Sept. 15 — The Failed Plot By Dr. Khaled M. Batarfi: New Age Islam's Selection, 19 September 2017
New Age Islam Edit Bureau
19 September 2017
• Sept. 15 — The Failed Plot
By Dr. Khaled M. Batarfi
• The Iranians and Turks in Syria and Iraq
By Radwan Al-Sayed
• Netanyahu’s Devious Campaign to Sit at the World’s Top Table
By Ramzy Baroud
• What Has Boycotting Israel Ever Done For The Palestinians?
By Diana Moukalled
• Qatar’s Problem Is That It Is Ruled by Two People
By Abdulrahman Al-Rashed
• What That Missile Deal Really Means For Turkey
By Yasar Yakis
• Will September Be Decisive For The Nuclear Agreement?
By Salman Al-Dosary
• Hajj and the Cumulative Experience of Organizing It
By Hussein Shobokshi
• How British Colonialism Ruined A Perfect Cup Of Tea
By Hamid Dabashi
Compiled By New Age Islam Edit Bureau
----
The Iranians and Turks in Syria and Iraq
By Radwan Al-Sayed
18 September 2017
The situation between Iran and Turkey reached its worse between 2014 and 2016. Before that, the two countries had disagreed over their stances towards Bashar al-Assad.
Ever since the revolution erupted in Syria, the two allies, Qatar and Turkey, who were friends with the Syrian president since 2004, voiced the importance of reform to Assad. Iran stood with Assad from the start and Russia did the same particularly following its negative experience with the West in Libya.
Also read: Barzani meets with Saudi minister ahead of Kurdish referendum
Between 2012 and 2013, the Iranians militarily intervened in Syria through Hezbollah. Things were no longer limited to providing experts for advice and help in operations rooms. The Turks and Qataris went ahead and supported the Brotherhood in Egypt and Syria and began to arm groups near Damascus and north of the country.
This disagreement over interests reached its peak when ISIS and al-Nusra emerged. The Iranians and Washington thus began to support the Kurds in Syria. The US did not do anything when the Kurdistan workers’ party settled in Sinjar. Turkish forces entered to areas around Mosul and said they will not allow Popular Mobilization forces to enter Tal Afar because there is a Turkmen minority there.
Anger and Mistrust
Trade relations were not affected but mutual visits of Turkish and Iranian officials between 2014 and 2015 were charged with anger and mistrust. The scene then entirely changed when Russia intervened in Syria in 2014. After downing a Russian jet, Turkey had to reach a truce with Russia and it was pushed to do so due to the Russians’ anger and to the deterioration of relations with the US.
Turkey’s rapprochement with Russia in north Syria and allowing it to defy the Kurds and ISIS on its border with Syria mitigated the Iranian-Turkish conflict. Moscow entered as a mediator between the two parties and pushed each to recognize the interests of the other party in Syria and Iraq. Russia also took both to the Astana meetings. They also held bilateral talks to discuss cooperation against terrorism and to discuss their fears of the American support of the Kurds in Syria and Iraq.
Practical cooperation between them appeared during the war in Aleppo. The Turks, who viewed Aleppo as their influence zone, had to negotiate with the Russians to withdraw gunmen from the city and its neighbouring areas after most of the old town was destroyed. The Iranians were thus present alongside the Russians in North Syria on the Kurdish-Turkish borders.
While negotiating the borders of influence in the Syrian east and north, the Turks realized that Iran’s relations with ISIS and al-Nusra are sometimes stronger than its own relations with the two groups. Turkey supported several armed organizations in the Syrian north and it’s concerned about the situation on its borders there. Meanwhile the Iranians are concerned about Syrian border areas with Iraq.
The War In Aleppo
The Russians and Iranians feared that the operation to seize Idlib and its towns – where al-Nusra is in control – will be launched amid the war in Aleppo. After the idea of the de-escalation zones was proposed, Russia and Iran urged Turkey to push al-Nusra out of Edleb.
When this did not work, Russia and Iran handed the matter over to Turkey, which recently announced that it will storm Edleb along with 20,000 Arab Syrian gunmen if it has to. Meanwhile, the Iranians went to help regime forces raid Deir az-Zour which is close to the Iraqi border. They are aided by Russian air force and the Americans’ shelling of Deir az-Zour and Raqqa.
Iran and Turkey exploited terrorism or redirected its factions. And just like the Iranians willingly got ISIS and Al-Nusra out of Lebanon’s Jurud, the Turks may also willingly get Al-Nusra out of Edleb. The partnership is back between Iran and Turkey to prevent the Kurds from becoming independent in Syria and Iraq.
They are cooperating so each can have its own influence zone as Iran wants one on Iraq’s borders and Turkey wants one on its borders.
Source: english.alarabiya.net/en/views/news/middle-east/2017/09/18/The-Iranians-and-Turks-in-Syria-and-Iraq.html
-----
Sept. 15 — The Failed Plot
By Dr. Khaled M. Batarfi
WERE we too concerned over the calls to protests on Sep 15? I would say no for those who knew their country and countrymen better. Previous calls — and there were many— ended up with nothing, so why the worry now?
The heated discussion in Twitter, in my opinion, is more about the foreign hands behind the movement — mainly Qatar and its Islamists allies, their electronic army, and the fifth column among us. They were responding — in kind — to the Arab boycott and calls for leadership change in Qatar. Only this was not their first attempt. Since the so-called “Arab Spring,” they teamed up with the Obama Administration, Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood to destabilize traditional US allies. The US inspired Academy of Change, in Doha, trained young Saudis, Kuwaitis, Bahraini, Emiratis and Egyptians (but no Qataris!) on the same strategies used to revolutionize Serbia and Ukraine. Leaked videos showed trainers demonstrating how to outmanoeuvre police forces. Hundreds were also trained on using social media to organize protests and criticize governments.
The strategies succeeded in setting stable Arab nations, like Egypt, Bahrain and Tunisia, on fire. If it wasn’t for Saudi-led Arab campaigns, Bahrain and Yemen would have been overtaken by Iran and the rest of the Arab world ruled by Muslim Brotherhood governments, supported by America, Turkey and Qatar. Peaceful dialogue with Qatar achieved little. They were building up a modern-day caliphate. A few hiccups on the way won’t stop their express train, or so they thought. Even today, after their disastrous revolutions failed to get them on the top of the Arab world, they never lost hope or ceased trying.
Here comes a new US Administration with a time-tested American strategy. Its priorities are to eradicate terrorism, by standing up to terror sponsors in Tehran and Doha. President Trump has returned America to its traditional Arab allies, led by Saudi Arabia and Egypt. No more covert support for Iran, Qatar and their Islamist militias, and zero tolerance for funding terrorist organizations such as Daesh, Al-Qaeda, Al-Nusra and Hezbollah. Also gone were the Democratic Administration schemes to destabilize and remake the Middle Eastern government structure.
Qatar and company found themselves out in the cold. For the first time since they started their unholy alliances, they became defensive. Their calls for change in other countries are matched now by similar ones in Iran and Qatar. Their use of Haj to lift the boycott has boomeranged on them.
Sheikh Abdullah Bin Ali Al-Thani, the legitimate heir of the throne, has come to the rescue. He resolved the Haj issue and took care of his people during their stay in the Kingdom. Other leaders and personalities found their voices and organized an opposition movement. Their first conference in London was a success. They pointed to Qatar’s support of terror groups and financing of destabilizing forces in Arab world, and beyond — Chad and Somalia for example.
To fight back, Qatar intensified its old ways of doing business. The only difference is about light. What they used to do in the dark came now under the spotlight of the international scrutiny. The American umbrella is lifted and their acts are exposed and criticized by the American, European, Russian and Arab governments.
So Saudis were discussing these issues in the media during the days leading to Sept. 15. Knowing who was behind these campaigns made them more patriotic. The occasion became some sort of a “national day” to celebrate our love and devotion to our great nation and unbreakable allegiance to our leadership.
If Iran-Qatar axis was betting on sowing division among Saudis, they got solidarity against their intervention. And if their aim was to transfer the battle from their field to ours, they had the ball back in their court. The next could be a taste of their own medicine. The world has had enough of them, and their people deserve better... much better!
Source: saudigazette.com.sa/article/517497/Opinion/OP-ED/Saudi-Arabia
----
Netanyahu’s Devious Campaign to Sit at the World’s Top Table
By Ramzy Baroud
18 September 2017
There is a great irony in Israel seeking a seat on the UN Security Council. Since its establishment amid the ruins of Palestinian cities and villages in 1948, Israel has had the most precarious relationship with the world’s largest international body. It has desperately sought to be legitimized by the UN, while doing its utmost to delegitimize the UN.
After a resolution at the UN Human Rights Council in March 2014 condemning Israel’s human rights abuses in the Occupied Territories, Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu described the UN as absurd and vowed to “continue to denounce and expose” its “procession of hypocrisy.” For years, Israel has undermined the UN and its various bodies and, with unconditional support from Washington, ignored UN resolutions on the illegal occupation of Palestine.
To a certain extent, the strategy has worked. With US vetoes blocking every UN attempt at pressuring Israel to end its military occupation and human rights violations, Israel was in no rush to comply with international law.
But two major events have forced an Israeli rethink.
First, in December 2016, the US abstained from a UN resolution that condemned Israel’s illegal settlement activities. After decades of shielding Israel from international censure, it appeared that Washington’s allegiance to Tel Aviv was uncertain.
Second, the rise of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement began changing the dynamics of international politics regarding the Israeli occupation.
The movement, which began as a call by Palestinian civil society to hold Israel accountable for its human rights violations, grew rapidly into a global movement. Hundreds of groups multiplied around the world, joined by artists, academicians, union members and elected politicians.
Within a few years, BDS has become a serious tool of pressure to denounce the occupation and demand justice for the Palestinian people. The UN Human Rights Council said it would release a list of companies that must be boycotted for operating in illegal settlements, and there were repeated condemnations of Israel’s human rights violations as recorded by the UN cultural agency, UNESCO.
UN bodies with no veto-wielding members grew in their ability to challenge the Security Council, spurring a determined Israeli-American campaign to delegitimize them.
The Trump administration and the US ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley, have has waged a war against the UN, using intimidation and threats to withhold funds.
Nevertheless, UNESCO stood firm and the UNHRC said it would publish its list by the end of the year. It is thought to include Coca-Cola, TripAdviser, Airbnb, Priceline and Caterpillar, along with Israeli companies and two large banks. Israel’s Deputy Foreign Minister Tzipi Hotovely said the UN was “playing with fire,” and the US and Israel would work together to start a “revolution” at the Human Rights Council.
Signs of this oddly termed “revolution” are already apparent. Aside from choking off funds to UN bodies, Israel is lobbying countries that have traditionally shown solidarity with Palestinians because of common historical bonds of foreign oppression and anti-colonial struggles.
Netanyahu has just visited Latin America, and in Mexico he offered to “develop Central America.” The price, of course, is for Latin American countries to support Israel’s occupation of Palestine and turn a blind eye to its human rights violations in Palestine. The irony that escaped no one is that, in January, Netanyahu declared his support for Trump’s promise to build a wall along the Mexican border and make Mexico pay for it.
Netanyahu’s charm offensive was supposed to include an Israel-Africa Summit in Togo in October, but it was canceled because over half of African countries planned to boycott it.
Netanyahu has made African diplomacy a pillar of his foreign policy. In June he visited Uganda, Kenya, Ethiopia, Tanzania and Rwanda, with a large delegation of business executives. He promised West African leaders at a summit in Liberia that Israel would supply them with agricultural technology to prevent drought and food scarcity, provided they opposed UN resolutions critical of Israel’s occupation of Palestine. Not all African leaders allowed themselves to be manipulated.
Israel’s aim is to undercut support for the Palestinians at the UN General Assembly, and sabotage the work of UN bodies outside the realm of US power.
Meanwhile, it also wants a seat on the UN Security Council. The assumption is that, with the support of Haley at the UN, this is not far-fetched. In addition to the five permanent veto-wielding members, ten countries are elected for two-year terms. Israel’s charm offensive in Latin America, Africa and Asia is meant to win it a seat in the 2019-2020 term. The vote will take place next year, and Israel will stand against Germany and Belgium.
Israel’s strategy of elevating its status at the UN can also been seen as an admission of the failure of its antagonistic behavior. However, if it wins that seat it will use the new position to strengthen its occupation of Palestine, rather than adhere to international law.
It is unfortunate that the Arabs and the Palestinian Authority are waking up to this reality late. Israel has been plotting it since 2005 under the premiership of Ariel Sharon, but the PA is only now requesting an Arab League strategy to prevent it.
Palestinians are counting on the historical support they have among many countries around the world, especially in the global South. Most of these nations have experienced colonization and military occupation, and have had their own costly and painful liberation struggles. They should not allow a colonialist regime to sit at the summit of the UN, obstructing international law while preaching to the world about democracy and human rights.
Source: arabnews.com/node/1163376/columns
-----
What Has Boycotting Israel Ever Done For The Palestinians?
By Diana Moukalled
18 September 2017
Boycotting Israel and rejecting any type of normalization is back in the spotlight after the arrest this month of the Lebanese-French film director Ziad Doueiri.
Doueiri was detained on his arrival at Beirut airport after the publication of an offensive and provocative article about him in Al-Akhbar, a Lebanese daily newspaper that broadly supports Hezbollah.
The article related to Doueiri’s 2012 movie “The Attack,” which tackled the Palestinian cause through a love story involving a female suicide bomber and her doctor, a Palestinian living in Israel. The movie was shot in Israel and the Occupied Territories. Lebanon is officially at war with Israel, and its citizens, such as Doueiri, are not permitted to travel there. Al-Akhbar’s article urged authorities to take action against him.
As a result, when the director arrived in Beirut for the premiere of his latest movie, “The Insult,” security officials detained him at the airport. His Lebanese and French passports were confiscated and he was ordered to appear before a military court the following day. The judge ruled that he had no case to answer, returned his passports and released him.
This case has two dimensions: The relativisation of power, and control. Doueiri had visited Lebanon several times before and was not arrested. He said he had informed the authorities that he was producing a movie about the Palestinian cause and no one objected, except of course when it came to depicting relations between Lebanese figures known for their former relations with Israel and who are currently in power. Doueiri himself has said that the boycott of Israel harms the Palestinians more than it does Israel.
The debate revolves around one main point: The 70-year-old slogan rejecting any type of normalization with Israel. The boycott weapon has always been part of the conflict. It has deliberately blurred the line between the stance taken on the occupied country and the stance taken against the repressive Israeli authorities. We should distinguish between the Israeli authorities and their policies, and Israelis in general; what happens now is that anyone who dares to say they like an Israeli song, writer, movie or dish is accused of being an Israeli agent.
So what has the boycott achieved? How has it served the Palestinian cause (which is indisputably fair and just)? Name one achievement, and by that I do not mean a Western musician or writer refusing to visit Israel. How has the boycott helped the Palestinian cause that is now fading? Why has Israel been able to repress us, despite all the years of boycott?
Far from helping us, the boycott has been exploited to spread ignorance. The Israeli writer Amos Oz’s book “A Tale of Love and Darkness,” which depicts the awful face of Israel, was banned. We have been fooled by “intellectuals” who we have allowed to censor our minds and our intelligence. We need to see that the conflict with Israel is not only about the passing, agenda-driven missiles, which are far from restoring Palestinians’ rights.
Israel, the country that we do not like, is an occupier oppressing the Palestinians; however, Haifa and Jaffa are cities that we would love to visit. None of the boycotters like these cities more than we do.
We need to be honest and admit that the boycott has achieved nothing for the Palestinian cause. Instead, it has been used against us to spread ignorance and prevent us from discussing and learning new things. This is the dilemma of the anti-normalization advocates: They adopted an approach that empowered Israel against us. They imposed the logic of absolute confrontation, all against all.
In our region, people are ruled through tyranny and sectarianism, which is why our countries have become a permanent arena for civil war. The boycotters are using this same logic to drive us toward a permanent fight against normalization with Israel. They are using the Palestinian cause to keep us recklessly enraged; this is why we are trapped in our current state.
Source: arabnews.com/node/1163366/columns
-----
Qatar’s Problem Is That It Is Ruled by Two People
By Abdulrahman Al-Rashed
18 September 2017
From the course of action taken by the four countries to end the Qatari status quo, we can realize that their success is highly probable, no matter how much Doha’s government resists. This week’s political meetings in New York will shed light on the crisis and its progress. If Qatar accepts the ultimatum of the Arab countries, it will finally be relieved. If it is seeking to accept some conditions and disregard some others, the crisis will continue for years.
The whole world is benefiting from the confrontation with Qatar. It is a small country with huge superfluous money and a great appetite for sowing chaos in the region and beyond; it has already caused many calamities. The Middle East got rid of almost all regimes financing and sowing chaos, except two: Qatar and Iran. By ending the Qatari role, problems will decline, extremist religious groups will be curtailed, and Iran will remain alone.
For two decades, Qatar has been responsible for chaos, extremism and a share of terrorism. No one addressed the Qatari threat in the beginning because they all underestimated its impact and influence. When the Qatari threat grew bigger and the number of crises supported by Qatar increased, Doha started to hide behind alliances. However, the joint efforts of four active Arab countries to face Qatar changed the rules of the game and besieged Qatar.
Qatar, without being supervised, becomes a dangerous country that has excess gas and oil revenues from which it can finance extremist organizations all over the world and seek to overthrow regimes it opposes. This made Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the UAE and Bahrain determined to put an end to the Qatari actions and policies. Most of the countries that have to choose between the four countries and Qatar will choose the Anti-Terror Quartet because of their influence, importance and interests.
Before the meetings that will take place on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly this month, Qatar sought to persuade major countries to be on its side against the Quartet, but it failed. German Chancellor Angela Merkel has advised the emir of Qatar to negotiate privately with the Quartet, which means that he will have to back down.
This week is crucial for Qataris, as they are trying to convince the US to mediate again and arrange a suitable political deal with the Quartet. Qatar’s leadership may not succeed because of what it did when US President Donald Trump intervened, after the invitation of Kuwaiti Emir Sheikh Sabah Al-Ahmad Al-Jaber Al-Sabah. Qatar Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al-Thani thwarted the attempt from the first hour of the announcement of the mediation.
But why does Qatar seek mediation and then sabotage it? The answer is that Qatar is ruled by two people. Sheikh Tamim is the one working on a solution, but he does not control the executive powers. His father, the former emir, Sheikh Hamad, and his former foreign minister are both controlling the operative state institutions.
If all solutions fail in the next two weeks, the crisis could last for a year or maybe two. The train could easily go beyond small stations, for, as Saudi Foreign Minister Adel Al-Jubeir said, the Quartet has nothing to lose in its boycott. Whereas for Qatar, it will suffer as it is unable to survive under pressure. Despite the fact that the port and airport are open, the authorities in Qatar are besieged because of the unbearable disconnection.
The enormous pressure on Qatar is not limited to its land border with Saudi Arabia, extending over 60 km, but it goes way beyond to reach international and regional institutions. Qataris and foreigners will sooner or later realize that the crisis will eventually carry on and weaken the state, if it is not resolved soon.
Source: arabnews.com/node/1163371/columns
----
What That Missile Deal Really Means For Turkey
By Yasar Yakis
18 September 2017
The Russian S-400 surface-to-air missile array has been described as the most sophisticated air defence system in the world. It can track up to 80 targets at the same time, aiming two missiles at each one. It can destroy aircraft, cruise missiles, medium range missiles, drones and other airborne surveillance systems. And now Turkey has bought it from Russia.
“My colleagues have already signed a deal on S-400s. A deposit has also been paid as far as I know,” Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said last week.
Little detail has been disclosed about the deal. According to the available information, Turkey will receive two S-400 missile batteries, probably toward the end of 2019. Two other batteries will be manufactured later in Turkey under license. The software for the “identification of friend or foe” will be provided by Turkey’s national defense industry companies and mounted in Russia before the delivery.
Ankara’s decision to purchase S-400s did not come out of the blue. When the second Gulf War broke out, Turkey asked its NATO allies to deploy Patriot missiles in the airports close to the Iraqi border to protect it against possible air attacks.
The NATO allies reluctantly agreed, but attached several conditions. To add insult to injury, the US, Germany and the Netherlands declined to renew their deployment and withdrew their missiles from Turkey while instability in the region continued.
Turkey was severely disappointed with this attitude of its NATO allies. It started to look for the establishment of its own missile-defense system and opened a tender to this effect. The bids submitted by the NATO countries turned out to be much more expensive. Turkey’s request to manufacture some of the equipment in Turkey, with some technology transfer, fell on the deaf ears of its allies.
China’s bid emerged as the most suitable, but the deal could not be concluded. The one with Russia was.
Turkey has the second largest army in NATO after the US. It is part of the NADGE (NATO Air Defence Ground Environment), which is the best integrated air defence system in the world.
NADGE is supported by another NATO system called AWACS (Airborne Warning and Command System). Even a few seconds are important for the identification and interception of a missile directed at your country. Since AWACS is airborne, it has the capability to see deeper into the enemy territory, and therefore notice earlier the launching of any enemy missile.
The S-400s are efficient in destroying enemy aircraft or land-based targets. To destroy a missile in mid-air requires utmost precision. The defence missile does not collide head-on with the enemy missile. It explodes on the trajectory of the incoming missile in the fraction of a second before they meet and prevents it from reaching its target.
Some defence analysts have claimed that the deal with Russia is an indication that Turkey expects an attack from the West. Turkey’s accession negotiations to the EU are stuck. There are strong criticisms directed at Turkey’s human rights record both in NATO and in the EU.
In the long run anything may happen, but there is no convincing evidence that Turkey may become the target of an attack from the West in the foreseeable future. Therefore, it is safer to interpret the deal as a sign of good relations between Turkey and Russia rather than as a sign of a probable military clash between Turkey and a Western country.
Since S-400s are not designed to be inter-operable with NADGE there will be duplication, which will cost Turkish taxpayers a little more than $2.5 billion, but the political meaning of the deal is probably more important than its contribution to Turkey’s defense.
NATO allies’ reaction to the deal has varied.
The Pentagon used careful language, expressing its concern and saying that “generally it’s a good idea for NATO allies to buy inter-operable equipment.” German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel went further and said Berlin would put on hold all arms exports to Turkey. There are other reasons for this decision by Germany, but the S-400s issue has provided an additional excuse.
Despite the eroding mutual trust, Turkey is likely to stay in NATO, but also enjoy good relations with Russia. This may be a convenient modus vivendi between NATO and Russia as well.
Source: arabnews.com/node/1163351/columns
-----
Will September Be Decisive For The Nuclear Agreement?
By Salman al-Dosary
18 September 2017
Two frustrating years out of ten have passed since the nuclear agreement was signed. The world is stepping into the third year of an agreement described by US President Donald Trump as the worst in ages.
It is obvious that September will be decisive for the nuclear agreement as the US administration is considering a comprehensive strategy for all noxious Iranian acts – a strategy that calls for more strictness against Iranian forces and its agents of extremist Shi’ite groups in Iraq and Syria.
Through its new strategy, Washington aims to increase pressure on Tehran to curb its ballistic missiles program and its support to extremists. It also targets cyber-spying and possibly, nuclear proliferation.
According to Reuters, the new US strategy “could be agreed and made public before the end of September.” Once agreement is reached on this comprehensive strategy, then we will face a new phase of a serious attempt to downsize Iranian expansion after it lasted eight years (during the term of Obama) and, ironically, reached its zenith after signing the nuclear agreement.
Most importantly, the strategy will be the first practical step by Trump’s administration towards a stricter supervision of the nuclear agreement without letting it be an advantageous award to Tehran’s arms and militias in the region.
The real catastrophe is that Iran has already received all it had to gain from the nuclear deal, which serves its interest and doesn’t terminate uranium enrichment. Nikki Haley, US ambassador to the United Nations, said it is likely that Iran has already accumulated enough reactors to produce a nuclear bomb.
The problem with the agreement was and still is that it does not stand against Iran’s aspirations to expand aggressively in the region. Furthermore, it does not effectively tackle Iran’s previous efforts for nuclear armament at a time when it still continued to the violate the agreement.
In No One’s Interest
The truth is, no one opposes a nuclear agreement that falls in the interest of the world. No one wishes to besiege Iran as long as it doesn’t violate international laws. It is in no one’s interest to call for abolishing the agreement, but the concerns that appeared when announcing the agreement in July 2015 seemed obvious after the deal was signed.
In short, Iran had violated the agreement in the first month and it continued to manipulate it under the pretext of “the spirit of the agreement”. But in fact it has been violating central details without being held accountable.
For example, the agreement stipulates that Iran be notified if it violates any of the articles, and in case it abides by it again later on then this wouldn’t be considered a breach. In this way, Iran continues to violate the agreement, and then it stops when being notified.
I think that this is the best agreement Iran has ever signed because it is benefiting from it in any way it wants, while the region is jeopardized by Iran’s use of its terrorist networks under the umbrella of the international agreement.
We can say that this is the first article that should be revised strictly so that Iran becomes aware of the consequences of its violations. Who would believe that the US navy can’t strongly respond when IRGC-affiliated armed ships provoke it (a thing that occurred several times in the past two years)? The desire not to give Iran an excuse to disrupt the nuclear agreement is the only thing stopping them. What better gift could be given to Iran?
In his famous interview with Atlantic magazine in 2015, Obama said that the long negotiations with the Iranians that led to the agreement would help restore respect to Iran and calm in the region. He pointed out that he has no excessive concerns over Iran’s corruption and that supporting the US allies against Tehran would trigger conflicts.
Two years of the agreement have proven that everything Obama said and believed in, and everyone who supported the agreement, was wrong. The region didn’t calm down, but the opposite. The agreement didn’t help Tehran respect its neighbours. The only thing that happened is that ignoring Tehran’s attitude led to an escalating threat to the world, not only the region.
May be it is time to call Iran to account for violating the nuclear agreement, even after two years of signing it.
Source: english.alarabiya.net/en/views/news/middle-east/2017/09/18/Will-September-be-decisive-for-the-nuclear-agreement-.html
-----
Hajj and the Cumulative Experience of Organizing It
By Hussein Shobokshi
18 September 2017
Both participants and those who followed the blessed Hajj season this year confirm that the preparations, equipment and capabilities mobilized for the pilgrimage were unprecedented at all levels, whether in terms of security forces, human resources, infrastructure and technical equipment and additional technical support.
There has been a qualitative development in the implementation of means of support in all sectors of security, traffic, medical, safety, housing and emergency services.
More than 55,000 soldiers were recruited by Saudi Arabia in all military, civil, medical and voluntary sectors to work on the success of the pilgrimage season this year. There was constant work round the clock in different areas until the pilgrimage appeared to be in an honourable way of the season.
Everyone worked after studying all the observations, complaints and suggestions made during previous Hajj seasons. The Ministry of Hajj through its new minister, who makes deft use of modern technology and modern administrative measures, improved its performance and facilitated the functions of arrival and the movement of pilgrims.
The Ministry of Interior developed the performance of the departments of passports and traffic and civil defence so that the rates of facilitation procedures were very remarkable and distinctive.
The entire security sectors in all official Saudi institutions were present strongly in the public scene this year. Their performance and their interaction with the pilgrims and the stories that are circulating about what they have done are like myths in the power of their great influence.
Practical and Concrete Ways
The Hajj system in Saudi Arabia is developing in practical and concrete ways. It opens up to the jurisprudence schools to expand the sentences so as not to restrict the Muslims to one opinion and one fatwa, resulting in bottlenecks and crises, using the latest and most important techniques to ensure ease of movement and safety of pilgrims.
There is a cumulative experience over the decades, characterized by the uniqueness of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Over time, there has been an undeniable educational curve. It must be noted and pointed out because it is the one that makes the difference in reform and development year after year.
The remarkable organization of Hajj this year and the remarkable development in the transportation of airplanes, buses, cars, railways, accommodation facilities in camps and hotels, smooth flow of traffic, legendary development in medical services, rapid interaction, handling and emergency response of all kinds was amazing to all.
Also read: Hajj 2017 is over, but a pilgrim’s journey is unending
The media discourse that opposed to Saudi Arabia hosting the Hajj has been thoroughly exposed. It failed in all its attempts in the face of this organizational achievement, which the Saudis boast more than anything else.
It is a certificate that is not equivalent to a testimony in the ability of the Saudi to meet the exceptional challenge in harsh climatic conditions and human gathering. And a great religious rite and the performance remains impressive despite all the difficulties.
Congratulations to the Saudis who organized Hajj this year in a wonderful, honorable and sophisticated way. It may be a lesson to silence the critics.
Source: english.alarabiya.net/en/views/news/middle-east/2017/09/18/Hajj-pilgrimage-and-the-cumulative-experience-of-organizing-it.html
----
How British Colonialism Ruined a Perfect Cup of Tea
By Hamid Dabashi
18 September 2017
Recently my colleague Ilan Pappe and I were in Mexico City attending a conference on Palestine. In the course of the memorable few days we spent together catching up with the latest atrocities around the globe (in between our respective talks on the habitual shenanigans of the Zionist settler colony in Palestine), perhaps the most memorable phrase I remember is when Ilan cited our mutual friend the eminent Indian Marxist Aijaz Ahmed who had once told him "our singular historical failure as a nation was after 200 years of British colonialism we failed to teach them how to cook!"
Soon after that memorable phrase I came across a typically blase BBC report headlined "The true story behind England's tea obsession", celebrating British and other European aristocracies, this time about the culinary calamity the British call "tea".
"Imagine the most English-English person you can think of," the piece begins, "Now I'm fairly certain that no matter what picture you just conjured up, that person comes complete with a stiff upper lip and a cup of tea in their hand". Clumsy grammar you might say, but the point is quite clear: the origin of tea might indeed be China, but it was Catherine of Braganza, daughter of Portugal's King John IV, who made tea popular in England. The entire article is a silly piece of British aristocratic memorabilia covering up a much nastier global history of British imperialism surrounding tea.
Let's Put It Bluntly
First of all, let's talk tea. The British do not know how to make tea. What they call "tea" is a travesty. There is no polite way of putting it. They just suck at making tea. Yes, they have built a splendid ceremony around what they call "the afternoon tea" but at the centre of the ritual is a nonsensical disaster they make with a beautiful and miraculous herb about which they do not understand the most basic facts.
"There are few hours in life more agreeable," says Henry James famously in The Portrait of a Lady "than the hour dedicated to the ceremony known as afternoon tea." Perhaps so - though the Japanese Tea Ceremony/The Way of Tea is infinitely more elegant and sublime. Be that as it may, the British mannerism around tea is most certainly not because of the wretchedly abused leaves they kill to nullity but because of the literary aura that Henry James and others have helped build around the ceremony.
To be sure, I am not the first person to point out the fact the British are a global embarrassment to the very idea of tea. "Tea is shit." This is not me. I will never say such a thing about any other people's culinary habits - no matter how atrocious. This is coming from writer Joel Golby, a proper Brit who has come out and declared what the British call tea "a national disgrace," confessing for the whole world to know that their "tea is shit." Further elaborating:
We don't examine this enough in England. We just putter along, thinking tea is good; but it's not good. It's a lukewarm mug of leaf water, presented as a cure-all for life's ills. "Nice cup of tea," people say, when you've watched a vivid car accident or been given a terminal diagnosis, or gone for a walk and it's started raining. Whether the mafia has kidnapped you and made you kill a man with a gun to win your freedom or if you've done quite badly in an exam, someone will say: "Let me get you a nice cup of tea."
But what is the problem, where did the British go wrong with their tasteless abuse of tea? Oh, Brother let me count the ways!
Tea, dear friends, is a miraculous potion and if brewed to perfection it is composed on the physiognomy of the human face - and thus made to yield its God-given properties it will entice three of our most precious five senses. Following the order of the human face, a perfectly brewed tea begins with the gift of sight in our eyes on the top of our face designed to see, coming down to the nose in the middle to smell the aroma and concluding with the lips and the mouth where our sense of taste informs the treasure house of our palate.
I have known since I was a toddler accompanying my late mother to Hajj Abduh's grocery store in Ahvaz, may they both rest in peace, that no tea on this earthly abode has these three qualities of colour, aroma and taste together and therefore a good tea is a composite tea, judiciously made of at least three different kinds of teas.
Towards A Post-Colonial Theory Of Tea
Let me be more specific: imagine a beautiful cup of tea. What is the first thing you notice about that cup of tea: Of course its splendidly ruby colour. That is the first law of tea that the British egregiously violate by drinking their tea in those silly cups that are not see-through. A proper cup of tea, as any civilised Indian, Iranian, Turk or central Asian can tell you, needs to be poured into a see-through cup. You start enjoying your tea by first looking at it, "drinking", as it were, its miraculously crimson colour.
Then as you bring the see-through cup closer to your face to drink it rises the aroma (nose) and finally the taste (mouth) of the tea.
Here comes the next calamity of the British, which is flooding their wretched tea with milk! What a total horror! Milk rudely destroys the delicately combined comportment of colour, aroma and taste of any decent tea all at the same time.
The few precious words that my generous Al Jazeera editors afford me do not allow me to talk in detail about the most precious of all moments when you actually drink the tea in the company of a small piece of sugar cube you strategically place in the corner of your mouth for what we call dishlameh or ghand-pahlo, the exact antithesis of the criminal atrocity of the British saturating their tea with merciless spoons of sugar, poisoning the wretched tea they drink.
The entire joy of drinking tea, as any Turk, Russian, Iranian, or Central Asian teahouse master will tell you is the exquisite delicacy of negotiating a peaceful, cooperative, and delightful coexistence between the bitterness of tea and the sweetness of sugar, diplomatically negotiated inside your mouth. Can you even imagine Donald Trump, Benjamin Netanyahu, or Theresa May trying to grasp that sublime sense of peaceful coexistence between tea and a sugar cube conversing in your mouth? Of course not. Ask them what is dishlameh - it's Greek to them.
The Colonial Colouring of Tea
But "what went wrong" - as the notorious Zionist Orientalist Bernard Lewis would say. How did the British end up with their miserable cup of tea?
The history of British tea does not begin with some silly aristocratic marriage but with slavery. "How did tea emerge as Britain's hot beverage of choice" an acute observer has asked recently on NPR, to which she has offered the apt observation: "Tea met sugar, forming a power couple that altered the course of history. It was a marriage shaped by fashion, health fads and global economics. And the growing taste for sweetened tea also helped fuel one of the worst blights on human history: the slave trade."
When American colonies began their revolt against the British, they called their initial uprising the "Tea Party", for disguised as Native Americans, they threw an entire shipment of tea sent to American colonies by the notorious East India Company into Boston Harbor. But this very American Revolution would itself degenerate into the genocide of those very Native Americans and an even more murderous chapter in African slavery.
The selfsame East India Company whose tea was thrown into Boston harbour used to buy tea from China for import with the money they made by their illegal trading in opium they grew in India. The British thus aggressively turned the Chinese into drug addicts by the abused labour of their colonies in India. Just imagine the depth of bastardy! What a plague, what a criminal calamity beyond words has British colonialism been to the world. When the Chinese tried to stop these illegal smuggling, Great Britain went to war with China in their so-called "Opium Wars".
Historians of tea tell us: "The rise of tea and sugar as a power duo was a boon for British government coffers. By the mid-1700s, tea imports accounted for one-tenth of overall tax income". The same goes for sugar: "According to one analysis ... in the 1760s, the annual duties on sugar imports were 'enough to pay to maintain all ships in the navy ... Those tea-and-sugar monies helped supply the British navy with better foodstuffs ... and that navy was key to spreading British might across the globe. It's this dominance of the British navy that allows Britain to become the major colonial power in the 19th century."
What was the cost of this horrid British "cup of tea"? That cost will have to be measured in human misery. "This fad for tea came in just as sugar was under attack and had started to fall out of favour. By creating a new and lasting use for this sweetener, tea helped buoy demand for sugar from the West Indies. And indeed, it continued to support the expansion of slavery there."
After all these criminal atrocities around the world - stealing, pillaging, trading in slaves, mass murdering people to rob them of their natural resources - are you surprised at what the British have ended up with? Drinking that tea is an act of redemptive suffering, a just punishment for what the British have done to the world at large. Every time they sip from that accursed cup they are paying penance for the terror they have visited upon this earth.
Source: aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/british-colonialism-ruined-perfect-cup-tea-170918113331476.html
-----
URL: https://www.newageislam.com/middle-east-press/sept-15-—-failed-plot/d/112570