Thursday, April 10, 2008

I've been quite busy recently and haven't been able to post as much as I'd like to but that does not mean I haven't been following the news closely. When I heard that Maliki's government had decided it was going to eliminate the Sadr militia in Basra I immediately thought that this was a stupid move. The Mahdi army might have been thuggish and inexperienced when they first started, but they reminded me of things I had read about Hezbullah when they had first appeared in the south of Lebanon. If we compare Hezbullah then to now, it is like trying to compare a Maserati with a Ford Model T, so why is that? It is because Hezbullah were able to demonstrate to Iran and Syria that they were capable, adaptable and reliable enough to be heavily invested in. That investment has been paid off and Hezbullah is itself a force to be reckoned with now, rather than some Iranian appendage as some like to believe. I think somebody in Iran looked at Muqtada with his bad teeth and frightening, unphotogenic visage and thought he had the potential for a makeover. The Mahdi army has the same seeds of potential as Hezbullah did and someone has been investing heavily in them.

Recently, As'ad Abu Khalil had noticed the massive difference in Muqtada's handling of interviews and the media since his long absence. Another thing to remember is that the American occupation had announced a while back of their capture of a Hezbullah operative in the south of Iraq. I'm sure Hezbullah's performance against Israel in 2006 was monitored very closely by al Sadr's militia, as it was by almost all other guerilla movements throughout the world. So all in all, al Maliki's stupid decision, if it was his at all, in sending his own army made up predominantly of Shia Muslims against the Mahdi army probably jeapardised the entire quisling Iraqi government had it not been for a hasty American and British intervention. Now this tell's me that this part of the fence is not going to be suitable for America's next attempt at reshaping the Middle East so it will have to try in another place.

This second place might be in Gaza, the weakest link in the chain. Shamefully, Egypt has reinforced it's border fence with the place with armoured vehicles and riot police (all armed to the teeth). Now there are rumours of another attempted breach by Hamas as they did earlier this year, but what is ominous is that they said they would also attempt it in "other" areas and not just with Egypt. I think the recent attack against an Israeli fuel depot is a prelude to that, though I find it amusing that now Israel also uses the Syrian response of "a place and time of our choosing". Another action like this might be the pretext the Israeli's want for demolishing Gaza with a "Fallujah option" and that's probably what I would do before trying to take on Hezbullah and Iran.

If Israel manages to set its "house" in order by taking out the thorn in its backside, then that will be an improvement of what is already a very bleak situation for her. Whether she will manage is another matter. I think both Israel and the United States now realise that the Arabs of today are not the same as the Arabs of thirty years ago - though of couse this will mean they will now devise ways of being even more deadly in their attacks.


La Luz said...

Hi Wassim. Welcome back.

I am surprised by your reference to Gaza as the "weakest link." In fact, if we look at events ever since the democratic election of Hamas in 2006, and the overwhelming (and illegal) international pressure on the people of Gaza to bow down to the Israeli/US demand to oust Hamas, we will see that in fact the people of Gaza have shown immense resilience, dignity and above all restraint. Two years and four months on, they remain resilient.

Secondly, when it comes to both Iraq and Palestine, resistance is of the people, and of no other state. Let us not forget this lest we fall into the trap of accepting the unacceptable.

The Iraqi people have resisted genocide now for 5 years. By virtue of this and this alone, the US has long lost its war. The only option available to it and its allies is immediate withdrawal.

Maysaloon said...

Hi Serene,
Nice to see you at Maysaloon more often btw :) Well firstly when I refer to Gaza as the weakest link in no way do I denigrate the remarkable resilience of the Palestinian people there. When you are drowning you clutch at straws and an Israeli strategist would probably decide that between HA, Iran and Gaza, it is Gaza which would not be able to put up as much resistance to a full out onslaught. I hope I'm wrong about this of course.

I agree with the second point you made but you and I both know that the option you demand will not be accepted by people whose job it is to ensure that they win. What I was trying to do is see what other things they might try to do since, as they Americans say, "it 'aint over till the fat lady sings".

La Luz said...


I would like to remind you of the content of your disclaimer: "This blog has been written from an Arab perspective, and the articles and views expressed indicate clearly my opinion on the subjects." This is your strength. All I do is ask you to maintain it.

In addition, as for the US trying to win, the more it tries, the more it shows its weakness.
Five years on from invasion and a blatant failure to subdue the Iraqi people, it is clear that it is the US strategists whom you refer to that are clutching at straws the hardest.

Maysaloon said...

Actually the US strategists are exactly who I had in mind when I used that phrase ;)

Wow, I don't think I've ever been grilled by a journalist before. I'll try to stick with what my disclaimer said in future!

G.Gar said...

"Another thing to remember is that the American occupation had announced a while back of their capture of a Hezbullah operative in the south of Iraq"

I se so Nasarallh is directly involved in Iran's proxies crack down on the most heroic reistance in history off mankind. the Iraqi one who are taking on Iran, U.S and its allies all simultaniously:)

So Hezbollah is a not an Iranian puppet. why did Iran invest in it then? is for the love of humanity or what:)

It is amzing the last war hizbollah launched aginst Israel. Just to serve Iranian interets as well as American ones in divisding the Arab world along sectarian lines:)

I also wonder how would Syria have dealt with Hamas had they stromed the Syrian borders.

Hamas will be used the same way U.S-Iran used the Iranian-Iraqi shiites to create the new middle east, where Iran expends to the mediterrenean , Egypt locked out But exporting gaza to Sinai. Sooner than ou expect ou will see marginal Arab statlets revolving around Iranian and Israelian orbits:)

nadia said...

I've disagreed with you before but with your characterization of Sadr here I'm simply confused. I fugured cleansing of Palestinians is a place where you could draw a pretty clear line.

Maysaloon said...

Hi Nadia,
I'm just looking at what he is doing and the position that his Mahdi army is in right now. Would you mind telling me a bit more as I'm not really sure how you arrived to that conclusion!

nadia said...

At which conclusion, that what happened in Baghdad qualifies as ethnic cleansing, that it stopped when he called a truce? I don't know that I agree with your comparison between the Mahdi and Hizbllh in their early days. But even if they did go that route it seems like wishful thinking that they will at this stage, and it bothers me that people are so willing to accept them before they actually show they are willing to do so. Some douchebags just remain douchebags.

qunfuz said...

Amre - It wasn't Hizbullah who tried to divide the region by sect. That was the Saudis, Jordanians, Egyptians, who whinge about a supposed 'Shia cresent' whenever Hizbullah strikes a blow against Zionist/American hegemony. The pro-American Sunni regimes (although their politics has nothing really to do with their sect) are playing the sectarian card to distract from the real conflict - of pro and anti-imperialist forces.

If Hizbullah is so sectarian why is it working with Sunni Hamas?

And it isn't Iran's or Hizbullah's fault if Egypt is irrelevant. Tnat's the fault of the oppressive US-client regime in Egypt.

Maysaloon said...

Qunfuz has a point Amre, have you ever thought that maybe you comment on the events as you want them to be and not just on what they are?

Maysaloon said...

Hi Nadia,
Well I'm sure there is a lot to disagree with in my post and maybe I sounded a bit too sympathetic to al Sadr and his movement, which I'm not. Still, that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to analyse what is happening and try to explain it so that we understand. We are talking about a context in which none of the actors is particularly nice or just.

G.Gar said...


An Iranioan is saying Egypt is irrelevet:))

Man compare the two countries and you will realize that your country Iran is a big zero.

I am talking technological advancment, women rights , individual liberty, military efffciency.

And if we are really irrelevnt, then ask someof your country men who fought in 1988 about what missiles, and technlogies that slew Iranians in thoudsands in 1988 iam talking El-Fao.

The Iranian qunfuz is talking about sectariansim.

You have actually, qunfuz, reinforced my point abpout the structural defiecincies in this entity so called Iran. you a really one dimensional minded and totally incapable of serious thinking.

The head of the Egyptian regime fought Israel with his own hands 5 times and contributed in bringing on its first defeat.

Th eregime of Hosni Moubarak, provided staregic and technical suport to Iraq when it was going through an 8 years n behalf of the Arab nation against the Irania enemy.

Now let's look at the BABOON- AYATOLLAH KHOMEINI which you worship and his mistress- Ayatollaj Ali Khameini.

First Khomeni was installed by the CIA which encouraged him to call for bringing down the regime in Bagdad, it cracked down onArab nationalism and started al over the old habit of the sticky Iranians imposeing themslves on Arabs, that resulted in an 8 years war that destabilised the region.


However Egyptian regime took the homourabnle stand againsty the Irania enemy.

Despite of all my reservations against Egyptian regime, comartively speaking I have to say that an old shoe of Moubarak i equal to the entire Iranian nation.

Qunfuz- get out of the land of your masters:)) or you will be gassed gain. some times chemical insecticides is best way to handle LOCUST no matter how harmful it is to the environment.

For thousands of years Iran is nothing but trouble enforcing itself on Arabs , we have civilised you all the time bring you alphabet and letters, but it doesnt work, you never scram!!!!!!!

qunfuz said...

Amre - you have just posted a similar bout of hysteria on my blog. I've taken it with a smile so far, but when I read your rants about 'locusts' (on my blog you say that Iranians are really Indians) then I stop smiling. Racism isn't funny. And if you think such hatred of Iranians is going to help solve our region's problems you are even stupider than you seem. Also, your pride in Saddam Hussain's criminal Western-backed genocidal use of poison gas against Iranian cities, as well as against Iraqi civilians is simply disgusting.

And I wonder where you get the idea that I'm Iranian? I'm not.

G.Gar said...

It was Iran that used gas first- proven.

And President Saddam did his best to defend his country and the entire Arab nation against the saidistic retrograde retarded gangesters of Qum whose leader installed by the CIA, in order to plunge the whole region into chaeos destabilsing it which would prevent Arab people from fully actualising their potentials.

Secondly, I didn't say Iranians are Indians- I simply said that Persian culture belong to the Indian civilisation sphere ( it is not an Arab culture and it has never been a part of the near east, unlike Babylon, Arabia, Egypt, Syria, Yemen).

It seems that it is you who is a recist since you got hyterical at the slightest implication of an Iranian connection with India ( which is not totally wrong by the way, as Dravidians had been the main inhabitants of the Iranian plateau until the arrival of the Aryan wave in second millenium B.C)

Why do you use the term our region?

It is all made up of Arabs. Israel is a colonsing anomaly. Turkey is oriented towards Europe, why impose yourself?

If you were not Iranian, then it is worse because it means that you are traitor brain washed Arab with no dignity, one with no qualms about throwing himself into the arms of the criminal natin of Iran ( along with the wahabi Queda terrorists) which killing Arab women and childern and ethnically cleansing a great city like Baghdad.

Lirun said...

interesting discourse