rule.”
To the U.S.-Israeli Zionist mentality, a call for negotiation by an adversary is taken as a sign of weakness of the adversary. Those who call for negotiations on the other side typically end up dead—murdered by Israel or U.S. assets. We’ve seen this play out recently in Lebanon. The Lebanese Foreign Minister confirmed that Hassan Nasrallah, Former Secretary-General of Hezbollah had agreed to a ceasefire with Israel days before his assassination. Hezbollah’s willingness to accept a peace agreement according to the Arab-Islamic world’s wishes of a two-state solution is long-standing. Similarly, instead of negotiating to end the war in Gaza, Israel assassinated Hamas’ political chief, Ismail Haniyeh, in Tehran.
Similarly in Syria, instead of allowing for a political solution to emerge, the U.S. opposed the peace process multiple times. In 2012, the UN had negotiated a peace agreement in Syria that was blocked by the Americans, who demanded that Assad must go on the first day of the peace agreement. The U.S. wanted regime change, not peace. In September 2024, Netanyahu addressed the General Assembly with a map of the Middle East divided between “Blessing” and “Curse,” with Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Iran as part of Netanyahu’s curse. The real curse is Israel’s path of mayhem and war, which has now engulfed Lebanon and Syria, with Netayahu’s fervent hope to draw the U.S. into war with Iran as well.
The U.S. and Israel are high-fiving that they have successfully wrecked yet another adversary of Israel and defender of the Palestinian cause, with Netanyahu claiming “credit for starting the historic process.” Most likely Syria will now succumb to continued war among the many armed protagonists, as has happened in the previous U.S.-Israeli regime-change operations.
In short, American interference, at the behest of Netanyahu’s Israel, has left the Middle East in ruins, with over a million dead and open wars raging in Libya, Sudan, Somalia, Lebanon, Syria, and Palestine, and with Iran on the brink of a nuclear arsenal, being pushed against its own inclinations to this eventuality.
All this is in the service of a profoundly unjust cause: to deny Palestinians their political rights in the service of Zionist extremism based on the 7th century BCE Book of Joshua. Remarkably, according to that text—one relied on by Israel’s own religious zealots—the Israelites were not even the original inhabitants of the land. Rather, according the text, God instructs Joshua and his warriors to commit multiple genocides to conquer the land.
Against this backdrop, the Arab-Islamic nations and indeed almost all of the world have repeatedly united in the call for a two-state solution and peace between Israel and Palestine.
Instead of the two-state solution, Israel and the U.S. have made a desert and called it peace.
Lessons from Syria, Lebanon: Resistance is the only guarantor of sovereignty
By Mohamad Hasan Sweidan | The Cradle | December 12, 2024
On the heels of thinly veiled threats from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that deposed Syrian president Bashar al-Assad was “playing with fire,” and seizing the opportunity presented by the sudden collapse of the Syrian state, the occupation army invaded Syrian territory for the first time in 50 years.
The pretext of establishing a “buffer zone” was a transparent attempt to conceal Israel’s historic regional agenda: the weakening and fragmentation of Arab states to facilitate Tel Aviv’s regional domination.
Exploiting the power vacuum that ensued from the fall of Damascus, Israel launched hundreds of air strikes to cripple Syria’s already weakened military capabilities, and patted itself on the back for what it called the largest air blitz in its history. Its land forces and armored vehicles now lay a few kilometers from the Syrian capital, having literally driven through border terrain without a single challenge by opposing troops.
For many observers in neighboring Lebanon – and perhaps Iraq and other regional states – the Israeli rout answered a critical question: if they relinquished the will or capacity to defend themselves, would this too be Lebanon’s fate?
A legacy of expansionism
The concept of ‘Greater Israel’ is deeply rooted in Zionist ideology. From Theodor Herzl, the father of modern Zionism, to revisionist figures like Ze’ev Jabotinsky, and even Israel’s first prime minister, David Ben-Gurion, expansionist ambitions have been a consistent theme.
Oded Yinon’s plan, A Strategy for Israel in the Eighties, further solidified this vision. First made public in the magazine Kivunim (Directions) of the World Zionist Organization in February 1982, the plan was based on the vision of Herzl, and the founders of the Israeli state in the late 1940s, among them Polish-born, US Zionist leader Jacob Fishman.
From North Africa to the Levant to the Arabian Peninsula, Yinon advocated a strategy of breaking up and chronically weakening Arab states in order to ensure Israel’s long-term security.
“Israel’s policy, both in war and in peace, ought to be directed at the liquidation of Jordan under the present regime and the transfer of power to the Palestinian majority … The dissolution of Syria and Iraq later on into ethnically or religiously unique areas such as in Lebanon, is Israel’s primary target on the Eastern front … Iraq, rich in oil on the one hand and internally torn on the other, is guaranteed as a candidate for Israel’s targets. Its dissolution is even more important for us than that of Syria … The entire Arabian peninsula is a natural candidate for dissolution due to internal and external pressures, and the matter is inevitable especially in Saudi Arabia … Egypt is divided and torn apart into many foci of authority. If Egypt falls apart, countries like Libya, Sudan or even the more distant states will not continue to exist in their present form and will join the downfall and dissolution of Egypt.”
This destructive and expansionist drive is not confined to historical Israeli figures. Current Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich has openly stated his desire for Israel to control territory extending to Damascus and including Jordan. In a 2016 interview, he is quoted as saying: “Our great religious elders used to say that the future of Jerusalem was to extend as far as Damascus.”
More recently, following the fall of Damascus, Smotrich pressed: “It is time to seize control of Gaza and strip Hamas of its civilian authority, cutting off its lifeline,” and to launch an all-out offensive in the occupied West Bank.
Such pronouncements, far from being isolated incidents, reflect a core Zionist principle that resurfaces with increased intensity during times of conflict.
The ongoing war in Gaza exemplifies this. Nearly 10 months after the start of the war, Netanyahu said of the Occupied Palestinian Territory: “It is part of our homeland. We intend to stay there.” Smotrich’s display of a ‘Greater Israel’ map encompassing all of historic Palestine and Jordan during a 2023 visit to Paris further illustrates these ambitions.
Historically, these far-right expansionist fantasies are rooted in religious beliefs that the ‘Promised Land’ stretches from the Nile River in Egypt to the Euphrates River in Iraq. These beliefs have been seeded and advanced by the leaders of the Zionist movement since its inception more than 120 years ago.
Breaking up West Asia
Their expansionist fantasies are not merely ideological. The Yinon Plan outlined a strategy for breaking Arab states into weak, sectarian ones, each dependent on Israel for survival. Iraq is to be divided into Kurdish, Sunni, and Shia states, Lebanon reduced to fragments, and Syria obliterated. This is not a theory – it’s a Zionist roadmap for domination, and the occupation state’s aggression in Syria is a direct implementation of these sinister goals.
Israel’s actions in Syria lay bare the insatiable greed of the occupation state. Without resistance movements in neighboring Lebanon, Israeli tanks would undoubtedly have rolled deep into Lebanese territory, seizing lands far beyond the south of the Litani.
The evidence is clear. Since the ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon took effect on 27 November, the Israeli occupation army has violated Lebanese sovereignty at least 195 times. These violations include airstrikes, drone incursions, artillery bombardments, and the destruction of homes – acts of terror meant to keep Lebanon on its knees.
The Lebanese government and armed forces, shackled by limited capacity and international neglect, have been unable to halt this aggression. International mechanisms like the five-member committee – comprising the US, France, Lebanon, Israel, and UNIFIL – are nothing more than diplomatic theatrics.
Resistance: The barrier against occupation
A day after the committee meeting on 9 December, the Israeli army committed 12 violations of the ceasefire agreement.
They meet, they talk, but they fail to act. While these parties dither, Tel Aviv tightens its grip, proving time and time again that the only language it understands is the language of force. This is why Lebanon’s resistance remains the only genuine national safeguard against Israeli aggression.
Southerners in Lebanon know this truth intimately: without the resistance, Israel’s greed knows no bounds. Every incursion, every violation, is a reminder that resistance is not just a choice – it’s a necessity.
The unrelenting aggression of the occupation state reveals a harsh reality; in a world dominated by power, weakness invites exploitation. Realists in international relations argue that power is the only currency that matters, and Lebanon’s experience validates this view.
Resistance movements have demonstrated that the balance of power is the sole way to curb Tel Aviv’s appetite and ambitions. Israel’s expansionism will not end with Syria or Palestine. It eyes every vulnerable nation in the region, seeking to carve it up and dominate.
The lesson is clear. Only through resilience and force can sovereignty be defended. Resistance is not just a shield – it is the only path to survival against an entity that thrives on destruction and occupation.
With Assad gone, Israel looks to expand while rival NATO-backed groups will turn on each other
By Omar Ahmed | MEMO | December 10, 2024
Militant commander calls for Israeli support, strikes on Syrian troops
Press TV – December 7, 2024
A commander from the so-called Free Syrian Army (FSA) militant group has reportedly expressed hope for friendly relations with Israel, urging the occupying regime to extend both political and military support for their insurgency against the Syrian government.
In an article published on Friday, the Times of Israel quoted an unnamed FSA commander as stressing the need for a clear political stance from the Israeli regime.
“We have enough fighters on the ground. What we need from Israel is a clear political stance against the Assad regime,” he stated.
The commander also called for increased aerial support from the Israeli regime, suggesting that the regime should attack the forces in Syria “wherever it sees them.”
“We are trying to block them on the roads and ambush them, but Israel should also take action from the air,” said the commander.
Highlighting the potential for friendship, he noted that the armed group is open to alliances “with everyone in the region – including Israel.”
He also referenced recent Israeli airstrikes in Lebanon, stating that they have significantly aided the militant group in its advancements on Syrian soil.
“We are thankful to Israel for its strikes against Hezbollah,” he said, adding, “We hope that after the fall of Assad, Israel will plant a rose in the Syrian garden and will support the Syrian people.”
Asked about the future of Syria, the militant commander affirmed, “We will go for full peace with Israel, we will live side by side as neighbors,” insisting that the group has never made “any critical comments about Israel.”
His comments come as militants, having suffered setbacks due to years of retaliatory operations by the Syrian military and its allies, are attempting to regroup in northern Syria.
There are growing reports of substantial Western and Israeli support for anti-Damascus factions, including those affiliated with Hayʼat Tahrir al-Sham.
The Syrian military continues its extensive campaign, reversing some of the territorial gains by the militants.
Who is Massad Boulos, Tapped as Trump’s Advisor on Arab, Middle Eastern Affairs?
By Svetlana Ekimenko – Sputnik – 02.12.2024
Donald Trump lauded Massad Boulos as a “highly respected leader in the business world, with extensive experience on the International scene” in a post on his social media platform Truth Social on Sunday.
US President-elect Donald Trump has announced Massad Boulos as his pick for the position of senior advisor on Arab and Middle Eastern affairs.
Who is Massad Boulos?
Boulos is a Lebanese American businessman who is also father-in-law to Trump’s daughter, Tiffany.
Boulos helped Trump win back the swing state of Michigan by flipping Arab American voters frustrated with Joe Biden’s policies supporting Israel in its war on Hamas in Gaza and on Hezbollah in Lebanon, campaign officials told Reuters.
He assured Arab Americans during the election campaign that Trump was committed to ending the wars in the Middle East.
“Let’s move to peace, and let’s move to rebuilding Gaza and rebuilding Lebanon,” Boulos told Sky News in October, adding:
“We want Gaza to be prosperous. We want the Palestinian people to be prosperous, to live in peace, to live in harmony, side by side with the Israelis and full security on both sides.”
Trump’s in-law has ties to various factions in Lebanese politics, including the Free Patriotic Movement (Christian party aligned with Lebanese Shiite movement Hezbollah), and the Lebanese Forces Party, according to media reports.
He is familiar with Suleiman Frangieh, leader of the Christian Marada Movement and a candidate for Hezbollah’s faction in the 2022-2024 Lebanese presidential election, Reuters noted.
Massad Boulos, who has acted as a go-between for Trump and Mahmoud Abbas in the past, met with the Palestinian leader on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in September, a senior Palestinian official told The Times of Israel. Abbas reportedly voiced willingness to work with Trump to reach a two-state solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.
Boulos has friends who are close to Syria’s President Bashar Al-Assad, according to media reports.
South Lebanon Bombed Church
Craig Murray | November 30, 2024
At dusk, I visit the old church which Israel bombed, murdering 15 first responders. Israel has killed over 220 medics and paramedics in Lebanon.
The Long War to reaffirm Western and Israeli primacy undergoes a shape-shift
By Alastair Crooke | Strategic Culture Foundation | December 2, 2024
The long war to reaffirm western and Israeli primacy is undergoing a shape-shift. On one front, the calculus in respect to Russia and the Ukraine war has shifted. And in the Middle East, the locus and shape of the war is shifting in a distinct way.
Georges Kennan’s famed Soviet doctrine has long formed the baseline to U.S. policy, firstly directed toward the Soviet Union, and latterly, towards Russia. Kennan’s thesis from 1946 was that the United States needed to work patiently and resolutely to thwart the Soviet threat, and to enhance and aggravate the internal fissures in the Soviet system, until its contradictions triggered the collapse from within.
More recently, the Atlantic Council has drawn on the Kennan doctrine to suggest that his broad outline should serve as the basis of U.S. policy towards Iran. “The threat that Iran poses to the U.S. resembles the one faced from the Soviet Union after World War II. In this regard, the policy that George Kennan outlined for dealing with the Soviet Union has some applications for Iran”, the Atlantic report states.
Over the years, that doctrine has ossified into an entire network of security understandings, based on the archetypal conviction that America is strong, and that Russia was weak. Russia must ‘know that’, and thus, it was argued, there could be no logic for Russian strategists to imagine they had any other option but to submit to the overmatch represented by the combined military strength of NATO versus a ‘weak’ Russia. And should Russian strategists unwisely persevere with challenging the West, it was said, the inherent contrariety simply would cause Russia to fracture.
American neocons and western intelligence have not listened to any other view, because they were (and largely still are) convinced by Kennan’s formulation. The American foreign policy class simply could not accept the possibility that such a core thesis was wrong. The entire approach reflected more a deep-seated culture, rather than any rational analysis – even when visible facts on the ground pointed them to a different reality.
So, America has piled the pressure on Russia through the incremental delivery of additional weapons systems to Ukraine; through stationing intermediate range nuclear-capable missiles ever-closer to Russia’s borders; and most recently, by shooting ATACMS into ‘old Russia’.
The aim has been to pressure Russia into a situation where it would feel obliged to make concessions to Ukraine, such as to accept a freezing of the conflict, and to be obliged to negotiate against Ukrainian bargaining ‘cards’ devised to yield a solution acceptable to the U.S. Or, alternatively, for Russia to be cornered into the ‘nuclear corner’.
American strategy ultimately rests on the conviction that the U.S. could engage in a nuclear war with Russia – and prevail; that Russia understands that were it to go nuclear, it would ‘lose the world’. Or, pressured by NATO, the anger amongst Russians likely would sweep Putin from office were he to make significant concessions to Ukraine. It was a ‘win-win’ outcome – from the U.S. perspective.
Unexpectedly however, a new weapon appeared on the scene which precisely unshackles President Putin from the ‘all-or-nothing’ choice of having to concede a bargaining ‘hand’ to Ukraine, or resort to nuclear deterrence. Instead, the war can be settled by facts on the ground. Effectively, the George Kennan ‘trap’ imploded.
The Oreshnik missile (that was used to attack the Yuzhmash complex at Dnietropetrovsk) provides Russia with a weapon, such as never before witnessed: An intermediate range missile system that effectively checkmates the western nuclear threat.
Russia can now manage western escalation with a credible threat of retaliation that is both hugely destructive – yet conventional. It inverts the paradigm. It is now the West’s escalation that either has to go nuclear, or be limited to providing Ukraine with weapons such as ATACMS or Storm Shadow that will not alter the course of the war. Were NATO to escalate further, it risks an Oreshnik strike in retaliation, either in Ukraine or on some target in Europe, leaving the West with the dilemma of what to do next.
Putin has warned: ‘If you strike again in Russia, we will respond with an Oreshnik hit on a military facility in another nation. We will provide warning, so that civilians can evacuate. There is nothing that you can do to prevent this; you do not have an anti-missile system that can stop an attack coming in at Mach 10’.
The tables are turned.
Of course, there are other reasons beyond the permanent security cadre’s wish to Gulliverise Trump into continuing the war in Ukraine, in order to taint him with a war that he promised immediately to end.
Particularly the British, and others in Europe, want the war to continue, because they are on the financial hook from their holdings of some $20 billion Ukrainian bonds which are in a ‘default-like status’, or from their guarantees to the IMF for loans to Ukraine. Europe simply cannot afford the costs of a full default. Neither can Europe afford to pick up the burden, were the Trump Administration to walk away from supporting Ukraine financially. So they collude with the U.S. interagency structure to make the continuation of the war proofed against a Trump policy reversal: Europe for financial motives, and the Deep State because it wants to disrupt Trump, and his domestic agenda.
The other wing to the ‘global war’ reflects a mirror paradox: That is, ‘Israel is strong and Iran is weak’. The central point is not only its cultural underpinning, but that the entire Israeli and U.S. apparatus is party to the narrative that Iran is a weak and technically backward country.
The most significant aspect is the multi-year failure as regards factors such as the skill to understand strategies, and recognize changes in the other sides’ capabilities, views and understandings.
Russia seems to have solved some of the general physical problems of objects flying at hypersonic speed. The use of new composite materials has made it possible to enable the gliding cruise bloc to make a long-distance guided flight practically in conditions of plasma formation. It flies to its target like a meteorite; like a ball of fire. The temperature on its surface reaches 1,600–2,000 degrees Celsius but the cruise bloc is reliably guided.
And Iran seems to have solved the problems associated with an adversary enjoying air dominance. Iran has created a deterrence fashioned from the evolution of cheap swarms drones matched up with Ballistic missiles carrying precision hypersonic warheads. It puts $1,000 drones and cheap, precision missiles up and against hugely expensive piloted airframes – An inversion of warfare that has been twenty years in the making.
The Israeli war however, is metamorphosing in other ways. The war in Gaza and Lebanon has strained Israeli manpower; the IDF have sustained heavy losses; its troops are exhausted; and the reservists are losing commitment to Israel’s wars, and are failing to show up for duty.
Israel has reached the limits of its capacity to put boots on the ground (short of conscripting the Orthodox Haredi Yeshiva students – an act that could bring down the Coalition).
In short, the Israeli army’s troop levels have fallen below present command ordered military commitments. The economy is imploding and internal divisions are raw and bruising. This is especially so due to the inequity of secular Israelis dying, whilst others stay exempt from military service – a destiny reserved for some but not others.
This tension played a major part in Netanyahu’s decision to agree to a ceasefire in Lebanon. The growing animus about Orthodox Haredi exemption risked bringing down the Coalition.
There are – metaphorically speaking – now two Israels: The Kingdom of Judea versus the State of Israel. In view of such deep antagonisms, many Israelis now see war with Iran as the catharsis that will bind a fractured people together again, and – if victorious – end all of Israel’s wars.
Outside, the war widens and shape-shifts: Lebanon, for now, is put on a low flame burner, but Turkey has triggered a major military operation (reportedly some 15,000 strong) in an attack on Aleppo, using U.S. and Turkish trained jihadists and militia from Idlib. Turkish Intelligence no doubt has its own distinct objectives, but the U.S. and Israel have a particular interest to disrupt weapons supply routes to Hizbullah in Lebanon.
The Israeli wanton onslaught on non-combatants, women and children – and its explicit ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian population – has left the region (and the Global South) seething and radicalised. Israel, through its actions, is disrupting the old ethos. The region is ‘conservative’ no more. Rather, a very different ‘Awakening’ is gestating.

