Il aura fallu que la Knesseth clame publiquement qu’un Etat palestinien n’existera jamais pour voir les frémissements de ceux qui regardaient faire la lutte pour la récupération de la patrie palestinienne.

Non pas pour soutenir la juste cause mais pour s’inquiéter de leurs lendemains moins enchanteurs…

Pour n’épargner personne, citons à partir de l’intérieur du cercle de la criminelle indifférence, les Palestiniens naturalisés israéliens qui vaquent à leurs occupations afin de protéger leurs emplois, leur smic en shekels et continuent à lire leur journal au café kasher du coin. 

Viennent ensuite les habitants de la Cisjordanie dont les tressaillements ne menacent aucunement l’occupant, et puis, les peuples frères de la Jordanie, de la Syrie, de l’Irak et du Liban (à l’exception de ceux qui se battent au sud) qui se contentent d’élever la voix pour tromper leur coupable passivité. Des voix sans le moindre écho.

Pis encore, du Golfe à l’Atlantique…on se masse les orteils (pour reprendre l’expression de mon confrère et ami Gaby Nasr) et on se gave de couscous en attendant un dénouement qu’on ne verra jamais. 

Ajouter à tout cela un monde dit arabo-musulman apathique et sourd.

Car depuis la nuit des temps, des antiques arènes aux stades bondés du sport moderne, on crie, on s’excite sur les gradins et on applaudit le gagnant en oubliant le perdant.

Le public attend un coup de sifflet final qui ne retentit pas.

On reste immobile, on s’emporte et on fait semblant de négocier sachant que Gaza disparaîtra et la Palestine avec.

L’Histoire pullule de guerres oubliées, de patries rayées de la carte et de peuples errants à l’infini. 

Sur cette terre trois fois sainte qualifiée par les mécréants de « terre sans peuple » et revendiquée par les croyants une terre pour deux peuples, on tue et on massacre impunément à la face d’un monde impassible ou complice.

Arguant du fait qu’il faut faire la guerre pour faire régner la paix…

Quelle paix et à quel prix ? 

La paix des braves ou juste le silence des tombeaux. 

E.M. 

Ainsi parla ...KAMALA HARRIS !

https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/25/politics/harris-netanyahu-israel-hamas-ceasefire(17) Publier | LinkedIn

Kamala Harris après avoir rencontré Netanyahu aujourd’hui.

Je vois un nouveau ton et une lueur d’espoir.

Traduisons immédiatement ces paroles en actes sur le terrain pour éviter d’autres souffrances.

Toutes les personnes éprises de paix qui voient cela devraient exprimer leur soutien et agir avec détermination.

Pas un enfant de plus ne devrait mourir à Gaza aujourd’hui.

More than nine months into its war with Hamas in the Gaza Strip, Israel now appears closer than ever to a second, even larger war with Hezbollah on its northern border. In June, the Israel Defense Forces announced that plans for a full-scale attack in southern Lebanon had been approved. And in mid-July, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah said that the Iranian-backed Shiite group was prepared to broaden its rocket attacks to a wider range of Israeli towns.

Although the possibility has received relatively little scrutiny in the international media, a full-scale war between Israel and Hezbollah would have consequences that dwarf the current Gaza conflict. A major Israeli air and ground assault against Hezbollah, the most heavily armed group in the Middle East, would likely cause turmoil across the entire region, and could prove particularly destabilizing as the United States enters a crucial stage of its presidential election season. It is also far from clear that such a war could be ended quickly, or that there is a clear path to a decisive victory.

The implications for Israel itself could be stark. Although Israeli air defense systems have been extremely successful thus far against missile attacks from Gaza, Lebanon, Iran, and Yemen, a total war with Hezbollah would be a whole different ballgame. According to Israeli intelligence estimates, Hezbollah’s weapons stockpile is more than seven times as large as Hamas’s and includes far more lethal weapons. Along with hundreds of attack drones, it includes some 130,000–150,000 rockets and missiles, including hundreds of ballistic missiles that could reach targets in Tel Aviv and even further south—indeed, every point in the country.

Moreover, as previous wars attest, Lebanon is a treacherous battlefield. Israel’s last war with Hezbollah, in the summer of 2006, was inconclusive, and despite killing several hundred of the group’s fighters, it left the group’s military power largely intact. Hezbollah is also far better armed than it was then. Israel’s home-front command estimates that if a full-scale conflict broke out now, Hezbollah would launch some 3,000 rockets and missiles every day of the war, threatening to overwhelm Israel’s missile defenses. Israel would have to concentrate on defending crucial infrastructure and military bases, tell the civilian population to stay in bomb shelters, and hope for the best. It would be a challenge that far exceeds anything that Israeli leaders have faced before.

For now, both sides still have reason to exercise restraint. In fact, it seems that all the actors involved in the current conflict—Israel, Hezbollah, Iran, the Lebanese government, and the United States—have strong reasons to try and avoid a regional war. But even if the Biden administration manages to achieve an agreement between Israel and Hezbollah that includes a withdrawal of Hezbollah forces from the area around the border, Israel’s leaders may still find it hard not to respond to a domestic audience that favors dealing with Hezbollah once and for all. If Israel succumbs to that temptation without a clearly defined endgame or strategy for limiting the war, the results could be devastating.

In contrast to its unexpected war in Gaza, Israel has long been preparing for a war with Hezbollah. Although Israel’s military leadership was caught completely by surprise by Hamas’s October 7 attack, it had for several years anticipated that Hamas might try to unite with Hezbollah and Iran’s other regional proxies in a coordinated multifront attack against Israel. In the years before his 2020 assassination by U.S. forces, Qasem Soleimani, who headed Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ Quds Force and supervised Iranian proxy forces across the Middle East, actively promoted a new strategy called “ring of fire”: by backing and arming a series of mostly Shiite militias, the Islamic Republic would gain influence in countries such as Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, and Yemen. At the same time, he tightened links with the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip.

These militias, several of which sat on Israel’s borders, provided Iran with deterrence against Israel’s more powerful military and gave Tehran a ready launching pad for attacks. By early 2023, Salah al-Arouri, a senior Hamas leader who was then based in Lebanon and helped cement Hamas’s ties with Hezbollah, was talking publicly of the need to “unite all fronts” against Israel. To many Israeli officials, Hezbollah, as the most heavily armed and well trained of these Iranian proxies, posed the greatest threat. On October 7, as Hamas’s brutal assault was unfolding along the Gaza perimeter, Israeli leaders rushed to prepare for an even larger attack from Hezbollah in the north.

Thus, in the morning and afternoon hours of October 7, even as the IDF’s leadership frantically tried to save the southern Israeli communities and military bases around Gaza, it was also positioning massive numbers of troops on the Lebanese border in case Hezbollah decided to join in. Though this second task was little reported at the time, it proved much more successful than the first. In the south, where nearly 1,200 Israelis would be killed and 255 kidnapped by Hamas, the IDF took hours or even days to regain control. By contrast, in the north, three Israeli divisions, including tens of thousands of soldiers, were rapidly deployed and Hezbollah hesitated—missing the chance to strike an unprepared Israel. “Had they been quick enough,” one IDF division commander told me, “we would have managed to stop them only at Haifa”—Israel’s third-largest city, about 26 miles south of the Lebanese border.

In fact, the army’s northern command had been preparing for years for this challenge. Still, on October 7, Israeli forces at the border knew that everything depended on Nasrallah, Hezbollah’s secretary-general. Had Hezbollah acted more decisively, the situation probably wouldn’t have been much different than it was around Gaza. But Nasrallah chose to wait. Hezbollah did not respond until the following day, and then only by launching a limited number of rockets, drones, and antitank missiles toward IDF outposts and Israeli border communities. By that time, the IDF had made the huge deployment at the border and began returning fire, although neither side attempted to cross the border.

In fact, Hezbollah and its patron Iran had been taken by surprise on October 7, just like Israel. As Israeli intelligence and Hamas sources later confirmed, Yahya Sinwar, Hamas’s leader in the Gaza Strip, did not notify his partners in Tehran and Beirut in advance of his intentions. In retrospect, the Israelis assess that had he confided in Iran and Hezbollah, they would have managed to intercept some of those messages and prepare to halt the attack. At the time, however, this was not known and Israeli officials feared the worst.

That day, the army made another fateful decision, approved by the Israeli government: all Israeli residents living within three miles of the northern border were ordered to evacuate. As a result, some 60,000 Israelis became refugees inside their own country, mostly staying at hotels around the country, including in Tel Aviv, financed by the state. At the time the order was issued, it was assumed that it would be temporary; no one guessed that these people would still be displaced more than nine months later. But as soon as these villages and towns in northern Israel had been emptied, Hezbollah turned them into a shooting range, rendering many of them virtually uninhabitable.

The common complaint among Israelis is that the evacuation of the north has given Hezbollah a three-mile security zone inside Israel, thus upending a status quo on the border that had more or less held since the 2006 war. The fact that twice the number of Lebanese citizens have been forced out of their homes as well, and from an area even further away from the border, is of little comfort for the displaced Israelis. But arguably even more important in the immediate aftermath of October 7 was the outcome of an intense debate within the Israeli government about whether to launch a massive assault on Hezbollah itself.

If some of Israel’s military leaders had their way, Israel might have launched a war against Hezbollah even before the IDF invasion of Gaza began. On October 10, U.S. President Joe Biden gave an important speech in which he promised American help to Israel against Hezbollah and Iran, including sending two aircraft carriers to the region. He also warned the Iranian leadership with one word: “Don’t.” Tehran took note. 

At the Kirya, the IDF’s Tel Aviv headquarters, some officers were weeping as they watched the president’s speech. This was the first good news since the horror of October 7 began. Nonetheless, a day later, Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant and some of the generals tried to push Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to approve a major operation against Hezbollah that apparently would include the assassination of senior Hezbollah leaders.

But Netanyahu knew that Biden’s “Don’t” was also meant for him. He also understood that a major attack on Hezbollah would very likely end up in a ground invasion of southern Lebanon, as well, and he doubted whether the army was up to the task of fighting vicious wars on multiple fronts, just days after Hamas’s massacre of Israelis on October 7. So Netanyahu did something quite strange, according to officials who were present that afternoon: he told his security detail to prevent Gallant from entering the prime minister’s office in Tel Aviv. By the time Gallant could get through, several hours later, the window of opportunity for an airstrike had been lost.

That evening, Netanyahu also decided to invite Benny Gantz and Gadi Eisenkot, two former chiefs of staff for the IDF who were leaders of the centrist National Unity Party, to the newly established war cabinet, a move that would allow the government to restrain some of the more hawkish ideas suggested by Gallant or the leaders of his other right-wing coalition partners. (With their military background, Gantz and Eisenkot were concerned that an immediate war in Lebanon would be too much for the IDF after the Gaza fiasco.)

As the war in Gaza has unfolded, the situation along the northern border has remained volatile. Although both sides have exercised a degree of restraint, Israel has decided to escalate on multiple occasions. In early January, Israeli forces assassinated Arouri, the Hamas leader, while he was staying in the Dahiya, the Shiite quarter in southern Beirut—crossing a significant threshold, since Israeli attacks as far north as Beirut have been rare in recent years. More recently, Israel has also assassinated three of Hezbollah’s senior commanders. Throughout the war, the Israeli Air Force has frequently struck weapons convoys and sometimes killed Hezbollah operatives in the Bekaa Valley, close to Lebanon’s border with Syria. As of mid-July, Hezbollah had confirmed the deaths of more than 370 of its fighters in Israeli strikes since the war in Gaza started. Dozens of Palestinian gunmen and Lebanese civilians have also been killed.

Hezbollah, in turn, has gradually increased the range and quantity of its own rocket attacks, and on the Israeli side, about 30 soldiers and civilians have died. Towns and villages on both sides of the border have been flattened. Israeli authorities say that more than 1,000 houses and buildings have been severely damaged as a result of Hezbollah attacks. There are similar assessments regarding damage on the Lebanese side. But the largest effect on Israel thus far may be the long-term displacement of tens of thousands of Israelis.

When the Israeli government told residents of towns near the northern border to evacuate, it was mainly responding to those communities’ initial fears that they could face a similar fate as their counterparts near Gaza: a surprise Hezbollah invasion of towns and villages that would result in horrific violence. During the past few months, however, there is far more concern about Hezbollah’s growing use of antitank rockets, which have a range of up to 6.5 miles and are highly accurate and difficult to intercept. They have caused much of the damage and many of the casualties in the north since the violence started.

At the center of the standoff between Israel and Hezbollah is the Shiite group’s occupation and arming of areas south of the Litani River, which flows through southern Lebanon not far from the Israeli border. According to the 2006 cease-fire agreement, Hezbollah was supposed to remain north of the Litani, with the land between the river and the Israeli border—the distance varies from about seven miles in the east to 20 miles in the west—under UN control; only the Lebanese army would be allowed to have a military presence there. But these measures were never implemented, and from the outset Hezbollah forces established de facto control of the border with Israel.

Thus, Israel’s most important demand is that Hezbollah units, and especially the group’s elite Radwan forces—special operations forces that are designed to conduct raids and cross-border attacks in Israel—must remain north of the Litani River. To the contrary, Hezbollah has said that it will accept a future cease-fire only if it provides for a return to the pre–October 7 status quo—in other words, allowing Hezbollah fighters to return south of the Litani. In such a scenario, the group would also likely seek to reconstitute the 20 military outposts it built along the border two years ago, which the Israelis bombed and destroyed shortly after the war in Gaza began.

Since late 2023, Amos Hochstein, President Biden’s special envoy to the region, has been trying to broker a cease-fire between Israel and Hezbollah. But Hezbollah has made clear that it will continue fighting as long as Israel’s war in Gaza continues. In early July, Washington launched a new push for a hostage deal between Israel and Hamas, which would include a cease-fire in Gaza while the first part of a prisoner swap is implemented. If that plan succeeds—the chances appear slim at the moment—the White House would immediately work to move the Israeli-Lebanese negotiations forward. As far as the northern front goes, the IDF’s leadership views a Gaza cease-fire as a “clutch moment” that would provide a chance to end hostilities in the north. 

But U.S. and Israeli assumptions about a détente with Hezbollah may be too optimistic. “It is hard to envision a long-term sustainable agreement,” Assaf Orion, former head of IDF strategy and a fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, told me. Given what he calls “Hezbollah’s overconfidence,” he sees little prospect that a negotiated deal will be able to “answer Israel’s concerns about Hezbollah’s proximity to the border and the rocket threat.”

Even if Hezbollah agreed to Israel’s main demand and withdrew from the border, history suggests that it is highly unlikely that Hezbollah’s fighters will stay away permanently—or that any external player could enforce such a withdrawal. After Israel’s intelligence fiasco along the Gaza perimeter, how would Israel’s northern communities be reassured that the IDF will not miss similar signals on the Lebanese border? It is already clear that the IDF will have to permanently deploy significant forces in the north and around Gaza. Even then, however, it will be up to residents of these areas to decide whether the situation is safe. If they are not convinced, many of them won’t return.

Shimon Shapira, an Israeli analyst of Hezbollah, believes that Nasrallah hopes to avoid a full-scale war with Israel. Yet he sees further escalation—even if unintended—as entirely possible. One side might decide to strike a preemptive blow against the other, fearing that its opponent was planning a similar surprise attack. For example, if Hezbollah maintains its forces in the south on high alert, Israeli military intelligence could mistakenly assume that the group is preparing for an immediate operation and respond with massive force.

The calendar may also contribute to heightened support in Israel to take on Hezbollah soon. With the school year beginning on September 1, many families from the north are losing patience. Heads of local municipalities in the north fear that without government action many families will choose to leave the region for good. The Netanyahu government has gained notoriety for neglecting communities on the frontlines of the war—and although a special office was established to deal with the needs of southern residents, no similar action has been taken in the north. In recent weeks, opposition leaders have seized upon the government’s failure to address security around the northern border, and Netanyahu may conclude that time is running out.

The unsustainable situation on the northern border has left the Israeli government in a dilemma. Although Netanyahu and Gallant have threatened Hezbollah and the state of Lebanon with absolute destruction if Hezbollah launches an all-out war, neither seems keen on such a scenario now. 

It is worth recalling that Hezbollah was itself established in the wake of Israel’s first invasion of Lebanon in 1982, in what is now known as the First Lebanon War. By 2000, Hezbollah had been able to drive the Israelis out of their self-proclaimed security zone in southern Lebanon, forcing the IDF’s full withdrawal over growing Israeli public concern about military casualties. Then, the war that broke in July 2006 ended after 34 days in a miserable draw that left both sides unhappy but also wary of another massive direct confrontation. Many Israeli analysts suspect that Hezbollah has prepared itself rather well for the next round.

If Israel is drawn into a full-scale war, it is reasonable to assume that the IDF will mostly prefer a standoff conflict, in which it relies primarily on its air superiority and accurate strike capabilities. Israeli generals would probably also stage a ground incursion, but it is doubtful that they would have Israeli forces continue north of the Litani. Such a move would risk spreading their forces too thin, especially if the war in Gaza continues during that time. And any decision to attack will have to take into consideration Israel’s rather limited available manpower after nine months of fighting in Gaza; In July, the Knesset approved a bill to extend mandatory military service to three full years in an effort to make up for troop shortfalls.

Israeli officials have also hinted that the army is facing a severe shortage of accurate bombs and shells in Gaza, which could place significant constraints on a simultaneous offensive in Lebanon. As for ground forces, in spite of the relative military success achieved in Gaza, the challenge in Lebanon would be different. Though South Lebanon would presumably be almost empty of civilians, Hezbollah is far more sophisticated than Hamas. The IDF would probably be capable of winning the battle of South Lebanon, but it might come at a high cost to its forces. Israel would also have to consider the risks for its entire home front, including cities such as Tel Aviv and Haifa, which would likely be exposed to continual rocket attacks, including more sophisticated guided missiles that Hezbollah has received from Iran in recent years.

Some Israeli politicians and generals maintain that there is a middle way: by ramping up military pressure on Hezbollah for a few days, the thinking goes, Hezbollah, fearing an all-out war and the destruction it would unleash on Lebanon, would balk and withdraw from the border. This is a dangerous case of wishful thinking. In reality, once this kind of escalation was underway it would be very difficult for Israel to dictate to Hezbollah when the war should stop. If, for instance, Netanyahu decides to strike targets in Beirut, Nasrallah might decide to respond in kind by hitting Tel Aviv. And if a part of such an attack got through Israel’s antimissile defenses, there would be enormous pressure for a larger war that would inevitably threaten the civilian populations of both sides.

For the moment, both sides continue to seek to restore deterrence, in spite of escalating attacks. Nasrallah has talked publicly of a strategic equation, in which his group chooses targets in response to Israeli actions. Both sides are fully aware of the devastation that would be wrought in a full-scale war. Israeli airstrikes could bring massive destruction to all state-owned civilian infrastructure in Lebanon within a few days. It’s unlikely that Gulf states would volunteer to foot the bill after such devastation—and until now, Iran was only willing to directly assist Hezbollah and the Shiite community in Lebanon. Hezbollah, in turn, with its huge arsenal, could send Israelis into bomb shelters for weeks on end.

If a full armed conflict does occur, it may not be brief. There’s a chance that Hezbollah, with Iran’s encouragement, would attempt a war of attrition, hoping that this would gradually lead to Israel’s collapse, the way Tehran’s hard-line leaders have imagined it. Following the war in Ukraine from afar, many Israelis have been fearing that they would face a similar scenario: a never-ending war, designed to exhaust the country’s willpower and capabilities, until it succumbs to outside pressure. What they didn’t anticipate, given Hamas’s brutal invasion and attack on Israeli communities on October 7, was that Israel would indeed find itself in Ukraine’s shoes but, as it sought to defend itself, would be treated instead, by many Western countries and in the international media, as another Russia, almost a pariah state. (The Russian government, of course, is glad to see the prolongation of the war in Gaza, because it diverts Western attention and U.S. resources from its own bloody campaign in Ukraine.)

During the Israel-Hamas war, I have made a point of visiting the norther border of Israel every two or three weeks, in order to follow events on this second front of the war, which could yet become the primary one. It has been a frustrating experience. Once Israel’s most beautiful region, it is now scarred with medium-intensity military conflict. Many houses in villages along the border are totally destroyed, mostly by Russian-made Kornet antitank rockets—supplied to Hezbollah via Iran—which cause more damage than the Katyusha rockets that Hezbollah relied on in the past.

In one of my recent visits, I went to the Shebaa Farms, the contested area on the eastern part of the northern border which Israelis call Mount Dov. An IDF brigade commander told me that when soldiers from certain outposts now go on leave, they have to leave on foot, because it is too dangerous to allow large vehicles to enter an area that is continually exposed to Hezbollah’s antitank rockets. Along the road to one outpost, I could see the remains of a civilian truck hit by a rocket in April. Its driver, an Arab Israeli citizen, had been killed.

In mid-July, I went to see a friend, an army reserve officer who has been on active duty since October. He lives in a kibbutz in the western Galilee, about a mile from the border, and serves nearby. His family are now considering returning to their house after nine months of forced exile. The kids miss home. (Although it is up to families themselves to decide whether to return, few have done so.) And yet he still does not see a way out any time soon. “We have been defending rather well, but these tactical achievements do not converge into a strategic victory,” he told me. “Most of what we do is only a reaction to alterations along the border.”

If the situation explodes, however, the border region—and both countries—will experience something they have never encountered before: a full-blown war that will include unprecedented damage to civilian populations and national infrastructure. The current war in Gaza has already shown how easy it is for this kind of conflict to get prolonged. And judging from past wars between Israel and Lebanon, it is unlikely that it would come to a satisfying end.

Subscribe Now

The U.S. will have fully cleared out of one air base in Niger as it continues to move personnel and equipment from the African country ahead of a September deadline to complete its withdrawal, according to the head of U.S. Africa Command.

Niger and the U.S. announced their decision in a joint statement last month and set a deadline of Sept. 15 for the U.S. to move its forces out of the West African country. Ties between the two nations began to deteriorate last summer after a coup staged by a military junta known as the National Council for the Safeguard of the Homeland, or CNSP.

By March, a spokesman for the council said U.S. forces would no longer operate in the country.

“We are on pace and on plan, moving heavy equipment out of Air Base 101, and then we will conclude with Air Base 201,” U.S. Marine Corps Gen. Michael Langley told reporters in a June 24 press briefing.

“Within a few weeks, we’ll be done with 101. I’ll put it that way,” he added. “Heavy equipment, rolling stock, is always the biggest thing that we are getting out of there. … We’re right on pace if not ahead of the pace.”

America has relied on Niger as a counterterrorism hub for more than a decade. Until recently, more than 1,000 U.S. personnel have operated there, with most concentrated on an air base located in the center of the country, which cost more than $100 million.

The plan for relocating equipment is not yet finalized, but Langley said he has made tours across coastal West Africa and the rest of the region to best understand what those countries need for addressing the counterterrorism fight they face.

“I look at our overall strategy. We’re doubling down on the strategy of going through our partners, by, with and through, on deterring threats and also crisis response. I don’t measure that in the amount of equipment, relocating equipment; I measure it by capabilities,” he said.

The commander stressed that these countries are not asking for U.S. troops on the ground in “any scope or magnitude. They say it’s their fight. They’re looking for capabilities, whether it be exquisite capabilities of intel sharing [or] being able to achieve the capability to identify indications and warnings for themselves.”

Acknowledging the presence of Russian advisers and trainers in Niger at Air Base 101 where Americans are still withdrawing, Langley said: “What intentions they have beyond that, I don’t know. ... But right now I know that we’re doing a responsible and graduated withdrawal.”

Russian military presence exists as far north as Libya and as far south as the Central African Republic, according to Langley. Russian activity is likely to be a topic that comes up during the African Chiefs of Defense Conference, an annual forum set to kick off for the first time on the African continent in Botswana on June 25.

The Russian military in Africa is attempting, through active disinformation campaigns, to drive a wedge between the West and its African partners, according to Langley.

“Do [the Russians] really want to have helped these African countries to beat terrorism or try to build their governance into being more responsive to their public or civil society? I’m not seeing that. I’m seeing they’re trying to put a narrative out there that will sow a discord between our African partners and the West writ large,” he added.

Selon le ministre allemand de la Défense, son armée va cesser d’exploiter sa base de transport aérien d’ici au 31 août 2024. Les négociations avec la junte militaire de Niamey ont échoué, a-t-il précisé. La coopération militaire avec le Niger sera également abandonnée.  Des soldats allemands forment toujours des forces spéciales nigériennes à Tillia dans le nord de la région de Tahoua

Netanyahou a encore osé, devant l’impuissance générale : 1270 ha saisis en Cisjordanie, un record depuis 30 ans

Le vrai visage du Premier ministre israélien Benjamin Netanyahou, son vrai projet pour les Palestiniens il est là : Faire en sorte de les déposséder de toutes les bonnes terres pour les confiner par millions dans quelques kilomètres carrés. Son projet n’a jamais été la Paix avec ses voisins, en tout cas pas avec la Palestine. Ce projet funeste il ne s’en est jamais caché et l’a d’ailleurs clairement assumé durant sa campagne électorale : “Avec moi il n’y aura jamais d’Etat palestinien“. Donc quand les Israéliens l’ont réélu en novembre 2022 c’était en toute connaissance de cause. Netanyahou vient de signer un acte retentissant, sans doute le pire contre la Paix depuis les Accords d’Oslo, en 1993…

Son gouvernement a validé la confiscation de 1270 hectares de terres en Cisjordanie occupée, des “terres appartenant à des citoyens du village d’Aqraba, au sud-est de Naplouse“, a précisé hier mercredi 3 juillet la Commission de colonisation et de résistance du mur dans un communiqué. Israël a classé le territoire saisi comme «terre d’État» pour «convertir les terres des citoyens en un projet de colonisation en expansion», ajoute la même source.

C’est la saisie de terres la plus importante en territoire palestinien depuis trois décennies, d’après l’organisation israélienne “La Paix maintenant”. Ces terres fertiles, nichées dans la vallée du fleuve Jourdain, ont été déclarées en juin dernier «propriété du gouvernement» par l’autorité israélienne en charge des affaires foncières dans les Territoires palestiniens.

«L’année 2024 marque un pic dans l’étendue des déclarations de terres d’État» et la mesure prise par l’Etat hébreu «est un pas dans la mauvaise direction», a commenté Stéphane Dujarric, le porte-parole du secrétaire général de l’ONU. «La direction dans laquelle nous voulons aller est de trouver une solution négociée à deux États» israélien et palestinien, a-t-il ajouté. Mais de toute évidence ce n’est pas la voie prise par Netanyahou…

Depuis le début de 2024 son gouvernement s’est officiellement emparé de 23,7 km2 en Cisjordanie, territoire palestinien occupé par Israël depuis 1967. On avait annoncé le 22 mars la saisie de 800 hectares de terres en Cisjordanie pour y installer de nouvelles colonies. Cette décision avait été qualifiée de «provocation» par “La Paix maintenant”, qui se désole que les droits des Palestiniens sur la propriété ou sur les terres déclarées «terres d’État» soient rognées.

Les autorités israéliennes n’ont pas jugé utile de commenter publiquement cette saisie record. «(Benyamin) Netanyahou et (Bezalel) Smotrich [le ministre des Finances] sont déterminés à se battre contre le monde entier et contre les intérêts du peuple d’Israël au profit d’une poignée de colons», a fustigé “La Paix maintenant”…

«Aujourd’hui, il est clair pour tout le monde que ce conflit ne peut être résolu sans un règlement politique établissant un État palestinien aux côtés d’Israël», «et pourtant le gouvernement choisit de rendre cela difficile», a conclu l’organisation.

Mardi dernier le rapport semestriel de la Commission de colonisation a mentionné la création de 17 nouveaux avant-postes de colonies dédiés aux Juifs, dans le même temps le gouvernement israélien a légalisé 11 autres avant-postes. A noter que les avant-postes de colonies sont de petites communautés imposées par les colons israéliens illégaux sur des terres palestiniennes privées, sans l’aval du gouvernement israélien. Mais on a vu que dans la plupart des cas Netanyahou finit par se plier aux desideratas des colons.

On estime à près de 700 000 les Israéliens qui ont mis la main sur 300 colonies illégales en Cisjordanie occupée et à Jérusalem-Est. Mais au regard du droit international toutes les colonies juives dans les territoires occupés, toutes sans exception, sont illégales. Bien entendu Tel-Aviv n’en a cure et l’avalanche de condamnations de l’ONU – un record absolu – n’y change rien tant que les USA sont derrière Israël, que ce soit avec les démocrates ou les républicains au pouvoir à Washington.

Selon Juma’a de Stop the Wall, l’un des "outils efficaces" utilisés par les Israéliens sont les colonies dites "pastorales".

Les bergeries israéliennes, qui encerclent les communautés pastorales palestiniennes et les privent de pâturages, se sont accélérées depuis 2017, prospérant après que la pression internationale sur Israël a baissé grâce, en grande partie, au soutien de l’administration Trump.

Selon Juma’a, quelque 105 colonies pastorales ont été établies depuis 2018.

"Ils s’emparent de toutes les zones agricoles palestiniennes dans la zone C", a déclaré Juma’a.

"Ils veulent limiter les mouvements et l’expansion des Palestiniens uniquement dans les villages et les villes des zones A et B."

En juin, le gouvernement israélien a approuvé des mesures proposées par M. Smotrich visant à légaliser cinq avant-postes de colonies non réglementés et nouvellement établis en Cisjordanie, et à transférer les pouvoirs exécutifs de l’Autorité palestinienne à Israël dans de vastes parties de la zone B.

"Israël est désormais, pour la première fois, en mesure de construire des colonies, de démolir des maisons et d’exproprier des terres à l’intérieur de la zone B", a déclaré M. Halper.

"D’une certaine manière, la zone B, où vit la moitié de la population palestinienne, est devenue la prochaine zone C."

Selon M. Halper, l’objectif est de pousser l’ensemble de la population palestinienne à se réfugier dans la seule zone A. "Vous créez une situation dans laquelle les Palestiniens ne peuvent plus se déplacer."

"Vous êtes en train de créer une situation où des centaines de milliers de Palestiniens vont devoir quitter le pays parce que la zone B a été prise et colonisée", a-t-il averti.

L’apartheid sous le signe du génocide

Pour Halper, la guerre d’Israël contre Gaza sert de couverture à l’accélération des démolitions et à l’expansion des colonies en Cisjordanie, préparant ainsi le terrain à un accord de normalisation de l’Arabie saoudite avec Israël qui éliminerait effectivement les Palestiniens en tant que force politique.

"Il s’agit d’un génocide qui s’inscrit dans le cadre de l’apartheid", a-t-il déclaré.

L’Arabie saoudite et Israël semblaient sur le point d’établir des liens officiels avant le 7 octobre, mais depuis la guerre et l’indignation du monde arabe, Riyad a insisté pour que l’accord aboutisse à la création d’un État palestinien indépendant.

"Israël essaie d’expulser un million ou deux de Palestiniens de Gaza en la rendant inhabitable", a déclaré M. Halper.

"En Cisjordanie, le même processus s’est produit en démolissant des maisons, en chassant les gens de leurs terres", a-t-il ajouté.

"En six mois, nous avons normalisé avec l’Arabie saoudite, et c’est fini. Le régime israélien s’est consolidé sur 90 % de la Palestine et les Palestiniens ont tout simplement disparu."

* Source: AFPS

If I were an american !

Du Général Jamil Al Sayyed

* If I were an American and saw Netanyahu in Congress, members crowding around him to shake his hand and applaud him standing 70 times with hysterical cries of support within 50 minutes, * If I were an American and heard him bragging yesterday from Congress as if he was the one protecting, financing and arming America and that if it were not for him, America would have fallen and the civilized world would have fallen with it. * If I were an American and heard Netanyahu there giving lessons on the ethics of war and international law as if the Congress and the people of America would be fooled by his lies that his army did not kill a civilian, a child, or a woman, and did not destroy a hospital, a university, a school, or homes in Gaza and the West Bank, while he is accused for all these crimes before the International Court of Justice, *If I were an American and heard Netanyahu from the congressional podium reprimanding and threatening America’s students and youth protesting against the massacres in Gaza and accusing them of anti-Semitism and funding from Iran (yes, funding from Iran within America in particular!!), * If I were an American and saw him in Congress, how he treated us with contempt and condescension, and lied to us about Palestine, and how he addressed us as if we were an ignorant and stupid group who did not know the truth and facts, * If I were an American and saw how Congress, which represents me and represents rights and the law, proudly and joyfully invites and receives a foreign official like Netanyahu, who is being prosecuted in corruption cases in his country, * If I were an American and saw and heard all of this, I would be ashamed of myself first and demand that my country hand him over on the first plane to the International Court of Justice or deport him expelled from where he came from... But I'm not an American, Rather, I am sanctioned by America, for no other reason than that, thank God, I am nothing like Netanyahu. Otherwise, today I might have been invited to address Congress...

I now see Netanyahu entering the US Congress to deliver his speech. Ten minutes of loud applause and council members vying for the blessing of shaking his hand. And voices cheering him on with screams and some kind of wailing. He began his speech by saying that it is not a war between civilizations, but rather a war between barbarians and the civilized world. Whenever he uttered a sentence, the representatives interrupted him and stood up to each other with loud applause, shouting, and wailing. There is no need to follow the rest of the speech, It is known who is the master of the scene there... For those who wish to follow, They are now broadcasting the speech translated, including on Al-Jazeera and Al-Arabiya...

Vers une réconciliation ? Un membre du bureau politique du Hamas, Musa Abu Marzouk, a annoncé ce mardi que son mouvement avait signé un accord avec d’autres factions palestiniennes dont son rival, le Fatah, à l’issue d’une réunion en Chine. « Aujourd’hui, nous signons un accord sur l’unité nationale et nous déclarons que la voie à suivre pour achever ce processus est l’unité nationale. Nous nous engageons en faveur de l’unité nationale et nous l’appelons de nos vœux », a-t-il déclaré.

Un peu plus tôt ce mardi, le ministre chinois des Affaires étrangères Wang Yi avait salué l’accord conclu par quatorze factions palestiniennes qui prévoit la mise en place d’un « gouvernement intérimaire de réconciliation nationale » dans la bande de Gaza après la guerre. « Le fait le plus marquant est l’accord prévoyant la formation d’un gouvernement intérimaire de réconciliation nationale pour la gouvernance d’après-guerre de Gaza », a déclaré Wang Yi, après la signature à Pékin d’une déclaration commune par les différentes factions palestiniennes.

Hamas- Senior Leader Badaran: The Beijing Declaration is a Significant Step Towards National Unity

Hussam Badaran, Head of the National Relations Office in Hamas and Political Bureau member, affirmed that the Beijing Declaration is an additional positive step toward achieving Palestinian national unity. Its importance stems from the host country, the People's Republic of China, known for its international influence and unwavering support for the Palestinian cause.

In a press statement on Tuesday, Badaran expressed his deep appreciation for China's substantial efforts leading to this declaration. He noted that China’s involvement, given its significance and stature, is crucial for Palestinians to counter the unilateral policies of the United States regarding the Palestinian issue. The U.S. administration opposes any internal Palestinian national consensus and is wholly biased toward, and even partners with, the occupation in its crimes against our people.

Badaran added that this declaration comes at a critical time when our people, particularly in the Gaza Strip, face genocidal warfare.

He clarified that the official statement signed by the factions is clear in its contents, and what has been published and circulated since yesterday does not reflect this.

Badaran said that the participants in Beijing extended their greetings to the Palestinian people, especially in Gaza, commending their steadfastness. They appreciated the Palestinian resistance, which exercises our natural right to confront the occupation.

Badaran explained that there was agreement on Palestinian demands to end the war and the brutal aggression. These demands include: a ceasefire, complete withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, relief, and reconstruction.

He pointed out that one of the critical points of agreement was the formation of a Palestinian national unity government to manage the affairs of our people in Gaza and the West Bank, oversee reconstruction, and prepare for elections. This stance aligns with Hamas’s position, which it has advocated since the early weeks of the conflict.

The Head of the National Relations Office in Hamas confirmed that, from their perspective, this solution represents the ideal and most suitable national response to the Palestinian situation post-war. It stands as a strong barrier against all regional and international interventions that aim to impose realities counter to our people's interests in managing Palestinian affairs post-conflict.

Badaran reported that the participants in Beijing emphasized countering the occupier's conspiracies and continuous violations at the blessed Al-Aqsa Mosque. They also highlighted the attempts to Judaize Islamic and Christian holy sites in Jerusalem and reaffirmed their full support for the prisoners.

Un déni de tout Etat palestinien clamé par les gardiens de la loi hébraïque.

Une Énième séance de faux pourparlers CIA-Mossad sur l’après Gaza annulée après le discours de Bibi à l’ONU.

De retrouvailles incertaines de frères palestiniens à…Pékin.

Des espoirs bidon de reconnaissance de deux États basés sur le verdict de la Cour Internationale de Justice.

De creuses promesses d’accalmie sur le front du Liban-Sud assorties de garanties franco-européennes.

D’impressionnants bombardements « longue distance » entre le Yémen Hodeida et Tel-Aviv.

Des implantations galopantes en Cisjordanie.

D’invérifiables contacts irano-US pour éviter un conflit régional, voire mondial.

Et on nous parle d’un accord pour mettre fin au génocide et d’un après-Gaza.

De grâce…arrêtez de nous prendre pour ce que nous ne sommes pas ; c’est-à-dire des lecteurs et spectateurs de médias usant frauduleusement de l’intelligence artificielle pour insulter l’intelligence humaine.

                                                                                                                       Elie MASBOUNGI

L’UN DES PLUS GRANDS DEVELOPPEMENTS URBAINS EN AFRIQUE

The first impression is always the most important!!

This is what you will see first when you arrive to River City RDC in Lubumbashi :An Impressive Monumental Gate with a serie of Commercial Buildings next to it.

River City ,le projet qui va changer le paysage de l’immobilier au Haut Katanga dans Le Congo Démocratique ,est en train de prendre vie rapidement

Un projet d’une telle grandeur nécessite une entrée unique et majestueuse

L’entrée principale de River City garantit 24h/24 et 7j/7 sécurité! … En voir plus

Dans le cadre luxuriant de la campagne de Lubumbashi, deuxième ville de la République
Démocratique du Congo, une cité de rêve sortira de terre…et des eaux.
« River City » que l’on peut appeler « La Ville des Rivières » est un des plus grands projets
de développement en Afrique. Sur les méandres du fleuve du même nom et sur six millions de
mètres carrés sur la Ferme Nazem, un gigantesque chantier est déjà lancé proposant des
quartiers résidentiels, des centres commerciaux, des centres médicaux, des hôtels, des écoles
et universités, des centres de divertissement, un casino, et divers autres projets.

EPRESSPACK LEVE 7ME AUPRES D'ENTREPRENEUR INVEST

Epresspack, l’éditeur Saas des professionnels de la communication  qui accompagne plus de 300 grandes marques françaises et internationales (Accor, Allianz,  Bercy, Orange, LVMH, Renault, Hermès, Dove...) et 1300 utilisateurs dans 24 pays, annonce  avoir levé 7ME auprès du fonds d’investissement Entrepreneur Invest. Cette opération va  l’aider à consolider le secteur en Europe et en faire le champion européen du domaine. 

L’entreprise, qui compte plus de 40 salariés, recherche actuellement une dizaine de nouveaux  collaborateurs pour des postes de commerciaux, relations clients, développeurs.  

Leader incontesté sur le marché français et fort de son développement à l’international qui  représente déjà 45% de son activité, epresspack a pour ambition de devenir l’acteur Saas numéro  un européen et mondial du marché de la communication d’entreprise d’ici 3 ans. Dès 2025, il  prévoit de doubler son chiffre d’affaires, hors acquisition, et de réaliser 60% de son chiffre  d’affaires à l’international.  

Au terme de cette opération qui renforce la structure capitalistique de l’entreprise, Antoun Sfeir,  Président et CEO demeure actionnaire majoritaire. 

« Cette opération financière est structurante. Elle va nous permettre d’être un acteur clé de la  consolidation du marché et d’accélérer notre développement à l’international. Avec le soutien  dès l’origine d’Entrepreneur Invest, nous nous sommes imposés comme le leader en France avec  notre solution innovante. Nous voulons désormais assurer notre leadership en Europe », souligne  Antoun Sfeir, Président fondateur d’epresspack.

A propos de epresspack epresspack.com 

Editeur SaaS, epresspack est le leader français du marché très spécialisé des logiciels dédiés à la communication  d’entreprise. Depuis sa création en 2011, l’entreprise fondée par Antoun Sfeir développe des suites logicielles et des  modules couvrant le spectre des métiers de relations presse et de relations publiques pour les marques, les entreprises  et les institutions. Sa technologie – qui associe du front et du back office - accompagne plus de 320 clients (Accor,  Allianz, LVMH, Renault group, Hermès, Dove ...) et 1 300 utilisateurs dans 24 pays. Il rassemble quelque 40  collaborateurs. L’éditeur est parallèlement actionnaire de Mediaconnect, filiale de l’AFP et partenaire de l’EACD, réseau  le plus important de directeurs de la communication en Europe. En 2023, son CA est de près de 5 millions d’euros. 

À propos d'Entrepreneur Invest  

Créée en 2000, Entrepreneur Invest est une société de gestion indépendante agréée AMF, spécialisée dans le non coté.  Elle gère des fonds dans le domaine du financement des PME, de l’immobilier et des fonds de fonds dont elle assure la  gestion, la structuration et la sélection rigoureuse des partenaires.  

Entrepreneur Invest est fondée et dirigée par des entrepreneurs ayant connu, avec succès, les différentes étapes d’une  vie d’entreprise : création, développement, redressement, vente ou introduction en bourse.  Acteur majeur du financement des entreprises françaises avec 1,7 milliard d’€ collecté, Entrepreneur Invest a réalisé  plus de 300 opérations d’investissement en fonds propres et en obligations de PME et accompagne aujourd’hui plus  de 100 sociétés dans des domaines d’activités diversifiés : logiciel, industrie, médias & communication, éducation,  tourisme & loisirs, services B2B, santé, e-commerce, etc.

 The Knesset voted to affirm its opposition to the establishment of a Palestinian state.

The proposal garnered support from 68 MKs, including from Benny Gantz's centrist National Unity Party. Nine MKs from Arab parties opposed it, while the Labor Party did not attend.