country:iran

  • Entering A Major Regional Reset : The Syria Outcome Will Haunt Those Who Started This War | Zero Hedge
    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-01-14/entering-major-regional-reset-syria-outcome-will-haunt-those-who-started-

    A lire absolument si on s’intéresse à la géopolitique de cette région.

    Well, at least that speech should raise a chuckle around the region. In practice however, the regional fault-line has moved on: It is no longer so much Iran. GCC States have a new agenda, and are now far more concerned to contain Turkey, and to put a halt to Turkish influence spreading throughout the Levant. GCC states fear that President Erdogan, given the emotional and psychological wave of antipathy unleashed by the Khashoggi murder, may be mobilising newly re-energised Muslim Brotherhood, Gulf networks. The aim being to leverage present Gulf economic woes, and the general hollowing out of any broader GCC ‘vision’, in order to undercut the rigid Gulf ‘Arab system’ (tribal monarchy). The Brotherhood favours a soft Islamist reform of the Gulf monarchies – along lines, such as that once advocated by Jamal Khashoggi .

    Turkey’s leadership in any case is convinced that it was the UAE (MbZ specifically) that was the author behind the Kurdish buffer being constructed, and mini-state ‘plot’ against Turkey – in conjunction with Israel and the US. Understandably, Gulf states now fear possible Turkish retribution for their weaponising of Kurdish aspirations in this way.

    And Turkey is seen (by GCC States) as already working in close co-ordination with fellow Muslim Brotherhood patron and GCC member, Qatar, to divide the collapsing Council. This prefigures a new round to the MB versus Saudi Wahhabism spat for the soul of Sunni Islam.

    GGC states therefore, are hoping to stand-up a ‘front’ to balance Turkey in the Levant. And to this end, they are trying to recruit President Assad back into the Arab fold (which is to say, into the Arab League), and to have him act, jointly with them, as an Arab counter to Turkey.

    #grand_jeu


  • On a mission from God : Pompeo messages evangelicals from the Middle East - Asia Times
    http://www.atimes.com/article/on-a-mission-from-god-pompeo-messages-evangelicals-from-the-middle-east

    Commentaire ironique d’Elijah Magnier sur Twitter (https://twitter.com/ejmalrai/status/1085258903045238784) : Al-Baghdadi a également une « mission divine » et Dieu doit vraiment s’intéresser au Moyen-Orient pour y envoyer autant d’envoyés !

    “This trip is especially meaningful for me as an evangelical Christian, coming so soon after the Coptic Church’s Christmas celebrations. This is an important time. We’re all children of Abraham: Christians, Muslims, Jews. In my office, I keep a Bible open on my desk to remind me of God and His Word, and The Truth.”

    He added that he was in Cairo to herald another truth, that America was a “force for good” in the Middle East.

    Pompeo then proceeded to rip into former president Barack Obama, who some fringe evangelists have accused of being a secret Muslim and even the Antichrist. The secretary of state used his speech to air domestic grievances, blaming Obama for the rise of Islamic State (ISIS) and the empowerment of Iran.

    “Remember: It was here, here in this city, that another American stood before you. He told you that radical Islamist terrorism does not stem from an ideology. He told you that 9/11 led my country to abandon its ideals, particularly in the Middle East.

    “The results of these misjudgments have been dire,” Pompeo told an assembled group of blank-faced students, eliciting little palpable reaction.

    “We grossly underestimated the tenacity and viciousness of radical Islamism, a debauched strain of the faith that seeks to upend every other form of worship or governance. ISIS drove to the outskirts of Baghdad as America hesitated. They raped and pillaged and murdered tens of thousands of innocents. They birthed a caliphate across Syria and Iraq and launched terror attacks that killed all across continents,” he said.



  • De l’Influence des États-Unis sur le national-socialisme – Fragments sur les Temps Présents
    https://tempspresents.com/2019/01/14/de-linfluence-des-etats-unis-sur-le-national-socialisme

    La parution rapprochée du Modèle américain d’Hitler de James Q. Whitman et du Nazisme dans la civilisation. Miroir de l’Occident de Jean-Louis Vullierme nous donne le prétexte de revenir sur l’influence des États-Unis sur le national-socialisme. Encore aujourd’hui, il est difficile d’admettre que le système juridique et la politique raciale des nazis aient pu être influencées par une grande démocratie. Pourtant, ce pays ne fut pas qu’une nation tolérante et accueillante pour les persécutés d’Europe et d’ailleurs. Il fut aussi une nation raciste qui a cherché à préserver son « sang », comprendre celui des Pères fondateurs, blancs, anglo-saxons et protestants.

    Des politiques de quotas, les Quota Law, furent mises en place pour restreindre l’arrivée d’immigrants venant du Sud et de l’Est de l’Europe, surtout entre 1914 et la fin des années 1920. Une politique de ségrégation, les « lois de Jim Crow », racialisèrent les populations afro-américaines entre 1865 –la fin de la Guerre de Sécession– et les années 1960. Et cela sans parler de l’extermination des populations amérindiennes qui finirent parquées dans des Réserves. Pour justifier ces politiques, des essayistes et des universitaires théorisèrent l’inégalité des races et justifièrent cette politique raciale de promotion du sang nordique. De fait, les États-Unis étaient les leaders de la législation raciale au début du XXe siècle. Certains sont restés dans les mémoires comme Madison Grant, l’auteur du Déclin de la grande race, ou comme Lothrop Stoddard, celui du Flot montant des peuples de couleur, des ouvrages encore réédités aujourd’hui par des éditeurs d’extrême droite.

    • Quelques résultats de la recherche pour « american holocaust »

      Vidéo : American Holocaust of Native American Indians
      https://seenthis.net/messages/744082

      NATIVE AMERICAN HISTORY, COMPARATIVE GENOCIDE AND THE HOLOCAUST : HISTORIOGRAPHY, DEBATE AND CRITICAL ANALYSIS
      https://seenthis.net/messages/744080

      Reexamining the American Genocide Debate : Meaning, Historiography, and New Methods
      https://seenthis.net/messages/714125

      Ugly Precursor to Auschwitz : Hitler Said to Have Been Inspired by U.S. Indian Reservation System
      https://seenthis.net/messages/336319

      The Holocaust and the Bush family fortune - World Socialist Web Site
      https://seenthis.net/messages/741295

      Big business avec Hitler Jacques Pauwels
      https://seenthis.net/messages/741295#message741417

      Surviving the Nazis, Only to Be Jailed by America
      https://seenthis.net/messages/340794

      In Cold War, U.S. Spy Agencies Used 1,000 Nazis
      https://seenthis.net/messages/306331

      Korean War, a ‘Forgotten’ Conflict That Shaped the Modern World
      https://seenthis.net/messages/656300

      The Making of an American Nazi
      https://seenthis.net/messages/645956

      Aux #Etats-Unis, lumière sur les disparitions et meurtres d’#Amérindiennes
      https://seenthis.net/messages/710924

      Hedy Epstein, 90-Year-Old Holocaust Survivor, Arrested During Michael Brown Protest
      https://seenthis.net/messages/285870

      American exceptionalism
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_exceptionalism

      Les sources disponibles font penser que racisme et extermination systématique de populations entières font partie du concept politique étatsunien dès sa naissance. Les pilgrim fathers étaient des fanatiques religieux qui inspirent la politique étatsunienne encore de nos jours. Il suffit d’énumérer les groupes de populations et peuples qui ont souffert sous l’influence des américains du nord pour se rendre compte du caractère profondément inhuman du protestantise nord-américain.

      Des chercheur scientifiques ont montré que le type de religion qui promet le paradis aux fidèles et l’enfer aux autres est un moteur pour le développement du capitalisme surtout quand on prêche que richesse et santé sont des recompenses de dieu pour les meilleurs disciples du prophète.

      Le résultat direct de cet état d’esprit est l’exceptionnalisme américain qui justifie les pires exactions avec l’argument de la supériorité du modèle américain. Son anticommunisme a couté la vie à des millions dont les habitants d’Indonésie massacrés en 1965.

      Son messianisme rapproche la nation étatsunienne des autres régimes religieux qui sont intégrés dans son discours comme amis et forces du bien comme l’Israel ou comme ennemi héréditaire comme la république islamique d’Iran.

      Dans le contexte d’un capitalisme aux forces productives et technologiques à la faim de ressources gargantuesque l’éradication de pays et d’éthnies par cet état-énergumène armé jusqu’au dents n’est qu’une note de bas de page pour ses défenseurs. Heureusement l’Allemagne a tenté dans le passé de jouer le même rôle civilisateur. Les bourreaux américains n’ont alors aucun mal à minimiser l’impact désastreux de leur politique en se référent aux génocidé soi-disant unique et indépassable commis par la nation allemande.

      Comparer des actes des États-Unis ou d’un de leurs alliés avec des éléments de l’histoire nazie suscite systématiquement des réactions extrèmes. Il ne faut surtout pas mettre en question le caractère unique des méfaits allemands parce en absence de ce dogme on risque d’identifier le véritable caractère de la politique des USA.

      #USA #nazis #collaboration #génocide


  • Gazoduc Nord Stream 2 : les Etats-Unis s’en prennent directement aux entreprises européennes
    https://www.latribune.fr/entreprises-finance/industrie/energie-environnement/gazoduc-nord-stream-2-les-etats-unis-s-en-prennent-directement-aux-entrepr

    Washington maintient la pression contre le projet de #gazoduc germano-russe, #Nord_Stream_2, en menaçant de sanctions les entreprises allemandes impliquées.

    Le porte-parole de l’ambassade américaine à Berlin a indiqué dimanche à l’AFP que « La lettre rappelle à toutes les entreprises impliquées dans le secteur des gazoducs d’exportation de l’énergie russe qu’elles s’exposent à des sanctions américaines », une information révélée par le quotidien allemand Bild paru dimanche.

    Ce risque de sanctions est prévu par la Loi sur les « sanctions pour lutter contre les adversaires de l’Amérique » (CAATSA), adoptée en 2017 et qui vise l’Iran, la Corée du Nord et la Russie.

    Le porte-parole a précisé que cette missive n’avait pas « pour but d’être comprise comme une menace mais comme un message clair de la politique américaine ». Il a également souligné que le seul « chantage » possible dans ce dossier serait de voir à l’avenir le Kremlin contrôler les livraisons gazières à l’Europe.

    Le gazoduc qui attire ainsi les foudres de Washington est le projet Nord Stream 2 qui doit permettre de livrer directement du gaz russe à l’Allemagne et au reste de l’Europe en passant par la mer Baltique. Cela en contournant l’Ukraine, aujourd’hui principal point de passage.

    Afin de multiplier par deux la capacité de gaz transportée, Nord Stream 2 a pour objectif de doubler Nord Stream 1, dont le parcours traverse les eaux territoriales de cinq pays, Russie, Finlande, Suède, Danemark et Allemagne.

    Le projet regroupe le géant russe Gazprom et plusieurs groupes énergétiques européens dont les allemands Wintershall et Uniper, le néerlando-britannique Shell, le français Engie et l’autrichien OMV.

    Ce n’est pas la première fois que les Etats-Unis critiquent ce projet mais en menaçant directement de sanctions les entreprises concernées, ils franchissent in pas de plus dans leur opposition.

    #NordStream (1 et 2)


  • El exilio iraní financió el 80% de la campaña de Vox de 2014 | España | EL PAÍS
    https://elpais.com/politica/2019/01/11/actualidad/1547224673_461197.html

    L’extrême droite espagnole, arbitre politique de la Junta d’Andalousie après les dernières élections, largement financée par... les Iraniens... du Conseil national de la Résistance (en gros les Moudjahidines du peuple).

    Los seguidores de un grupo opositor iraní financiaron el 80% de la campaña de las elecciones europeas de Vox de 2014, que costó un millón de euros, según tres fuentes conocedoras de las cuentas de la formación. Desde más de una quincena de países —entre los que destacan Alemania, Italia, Suiza, EE UU y Canadá— partidarios del Consejo Nacional de la Resistencia de Irán (CNRI), una fuerza marxista-islámica en sus orígenes, enviaron durante tres meses 146 donativos a una cuenta de la formación de extrema derecha en España, según revelan las mismas fuentes, por valor de 800.000 euros.

    #espagne #vox


  • [Revision] « Tell Me How This Ends » | Harper’s Magazine
    https://harpers.org/archive/2019/02/american-involvement-in-syria

    Dans cet article très USA-centré, le récit des premiers temps de la guerre en #Syrie par l’ancien ambassadeur US à Damas. (J’ai grasseyé certains passages. Le récit US passe égaleemnt sous silence la présence à Hama de l’ambassadeur français et de quelques invités...) L’histoire de ce conflit commence petit à petit à s’écrire...

    The vulnerable regimes in early 2011 were in the American camp, a coincidence that the Syrian president, Bashar al-­Assad, interpreted as proof that the Arab Spring was a repudiation of American tutelage. As Russia’s and Iran’s only Arab ally, he foresaw no challenge to his throne. An omen in the unlikely guise of an incident at an open-­air market in the old city of Damascus, in February 2011, should have changed his mind. One policeman ordered a motorist to stop at an intersection, while another officer told him to drive on. “The poor guy got conflicting instructions, and did what I would have done and stopped,” recalled the US ambassador to Syria, Robert Ford, who had only just arrived in the country. The second policeman dragged the driver out of his car and thrashed him. “A crowd gathered, and all of a sudden it took off,” Ford said. “No violence, but it was big enough that the interior minister himself went down to the market and told people to go home.” Ford reported to Washington, “This is the first big demonstration that we know of. And it tells us that this tinder is dry.”

    The next month, the security police astride the Jordanian border in the dusty southern town of Daraa ignited the tinder by torturing children who had scrawled anti-­Assad graffiti on walls. Their families, proud Sunni tribespeople, appealed for justice, then called for reform of the regime, and finally demanded its removal. Rallies swelled by the day. Ford cabled Washington that the government was using live ammunition to quell the demonstrations. He noted that the protesters were not entirely peaceful: “There was a little bit of violence from the demonstrators in Daraa. They burned the Syriatel office.” (Syriatel is the cell phone company of Rami Makhlouf, Assad’s cousin, who epitomized for many Syrians the ruling elite’s corruption.) “And they burned a court building, but they didn’t kill anybody.” Funerals of protesters produced more demonstrations and thus more funerals. The Obama Administration, though, was preoccupied with Egypt, where Hosni Mubarak had resigned in February, and with the NATO bombing campaign in Libya to support the Libyan insurgents who would depose and murder Muammar Qaddafi in October.

    Ambassador Ford detected a turn in the Syrian uprising that would define part of its character: “The first really serious violence on the opposition side was up on the coast around Baniyas, where a bus was stopped and soldiers were hauled off the bus. If you were Alawite, you were shot. If you were Sunni, they let you go.” At demonstrations, some activists chanted the slogan, “Alawites to the grave, and Christians to Beirut.” A sectarian element wanted to remove Assad, not because he was a dictator but because he belonged to the Alawite minority sect that Sunni fundamentalists regard as heretical. Washington neglected to factor that into its early calculations.

    Phil Gordon, the assistant secretary of state for European affairs before becoming Obama’s White House coordinator for the Middle East, told me, “I think the initial attitude in Syria was seen through that prism of what was happening in the other countries, which was, in fact, leaders—the public rising up against their leaders and in some cases actually getting rid of them, and in Tunisia, and Yemen, and Libya, with our help.”

    Ambassador Ford said he counseled Syria’s activists to remain non­violent and urged both sides to negotiate. Demonstrations became weekly events, starting after Friday’s noon prayer as men left the mosques, and spreading north to Homs and Hama. Ford and some embassy staffers, including the military attaché, drove to Hama, with government permission, one Thursday evening in July. To his surprise, Ford said, “We were welcomed like heroes by the opposition people. We had a simple message—no violence. There were no burned buildings. There was a general strike going on, and the opposition people had control of the streets. They had all kinds of checkpoints. Largely, the government had pulled out.”

    Bassam Barabandi, a diplomat who defected in Washington to establish a Syrian exile organization, People Demand Change, thought that Ford had made two errors: his appearance in Hama raised hopes for direct intervention that was not forthcoming, and he was accompanied by a military attaché. “So, at that time, the big question for Damascus wasn’t Ford,” Barabandi told me in his spartan Washington office. “It was the military attaché. Why did this guy go with Ford?” The Syrian regime had a long-standing fear of American intelligence interference, dating to the CIA-­assisted overthrow in 1949 of the elected parliamentary government and several attempted coups d’état afterward. The presence in Hama of an ambassador with his military attaché allowed the Assad regime to paint its opponents as pawns of a hostile foreign power.


  • Contre l’Iran, Mike Pompeo pousse pour un Otan arabe - Libération
    https://www.liberation.fr/amphtml/planete/2019/01/10/contre-l-iran-mike-pompeo-pousse-pour-un-otan-arabe_1702182

    Mais les arrière-pensées économiques ne sont jamais absentes des plans de Trump. Comme il le demande à ses alliés européens de l’Otan, ce dernier ne cache pas que l’un des principaux objectifs du #Mesa est de « partager la charge financière » des dépenses militaires américaines pour la défense de la région. Le futur Otan arabe disposerait d’une force de plus de 300 000 soldats, 5 000 chars et 1 000 avions de combat et d’un budget de plus de 100 milliards de dollars (environ 87 millions d’euros).

    #le_beur_et_l’argent_du_beur #etats-unis


  • EXCLUSIVE : Pompeo announces international summit on Iran | Fox News
    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/exclusive-pompeo-announces-international-summit-on-iran

    Discussions avec le régime syrien pour l’avenir du pays contre lâchage de l’Iran (en prélude à une attaque) : la carotte et le bâton as usual.

    The United States will host an international summit next month to promote stability and freedom in the Middle East, focusing on Iran’s regional influence, said Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, in an exclusive Fox News interview, while traveling in the Middle East.

    "We’ll bring together dozens of countries from all around the world,” said Pompeo, announcing the February 13-14 event in Poland. “Countries will all come together to focus on Middle East stability and peace and freedom and security here in this region, and that includes an important element of making sure that Iran is not a destabilizing influence.”

    (...)

    The secretary is in the middle of a nine-country trip through the Middle East, as the Trump administration is confronted with questions over when and how it plans to remove American forces from Syria.

    Pompeo’s predecessor, Rex Tillerson, said in October 2017, that Syrian President Bashar al Assad had no role in Syria’s political future, but when asked whether that is still the U.S. position, Pompeo today said the Assad regime will be part of those conversations.

    “We want to make sure all the options are open as that political discourse begins,” he said. “We are very hopeful that we will get the bad actors in the region, the Russians and the Iranians, to come to the table, along with the regime and all the other stakeholders in there to come to the table and have conversations about what a post-civil-war political structure might look like in Syria.”

    #syrie #iran #grand_jeu


  • Iran’s Tiny Navy Is Trying to Revive the Persian Empire - Bloomberg
    Opinion by Jim Stavridis

    https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-01-10/iran-s-tiny-navy-is-trying-to-revive-the-persian-empire


    A cheap alternative to aircraft carriers.
    Photographer: Atta Kenare/AFP/Getty Images

    The West sees Tehran as a regional player. Iranians see themselves as a global power.

    On the campaign trail in 2007, Senator John McCain sang a parody to the tune of the Beach Boys’ “Barbara Ann”: “Bomb, bomb, bomb … bomb, bomb Iran.” That sentiment resonates in the Donald Trump administration, and it’s understandable. The Iranians continue to push their influence throughout the Middle East: using proxies to threaten U.S. allies; supporting Bashar al-Assad in Syria; fueling the war in Yemen through support for Houthi rebels; and seeking to destabilize Iraq and gain further influence in Lebanon.

    Now we face a new twist to Iranian expansionism that demonstrates both Tehran’s ambition and its growing ties to Russia: the Iranian navy announced it will undertake a five-month deployment to the western Atlantic. While it’s unclear how many ships will be involved, Tehran says the flotilla will include a newly built destroyer, the Sahand. Some vessels are expected dock in Venezuela, one of the few countries in the Western Hemisphere that would welcome them.


  • Iran says it will send 2 satellites to orbit amid US concern
    https://apnews.com/4f432f1f5c61456baf37de1fa784ab4b

    Iran’s president said Thursday the Islamic Republic soon will send two new satellites into orbit using Iran-made rockets, despite U.S. concern the launch could help further develop its ballistic missiles.

    President Hassan Rouhani’s comments, during a commemoration for the late President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, confirmed the rocket launches would take place.

    Iran typically displays achievements in its space program in February, during the anniversary of the 1979 Islamic Revolution. This year will mark the 40th anniversary of the revolution, which saw the Persian monarchy of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi replaced by the Islamic Republic overseen by a Shiite cleric.

    “Soon, in the coming weeks, we will send two satellites into space using our domestically-made rockets,” Rouhani said, without elaborating.

    Previously, Iran has sent several short-lived satellites into orbit over the past decade, and in 2013 launched a monkey into space. The U.S. and its allies worry the same satellite-launching technology could be used to develop long-range missiles.

    Raison de plus pour certains de penser qu’il est vraiment temps de s’occuper rapidement de ces enturbannés... #iran


  • Onze ans de prison en vue pour un ex-ministre israélien accusé d’espionnage pour l’Iran - L’Orient-Le Jour
    https://www.lorientlejour.com/article/1151660/onze-ans-de-prison-en-vue-pour-un-ex-ministre-israelien-accuse-despio

    Un ancien ministre israélien devrait aller pour plusieurs années en prison après avoir accepté, au terme d’un parcours personnel déconcertant, de plaider coupable d’espionnage au profit de l’Iran, bête noire de l’Etat hébreu.

    Gonen Segev, ministre de l’Energie et des Infrastructures entre 1995 et 1996, a accepté mercredi de plaider coupable d’espionnage au profit de l’Iran et devrait être condamné à 11 ans de prison ferme, a annoncé mercredi le ministère de la Justice dans un communiqué.

    Au terme d’un accord entre la défense et l’accusation, les chefs d’accusation d’"espionnage aggravé" et « transfert d’informations à l’ennemi » ont été retenus contre l’ancien ministre, et celui de « trahison », qui figurait dans l’acte d’accusation initial, abandonné. L’accord sera soumis pour approbation à un tribunal qui siégera le 11 février.

    Selon l’acte d’accusation, dont la partie non censurée avait été rendue publique lors de l’ouverture du procès de Gonen Segev en juillet, ce dernier est accusé d’avoir fourni à l’Iran entre 2012 et juin 2018, alors qu’il résidait au Nigeria, des informations sur la localisation de sites abritant des services de sécurité israéliens ainsi que des noms de responsables.

    #israël #iran


  • EXCLUSIF : Le plan secret entre les États du Golfe et Israël pour réhabiliter Assad | Middle East Eye
    https://www.middleeasteye.net/fr/reportages/exclusif-le-plan-secret-entre-les-tats-du-golfe-et-isra-l-pour-r-habi

    EXCLUSIF : Le plan secret entre les États du Golfe et Israël pour réhabiliter Assad

    Le chef du Mossad, Yossi Cohen, a rencontré des responsables saoudiens, émiratis et égyptiens le mois dernier pour discuter des moyens de contrer l’influence régionale turque, selon des informations recueillies par MEE

    L’Arabie saoudite, les Émirats arabes unis et l’Égypte ont manigancé un plan avec Israël pour accueillir de nouveau le président syrien Bachar al-Assad au sein de la Ligue arabe afin de marginaliser l’influence régionale de la Turquie et de l’Iran, révèle en exclusivité Middle East Eye.

    Cette initiative diplomatique a été approuvée lors d’une réunion secrète, tenue dans une capitale du Golfe le mois dernier, à laquelle ont assisté de hauts responsables des services de renseignement des quatre pays, dont Yossi Cohen, directeur du Mossad, ont indiqué à MEE des sources au fait de cette réunion.

    La réunion a également été organisée en réaction au « refroidissement » notable des relations entre le président américain Donald Trump et Riyad depuis l’assassinat du journaliste Jamal Khashoggi au consulat d’Arabie saoudite à Istanbul en octobre.

    Trump a publiquement pris le parti du prince héritier saoudien Mohammed ben Salmane, que la CIA et des membres du Congrès américain tiennent pour responsable du meurtre de Khashoggi.

    Cependant, selon un responsable au courant de la réunion, il aurait été dit aux responsables des services de renseignement : « Trump a fait ce qu’il pouvait et ne fera rien de plus. »

    Les responsables ont également convenu lors de la réunion qu’ils considéraient la Turquie, et non l’Iran, comme leur principal rival militaire dans la région, et ils ont discuté de plans pour parer l’influence d’Ankara.

    Les Israéliens ont déclaré à cette occasion que l’Iran pouvait être maîtrisé militairement, mais que la Turquie avait des capacités beaucoup plus grandes. Lors de la réunion, Cohen aurait déclaré : « Le pouvoir iranien est fragile. La vraie menace vient de la Turquie. »

    Quatre mesures selon l’article :
    – Négociations avec les talibans
    – « contrôler la carte sunnite » en Irak
    – retour à la Ligue arabe pour Assad
    – soutenir les Kurdes de Syrie contre les tentatives de la Turquie d’expulser les YPG et leur homologue politique, le PYD

    #grand_jeu


  • Jocelyne Saab, l’indomptable - Colette KHALAF - L’Orient-Le Jour
    https://www.lorientlejour.com/article/1151436/jocelyne-saab-lindomptable.html

    Elle abandonne donc une mission qui devait l’emmener filmer le dénouement du conflit vietnamien pour rentrer au pays du Cèdre et réaliser son premier film sur les débuts et les origines de la guerre civile, Le Liban dans la tourmente (1975). Ce premier film réalisé en tant que cinéaste indépendante sort en salle à Paris, mais est censuré au Liban. C’est le début d’une longue histoire d’engagement. Très vite, Jocelyne Saab, ne craignant rien, choisit son camp. Elle s’engage aux côtés des Palestiniens, qui habitent aux abords de la capitale libanaise. Forte de ses convictions et au prix de sa vie, elle réalise l’année suivante, suite au massacre de la Quarantaine, Les Enfants de la guerre (1976). Jocelyne Saab filme, mais provoque et fait des remous. Elle réalisera plus d’une quarantaine de films, la plupart documentaires, sur le Liban, l’Égypte, le Sahara, l’Iran, la Turquie et le Vietnam, tout en témoignant des grands bouleversements de la seconde moitié du XXe siècle. Dans Beyrouth ma ville en 1982, elle illustre l’invasion israélienne avec une radicalité formelle qui donne à la journaliste documentariste ses galons de cinéaste.

    Nécro dans al-akhbar : https://al-akhbar.com/Last_Page/264264/%D8%AC%D9%88%D8%B3%D9%84%D9%8A%D9%86-%D8%B5%D8%B9%D8%A8-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B


  • La Banque d’Iran propose de supprimer quatre zéros du rial
    https://www.latribune.fr/depeches/reuters/KCN1P0096/la-banque-d-iran-propose-de-supprimer-quatre-zeros-du-rial.html

    La banque centrale iranienne a proposé au gouvernement de supprimer quatre zéros du rial, la monnaie nationale qui a plongé au cours de l’année écoulée pour cause de crise économique et de sanctions américaines, rapporte dimanche l’agence de presse Irna.

    « Un projet de loi visant à supprimer quatre zéros de la monnaie nationale a été présenté hier par la banque centrale au gouvernement et j’espère que cette question sera réglée au plus vite », a déclaré le gouverneur de la banque centrale Abdolnaser Hemmati, cité par Irna.

    Le projet de réduire le nombre de zéros est régulièrement évoqué depuis 2008, mais l’hypothèse a gagné en vigueur depuis que le rial a perdu plus de 60% de sa valeur l’an dernier, en dépit des efforts de la Banque d’Iran.

    La monnaie iranienne s’échangeait dimanche à environ 110.000 rials pour un dollar américain sur le marché non officiel, selon des sites de changes étrangers.

    La faiblesse du rial a perturbé l’an dernier les échanges extérieurs de l’Iran et alimenté l’inflation, dont le taux a atteint près de 40% en novembre.


  • Pan Am Flight 103 : Robert Mueller’s 30-Year Search for Justice | WIRED
    https://www.wired.com/story/robert-muellers-search-for-justice-for-pan-am-103

    Cet article décrit le rôle de Robert Mueller dans l’enquête historique qui a permis de dissimuler ou de justifier la plupart des batailles de la guerre non déclarée des États Unis contre l’OLP et les pays arabes qui soutenaient la lutte pour un état palestinien.

    Aux États-Unis, en Allemagne et en France le grand public ignore les actes de guerre commis par les États Unis dans cette guerre. Vu dans ce contexte on ne peut que classer le récit de cet article dans la catégorie idéologie et propagande même si les intentions et faits qu’on y apprend sont bien documentés et plausibles.

    Cette perspective transforme le contenu de cet article d’une variation sur un thème connu dans un reportage sur l’état d’âme des dirigeants étatsuniens moins fanatiques que l’équipe du président actuel.

    THIRTY YEARS AGO last Friday, on the darkest day of the year, 31,000 feet above one of the most remote parts of Europe, America suffered its first major terror attack.

    TEN YEARS AGO last Friday, then FBI director Robert Mueller bundled himself in his tan trench coat against the cold December air in Washington, his scarf wrapped tightly around his neck. Sitting on a small stage at Arlington National Cemetery, he scanned the faces arrayed before him—the victims he’d come to know over years, relatives and friends of husbands and wives who would never grow old, college students who would never graduate, business travelers and flight attendants who would never come home.

    Burned into Mueller’s memory were the small items those victims had left behind, items that he’d seen on the shelves of a small wooden warehouse outside Lockerbie, Scotland, a visit he would never forget: A teenager’s single white sneaker, an unworn Syracuse University sweatshirt, the wrapped Christmas gifts that would never be opened, a lonely teddy bear.

    A decade before the attacks of 9/11—attacks that came during Mueller’s second week as FBI director, and that awoke the rest of America to the threats of terrorism—the bombing of Pan Am 103 had impressed upon Mueller a new global threat.

    It had taught him the complexity of responding to international terror attacks, how unprepared the government was to respond to the needs of victims’ families, and how on the global stage justice would always be intertwined with geopolitics. In the intervening years, he had never lost sight of the Lockerbie bombing—known to the FBI by the codename Scotbom—and he had watched the orphaned children from the bombing grow up over the years.

    Nearby in the cemetery stood a memorial cairn made of pink sandstone—a single brick representing each of the victims, the stone mined from a Scottish quarry that the doomed flight passed over just seconds before the bomb ripped its baggage hold apart. The crowd that day had gathered near the cairn in the cold to mark the 20th anniversary of the bombing.

    For a man with an affinity for speaking in prose, not poetry, a man whose staff was accustomed to orders given in crisp sentences as if they were Marines on the battlefield or under cross-examination from a prosecutor in a courtroom, Mueller’s remarks that day soared in a way unlike almost any other speech he’d deliver.

    “There are those who say that time heals all wounds. But you know that not to be true. At its best, time may dull the deepest wounds; it cannot make them disappear,” Mueller told the assembled mourners. “Yet out of the darkness of this day comes a ray of light. The light of unity, of friendship, and of comfort from those who once were strangers and who are now bonded together by a terrible moment in time. The light of shared memories that bring smiles instead of sadness. And the light of hope for better days to come.”

    He talked of Robert Frost’s poem “Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening” and of inspiration drawn from Lockerbie’s town crest, with its simple motto, “Forward.” He spoke of what was then a two-decade-long quest for justice, of how on windswept Scottish mores and frigid lochs a generation of FBI agents, investigators, and prosecutors had redoubled their dedication to fighting terrorism.

    Mueller closed with a promise: “Today, as we stand here together on this, the darkest of days, we renew that bond. We remember the light these individuals brought to each of you here today. We renew our efforts to bring justice down on those who seek to harm us. We renew our efforts to keep our people safe, and to rid the world of terrorism. We will continue to move forward. But we will never forget.”

    Hand bells tolled for each of the victims as their names were read aloud, 270 names, 270 sets of bells.

    The investigation, though, was not yet closed. Mueller, although he didn’t know it then, wasn’t done with Pan Am 103. Just months after that speech, the case would test his innate sense of justice and morality in a way that few other cases in his career ever have.

    ROBERT S. MUELLER III had returned from a combat tour in Vietnam in the late 1960s and eventually headed to law school at the University of Virginia, part of a path that he hoped would lead him to being an FBI agent. Unable after graduation to get a job in government, he entered private practice in San Francisco, where he found he loved being a lawyer—just not a defense attorney.

    Then—as his wife Ann, a teacher, recounted to me years ago—one morning at their small home, while the two of them made the bed, Mueller complained, “Don’t I deserve to be doing something that makes me happy?” He finally landed a job as an assistant US attorney in San Francisco and stood, for the first time, in court and announced, “Good morning your Honor, I am Robert Mueller appearing on behalf of the United States of America.” It is a moment that young prosecutors often practice beforehand, and for Mueller those words carried enormous weight. He had found the thing that made him happy.

    His family remembers that time in San Francisco as some of their happiest years; the Muellers’ two daughters were young, they loved the Bay Area—and have returned there on annual vacations almost every year since relocating to the East Coast—and Mueller found himself at home as a prosecutor.

    On Friday nights, their routine was that Ann and the two girls would pick Mueller up at Harrington’s Bar & Grill, the city’s oldest Irish pub, not far from the Ferry Building in the Financial District, where he hung out each week with a group of prosecutors, defense attorneys, cops, and agents. (One Christmas, his daughter Cynthia gave him a model of the bar made out of Popsicle sticks.) He balanced that family time against weekends and trainings with the Marines Corps Reserves, where he served for more than a decade, until 1980, eventually rising to be a captain.

    Over the next 15 years, he rose through the ranks of the San Francisco US attorney’s office—an office he would return to lead during the Clinton administration—and then decamped to Massachusetts to work for US attorney William Weld in the 1980s. There, too, he shined and eventually became acting US attorney when Weld departed at the end of the Reagan administration. “You cannot get the words straight arrow out of your head,” Weld told me, speaking of Mueller a decade ago. “The agencies loved him because he knew his stuff. He didn’t try to be elegant or fancy, he just put the cards on the table.”

    In 1989, an old high school classmate, Robert Ross, who was chief of staff to then attorney general Richard Thornburgh, asked Mueller to come down to Washington to help advise Thornburgh. The offer intrigued Mueller. Ann protested the move—their younger daughter Melissa wanted to finish high school in Massachusetts. Ann told her husband, “We can’t possibly do this.” He replied, his eyes twinkling, “You’re right, it’s a terrible time. Well, why don’t we just go down and look at a few houses?” As she told me, “When he wants to do something, he just revisits it again and again.”

    For his first two years at so-called Main Justice in Washington, working under President George H.W. Bush, the family commuted back and forth from Boston to Washington, alternating weekends in each city, to allow Melissa to finish school.

    Washington gave Mueller his first exposure to national politics and cases with geopolitical implications; in September 1990, President Bush nominated him to be assistant attorney general, overseeing the Justice Department’s entire criminal division, which at that time handled all the nation’s terrorism cases as well. Mueller would oversee the prosecution of Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega, mob boss John Gotti, and the controversial investigation into a vast money laundering scheme run through the Bank of Credit and Commerce International, known as the Bank of Crooks and Criminals

    None of his cases in Washington, though, would affect him as much as the bombing of Pan Am 103.

    THE TIME ON the clocks in Lockerbie, Scotland, read 7:04 pm, on December 21, 1988, when the first emergency call came into the local fire brigade, reporting what sounded like a massive boiler explosion. It was technically early evening, but it had been dark for hours already; that far north, on the shortest day of the year, daylight barely stretched to eight hours.

    Soon it became clear something much worse than a boiler explosion had unfolded: Fiery debris pounded the landscape, plunging from the sky and killing 11 Lockerbie residents. As Mike Carnahan told a local TV reporter, “The whole sky was lit up with flames. It was actually raining, liquid fire. You could see several houses on the skyline with the roofs totally off and all you could see was flaming timbers.”

    At 8:45 pm, a farmer found in his field the cockpit of Pan Am 103, a Boeing 747 known as Clipper Maid of the Seas, lying on its side, 15 of its crew dead inside, just some of the 259 passengers and crew killed when a bomb had exploded inside the plane’s cargo hold. The scheduled London to New York flight never even made it out of the UK.

    It had taken just three seconds for the plane to disintegrate in the air, though the wreckage took three long minutes to fall the five miles from the sky to the earth; court testimony later would examine how passengers had still been alive as they fell. Nearly 200 of the passengers were American, including 35 students from Syracuse University returning home from a semester abroad. The attack horrified America, which until then had seen terror touch its shores only occasionally as a hijacking went awry; while the US had weathered the 1983 bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut, attacks almost never targeted civilians.

    The Pan Am 103 bombing seemed squarely aimed at the US, hitting one of its most iconic brands. Pan Am then represented America’s global reach in a way few companies did; the world’s most powerful airline shuttled 19 million passengers a year to more than 160 countries and had ferried the Beatles to their US tour and James Bond around the globe on his cinematic missions. In a moment of hubris a generation before Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos, the airline had even opened a “waiting list” for the first tourists to travel to outer space. Its New York headquarters, the Pan Am building, was the world’s largest commercial building and its terminal at JFK Airport the biggest in the world.

    The investigation into the bombing of Pan Am 103 began immediately, as police and investigators streamed north from London by the hundreds; chief constable John Boyd, the head of the local police, arrived at the Lockerbie police station by 8:15 pm, and within an hour the first victim had been brought in: A farmer arrived in town with the body of a baby girl who had fallen from the sky. He’d carefully placed her in the front seat of his pickup truck.

    An FBI agent posted in London had raced north too, with the US ambassador, aboard a special US Air Force flight, and at 2 am, when Boyd convened his first senior leadership meeting, he announced, “The FBI is here, and they are fully operational.” By that point, FBI explosives experts were already en route to Scotland aboard an FAA plane; agents would install special secure communications equipment in Lockerbie and remain on site for months.

    Although it quickly became clear that a bomb had targeted Pan Am 103—wreckage showed signs of an explosion and tested positive for PETN and RDX, two key ingredients of the explosive Semtex—the investigation proceeded with frustrating slowness. Pan Am’s records were incomplete, and it took days to even determine the full list of passengers. At the same time, it was the largest crime scene ever investigated—a fact that remains true today.

    Investigators walked 845 square miles, an area 12 times the size of Washington, DC, and searched so thoroughly that they recovered more than 70 packages of airline crackers and ultimately could reconstruct about 85 percent of the fuselage. (Today, the wreckage remains in an English scrapyard.) Constable Boyd, at his first press conference, told the media, “This is a mammoth inquiry.”

    On Christmas Eve, a searcher found a piece of a luggage pallet with signs of obvious scorching, which would indicate the bomb had been in the luggage compartment below the passenger cabin. The evidence was rushed to a special British military lab—one originally created to investigate the Guy Fawkes’ Gunpowder Plot to blow up Parliament and kill King James I in 1605.

    When the explosive tests came back a day later, the British government called the State Department’s ambassador-at-large for combating terrorism, L. Paul Bremer III (who would go on to be President George W. Bush’s viceroy in Baghdad after the 2003 invasion of Iraq), and officially delivered the news that everyone had anticipated: Pan Am 103 had been downed by a bomb.

    Meanwhile, FBI agents fanned out across the country. In New York, special agent Neil Herman—who would later lead the FBI’s counterterrorism office in New York in the run up to 9/11—was tasked with interviewing some of the victims’ families; many of the Syracuse students on board had been from the New York region. One of the mothers he interviewed hadn’t heard from the government in the 10 days since the attack. “It really struck me how ill-equipped we were to deal with this,” Herman told me, years later. “Multiply her by 270 victims and families.” The bombing underscored that the FBI and the US government had a lot to learn in responding and aiding victims in a terror attack.

    INVESTIGATORS MOVED TOWARD piecing together how a bomb could have been placed on board; years before the 9/11 attack, they discounted the idea of a suicide bomber aboard—there had never been a suicide attack on civil aviation at that point—and so focused on one of two theories: The possibility of a “mule,” an innocent passenger duped into carrying a bomb aboard, or an “inside man,” a trusted airport or airline employee who had smuggled the fatal cargo aboard. The initial suspect list stretched to 1,200 names.

    Yet even reconstructing what was on board took an eternity: Evidence pointed to a Japanese manufactured Toshiba cassette recorder as the likely delivery device for the bomb, and then, by the end of January, investigators located pieces of the suitcase that had held the bomb. After determining that it was a Samsonite bag, police and the FBI flew to the company’s headquarters in the United States and narrowed the search further: The bag, they found, was a System 4 Silhouette 4000 model, color “antique-copper,” a case and color made for only three years, 1985 to 1988, and sold only in the Middle East. There were a total of 3,500 such suitcases in circulation.

    By late spring, investigators had identified 14 pieces of luggage inside the target cargo container, known as AVE4041; each bore tell-tale signs of the explosion. Through careful retracing of how luggage moved through the London airport, investigators determined that the bags on the container’s bottom row came from passengers transferring in London. The bags on the second and third row of AVE4041 had been the last bags loaded onto the leg of the flight that began in Frankfurt, before the plane took off for London. None of the baggage had been X-rayed or matched with passengers on board.

    The British lab traced clothing fragments from the wreckage that bore signs of the explosion and thus likely originated in the bomb-carrying suitcase. It was an odd mix: Two herring-bone skirts, men’s pajamas, tartan trousers, and so on. The most promising fragment was a blue infant’s onesie that, after fiber analysis, was conclusively determined to have been inside the explosive case, and had a label saying “Malta Trading Company.” In March, two detectives took off for Malta, where the manufacturer told them that 500 such articles of clothing had been made and most sent to Ireland, while the rest went locally to Maltese outlets and others to continental Europe.

    As they dug deeper, they focused on bag B8849, which appeared to have come off Air Malta Flight 180—Malta to Frankfurt—on December 21, even though there was no record of one of that flight’s 47 passengers transferring to Pan Am 103.

    Investigators located the store in Malta where the suspect clothing had been sold; the British inspector later recorded in his statement, “[Store owner] Anthony Gauci interjected and stated that he could recall selling a pair of the checked trousers, size 34, and three pairs of the pajamas to a male person.” The investigators snapped to attention—after nine months did they finally have a suspect in their sights? “[Gauci] informed me that the man had also purchased the following items: one imitation Harris Tweed jacket; one woolen cardigan; one black umbrella; one blue colored ‘Baby Gro’ with a motif described by the witness as a ‘sheep’s face’ on the front; and one pair of gents’ brown herring-bone material trousers, size 36.”

    Game, set, match. Gauci had perfectly described the clothing fragments found by RARDE technicians to contain traces of explosive. The purchase, Gauci went on to explain, stood out in his mind because the customer—whom Gauci tellingly identified as speaking the “Libyan language”—had entered the store on November 23, 1988, and gathered items without seeming to care about the size, gender, or color of any of it.

    As the investigation painstakingly proceeded into 1989 and 1990, Robert Mueller arrived at Main Justice; the final objects of the Lockerbie search wouldn’t be found until the spring of 1990, just months before Mueller took over as assistant attorney general of the criminal division in September.

    The Justice Department that year was undergoing a series of leadership changes; the deputy attorney general, William Barr, became acting attorney general midyear as Richard Thornburgh stepped down to run for Senate back in his native Pennsylvania. President Bush then nominated Barr to take over as attorney general officially. (Earlier this month Barr was nominated by President Trump to become attorney general once again.)

    The bombing soon became one of the top cases on Mueller’s desk. He met regularly with Richard Marquise, the FBI special agent heading Scotbom. For Mueller, the case became personal; he met with victims’ families and toured the Lockerbie crash site and the investigation’s headquarters. He traveled repeatedly to the United Kingdom for meetings and walked the fields of Lockerbie himself. “The Scots just did a phenomenal job with the crime scene,” he told me, years ago.

    Mueller pushed the investigators forward constantly, getting involved in the investigation at a level that a high-ranking Justice Department official almost never does. Marquise turned to him in one meeting, after yet another set of directions, and sighed, “Geez, if I didn’t know better, I’d think you want to be FBI director.”

    The investigation gradually, carefully, zeroed in on Libya. Agents traced a circuit board used in the bomb to a similar device seized in Africa a couple of years earlier used by Libyan intelligence. An FBI-created database of Maltese immigration records even showed that a man using the same alias as one of those Libyan intelligence officers had departed from Malta on October 19, 1988—just two months before the bombing.

    The circuit board also helped makes sense of an important aspect of the bombing: It controlled a timer, meaning that the bomb was not set off by a barometric trigger that registers altitude. This, in turn, explained why the explosive baggage had lain peacefully in the jet’s hold as it took off and landed repeatedly.

    Tiny letters on the suspect timer said “MEBO.” What was MEBO? In the days before Google, searching for something called “Mebo” required going country to country, company to company. There were no shortcuts. The FBI, MI5, and CIA were, after months of work, able to trace MEBO back to a Swiss company, Meister et Bollier, adding a fifth country to the ever-expanding investigative circle.

    From Meister et Bollier, they learned that the company had provided 20 prototype timers to the Libyan government and the company helped ID their contact as a Libyan intelligence officer, Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi, who looked like the sketch of the Maltese clothing shopper. Then, when the FBI looked at its database of Maltese immigration records, they found that Al Megrahi had been present in Malta the day the clothing was purchased.

    Marquise sat down with Robert Mueller and the rest of the prosecutorial team and laid out the latest evidence. Mueller’s orders were clear—he wanted specific suspects and he wanted to bring charges. As he said, “Proceed toward indictment.” Let’s get this case moving.

    IN NOVEMBER 1990, Marquise was placed in charge of all aspects of the investigation and assigned on special duty to the Washington Field Office and moved to a new Scotbom task force. The field offce was located far from the Hoover building, in a run-down neighborhood known by the thoroughly unromantic moniker of Buzzard Point.

    The Scotbom task force had been allotted three tiny windowless rooms with dark wood paneling, which were soon covered floor-to-ceiling with 747 diagrams, crime scene photographs, maps, and other clues. By the door of the office, the team kept two photographs to remind themselves of the stakes: One, a tiny baby shoe recovered from the fields of Lockerbie; the other, a picture of the American flag on the tail of Pan Am 103. This was the first major attack on the US and its civilians. Whoever was responsible couldn’t be allowed to get away with it.

    With representatives from a half-dozen countries—the US, Britain, Scotland, Sweden, Germany, France, and Malta—now sitting around the table, putting together a case that met everyone’s evidentiary standards was difficult. “We talked through everything, and everything was always done to the higher standard,” Marquise says. In the US, for instance, the legal standard for a photo array was six photos; in Scotland, though, it was 12. So every photo array in the investigation had 12 photos to ensure that the IDs could be used in a British court.

    The trail of evidence so far was pretty clear, and it all pointed toward Libya. Yet there was still much work to do prior to an indictment. A solid hunch was one thing. Having evidence that would stand up in court and under cross-examination was something else entirely.

    As the case neared an indictment, the international investigators and prosecutors found themselves focusing at their gatherings on the fine print of their respective legal code and engaging in deep, philosophical-seeming debates: “What does murder mean in your statute? Huh? I know what murder means: I kill you. Well, then you start going through the details and the standards are just a little different. It may entail five factors in one country, three in another. Was Megrahi guilty of murder? Depends on the country.”

    At every meeting, the international team danced around the question of where a prosecution would ultimately take place. “Jurisdiction was an eggshell problem,” Marquise says. “It was always there, but no one wanted to talk about it. It was always the elephant in the room.”

    Mueller tried to deflect the debate for as long as possible, arguing there was more investigation to do first. Eventually, though, he argued forcefully that the case should be tried in the US. “I recognize that Scotland has significant equities which support trial of the case in your country,” he said in one meeting. “However, the primary target of this act of terrorism was the United States. The majority of the victims were Americans, and the Pan American aircraft was targeted precisely because it was of United States registry.”

    After one meeting, where the Scots and Americans debated jurisdiction for more than two hours, the group migrated over to the Peasant, a restaurant near the Justice Department, where, in an attempt to foster good spirits, it paid for the visiting Scots. Mueller and the other American officials each had to pay for their own meals.

    Mueller was getting ready to move forward; the federal grand jury would begin work in early September. Prosecutors and other investigators were already preparing background, readying evidence, and piecing together information like the names and nationalities of all the Lockerbie victims so that they could be included in the forthcoming indictment.

    There had never been any doubt in the US that the Pan Am 103 bombing would be handled as a criminal matter, but the case was still closely monitored by the White House and the National Security Council.

    The Reagan administration had been surprised in February 1988 by the indictment on drug charges of its close ally Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega, and a rule of thumb had been developed: Give the White House a heads up anytime you’re going to indict a foreign agent. “If you tag Libya with Pan Am 103, that’s fair to say it’s going to disrupt our relationship with Libya,” Mueller deadpans. So Mueller would head up to the Cabinet Room at the White House, charts and pictures in hand, to explain to President Bush and his team what Justice had in mind.

    To Mueller, the investigation underscored why such complex investigations needed a law enforcement eye. A few months after the attack, he sat through a CIA briefing pointing toward Syria as the culprit behind the attack. “That’s always struck with me as a lesson in the difference between intelligence and evidence. I always try to remember that,” he told me, back when he was FBI director. “It’s a very good object lesson about hasty action based on intelligence. What if we had gone and attacked Syria based on that initial intelligence? Then, after the attack, it came out that Libya had been behind it? What could we have done?”

    Marquise was the last witness for the federal grand jury on Friday, November 8, 1991. Only in the days leading up to that testimony had prosecutors zeroed in on Megrahi and another Libyan officer, Al Amin Khalifa Fhimah; as late as the week of the testimony, they had hoped to pursue additional indictments, yet the evidence wasn’t there to get to a conviction.

    Mueller traveled to London to meet with the Peter Fraser, the lord advocate—Scotland’s top prosecutor—and they agreed to announce indictments simultaneously on November 15, 1991. Who got their hands on the suspects first, well, that was a question for later. The joint indictment, Mueller believed, would benefit both countries. “It adds credibility to both our investigations,” he says.

    That coordinated joint, multi-nation statement and indictment would become a model that the US would deploy more regularly in the years to come, as the US and other western nations have tried to coordinate cyber investigations and indictments against hackers from countries like North Korea, Russia, and Iran.

    To make the stunning announcement against Libya, Mueller joined FBI director William Sessions, DC US attorney Jay Stephens, and attorney general William Barr.

    “We charge that two Libyan officials, acting as operatives of the Libyan intelligence agency, along with other co-conspirators, planted and detonated the bomb that destroyed Pan Am 103,” Barr said. “I have just telephoned some of the families of those murdered on Pan Am 103 to inform them and the organizations of the survivors that this indictment has been returned. Their loss has been ever present in our minds.”

    At the same time, in Scotland, investigators there were announcing the same indictments.

    At the press conference, Barr listed a long set of names to thank—the first one he singled out was Mueller’s. Then, he continued, “This investigation is by no means over. It continues unabated. We will not rest until all those responsible are brought to justice. We have no higher priority.”

    From there, the case would drag on for years. ABC News interviewed the two suspects in Libya later that month; both denied any responsibility for the bombing. Marquise was reassigned within six months; the other investigators moved along too.

    Mueller himself left the administration when Bill Clinton became president, spending an unhappy year in private practice before rejoining the Justice Department to work as a junior homicide prosecutor in DC under then US attorney Eric Holder; Mueller, who had led the nation’s entire criminal division was now working side by side with prosecutors just a few years out of law school, the equivalent of a three-star military general retiring and reenlisting as a second lieutenant. Clinton eventually named Mueller the US attorney in San Francisco, the office where he’d worked as a young attorney in the 1970s.

    THE 10TH ANNIVERSARY of the bombing came and went without any justice. Then, in April 1999, prolonged international negotiations led to Libyan dictator Muammar Qaddafi turning over the two suspects; the international economic sanctions imposed on Libya in the wake of the bombing were taking a toll on his country, and the leader wanted to put the incident behind him.

    The final negotiated agreement said that the two men would be tried by a Scottish court, under Scottish law, in The Hague in the Netherlands. Distinct from the international court there, the three-judge Scottish court would ensure that the men faced justice under the laws of the country where their accused crime had been committed.

    Allowing the Scots to move forward meant some concessions by the US. The big one was taking the death penalty, prohibited in Scotland, off the table. Mueller badly wanted the death penalty. Mueller, like many prosecutors and law enforcement officials, is a strong proponent of capital punishment, but he believes it should be reserved for only egregious crimes. “It has to be especially heinous, and you have to be 100 percent sure he’s guilty,” he says. This case met that criteria. “There’s never closure. If there can’t be closure, there should be justice—both for the victims as well as the society at large,” he says.

    An old US military facility, Kamp Van Zeist, was converted to an elaborate jail and courtroom in The Hague, and the Dutch formally surrendered the two Libyans to Scottish police. The trial began in May 2000. For nine months, the court heard testimony from around the world. In what many observers saw as a political verdict, Al Megrahi was found guilty and Fhimah was found not guilty.

    With barely 24 hours notice, Marquise and victim family members raced from the United States to be in the courtroom to hear the verdict. The morning of the verdict in 2001, Mueller was just days into his tenure as acting deputy US attorney general—filling in for the start of the George W. Bush administration in the department’s No. 2 role as attorney general John Ashcroft got himself situated.

    That day, Mueller awoke early and joined with victims’ families and other officials in Washington, who watched the verdict announcement via a satellite hookup. To him, it was a chance for some closure—but the investigation would go on. As he told the media, “The United States remains vigilant in its pursuit to bring to justice any other individuals who may have been involved in the conspiracy to bring down Pan Am Flight 103.”

    The Scotbom case would leave a deep imprint on Mueller; one of his first actions as FBI director was to recruit Kathryn Turman, who had served as the liaison to the Pan Am 103 victim families during the trial, to head the FBI’s Victim Services Division, helping to elevate the role and responsibility of the FBI in dealing with crime victims.

    JUST MONTHS AFTER that 20th anniversary ceremony with Mueller at Arlington National Cemetery, in the summer of 2009, Scotland released a terminally ill Megrahi from prison after a lengthy appeals process, and sent him back to Libya. The decision was made, the Scottish minister of justice reported, on “compassionate grounds.” Few involved on the US side believed the terrorist deserved compassion. Megrahi was greeted as a hero on the tarmac in Libya—rose petals, cheering crowds. The US consensus remained that he should rot in prison.

    The idea that Megrahi could walk out of prison on “compassionate” ground made a mockery of everything that Mueller had dedicated his life to fighting and doing. Amid a series of tepid official condemnations—President Obama labeled it “highly objectionable”—Mueller fired off a letter to Scottish minister Kenny MacAskill that stood out for its raw pain, anger, and deep sorrow.

    “Over the years I have been a prosecutor, and recently as the Director of the FBI, I have made it a practice not to comment on the actions of other prosecutors, since only the prosecutor handling the case has all the facts and the law before him in reaching the appropriate decision,” Mueller began. “Your decision to release Megrahi causes me to abandon that practice in this case. I do so because I am familiar with the facts, and the law, having been the Assistant Attorney General in charge of the investigation and indictment of Megrahi in 1991. And I do so because I am outraged at your decision, blithely defended on the grounds of ‘compassion.’”

    That nine months after the 20th anniversary of the bombing, the only person behind bars for the bombing would walk back onto Libyan soil a free man and be greeted with rose petals left Mueller seething.

    “Your action in releasing Megrahi is as inexplicable as it is detrimental to the cause of justice. Indeed your action makes a mockery of the rule of law. Your action gives comfort to terrorists around the world,” Mueller wrote. “You could not have spent much time with the families, certainly not as much time as others involved in the investigation and prosecution. You could not have visited the small wooden warehouse where the personal items of those who perished were gathered for identification—the single sneaker belonging to a teenager; the Syracuse sweatshirt never again to be worn by a college student returning home for the holidays; the toys in a suitcase of a businessman looking forward to spending Christmas with his wife and children.”

    For Mueller, walking the fields of Lockerbie had been walking on hallowed ground. The Scottish decision pained him especially deeply, because of the mission and dedication he and his Scottish counterparts had shared 20 years before. “If all civilized nations join together to apply the rules of law to international terrorists, certainly we will be successful in ridding the world of the scourge of terrorism,” he had written in a perhaps too hopeful private note to the Scottish Lord Advocate in 1990.

    Some 20 years later, in an era when counterterrorism would be a massive, multibillion dollar industry and a buzzword for politicians everywhere, Mueller—betrayed—concluded his letter with a decidedly un-Mueller-like plea, shouted plaintively and hopelessly across the Atlantic: “Where, I ask, is the justice?”

    #USA #Libye #impérialisme #terrorisme #histoire #CIA #idéologie #propagande


  • Israël réclame 250 milliards aux Arabes pour l’expulsion des Juifs - JForum
    https://www.jforum.fr/israel-reclame-250-milliards-aux-arabes-pour-lexpulsion-des-juifs.html

    Israël se prépare à demander une indemnisation d’un montant total de 250 milliards de dollars à sept pays arabes et à l’Iran pour les biens et avoirs laissés par les Juifs qui ont été forcés de fuir ces pays, à la suite de la création de l’État d’Israël.

    “Le temps est venu de corriger l’injustice historique des pogroms (contre les Juifs) dans sept pays arabes et en Iran, et de restaurer, pour des centaines de milliers de Juifs qui ont perdu leurs biens, ce qui leur revient légitimement”, a déclaré samedi le ministre israélien de l’Égalité sociale, Gila Gamliel, qui coordonne le traitement de la question par le gouvernement israélien, a déclaré samedi.

    Selon les chiffres cités samedi soir par le journal israélien Hadashot, les demandes d’indemnisation des deux premiers des huit pays concernés sont en cours de finalisation, Israël devant demander 35 milliards de dollars d’indemnisation pour la perte d’actifs juifs de Tunisie et 15 milliards de dollars à la Libye.

    Au total, le reportage télévisé a déclaré qu’Israël chercherait plus de 250 milliards de dollars auprès de ces deux pays, ainsi que du Maroc, de l’Irak, de la Syrie, de l’Egypte, du Yémen et de l’Iran.

    #israël #sans_vergogne

    • Israël réclame 250 milliards $ d’indemnisations aux Etats arabes !
      7 يناير، 2019
      https://algeriepress.com/israel-reclame-250-milliards-dindemnisations-aux-etats-arabes

      Des médias israéliens ont encore une fois rouvert le dossier des biens laissés par des Juifs dans un certain nombre de pays arabes qu’ils ont quittés pour la Palestine occupée.

      Ainsi, les Juifs réclament des indemnisations et envisagent même d’employer cette donne, provocante à l’endroit des Etats arabes-, lors des discussions prévues prochainement avec l’Etat de la Palestine.

      En effet, une télévision israélienne a annoncé dans un reportage que l’Etat hébreu a avancé pour la première fois une estimation officielle des biens laissés par des Juifs dans des pays arabes évaluée à 250 milliards de dollars, bien que la même chaîne n’a pas indiqué le montant de ces biens prétendus en Algérie.

      Un membre du parlement israélien (La Knesset) avait estimé, lui, que les biens laissés par les Juifs en Algérie s’élevaient à plus de 2 milliards de dollars, suggérant ainsi d’utiliser la carte des Juifs d’Algérie pour mettre la pression sur le gouvernement algérien afin de se montrer moins hostile vis-à-vis d’Israël et de cesser ses aides accordées aux résistants palestiniens. (...)


  • #Iran to send warships to the Atlantic, closer to U.S. waters | Reuters
    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-usa-navy-idUSKCN1OY0SX

    The Iranian navy will send warships to deploy in the Atlantic from March, a top commander said on Friday, as the Islamic Republic seeks to increase the operating range of its naval forces to the backyard of the United States, its arch foe.

    Iran sees the presence of U.S. aircraft carriers in the Gulf as a security concern and its navy has sought to counter that by showing the flag near American waters.

    A flotilla will leave for the Atlantic early in the Iranian new year, starting from March, Iran’s naval deputy commander said.

    The Atlantic Ocean is far and the operation of the Iranian naval flotilla might take five months,” Rear-Admiral Touraj Hassani was quoted as saying by the state news agency IRNA.

    He said Sahand, a newly-built destroyer, would be one of the warships. Sahand has a flight deck for helicopters and Iran says it is equipped with anti-aircraft and anti-ship guns, surface-to-surface and surface-to-air missiles and has electronic warfare capabilities.

    Hassani said in December that Iran would soon send two to three vessels on a mission to #Venezuela.

    A senior Iranian military official said last month that the navy could sail in the Atlantic near U.S. waters since U.S. aircraft carriers were allowed to move around in international waters near Iran.

    Iran’s navy has extended its reach in recent years, launching vessels in the Indian Ocean and the Gulf of Aden to protect Iranian ships from Somali pirates.


  • The roundabout revolutions

    The history of these banal, utilitarian instruments of traffic management has become entangled with that of political uprising, #Eyal_Weizman argues in his latest book

    This project started with a photograph. It was one of the most arresting images depicting the May 1980 #Gwangju uprising, recognised now as the first step in the eventual overthrow of the military dictatorship in South Korea. The photograph (above) depicts a large crowd of people occupying a roundabout in the city center. Atop a disused fountain in the middle of the roundabout a few protestors have unfurled a South Korean flag. The roundabout organised the protest in concentric circles, a geometric order that exposed the crowd to itself, helping a political collective in becoming.

    It had an uncanny resonance with events that had just unfolded: in the previous year a series of popular uprisings spread through Tunisia, Egypt, Bahrain, #Oman, Yemen, Libya, and Syria. These events shared with Gwangju not only the historical circumstances – they too were popular protests against military dictatorships – but, remarkably, an urban-architectural setting: many of them similarly erupted on roundabouts in downtown areas. The history of these roundabouts is entangled with the revolutions that rose from them.

    The photograph of the roundabout—now the symbol of the “liberated republic” – was taken by #Na_Kyung-taek from the roof of the occupied Provincial Hall, looking toward Geumnam-ro, only a few hours before the fall of the “#Gwangju_Republic”. In the early morning hours of the following day, the Gwangju uprising was overwhelmed by military force employing tanks and other armed vehicles. The last stand took place at the roundabout.

    The scene immediately resonates with the well-known photographs of people gathering in #Tahrir_Square in early 2011. Taken from different high-rise buildings around the square, a distinct feature in these images is the traffic circle visible by the way it organises bodies and objects in space. These images became the symbol of the revolution that led to the overthrow of President Hosni Mubarak in February 2011 – an event described by urban historian Nezar AlSayyad as “Cairo’s roundabout revolution”. But the Gwangju photograph also connects to images of other roundabouts that erupted in dissent in fast succession throughout the Middle East. Before Tahrir, as Jonathan Liu noted in his essay Roundabouts and Revolutions, it was the main roundabout in the capital of Tunisia – subsequently renamed Place du 14 Janvier 2011 after the date on which President Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali was forced to flee the country. Thousands of protesters gathered at the roundabout in Tunis and filled the city’s main boulevard.

    A main roundabout in Bahrain’s capital Manama erupted in protests shortly after the overthrow of Mubarak in Egypt. Its central traffic island became the site of popular protests against the government and the first decisive act of military repression: the protests were violently broken up and the roundabout itself destroyed and replaced with a traffic intersection. In solidarity with the Tahrir protests, the roundabouts in the small al-Manara Square in Ramallah and the immense Azadi Square in Tehran also filled with protesters. These events, too, were violently suppressed.

    The roundabouts in Tehran and Ramallah had also been the scenes of previous revolts. In 2009 the Azadi roundabout in Iran’s capital was the site of the main protests of the Green Movement contesting President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s reelection. Hamid Dabashi, a literature professor at Columbia University and one of the most outspoken public intellectuals on these revolutions, claims that the Green Movement was inspirational for the subsequent revolutionary wave in the Arab world. In Palestine, revolt was a permanent consequence of life under occupation, and the al-Manara roundabout was a frequent site of clashes between Palestinian youth and the Israeli military. The sequence of roundabout revolutions evolved as acts of imitation, each building on its predecessor, each helping propel the next.

    Roundabouts were of course not only exhilarating sites of protest and experiments in popular democracy, but moreover they were places where people gathered and risked their life. The Gwangju uprising is, thus, the first of the roundabout revolutions. Liu wrote: “In all these cases, the symbolism is almost jokingly obvious: what better place to stage a revolution, after all, then one built for turning around?” What better way to show solidarity across national borders than to stage protests in analogous places?

    Why roundabouts? After all, they are banal, utilitarian instruments of traffic management, certainly not prone to induce revolutionary feeling. Other kinds of sites – squares, boulevards, favelas, refugee camps – have served throughout history as the setting for political protest and revolt. Each alignment of a roundabout and a revolution has a specific context and diverse causes, but the curious repetition of this phenomenon might give rise to several speculations. Urban roundabouts are the intersection points of large axes, which also puts them at the start or end of processions.

    Occupying a roundabout demonstrates the power of tactical acupuncture: it blocks off all routes going in and out. Congestion moves outward like a wave, flowing down avenues and streets through large parts of the city. By pressuring a single pivotal point within a networked infrastructure, an entire city can be put under siege (a contemporary contradistinction to the medieval technique of surrounding the entire perimeter of a city wall). Unlike public squares, which are designed as sites for people to gather (therefore not interrupting the flow of vehicular traffic) and are usually monitored and policed, roundabout islands are designed to keep people away. The continuous flow of traffic around them creates a wall of speeding vehicles that prohibits access. While providing open spaces (in some cities the only available open spaces) these islands are meant to be seen but not used.

    Another possible explanation is their symbolic power: they often contain monuments that represent the existing regime. The roundabouts of recent revolutions had emblematic names – Place du 7 Novembre 1987, the date the previous regime took power in Tunisia; “Liberty” (Azadi), referring to the 1979 Iranian Revolution; or “Liberation” (Tahrir), referring to the 1952 revolutions in Egypt. Roundabout islands often had statues, both figurative and abstract, representing the symbolic order of regimes. Leaders might have wished to believe that circular movement around their monuments was akin to a form of worship or consent. While roundabouts exercise a centripetal force, pulling protestors into the city center, the police seek to generate movement in the opposite direction, out and away from the center, and to break a collective into controllable individuals that can be handled and dispersed.

    The most common of all centrifugal forces of urban disorganisation during protests is tear gas, a formless cloud that drifts through space to disperse crowds. From Gwangju to Cairo, Manama to Ramallah, hundreds of tear-gas canisters were used largely exceeding permitted levels in an attempt to evict protesters from public spaces. The bodily sensation of the gas forms part of the affective dimension of the roundabout revolution. When tear gas is inhaled, the pain is abrupt, sharp, and isolating. The eyes shut involuntary, generating a sense of disorientation and disempowerment.

    Protestors have found ways to mitigate the toxic effects of this weapon. Online advice is shared between activists from Palestine through Cairo to Ferguson. The best protection is offered by proper gas masks. Improvised masks made of mineral water bottles cut in half and equipped with a filter of wet towels also work, according to online manuals. Some activists wear swim goggles and place wet bandanas or kaffiyehs over their mouths. To mitigate some of the adverse effects, these improvised filters can be soaked in water, lemon juice, vinegar, toothpaste, or wrapped around an onion. When nothing else is at hand, breathe the air from inside your shirt and run upwind onto higher ground. When you have a chance, blow your nose, rinse your mouth, cough, and spit.


    https://www.iconeye.com/opinion/comment/item/12093-the-roundabout-revolutions
    #révolution #résistance #giratoire #carrefour #rond-point #routes #infrastructure_routière #soulèvement_politique #Corée_du_Sud #printemps_arabe #Egypte #Tunisie #Bahreïni #Yémen #Libye #Syrie #Tahrir

    Du coup : #gilets_jaunes ?

    @albertocampiphoto & @philippe_de_jonckheere

    This project started with a photograph. It was one of the most arresting images depicting the May 1980 #Gwangju uprising, recognised now as the first step in the eventual overthrow of the military dictatorship in South Korea. The photograph (above) depicts a large crowd of people occupying a roundabout in the city center. Atop a disused fountain in the middle of the roundabout a few protestors have unfurled a South Korean flag. The roundabout organised the protest in concentric circles, a geometric order that exposed the crowd to itself, helping a political collective in becoming.

    –-> le pouvoir d’une #photographie...

    signalé par @isskein

    ping @reka


  • UK sending Syrians back to countries where they were beaten and abused

    Refugees tell of being held in cages and even tortured in European countries including Hungary and Romania

    Britain is using EU rules to send asylum seekers from Syria and other countries back to eastern European states where they were beaten, incarcerated and abused, the Guardian has learned.

    Migrant rights groups and lawyers say the Home Office is using the rules to send people back to “police brutality, detention and beatings” in several European countries.

    The Guardian has spoken to refugees who were subjected to assaults as they travelled through Europe. The men tell of being held in “cages” in Hungary, waterboarded and handcuffed to beds by detention centre guards in Romania and beaten in Bulgaria.
    Britain is one of worst places in western Europe for asylum seekers
    Read more

    They now face being returned to those countries as, under the so-called Dublin law, asylum seekers are supposed to apply in their first EU country of entry.

    In 2015 more than 80,000 requests were made by EU countries for another government to take back an asylum seeker. The UK made 3,500 of these requests to countries around Europe, including Bulgaria, Romania, Italy and Hungary.

    The Home Office claims it should be entitled to assume that any EU country will treat asylum seekers properly.

    The charity Migrant Voice has collected testimony from several refugees who are fighting removal from the UK to other European countries. Nazek Ramadan, the director of the charity, said the men had been left traumatised by their journey and their subsequent treatment in the UK.

    “We know there are hundreds of Syrians in the UK who have fingerprints in other European countries,” said Ramadan. “Many no longer report to the Home Office because they are afraid of being detained and deported away from their family in the UK. Those who have been forcibly removed often end up destitute.

    “These are people who were abused in their home country, sometimes jailed by the regime there. Then they were imprisoned again in Europe. They feel that they are still living in a war zone, moving from one arrest and detention to another.”

    The law firm Duncan Lewis recently won a key case preventing forced removals back to Hungary because of the risk that people might be forced from there back to their country of origin.

    The firm is also challenging removals to Bulgaria because of what the UN refugee agency has described as “substandard” conditions there. A test case on whether Bulgaria is a safe country to send people back to is due to be heard by the court of appeal in November.

    The situation could get even more complex as an EU ban on sending asylum seekers back to Greece is due to be lifted on Wednesday after a six-year moratorium.

    Krisha Prathepan, of Duncan Lewis, said: “We intend to challenge any resumption of returns to Greece, as that country’s asylum system remains dysfunctional and the risk of refugees being returned from Greece to the very countries in which they faced persecution remains as high as ever.”

    The Home Office says it has no immediate plans to send refugees back to Greece, but is following European guidelines.

    “We have no current plans to resume Dublin returns to Greece,” a spokesperson said, citing among other reasons “the reception conditions in the country”.

    She added: “In April 2016, the high court ruled that transfer to Bulgaria under the Dublin regulation would not breach the European Convention on Human Rights. If there is evidence that Bulgaria is responsible for an asylum application, we will seek to transfer the application.”

    Mohammad Nadi Ismail, 32, Syrian

    Mohammad Nadi Ismail, a former Syrian navy captain, entered Europe via Bulgaria and Hungary, hoping to join his uncle and brother in Britain.

    In Bulgaria he was detained, beaten and humiliated. “They stripped us and made us stand in a row all naked. We had to bend over in a long line. Then they hit us on our private parts with truncheons.

    “They would wake us at night after they had been playing cards and drinking. Then they would come and hit us or kick us with their boots or truncheons.”

    One day he was released and took his chance to leave, walking for days to reach Hungary.

    But in Hungary he was locked up again. “They took us to a courtyard of a big building where there were five or six cages, about 8ft [2.4 metres] square. Most of the people were African. Some of them had been in there for four or five days. Luckily we Syrians were allowed out after one night and I headed for the UK.”

    In the UK Ismail met up with the family he hadn’t seen for three years and applied for asylum immediately.

    Then a letter came, saying his fingerprints had been found in Bulgaria and he would be returned. After a month in detention he now reports every two weeks, waiting and hoping that the UK will let him stay.

    “I will not go back to Bulgaria. I still have hope that I can stay here legally and rebuild my life with my family who have always supported me,” he said.

    ‘Dawoud’, 34, Iranian

    Dawoud (not his real name) was 28 when he fled Iran after his political activities had made him an enemy of the government. His brother and parents made it to the UK and were given refugee status.

    When he was told by border guards that he was in Romania he had no idea what that meant. “I had never even heard of this country,” he said. He was put in a camp where “water dripped through the electrics – we were electrocuted often. Children and families screamed. We lived in fear of the wild dogs who circled the camp, attacking and biting us. We were given no food; we had to go through bins in the town nearby for scraps.”

    He escaped once, to the Netherlands, but was sent back.

    “I experienced several beatings, on all parts of the body. There were people covered in blood and they were refused medical help. They even waterboarded me. I thought I would die.”

    Finally he managed to reach his mother, father and brother in the UK. For two years he has lived in hiding, too scared to apply for asylum for fear of being sent back to Romania. But a few months ago he finally reported to the Home Office. A letter informed him that a request had been made to Romania to take him back.

    Dawoud shakes as he talks about his fear of removal, saying: “When I hear people speak Romanian in the street it brings back my trauma. I once fell to the ground shaking just hearing someone speak. I will kill myself rather than go back.”

    Wael al-Awadi, 36, Syrian

    Wael travelled by sea to Italy and was detained on arrival in Sicily. “They hit us with their fists and sticks in order to make us give our fingerprints. Then they let us go. They gave us nothing, no accommodation, just told us: ‘Go where you like.’ So many Syrians were sleeping in the streets.”

    When he reached the UK he was detained for two months before friends helped him get bail. A year and a half later, when reporting at the Home Office, he was detained again and booked on to a plane to Italy.

    He refused to go and a solicitor got him out on bail. His appeal is due to be heard later this year. “I left Syria to avoid jail and detention and here I have been locked up twice,” he said. “I can’t understand it. Why can’t they look at me with some humanity? I am mentally so tired. My children call me from Syria but I can’t speak to them any more. It is too painful.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/12/the-refugees-uk-wants-to-send-back-to-countries-where-they-were-abused?
    #réfugiés_syriens #UK #Angleterre #Dublin #asile #migrations #réfugiés #Bulgarie #Roumanie #Hongrie #Italie #renvois #expulsions #renvois_Dublin


  • Quoi qu’il en soit, Trump ne quittera pas la Syrie et l’Afghanistan Stephen Gowans - 2 Janvier 2019 - Investigaction
    https://www.investigaction.net/fr/117672

    Il ne fait que transférer le fardeau sur les alliés et compter davantage sur les mercenaires

    Le retrait annoncé des troupes américaines de #Syrie et la diminution des troupes d’occupation en #Afghanistan ne correspondent très probablement pas à l’abandon par les #États-Unis de leurs objectifs au #Moyen-Orient, mais bien plutôt à l’adoption de nouveaux moyens pour atteindre les buts que la politique étrangère américaine vise depuis longtemps. Plutôt que de renoncer à l’objectif américain de dominer les mondes arabe et musulman par un système colonialiste et une occupation militaire directe, le président #Donald_Trump ne fait que mettre en œuvre une nouvelle politique – une politique basée sur un transfert plus important du fardeau du maintien de l’#Empire sur ses alliés et sur des soldats privés financés par les monarchies pétrolières.

    Le modus operandi de Trump en matière de relations étrangères a été constamment guidé par l’argument que les alliés des États-Unis ne parviennent pas à peser leur poids et devraient contribuer davantage à l’architecture de la sécurité américaine. Recruter des alliés arabes pour remplacer les troupes américaines en Syrie et déployer des #mercenaires (appelés par euphémisme des fournisseurs de sécurité) sont deux options que la Maison-Blanche examine activement depuis l’année dernière. De plus, il existe déjà une importante présence alliée et mercenaire en Afghanistan et le retrait prévu de 7000 soldats américains de ce pays ne réduira que marginalement l’empreinte militaire occidentale.

    Le conflit entre le secrétaire américain à la Défense #Jim_Mattis et Trump quant à leurs visions du monde est perçu à tort comme l’expression d’opinions contradictoires sur les objectifs américains plutôt que sur la manière de les atteindre. Mattis privilégie la poursuite des buts impériaux des États-Unis par la participation significative de l’armée américaine tandis que Trump favorise la pression sur les alliés pour qu’ils assument une plus grande partie du fardeau que constitue l’entretien de l’empire américain, tout en embauchant des fournisseurs de sécurité pour combler les lacunes. Le but de Trump est de réduire la ponction de l’Empire sur les finances américaines et d’assurer sa base électorale, à qui il a promis, dans le cadre de son plan « #America_First », de ramener les soldats américains au pays.

    Fait significatif, le plan de Trump est de réduire les dépenses des activités militaires américaines à l’étranger, non pas comme fin en soi mais comme moyen de libérer des revenus pour l’investissement intérieur dans les infrastructures publiques. De son point de vue, les dépenses pour la république devraient avoir la priorité sur les dépenses pour l’#Empire. « Nous avons [dépensé] 7 mille milliards de dollars au Moyen-Orient », s’est plaint le président américain auprès des membres de son administration. « Nous ne pouvons même pas réunir mille milliards de dollars pour l’infrastructure domestique. »[1] Plus tôt, à la veille de l’élection de 2016, Trump se plaignait que Washington avait « gaspillé 6 trillions de dollars en guerres au Moyen-Orient – nous aurions pu reconstruire deux fois notre pays – qui n’ont produit que plus de terrorisme, plus de mort et plus de souffrance – imaginez si cet argent avait été dépensé dans le pays. […] Nous avons dépensé 6 trillions de dollars, perdu des milliers de vies. On pourrait dire des centaines de milliers de vies, parce qu’il faut aussi regarder l’autre côté. » [2]

    En avril de cette année, Trump « a exprimé son impatience croissante face au coût et à la durée de l’effort pour stabiliser la Syrie » et a parlé de l’urgence d’accélérer le retrait des troupes américaines. [3] Les membres de son administration se sont empressés « d’élaborer une stratégie de sortie qui transférerait le fardeau américain sur des partenaires régionaux ». [4]

    La conseiller à la Sécurité nationale, #John_Bolton, « a appelé Abbas Kamel, le chef par intérim des services de renseignement égyptiens pour voir si le Caire contribuerait à cet effort ». [5] Puis l’#Arabie_ saoudite, le #Qatar et les Émirats arabes unis ont été « approchés par rapport à leur soutien financier et, plus largement, pour qu’ils contribuent ». Bolton a également demandé « aux pays arabes d’envoyer des troupes ». [6] Les satellites arabes ont été mis sous pression pour « travailler avec les combattants locaux #kurdes et arabes que les Américains soutenaient » [7] – autrement dit de prendre le relais des États-Unis.

    Peu après, #Erik_Prince, le fondateur de #Blackwater USA, l’entreprise de mercenaires, a « été contactée de manière informelle par des responsables arabes sur la perspective de construire une force en Syrie ». [8] À l’été 2017, Prince – le frère de la secrétaire américaine à l’Éducation #Betsy_De_Vos – a approché la Maison Blanche sur la possibilité de retirer les forces étasuniennes d’Afghanistan et d’envoyer des mercenaires combattre à leur place. [9] Le plan serait que les monarchies pétrolières du golfe Persique paient Prince pour déployer une force mercenaire qui prendrait la relève des troupes américaines.

    En avril, Trump a annoncé : « Nous avons demandé à nos partenaires d’assumer une plus grande responsabilité dans la sécurisation de leur région d’origine. » [10] La rédaction en chef du Wall Street Journal a applaudi cette décision. Le plan de Trump, a-t-il dit, était « la meilleure stratégie » – elle mobiliserait « les opposants régionaux de l’Iran », c’est-à-dire les potentats arabes qui gouvernent à la satisfaction de Washington en vue du projet de transformer « la Syrie en un Vietnam pour l’Ayatollah ». [11]

    En ce moment, il y a 14 000 soldats américains reconnus en Afghanistan, dont la moitié, soit 7 000, seront bientôt retirés. Mais il y a aussi environ 47 000 soldats occidentaux dans le pays, y compris des troupes de l’#OTAN et des mercenaires (14 000 soldats américains, 7 000 de l’OTAN [12] et 26 000 soldats privés [13]). Diviser la contribution étasunienne de moitié laissera encore 40 000 hommes de troupes occidentales comme force d’occupation en Afghanistan. Et la réduction des forces américaines peut être réalisée facilement en engageant 7000 remplaçants mercenaires, payés par les monarques du golfe Persique. « Le retrait », a rapporté The Wall Street Journal, « pourrait ouvrir la voie à un plus grand nombre d’entrepreneurs privés pour assumer des rôles de soutien et de formation », comme le souligne « la campagne de longue date d’Erik Prince ». Le Journal a noté que le frère de la secrétaire à l’Éducation « a mené une campagne agressive pour convaincre M. Trump de privatiser la guerre ». [14]

    La démission de Mattis a été interprétée comme une protestation contre Trump, qui « cède un territoire essentiel à la Russie et à l’Iran » [15] plutôt que comme un reproche à Trump de se reposer sur des alliés pour porter le fardeau de la poursuite des objectifs étasuniens en Syrie. La lettre de démission du secrétaire à la Défense était muette sur la décision de Trump de rapatrier les troupes américaines de Syrie et d’Afghanistan et insistait plutôt sur « les alliances et les partenariats ». Elle soulignait les préoccupations de Mattis sur le fait que le changement de direction de Trump n’accordait pas suffisamment d’attention au « maintien d’alliances solides et de signes de respect » à l’égard des alliés. Alors que cela a été interprété comme un reproche d’avoir abandonné le fer de lance américain en Syrie, les Kurdes, Mattis faisait référence aux « alliances et aux partenariats » au pluriel, ce qui indique que ses griefs vont plus loin que les relations des États-Unis avec les Kurdes. Au contraire, Mattis a exprimé des préoccupations cohérentes avec une plainte durable dans le milieu de la politique étrangère américaine selon laquelle les efforts incessants de Trump pour faire pression sur ses alliés afin qu’ils supportent davantage le coût du maintien de l’Empire aliènent les alliés des Américains et affaiblissent le « système d’alliances et de partenariats » qui le composent. [16]

    L’idée, aussi, que la démission de Mattis est un reproche à Trump pour l’abandon des Kurdes, est sans fondement. Les Kurdes ne sont pas abandonnés. Des commandos britanniques et français sont également présents dans le pays et « on s’attend à ce qu’ils restent en Syrie après le départ des troupes américaines ». [17] Mattis semble avoir été préoccupé par le fait qu’en extrayant les forces américaines de Syrie, Trump fasse peser plus lourdement le poids de la sécurisation des objectifs étasuniens sur les Britanniques et les Français, dont on ne peut guère attendre qu’ils tolèrent longtemps un arrangement où ils agissent comme force expéditionnaire pour Washington tandis que les troupes américaines restent chez elles. À un moment donné, ils se rendront compte qu’ils seraient peut-être mieux en dehors de l’alliance américaine. Pour Mattis, soucieux depuis longtemps de préserver un « système global d’alliances et de partenariats » comme moyen de « faire progresser un ordre international le plus propice à la sécurité, à la prospérité et aux valeurs [des États-Unis], le transfert du fardeau par Trump ne parvient guère à « traiter les alliés avec respect » ou à « faire preuve d’un leadership efficace », comme Mattis a écrit que Washington devrait le faire dans sa lettre de démission.

    Le président russe #Vladimir_Poutine a accueilli l’annonce de Trump avec scepticisme. « Nous ne voyons pas encore de signes du retrait des troupes américaines », a-t-il déclaré. « Depuis combien de temps les États-Unis sont-ils en Afghanistan ? Dix-sept ans ? Et presque chaque année, ils disent qu’ils retirent leurs troupes. » [18] Le #Pentagone parle déjà de déplacer les troupes américaines « vers l’#Irak voisin, où environ 5000 soldats étasuniens sont déjà déployés », et qui ‘déferleront’ en Syrie pour des raids spécifiques ». [19] Cette force pourrait aussi « retourner en Syrie pour des missions spéciales si des menaces graves surgissent » [20] ce qui pourrait inclure les tentatives de l’armée syrienne de récupérer son territoire occupé par les forces #kurdes. De plus, le Pentagone conserve la capacité de continuer de mener des « frappes aériennes et de réapprovisionner les combattants kurdes alliés avec des armes et du matériel » depuis l’Irak. [21]

    Trump n’a jamais eu l’intention d’apporter à la présidence une redéfinition radicale des objectifs de la politique étrangère américaine, mais seulement une manière différente de les atteindre, une manière qui profiterait de ses prouesses autoproclamées de négociation. Les tactiques de négociation de Trump n’impliquent rien de plus que de faire pression sur d’autres pour qu’ils paient la note, et c’est ce qu’il a fait ici. Les Français, les Britanniques et d’autres alliés des Américains remplaceront les bottes étasuniennes sur le terrain, avec des mercenaires qui seront financés par les monarchies pétrolières arabes. C’est vrai, la politique étrangère des États-Unis, instrument pour la protection et la promotion des profits américains, a toujours reposé sur quelqu’un d’autre pour payer la note, notamment les Américains ordinaires qui paient au travers de leurs impôts et, dans certains cas, par leurs vies et leurs corps en tant que soldats. En tant que salariés, ils ne tirent aucun avantage d’une politique façonnée par « des #élites_économiques et des groupes organisés représentant les intérêts des entreprises », comme les politologues Martin Gilens et Benjamin I. Page l’ont montré dans leur enquête de 2014 portant sur plus de 1700 questions politiques américaines. Les grandes entreprises, concluaient les chercheurs, « ont une influence considérable sur la politique gouvernementale, tandis que les citoyens moyens et les groupes fondés sur les intérêts des masses n’ont que peu d’influence ou pas d’influence du tout ». [22] Autrement dit, les grandes entreprises conçoivent la politique étrangère à leur avantage et en font payer le coût aux Américains ordinaires. 

    C’est ainsi que les choses devraient être, selon Mattis et d’autres membres de l’élite de la politique étrangère américaine. Le problème avec Trump, de leur point de vue, est qu’il essaie de transférer une partie du fardeau qui pèse actuellement lourdement sur les épaules des Américains ordinaires sur les épaules des gens ordinaires dans les pays qui constituent les éléments subordonnés de l’Empire américain. Et alors qu’on s’attend à ce que les alliés portent une partie du fardeau, la part accrue que Trump veut leur infliger nuit est peu favorable au maintien des alliances dont dépend l’Empire américain. 

    Notes :
    1. Bob Woodward, Fear : Trump in the White House, (Simon & Shuster, 2018) 307.

    2. Jon Schwarz, “This Thanksgiving, I’m Grateful for Donald Trump, America’s Most Honest President,” The Intercept, November 21, 2018.

    3. Michael R. Gordon, “US seeks Arab force and funding for Syria,” The Wall Street Journal, April 16, 2018.

    4. Gordon, April 16, 2018.

    5. Gordon, April 16, 2018.

    6. Gordon, April 16, 2018.

    7. Gordon, April 16, 2018.

    8. Gordon, April 16, 2018.

    9. Michael R. Gordon, Eric Schmitt and Maggie Haberman, “Trump settles on Afghan strategy expected to raise troop levels,” The New York Times, August 20, 2017.

    10. Gordon, April 16, 2018.

    11. The Editorial Board, “Trump’s next Syria challenge,” The Wall Street Journal, April 15, 2018.

    12. Julian E. Barnes, “NATO announces deployment of more troops to Afghanistan,” The Wall Street Journal, June 29, 2017.

    13. Erik Prince, “Contractors, not troops, will save Afghanistan,” The New York Times, August 30, 2017.

    14. Craig Nelson, “Trump withdrawal plan alters calculus on ground in Afghanistan,” The Wall Street Journal, December 21, 2018.

    15. Helene Cooper, “Jim Mattis, defense secretary, resigns in rebuke of Trump’s worldview,” The New York Times, December 20, 2018.

    16. “Read Jim Mattis’s letter to Trump : Full text,” The New York Times, December 20, 2018.

    17. Thomas Gibbons-Neff and Eric Schmitt, “Pentagon considers using special operations forces to continue mission in Syria,” The New York Times, December 21, 2018.

    18. Neil MacFarquhar and Andrew E. Kramer, “Putin welcomes withdrawal from Syria as ‘correct’,” The New York Times, December 20, 2018.

    19. Thomas Gibbons-Neff and Eric Schmitt, “Pentagon considers using special operations forces to continue mission in Syria,” The New York Times, December 21, 2018.

    20. Gibbons-Neff and Schmitt, December 21, 2018.

    21. Gibbons-Neff and Schmitt, December 21, 2018.

    22. Martin Gilens and Benjamin I. Page, “Testing Theories of American Politics : Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens,” Perspectives on Politics, Fall 2014.
    Traduit par Diane Gilliard
    Source : https://gowans.wordpress.com/2018/12/22/no-matter-how-it-appears-trump-isnt-getting-out-of-syria-and-afgha


  • Richard Haass : Iran Is The Most Likely Setting For A Major New War In 2019 | Video | RealClearPolitics
    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/12/27/richard_haass_iran_is_the_most_likely_setting_for_a_major_new_war

    If I were going to place a bet on 2019, where there could well be a serious new war in the world, it wouldn’t be North Korea, it wouldn’t be the South China Sea. You never know what Mr. Putin will do in Ukraine, but I would bet on Iran, whether it is Israel vis-a-vis Iran or it is the Saudis doing something

    #arabie_saoudite #prophétie_autoréalisatrice


  • Je ne sais pas ce qu’il y dans mon café ce matin, mais je viens de réaliser quelque chose qui me donne le vertige, nous sommes donc, désormais, en 2019, ce qui veut dire que cette année, en octobre, nous allons commémorer le trentième anniversaire de la chute du mur de Berlin, qui, dans mon souvenir, était hier, avant-hier tout au plus.

    http://www.desordre.net/bloc/ursula/2014/cinquantaine/pele-meles/022.htm

    • ah oui tiens ! j’aurai dû m’en souvenir aussi @sombre ma fille est aussi née en 89 mais au mois de mars.
      Par contre je me souvenais toujours de la date de construction du mur de Berlin dans la nuit du 12 au 13 août 1961 par la RDA. Un bon copain était né le lendemain, le 14.

    • C’est aussi la fin de la guerre Afghanistan/URSS et de celle du Liban, mais c’est le début de la guerre au Kosovo

      C’est la répression place Tien An Men en Chine et la mort de Khomeiny en Iran

      C’est l’assassinat de Jean-Marie Tjibaou et Yeiwéné Yeiwéné en Nouvelle Calédonie

      C’est la tuerie de Polytechnique à Montréal (14 femmes tuées)

      C’est le début de la transition démocratique en Tchecoslovaquie, Hongrie, Pologne, Bulgarie, Chili, Paraguay, Nicaragua, et Salvador

      C’est l’année de Camille Claudel (avec Isabelle Adjani) et de Do the Right Thing de Spike Lee, de Mystery Train de Jim Jarmusch et de Dangerous Liaisons de Stephen Frears, de Sex Lies and Videotapes de Steven Soderbergh et du Temps des Gitans de Emir Kusturica

      C’est l’année de Puta’s Fever, de la Mano Negra, et de Mlah, des Negresses Vertes, de New-York, le retour de Lou Reed, de Oh Mercy, le retour de Bob Dylan

      (oui, je suis aussi obsédé par 1989)

      #1989


  • Ancient civilization in #Iran recognized transgender people 3,000 years ago, study suggests Haaretz.Com
    http://www.haaretz.com/misc/article-print-page/.premium.MAGAZINE-ancient-civilization-in-iran-recognized-transgender-peopl

    The study rattles the assumptions archaeologists make about sex and gender in ancient civilizations, and also highlights that many non-western societies – past or present – have a non-binary view of gender.

    #histoire #genre

    • L’Iran contemporain « aurorise » des hommes à devenir des femmes pour des raisons homophobes. Le transgenrisme est parfaitement compatible avec les cultures ultra misogyne et très rétrogrades, ca n’est absolument pas un signe de progressisme. On retrouve ce type de coutume en Indes qui traite les femmes plus mal que les betes, mais l’article en parle comme si faire des eunuques pour que les hommes puissent les baisé sans se croire gay etait super progressiste et que Trump devait en tiré des leçons !

      Le sois disant 3eme sexe ( qui est en fait des hommes déguisé en femmes à 99% du temps) sert à normalisé la prostitution d’hommes pour des hommes et surtout des hommes jeunes, ca ressemble à des résidus de la pédérastie grec. Les Feminelli dont parle l’article est aussi dans ce contexte. Faire comme si c’était des progressistes alors que la transition (et mutilation sexuelle qui va avec) sont imposées aux gay sous la menace de peine de mort (c’est le cas pour l’Iran contemporain). Ce que l’article ne mentionne pas car il s’interesse pas à la réalité et instrumentalise les gay iraniens pour le lobby des autogynophiles occidentaux.

      Le texte mentionne qu’il y aurait 20% de femmes dans ces catégories de « trans » mais bien sur jamais un mot sur elles et vu les critères sexistes pour faire ces sois disants « 3eme sexe » n’importe quelle femme guerrière, ou femme armée sera traité de trans par ces idéologues.

      #misogynie #homophobie #prostitution #invisibilisation


  • Sic Semper Tyrannis : Two new US bases in western Iraq.
    https://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/12/httpswwwalmasdarnewscomarticleus-builds-two-military-bases-alon

    The generals’ club is probably at work in this, seeking to limit the effect of Trump’s order for US forces to withdraw from Syria.

    The one in roumana sub-district  is the location from which US Army 155mm artillery is firing in support of continuing  SDF attacks against the hajin pocket in the SE corner of Syria.  There will be US Army GBs with the SDF adjusting these fires.  IMO those GBs will be left in Syria to do what only they do best, keep the locals in the fight.  This base will be useful as a forward staging point for any raids that SOF forces might want to make into Syria (kill Baghdadi, etc.)

    The other base is at rutbah and is positioned astride the highway from al-tanf in Syria.  In this position it will continue to obstruct the Damascus-Baghdad-Iran main ground route. 

    These two facilities will surely be supported and supplied from the al-asad air bast which Trump visited.  pl

    #Syrie #Etats-Unis #Irak