OMedia

Free
Media

OMedia
Homepage

Political
Reports1

Palestinian-Israeli
2

Palestinian-Israeli
3

Palestinian
-Israeli 4

Palestinian-Israeli
5

Israeli
Historians 6

Israeli
Historians 7

Two States
Solution 8

London
Document 9

Jordan
Option 10-E

Two-State
Solution 11

تحدي إقامة
دولتين-معرب

Ariel
Sharon

Iran-Syria
Affairs 14

إنسحاب من
غزة-15

Avi
Shlaim-Amira Hass

Protests-T.Nazmi
17

Germany-T.Nazmi
18

Report
19

Human
Rights Watch 20

Jordanian
Affairs 21

Palestinian Affair
22

Palestinian Affairs
23

Palestinian Affairs
24

Iraq
Affairs 25

Palestinian Affairs
26

Jordanian
Affairs 27

Palestinian Affairs
28

Palestinian Affairs
29

Jordan-Palestine30

Jordan-Palestine31

Iranian
Affairs32

Yemen
Affairs33

Hamas
Affairs34

Hamas
Affairs35

Hamas
Affairs36

Jordanian
Affairs37

Jordanian
Affairs38

Hamas
Affairs39

Jordan
Affairs40

Yemen
Affairs41

Iraq
Affairs42

Lebanon
Affairs43

Jordan
Affairs44

Lebanon
45

JPR 46

JPR 47

JPR 48

Hezbullah49

Hezbollah50

Hezbollah51

JPR
Hizbullah52

JPR
Hizbullah53

JPR
Hizbullah54

JPR
Hizbullah55

JPR
Hizbullah56

JPR
Pakistan57

JPR
USA58

JPR59

JPR60

JPR61

JPR62

JPR63

JPR64

JPR65

JPR66

JPR67

JPR68

JPR69

JPR70

JPR71

JPR72

JPR73

Iran-Israel
JPR74

JPR75

JPR76

JPR77

JPR78

JPR79

JPR80

JPR81

JPR82

JPR83

JPR84

Iran&Venezuela

Palestinians-Iraq
JP86

JPR 87

JPR 88

JPR 89

JPR 90

JPR 91

JPR 92

JPR 93

JPR 94

JPR 95

JPR 96

JPR 97

JPR 98

JPR 99

Archive
OMedia 100

للإتصال
بنا

JPR 52

13/8/2006

خذوا
ديمقراطيتكم واغربوا عنا

(رغم تحفظ حركة
إبداع الشديد على انفعال الصديق شاكر الجوهري هنا ومخالفتها له
الرأي إلا أننا ننشر مقالته)

شاكر
الجوهري

التدخل الأميركي في الشؤون
الداخلية للنظام العربي فاق كل الحدود.

في البداية وجدت احاديث
الديمقراطية الأميركية طريقها إلى بعض العقول انطلاقا من قناعة
ترى أن قاسما مشتركا ربما يكون قد تشكل بينها وبين الإدارة
الأميركية على قاعدة ضرورة دمقرطة الأنظمة الحليفة لأميركا, بعد
أن ثبت أنها أنظمة منتجة للإرهاب والإرهابيين.

الدوافع كانت متباينة, غير أن
النتيجة يفترض أن تكون واحدة.

فأميركا تريد إلغاء الأسباب
المنتجة للإرهاب, وهي اسباب رأت أنها كامنة في تركيبة الأنظمة.
والشعوب تريد أن تستعيد حريتها من الأنظمة.

غير أن الأنظمة كانت أكثر منا
خبرة بأميركا, فقايضتها: حرية الشعوب مقابل حرية
الأوطان.

وتمت الصفقة..!

وثبت أن اميركا غير صادقة في
موضوعة الديمقراطية والحريات العامة إلا بالقدر الذي يخدم
مصالحها. وهي ضد الديمقراطية والحريات العامة حين تفرز حكومات
غير منسجمة مع مصالحها.

على ذلك مثالين
بارزين:

الأول: افرازات الديمقرطية
الأميركية في العراق, حيث اغلقت الباب مقدما في وجه القوى
المعارضة لأميركا, وحالت دونها وخوض الإنتخابات, فأفرزت هذه
الإنتخابات حكومة على شاكلة الإحتلال, ومجلس الحكم الذي شكله
بريمر في البدايات.

الثاني: رفض اميركا لنتائج
الديمقراطية الفلسطينية.. وها هي كما أصرت على تواصل اطلاق النار
ضد شعب لبنان, أصرت كذلك على تواصل اطلاق النار ضد الشعب
الفلسطيني في قطاع غزة.

وفي الحالتين, المطلوب
الأميركي تثوير الحاضنة الشعبية ضد حزب الله وحركة
"حماس".

ديمقراطية اميركا ثبت أنها مثل
الأصنام التي كان يصنعها البعض من التمر. يقومون بالتهامها بعد
أن يصلوا لها.

في بعض الحالات كانت العرب في
الجاهلية حين لا تجد حجرا, تبول على الرمل, وتصنع منه إلها
تعبده..!!

لكن اميركا لم تقف عن هذا الحد
من التدخل في شؤوننا, فهي وبعد أن تراجعت عمليا عن المطالبة
بالديمقراطية نيابة عنا, قررت أن تختار لنا من
يحكمنا..!!!

الممثلون الأميركيون باتوا
يسألون شخصيات عامة في هذا البلد أو ذاك: من تفضلون رئيسا
لدولتكم.. فلان أم علان..؟!

من قال لأميركا أن شعوبنا تقبل
هذا التدخل الفظ في أخص خصوصياتنا..؟!

من قال لأميركا أن شعوبنا تقبل
أن تحدد لها شكل ومضمون نظام الحكم, واشخاصه..؟!

من قال لأميركا أننا نقبل أن
تحل اميركا نفسها ومصالحها محل ارادة شعوبنا في الخيار
الحر.

أيها الأميركيون.. خذوا
ديمقراطيتكم وحرياتكم, وكل بضاعتكم الفاسدة, وحلوا عن
سمانا.

قالتها شعوبنا لكم منذ زمن,
وها نحن نكررها على اسماعكم.

«نيوستيتسمان»: بلير كان
على علم بخطة إسرائيل قبل خطف الجنديين وأوفد ليفي إلى تل أبيب
لبحثها

لندن - من إلياس نصرالله: يواجه رئيس
الوزراء البريطاني توني بلير، للمرة الاولى، منذ شن إسرائيل
حربها على لبنان، اتهاماً خطيراً بأنه كان على علم مسبق بأن
الدولة العبرية تنوي تدمير القرى في جنوب لبنان قبل خطف «حزب
الله»، للجنديين من أجل القضاء على قواعد الحزب وأنه لم يفعل
شيئاً لوقف هذه المجزرة، وهو اتهام يحظى بأهمية كبيرة كونه صدر
هذه المرة، ليس عن المعارضين لبلير أو المعادين له، بل من داخل
حزب العمال الحاكم الذي يتربع بلير على كرسي القيادة فيه منذ نحو
عشر سنوات.
وكتبت
أسبوعية «نيوستيتسمان»، وهي المجلة النظرية التابعة لحزب العمال
والتي كثيراً ما توصف بأنها يسارية كونها تلتزم خط الحزب الرسمي
المدافع عن حقوق الطبقة العاملة، أن رئيس الوزراء الإسرائيلي
إيهود أولمرت أبلغ الرئيس جورج بوش قبل الحرب نيته توجيه ضربة
قاضية للحزب وأن الخطة تتضمن «تدمير» القرى في جنوب لبنان،
وأضافت أن الرئيس الاميركي أبلغ بلير هذه الخطة حالاً بعد إطلاع
أولمرت عليها.
وتابعت المجلة: «إذن بلير كان يعلم, وهذا يكشف عن زيف
الجدل الذي دار خلال الأسبوع الماضي حول الدعوة لوقف إطلاق
النار», وأضافت ان «المسألة لم تقتصر فقط على غض الطرف والتقصير
في وقف المذبحة، بل تعدت ذلك إلى تقديم مساعدة فعالة»
لتنفيذها.
من
جهتها، نقل الموقع الإلكتروني لصحيفة «ديلي ميل» عن مصدر من داخل
الحكومة، أن إسرائيل أطلعت واشنطن بالفعل على الخطة وأنه تم
إبلاغ لندن بالأمر, ونقلت عن عدد من النواب في مجلس العموم أن
بلير كان ضالعاً في الخطة وأنه أوفد مبعوثه الخاص إلى الشرق
الأوسط اللورد ليفي للقاء المسؤولين الإسرائيليين، وأن ليفي أجرى
عشرات اللقاءات مع الوزراء الإسرائيليين لبحث الخطة قبل شن الحرب
بكثير، رغم المشاكل التي كانت تحيط بعلاقة بلير باللورد على
الساحة الداخلية وتورطهما في فضيحة منح الألقاب الرسمية «لورد
وسير» للمتبرعين لحزب العمال التي أدت إلى اعتقال ليفي وإخضاعه
للتحقيق من جانب الشرطة.

وأشار
النواب إلى أن العدد الكبير من الزيارات التي قام بها ليفي،
لإسرائيل خلال يونيو ويوليو الماضيين، هما أكبر دليل على العلاقة
الحميمة وغير العادية بين تل أبيب ولندن في وقت كانت الأولى تعدّ
العدة لشن الحرب.
وأوردت «ديلي ميل» على لسان جون بايك، أحد كبار
المستشارين العسكريين للحكومة الأميركية: «تسألون ما إذا أعطت
الولايات المتحدة إسرائيل الضوء الأخضر لمهاجمة حزب الله وإبعاد
قواته من جنوب لبنان؟ نعم بالطبع فعلت ذلك», وقال أن هناك على حد
علمه اتفاق بين واشنطن وتل أبيب على توجيه إسرائيل ضربة عسكرية
للمفاعل الذري الإيراني، «ربما السنة المقبلة, ونظراً لكونه من
المؤكد أن إيران في حال ضرب مفاعلها النووي ستطلب من حزب الله أن
يبدأ بقصف إسرائيل، تقرر ضرب حزب الله قبل توجيه الضربة للمفاعل
الإيراني».
ويأتي
اتهام بلير بعلمه المسبق بخطة الحرب على لبنان تتويجاً لحملة
واسعة ضد الموقف المؤيد لإسرائيل وخروج عدد من الوزراء
والديبلوماسيين وغيرهم من المسؤولين علناً ضده, ووصف السير
رودريك بريثويت، وهو من أبرز السفراء البريطانيين السابقين،
الضرر الذي أحدثه موقف بلير من الحرب على لبنان بالضرر الهائل
الذي لحق ببريطانيا ومصالحها في العالم العربي عقب مشاركتها في
حرب السويس على مصر وأدت إلى خروجها لاحقاً من منطقة الخليج
وعدن.
وسارع
مكتب رئيس الوزراء إلى نفي علمه بتفاصيل الخبر الذي أوردته
«نيوستيتسمان»، غير أن زعيم الحزب الليبرالي الديموقراطي السير
منزيس كامبل، قال: «إذا صحّ هذا الاتهام فأنه سيمس صميم مصداقية
رئيس الوزراء وشرعية حكومته, لأن أسئلة كثيرة ستثار حول عدم
مصارحته البرلمان بهذا الأمر»,
ولوحظ أن بلير حاول في تصريح له صباح أمس،
الدفاع عن نفسه والتأكيد أنه «لم يعط الضوء الأخضر» لإسرائيل
لمواصلة حربها، معترفاً بالخلافات الداخلية في مجلس الوزراء حول
الموقف من الحرب على لبنان.

Thousands of
Shi'ites march in Baghdad

Wed
Aug 2, 2006 9:19 AM BST

By Omar al-Ibadi
and Michael Georgy

BAGHDAD (Reuters) -
Thousands of Shi'ite civilians charged with guarding
neighbourhoods in Iraq marched through Baghdad
on Wednesday in a show of force likely to stir passions in a
country ravaged by sectarian violence.

Young men in
civilian uniforms and headbands, all members of what is known
as the popular committees, chanted as a speaker called on them
to crush "terrorists" and loyalists of ousted President Saddam
Hussein leading a Sunni Arab insurgency against the
Shi'ite-led government.

"Step on
terrorism," he said.

The crowd included
members of the Badr Organisation, one of the armed Shi'ite
groups Sunni Arabs accuse of running militia death squads, a
charge they deny.

"We have to
benefit from this wide popular base and the state and Iraqi
people should form these

popular regional committees from the best
of our young men to face terrorism," Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, one
of Iraq's most power
Shi'ite leaders, told a crowd.

"They will defend
people of districts; Sunnis, Shi'ites, Arabs, Kurds and
Turkmen. They do not differentiate between anybody. They will
provide support for the official security apparatus."

Iraqi Prime
Minister Nuri al-Maliki, whose reconciliation plan has failed
to ease sectarian bloodshed, has promised to disband militias
that many fear will push the country to civil war.

"The first enemy
is the Baathist Saddam loyalists and their henchmen the
Islamic extremists," said Hakim.

Officially, the
event was held to mark the third anniversary of the death of
Hakim's brother, Ayatollah Muhammad Baqr al-Hakim, in a
bombing in the southern city of Najaf.

But the
speeches also covered some of the most explosive issues in
Iraq, such
as federalism, which is opposed by Sunnis who fear it will
leave them deprived of oil in resource-poor central Iraq.

"We
believe that implementation of a federal system in
Iraq will
achieve justice and rebuild Iraq and guarantee
the unity of the Iraqi people and land," said Hakim.

Hours
before he spoke, three roadside bombs exploded in central
Baghdad near a group of
labourers seeking work, killing three people and wounding
nine, police sources said.

In
Baquba, north of Baghdad, gunmen killed the
chief of the traffic police, Ahmed Abdel Hussein, and one of
his bodyguards.

The
violence came a day after bombings and shootings killed up to
61 people across Iraq, including at
least 26 soldiers.

Israel, terrorism and the
laws of war

By IRWIN
COTLER

ouise Arbour’s comments on
international law as it applies to Israel’s military actions in
Lebanon are as
superficial as they are simplistic as a matter of law, and
uninformed and misleading in their appreciation of and
application to the facts.

First, it is a basic postulate of
constitutional law that a government’s first duty – be it in
Canada or
in Israel – is the
protection of its citizens. Second, and not unrelated,
international law mandates the right, if not the duty, of
self-defence against aggression, and the reasonable use of
military force for that protective purpose, whether in
response to an armed attack from another state or a terrorist
act.

In the case at hand, the triggers for
the present hostilities include the abduction of Israeli
soldiers and the intentional and unprovoked rocket and missile
bombardment across international boundaries of Israeli cities,
towns and villages by Hezbollah and Hamas. The root cause is
the unwillingness of these terrorist entities and their
supporters, like Iran, to recognize the
legitimacy of Israel within any
boundaries. By their own avowed declarations, they are sworn
to the destruction of Israel and the killing of Jews
wherever they may be – aided and abetted by their sponsors,
Iran and
Syria.

Accordingly, the declarations of
Arbour, the United Nations’ high commissioner for human rights
and a former Canadian Supreme Court justice, to the effect
that international law “prohibits the bombardment of sites
with military significance but resulting invariably in the
killing of innocent civilians” is wrong as a statement of
international law, and dangerously wrong in the application of
that alleged international law principle to the facts at hand.

First, it is legitimate under
international law to attack military targets located in
cities, as long as every effort is made to reduce civilian
casualties. Second, targets located in cities – including even
apartment buildings, bridges and infrastructure – are
legitimate military targets if they become the infrastructure
from which war is waged, whether they are used to store and
launch rockets and missiles, or to house and shield the
terrorists themselves, or, as in the case of bridges, to
transport both the terrorists and their weapons.

Indeed, Arbour’s statement of the law
is not only simplistic as a matter of law, but

dangerously so in
this instance. For if Israel is to be prohibited from
exercising its right of self-defence to counter the
indiscriminate bombardment of its citizens, the whole of
Israel becomes a
“sitting duck” for Hezbollah’s and Hamas’ international
criminality. It would transform international law – and
Israel’s
constitution or that of any democracy– into a suicide pact,
with Hamas and Hezbollah able to commit war crimes with
impunity.

Fortunately, the basic principles of
international treaty and customary law respecting the
reasonable use of force to repel aggression make it clear that
the intentional co-mingling of combatants with civilians – or
the embedding of combatants in civilian areas such that an
attack on combatants would necessarily entail an excessively
large number of casualties – is a flagrant violation of
international humanitarian law. Hezbollah and Hamas are in
violation of the laws of war when they launch missiles and
rockets from villages and homes in order to immunize
themselves from Israeli reprisals.

Accordingly, Hezbollah and Hamas are
legally and morally responsible for any civilian casualty that
results from any Israeli bombardment of areas containing
missiles, rockets or the terrorists themselves, as long as the
Israeli intention is for the purpose of protecting its
civilians and Israel makes every
effort to limit the civilian casualties in its response.

Admittedly, the right of self-defence
in the response of Israel (or any
other democracy) to such acts of aggression is not unlimited.
The principle of “reasonableness” and “proportionality” in
response still applies even when terrorist organizations like
Hezbollah intentionally and indiscriminately target Israeli
civilians and commit the war crime of using their own
civilians as human shields. But then the test of
“proportionality” for Israel (or any
other democracy) – and the question of whether there has been
excessive injury to civilians – must be assessed in the
context of the intention and actions of both the aggressor and
the responding state, including:

• The intentional and unprovoked
acts of war across international boundaries by the terrorist
organization to begin with;

• The use by the terrorist
organizations of civilians as human shields to immunize
themselves from an Israeli response;

• The avowed and publicly declared
intention to destroy a state (Israel) and kill as
many of its citizens as possible;

• The support for these terrorist
organizations by states like Iran, which help recruit, train,
supply, finance, harbour and instigate the terrorist
movements, and which have their own genocidal ideology;

• The fact that terrorist
organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah act as proxies or
surrogates to the strategic objectives of Syria and Iran and
which, in the case of Iran, include not only “wiping Israel
off the map” but changing the map of the Middle-East itself;

• The intended and anticipated
moral and strategic gains for Israel, which include better

protecting from
rocket and missile attacks more than two million Israelis –
and with Tel Aviv in central Israel, protecting the country’s
entire population of seven million – must also be factored
into any judgments about the “proportionality” of Israel’s
operations against Hezbollah.

It is painful and tragic to see
hundreds of thousands of civilians fleeing the war zone; and
the death of any innocent, Israeli, Palestinian or Lebanese,
is a tragedy. But it must never be forgotten that there would
have been no terrorist Hezbollah if UN Security Council
Resolution 1559 had been complied with and enforced. There
would have been no need for an Israeli response and no
civilian casualties on any side if there had been no
unprovoked act of aggression across international boundaries
by both Hezbollah and Hamas to begin with. There would have
been no Hezbollah capacity for an indiscriminate missile and
rocket bombardment of the Israeli civilian population were it
not for the Iranian and Syrian supply of some 15,000 of these
deadly missiles and rockets to Hezbollah alone. There would
have been nowhere near the number of Palestinian and Lebanese
civilian casualties if Hamas and Hezbollah were not embedding
themselves in the civilian population and using the civilians
as human shields. And, as a matter of fundamental principle,
there should no moral equivalence between the terrorist
intention to maximize civilian casualties and the Israeli
intention to minimize civilian casualties.

This discourse about the laws of war
may, in the light of individual tragedies and civilian deaths,
appear to be insufficiently sensitive to the human tragedies
involved. Indeed, the “laws of war” may appear to be a
contradiction in terms. But the very notion of laws of war and
the theory of just wars presuppose that wars will still be
fought, but that they must be fought justly.

In the end, Hamas and Hezbollah
launched an unprovoked act of war against Israel.
Israel had no
choice but to respond to protect its citizens. The question is
whether that response is just, and the answer has to be one
rendered with full appreciation of the principles of
international law and the facts and circumstances of the
present conflict.

Irwin Cotler is the member of
Parliament for Mount Royal and professor of law (on leave) at
McGill University.

Kuwaitis
slam US' 'New Middle
East'

By Ahmad
Al-Khaled
KUWAIT: More than 500 people rallied on Shara
Sahafa (Journalism Street) late yesterday in support of
Lebanese endurance against Israeli aggression and denounced
the US' vision of a "New Middle East'. Frequent chants of
"Death to America!", "America the Great
Satan! and "Death to Israel!" could be
heard. "We tell the American and British ambassadors in
Kuwait that they
are unwanted and unwelcome in our diwaniyas and homes,
especially in the month of Ramadan," a speaker told the crowd
to chants of "We are Hezbollah" and "Down, Down USA".

Protestors gathered 3000 signatures of Kuwaiti citizens
supporting an immediate ceasefire and an end to Israeli
hostilities in Lebanon, which was
sent to all countries that are permanent members of the UN
Security Council and several international humanitarian
agencies. "What is happening in Lebanon is not a
crime - it is crimes against humanity," Ayad Al-Mena, a
Kuwaiti journalist told the crowd. "Close the US Embassy"
signs hung amid coffins marked "UN" and "Arab League",
signifying protestors' lack of confidence in both agencies to
accomplish anything in the current Mideast conflict. "It is a mistake to
call this war an Israeli war as it is an Israeli-American
war," Ahmed Al-Diyan, a Kuwaiti constitutional scholar and
writer said. "The UN is a division of the US State
Department," he added.
All speakers at the rally slammed
US policy in the
region with Kuwaiti journalist Mustafa Behbahani saying: "The
American Zionist intention is the control of the region and
anyone who does not submit gets eliminated." Behbahani called
on the National Assembly to enact laws that criminalise
relations with Israel. Kuwaiti
journalist and head of the political office of the Salafist
Movement (a Sunni political party) Fahaid Al-Heliem said:
"This is a crusade against Islam and Muslims! When the two
towers fell, all the values of US democracy fell!"

"The US wants Islamic nations to submit - their only
obstacle is Islamic resistance which they want to remove. They
want to destroy the idea of resistance. Support the resistance
- if they are defeated it is a defeat for all of us. Support
them with your words, money and everything you can," Al-Mena
implored. "They (the US) want to destroy
even the idea of resistance," Al-Diyan chorused. Referring to
the US' self-proclaimed
"New Middle East" he said: "This New Middle East will be made
up of small countries built on ethnicity and sectarianism and
have no will." "US support for Israel is fuelling more
extremism and hatred for the US," Al-Mena added.

Shiite religious cleric Abdullah Al-Najada denounced the
local press. "There are (US and Israeli) agents in the free
press," he charged. The mostly Shiite crowd responded with
chants of "Death to Traitors!", "Death to Agents!" and "Death
to Mercenaries!" "There are no Sunnis, there are no Shiites -
only Muslim," Salafist Al-Heliem said. "And with all our
fights with Israel, we have only had Arab
Nationalism (which is dead) - once we ousted Islam, we lost
everything," he added, calling on the free Kuwaiti press to
support Lebanon. The
Kuwaiti Journalist Association also urged the press yesterday
to expose Israeli atrocities and crimes.

God
save Nasrallah...say Kuwait's
children

By Rania El
Gamal
Staff Writer
KUWAIT: They were dressed in
tee-shirts with slogans such as 'Death to Israel...Death to America'. Some were
holding Lebanese flags and yellow balloons with Hassan
Nasrallah's photo on them. Others were wearing yellow bandanas
with 'All of us are Hezbullah' printed on them. These were the
scenes as Kuwaiti children held their first peaceful
demonstration yesterday, in front of the offices of local
newspapers in Shuwaikh.
About 200 protestors-mainly
children-gathered yesterday in the afternoon in spite of the
heat to assert their support for the children and women of
Lebanon,
especially after the Israeli raid on the southern Lebanese
village of Qana on Sunday, that
killed at least 54 civilians, mostly children.
"This
demonstration is mainly for the Kuwaiti children as well as
the Lebanese children living in Kuwait. We dedicate
it to Lebanon," said
Yaoub Dashti, spokesperson for the group 'Kuwaitis Supporting
Endurance'.
"This peaceful gathering is only for children
and women and we chose this place [in front of the local
newspapers] because newspapers will deliver the message," he
said.
Speaking to the Kuwait Times, Dashti said that there
would be a workshop later on where kids could paint their own
pictures about Lebanon and the
Israeli aggression and then present them at the demonstration.
Dashti also said that their organisation was collecting and
sending donations to Lebanon through the
Kuwait Red
Crescent.
"The speakers [in
this demonstration] will be children, talking to the audience
about what is happening in Lebanon and
Occupied Palestine," he added.
The age of the children who
attended yesterday's protest varied from 4 to 15. This poses
the question: Were these children really aware of the reasons
why they were there?

"My children insisted to come here and
participate in the demonstration," said Intisar, a middle-aged
woman dressed in a black abaya. She has three children-aged 6,
10 and 13 -- attending the protest.
"I am calling upon all
the different sects to unite for Lebanon. This is a
humanitarian matter - there is no difference between Sunnis
and Shiites, we have to unite to fight Israel, America and its
supporters," she said.
"The children understand what is
happening and they were very disturbed of what happened in
Qana's massacre," said Um Yousef, another protestor who
brought her three children with her to the protest.
"What
is happening [in Lebanon] threatens all the
Arabs, and unfortunately the stand of the Arab League was very
disappointing," she added, showing the pictures that her
children drew in pencil, depicting the war in
Lebanon.
Three
different children spoke at the protest yesterday. Fatma, an
11-year-old girl, recited a poem in Arabic supporting the
Lebanese people and Hezbollah.
Mohammad, a 10-year-old
Kuwaiti child spoke eloquently in classical Arabic,
represented the children of Kuwait in their support for the
children of Lebanon and Palestine. Speaking to the
Kuwait Times, he called upon the Lebanese children to stand
together. "Don't be afraid and be strong," he said, reciting
verses of the Quran: "O you who believe! If you help (the
cause of) Allah, He will help you and make firm your feet."
Surah Mohammad, Verse 7.
Almost every
protestor carried photos of Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of
Hezbollah, who is regarded by many as the 'protector' of
Lebanon from
Israeli aggression.
"God save Nasrallah...Allah Akbar,"
shouted Abdul Wahab Al-Majedy, head of the Islamic Group in
Kuwait University to the
protestors, who repeated the same words back to him. "Who is
our enemy?" he asked, and the crowd answered,
"Israel". "Who is
their ally?" he asked again. "America," was their
answer. "Let the world see what our kids are saying," he
concluded.

Lebanese
premier sandwiched between Israel, Syria America

BEIRUT:
Faced with the worst Israeli military onslaught in more than
two decades, Prime Minister Fuad Saniora has a near-impossible
job as the leader of Lebanon. The
Western-backed leader finds himself walking a political
tightrope, trying to reconcile widespread public opinion that
the United States has shunned Lebanon in favor of Israel while
keeping good relations with Washington and Hezbollah onboard
his Cabinet. Many believe the future of Lebanon and its
stability at this difficult period hinges on the prime
minister and his ability to manoeuvre internally and on the
international scene.
"He is the protector of the country's
unity and its internal stability," said political analyst
Sateh Noureddine. "His actions are responsible and beneficial
for the country, and are leaving a great impression abroad in
America,
Europe, Israel and the Arab
world," said Noureddine, managing editor of the As-Safir
newspaper.  After the devastating Israeli air strike
Sunday on the town of Qana that killed at least 56
people, more than half children, Saniora canceled a visit of
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and praised Hezbollah's
leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah for his "sacrifices" and hinting
retaliation may be justified. "As long as the aggression
continues there is response to be exercised," he said as he
struggled to rally his war-torn nation behind him and keep his
fractured government from falling apart. The remarks represent
a significant departure for the anti-Syrian leader, who has
had a tense relationship with Damascus-backed Hezbollah in
recent months.
As the conflict began 20 days ago,
Saniora put forward ideas that include deploying an
international force in the south and a vague promise to disarm
the guerrillas at a later stage. But after the Qana attack, he
said any negotiations on a broader deal were off.  "We
will not negotiate until the Israeli war stops shedding the
blood of innocent people," he said.  Whether his remarks
were in a moment of anger at the horrific scenes of dead
children or a shift in policy, Saniora remains the captain who
has to navigate the country through its most difficult time in
decades.  Saniora, 63, was a longtime trusted aide and
business associate of former Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri, the
architect of Lebanon's
reconstruction from the 1975-90 civil war who was killed in a
2005 car bombing.  After Hariri's assassination, which
many blamed on Syria, Saniora came to power in
the first elections since Syria withdrew its troops from
Lebanon last
year.  Since he took office a year ago,
Lebanon's
relations with Syria have further
deteriorated.

The relations reached such a low point that
Syrian President Bashar Assad called Saniora a "slave" who
takes orders from his Western masters. But Saniora never lost
his nerve and kept preaching with a quiet tone that
Syria must
accept an independent Lebanon and
establish diplomatic relations. "Lebanese have to realise that
they must make their own decisions by themselves, and the
Syrian brothers have to get used to Lebanon being an
independent country," Saniora said late last year. The dispute
with Syria reflected
tension with its Lebanese allies. Saniora's Cabinet partners,
Hezbollah, have taken an opposing line to that of Saniora and
his backers in the anti-Syrian majority, particularly on
relations with Syria and Western
backing. The prime minister also has been at odds with
President Emile Lahoud, a staunch pro-Syrian whom the
anti-Syrian groups want to step down.
Saniora was
able to hold firm until Israel started
pounding the country in retaliation for Hezbollah's capture of
two of its soldiers on July 12. A week after the bombardment
began, Saniora criticised the world's silence. "Is the value
of human life in Lebanon less than
that of the citizens of other countries?" he asked during an
address to foreign ambassadors. He was also openly critical of
the United
States, which had been
supportive of Saniora and his attempts to rid Lebanon of Syria
influence. "Is this the price we pay for aspiring to build our
democratic institutions?" he asked. In another speech, Saniora
chocked back tears as he pleaded with the United Nations to
broker a cease-fire for his "disaster-stricken nation." His
siding with Hezbollah as the country is being pounded from the
air and the sea at least in the short term ensures his
government survives and his popular support swells as he
attempts to end the conflict. -- AP

Next report 53

Back report 51

المدونة السابقة

المدونة التالية

بلغ عن
محتوى مسيء

أنشىء مدونتك مجانا

دخول