user preferences

mashriq / arabia / iraq / emperyalizm / savaş / feature Thursday March 05, 2020 04:17 byDevrimci Anarşist Faaliyet
featured image

Suriye’de savaşın ve TSK desteğindeki cihatçı çetelerin sıkıştığı son nokta olan İdlip’te uzun zamandır beklenenler olmaya başladı. Şubat’ın 27’sini 28’e bağlayan gece -TC’nin Suriye Ordusu’na İdlip’te aldığı yerlerden çekilmesi konusunda verdiği “ültimatomun” dolmasına az bir süre kala- TSK’ye bağlı birlikler hava saldırısına uğradı. Bu hava saldırısı sonucu resmi rakamlara göre 34 asker öldü. Saldırı, TC kaynaklarına göre Suriye tarafından gerçekleştirildi.


mashriq / arabia / iraq / imperialism / war / press release Tuesday March 03, 2020 17:22 byDAF

The long-awaited developments began to happen In Idlib where is the last point of the war and also the last point of the djihadist gangs supported by TAF were stucked. The troops of the TAF were attacked by aerial strike on the night of 27 February to 28 -shortly before the “ultimatum” that T.C gave to the Syrian Army to withdraw from the places it took in Idlip- According to official figures, 34 soldiers died as a result of this airstrike, It was carried out by Syria according to T.C sources.

The long-awaited developments began to happen In Idlib where is the last point of the war and also the last point of the djihadist gangs supported by TAF were stucked. The troops of the TAF were attacked by aerial strike on the night of 27 February to 28 -shortly before the “ultimatum” that T.C gave to the Syrian Army to withdraw from the places it took in Idlip- According to official figures, 34 soldiers died as a result of this airstrike, It was carried out by Syria according to T.C sources.

In a statement made by the Russian Ministry of Defense, the fine message to Ankara stated that the TAF elements should not leave the observation points established in accordance with the Sochi Accord. The “striking” message in the statement made by the ministry was that “the Syrian air force is operating against the HTS (Hayʼat Taḥrīr al-Shām, Levant Liberation Committee ) targets and the TAF troops should not be in this particular region”. With these statements that Russia insistently emphasized the partnership of T.C with Al-Qaeda derivative HTS, which is accepted as the terrorist organization by the whole world.

The war is growing rapidly, the heroism speech used by the sSate has risen, and the speed of the media as it equips its war uniforms and the fact that almost all of the opposition quickly adapt to this situation. The last air strike is one of the historical turns of the war in Syria since 2011. We experienced one of these historical turns on May 13, 2013 after the bomb attack in Reyhanlı, which cost the lives of 53 people. Although it is not said who and why “TC was at war” in Syria, we felt other shocking reflections of this war in our geography very close at the massacres of Suruç, Ankara, Reina, İstanbul Yeşilköy Airport in the coming years.

State’s War Opportunism

The “usefulness” of the Syrian War, which caused such devastating outcomes for the peoples, on the other hand, in terms of regional and global states especially by T.C, is extremely obvious. T.C, instrumentalized the civil war in Syria for the increasing nationalism in domestic politics and the pression applications such as state of emergencyagainst the street opposition. Likewise, with its military and administrative presence in regions such as Afrin, Euphrates Shield and Serekaniye, it effectively filled the “Neo Ottomanist” promises towards its nationalist-conservative base.

We know that wars are the processes for the states to suppress opposition within their borders, to silence voices against power, to stop manifestations, and to accustom the society to “state of emergency” practices. The “democratic” practices of the state are put on the shelf with the war process,. Social pressure and passivation increase.

The ongoing war process will be used to further mobilize the increasing pressure mechanisms towards society. Violent words and actions against the current functioning will be punished, and state violence will become the most evident. On the one hand, the state will shape these processes as it wishes, while on the other hand it will use the war for its economic purposes.

War as a Solution to the Economic Crisis

The economic crisis is destroying the lives of the oppressed; the economic crisis is being hushed up by the war!
The minimum wage was announced in December: 2,324 TL! According to the statements of the unions, the monthly food expenditure (hunger threshold) required for a family of four to be healthy, balanced and adequate is 2 thousand 219,45 TL. Only 105 TL more than the hunger limit was deemed proper for the worker. Moreover, 43% of workers in Turkey are working for the minimum wage. In the same year, the budget spent by the T.C state for the TAF is 19 billion dollars. According to data of 2019 the wealth of 25 billionaire boss of Turkey’s is 43.1 billion $. The number of workers who committed suicide because of they could not maintain themselves and their family in the last 6 years is 351!

The worker who sets himself up fire as he cry out “I can’t survive” in front of the parliament while the bosses add their wealth, lathe worker who committed suicide because he could not buy pants for his son, young worker who burned himself in front of the mayor because he could not find a job, The industrial worker who eventually threw himself into a 1600 degree iron melting boiler because he could not bring the end of the month with the wage he received.

Some of them who works, the amount in the hand was not enough to make a living; some of them who are looking for a job and c’ant find so they become dependent to a bite of bread. While the economic crisis brought the oppressed to the point that they could take away their life, the wealthy added money to their money by turning the crisis into an opportunity and creating new wars, let alone lose anything from their wealth. New wars meant new tenders for them. It was the time of making war speeches on TVs and decorating, tearing and giving “martyred soldier” news and growing their shares from the cake with unquestionable auctions.

Details of War: Immigrants

It was reported that after the air attack on the TAF in the Idlib region of Syria, the state decided not to prevent migrants from passing to Europe by land or sea. AKP Spokesperson Ömer Çelik said “Our refugee policy is the same, but there is a situation, we are no longer in a position to hold refugees.” . Many immigrants in Izmir, Canakkale and Istanbul were directed to the beaches and Thrace. Europe was being threatened by the acceleration of the movement of migrants to the West from Turkey, for a long time in case of worsening of the situation in Idlib .

The state, which uses immigrants as a trump card at every opportunity, enthusiastically embraced his trump card after February 27. Those who cannot give their message openly to the EU and the West, seek supporters in Syria with threats over their lives. The state, which does not hesitate to use immigrants for its strategic position and serves it to the world through its media, tries to open space for itself and trying to be the “playing” state, instead of the state where “games are played”.

Strategic Position Between States

The state’s war strategy, which became public after the war, is not only focused on political and economic gains in the current region. The target is also to be one of the states which has “influence” in the inter-state political arena. The state, which aims to take a position in this arena through actions such as being a party to the wars that continue from Libya to Cyprus, from Egypt to Syria, to support one of the parties, and to be directly involved in the war, also trying to expand it’s “self-ordained” domestic politics beyond it’s borders. This self-ordainism has evolved to “conquest policies” with nationalist intentions, and support is provided in all circumstances from the nationalist conservative mindset within the borders. Legitimacy is tried to be achieved by drawing the image of the state who has influence in foreign policy and trying to achieve this status through aggressive policies.

For those who express their long-term goals (such as 2023, 2071) with epic rhetoric at every opportunity, neither the events experienced on February 27 nor the loss of lives any other time are important. While every megaloman project, which is kneaded in accordance with the statist discourses, is marketed with nationalist intentions and holiness, the account of the lives lost in the war is not questioned and melts in the ambiguity of the martyrdom of the state. Those who are regarded as “details” for the sake of the interests of the states will not be remembered the next week, month or year.

The ones with Power do not hesitate to plunder the lives of millions of people for the sake of their own interests, and, as in every war, it tries to crush those who are oppressed in this war. What we need to do as oppressed is not to be a pawn in the war of Power. What we have to do is to defend our lives that are trying to be plundered, to continue our fight against all war propaganda and to build a free world.

Revolutionary Anarchist Action

mashriq / arabia / iraq / imperialism / war / non-anarchist press Saturday February 08, 2020 22:27 byAndrew G Jones

A US strike which killed Iranian general Qassem Soleimani in Baghdad in January, and the counter-strike by the Iranian military on US targets in Iraq, raised serious questions about the legitimate use of force. When military force was used against targets within its territory, Iraq’s sovereignty was breached.

As a country caught in the middle of the long-running feud between the US and Iran, Iraq has already suffered a great deal in this latest escalation. A senior Iraqi militia commander, Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, was also killed in the US strike.

In the weeks since, thousands of protesters have taken to the streets in Iraq. While some continue to demonstrate against the government, others – many of them supporters of Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr – are demanding the withdrawal of US troops from the country.

The continued US military presence in the country, against the wishes of the Iraqi government and parliament, is a breach of international law.

Force and intervention

Public international law maintains a tight grip on the rules surrounding the use of force. Article 2(4) of the UN Charter prohibits the use of force, except in self-defence against an armed attack or collective action authorised by the UN Security Council.

Beyond this, there are very few truly accepted justifications which a country can rely on to legitimately use force within another’s territory. One exception is a doctrine called “intervention by invitation”, where one country is given express permission to take military action in another country by that country’s government.

Alongside other rules that govern this kind of interaction, there are also rules on when a state overstays its welcome and becomes in breach of its international obligations. For example, the Definition of Aggression, a text adopted by the UN which outlines what is considered aggression under international law, sets out that if the state intervening breaks the conditions, or extends its presence on the territory, this counts as an act of aggression.

This was put forward as a claim in a case between the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Uganda in 2005. The DRC claimed that Uganda’s ongoing use of force on its territory, after it had stopped giving consent, amounted to aggression.

Although in this particular case the International Court of Justice did not find Uganda’s actions were an act of aggression, the court did rule that Uganda had breached the UN Charter’s basic prohibition of force. As a result it was clearly established that a country cannot maintain a military presence within another country after it has been asked to leave.

US refusal to withdraw

The presence of US troops in Iraq dates to the invasion which overthrew Saddam Hussain’s regime in 2003. Whatever the legal status of that conflict, the presence of US forces has been legitimised since that point through the consent of the Iraqi government. In more recent years, American and Iraqi forces have maintained friendly relations, working together to fight the threat of Islamic State.

The closeness of Iraq’s relationship with the US is part of a wider balancing act. Iraq also needs to maintain its relationship with Iran, to which it has become much closer since the fall of Hussein. But since the drone attack which killed Soleimani and al-Muhandis, this balance has shifted. The country’s alliances have been put under increased strain amid growing anti-US sentiment.

In the aftermath of the US strike in January, Iraq’s parliament voted on the future presence of US troops in the country. MPs passed a non-binding resolution stating that the Iraqi government should: “Work to end the presence of any foreign troops on Iraqi soil and prohibit them from using its land, airspace or water for any reason.”

During a subsequent phone call with US secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, Iraq’s prime minister, Adel Abdul-Mahdi, requested a US withdrawal. But instead of heeding the Iraqi authorities’ decision, the US State Department declared that it would not discuss the withdrawal of US troops as their presence in Iraq was “appropriate”. It claimed that there was instead a need for “a conversation between the US and Iraqi governments not just regarding security, but about our financial, economic, and diplomatic partnership.”

Implications under international law

Despite the undeniable power and influence the US has over global events and international policy, the country remains subject to international law. By refusing to withdraw its troops as the Iraqi government requested, the US finds itself at least in breach of Article 2(4) of the UN Charter. A case could also be made that this amounts to an act of aggression.

There is a very real danger of Iraq becoming the battleground for a fight between Iran and the US to which it is not a party. In a country already scarred by decades of conflict, Iraq urgently wants to avoid such a circumstance. As such, it’s now for the US to heed the country’s request and to withdraw its troops in line with its international obligations, and for both the US and Iran to avoid further escalating an already tense situation.

It is up to the international community as a whole to ensure respect of the rule of law. But as the world’s most powerful nation, the US must demonstrate its willingness to comply with its responsibilities and uphold the ideals of international law.
mashriq / arabia / iraq / imperialism / war / non-anarchist press Monday February 03, 2020 20:22 byAlan Macleod

The three sites chosen for the news bases, Erbin, Sulimania and Halabja are all extremely close to Iran, with Halabja just eight miles from its border.

Less than a week after millions of Iraqis took to the streets demanding the U.S. military leave for good, the United States announced that is planning to build three new military bases in Iraq, according to military news service Breaking Defense. The three sites chosen – Erbin, Sulimania and Halabja – are all extremely close to Iran, with Halabja (the site of the 1988 chemical weapons attack) just eight miles from the border.

The news will come as a shock to the Iraqi parliament, who earlier this month voted overwhelmingly (with some abstentions) to expel American forces from the country. But the U.S. government has flatly refused to leave. “At this time, any delegation sent to Iraq would be dedicated to discussing how to best recommit to our strategic partnership — not to discuss troop withdrawal, but our right, appropriate force posture in the Middle East,” said State Department spokesperson Morgan Ortagus, adding, “We strongly urge Iraqi leaders to reconsider the importance of the ongoing economic and security relationship between the two countries… We believe it is in the shared interests of the United States and Iraq to continue fighting ISIS together.” Earlier this month the U.S. decided to send an extra 3,000 troops to the region.

President Trump responded by threatening sweeping mass punishments against the Iraqi people. “We’re not leaving unless they pay us back for it…If they do ask us to leave, if we don’t do it in a very friendly basis, we will charge them sanctions like they’ve never seen before ever,” he said. U.S.-led sanctions on Iraq in the 1990s are thought to have killed over one million people, including over half a million young children. Successive U.N. diplomats in charge of Iraq during the sanctions denounced them as genocide against its people. Trump said his sanctions would make the ones on Iran look tame by comparison.

“If there’s any hostility,” he said, “we are going to put sanctions on Iraq, very big sanctions.” Trump also threatened to commit genocide against the people of Iran, destroying their cultural heritage sites in a move condemned by many and compared to the Taliban’s destruction of the world-renowned Buddhas of Bamyan in Afghanistan.

Despite the president’s threats, enormous numbers of Iraqis heeded Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr’s call for a “million man march” in Baghdad last week. While Time magazine claimed there were only “hundreds” in attendance, drone footage told a very different story. Some estimates put the total at over 2.5 million. And despite Bloomberg Quick Take originally claiming that they were “anti-government demonstrations,” the huge banner on the main stage reading “GET OUT AMERICA” in uppercase English letters suggested otherwise.

Hostilities between the United States and Iran threatened to spiral out of control after the January 3 assassination of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani. Soleimani had been invited to Baghdad by Iraqi Prime Minister Adil Abdul-Mahdi for regional peace talks. Abdul-Mahdi asked Trump for permission for Soleimani to enter Iraq. Trump accepted, then used the opportunity to kill the general with a drone strike, something the Iraqi parliament declared a violation of their national sovereignty. In retaliation, the Iranians fired ballistic missiles at U.S.-occupied bases in Iraq, causing pinpoint damage, but no fatalities, as the U.S. was warned of the impending response. The Pentagon has said that dozens of troops have suffered brain injuries as a result, but the president disagrees, claiming they amount to little more than headaches.

The plan to build new bases will be seen in Iran as an attempt to tighten the noose around it more tightly. There are already over 65,000 American military personnel in neighboring countries. The U.S. continues to occupy Iraq and Afghanistan since the invasions launched in the wake of the 2001 World Trade Center attacks.

Since 2003, an estimated 2.4 million people have been killed in the U.S. war on Iraq. One of the consequences of the wars in the Middle East was the rise of the Islamic State, which itself has led to further conflict. The U.S. military also operates from a network of bases in Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and many other states in the region.

The move to establish three new U.S. military bases on Iran’s borders will not be a welcome move to those who wish to deescalate tensions, least of all by the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, who moved their Doomsday Clock to just 100 seconds to midnight, citing a possible regional nuclear catastrophe as a factor.
mashriq / arabia / iraq / imperialismo / guerra / opinião / análise Thursday January 16, 2020 20:34 byBrunoL

No dia 03 de janeiro de 2020 ainda antes da resposta iraniana ao ato terrorista autorizado pelo presidente do Império Donald Trump, o célebre articulista e ex-editor do New York Times, Thomas Friedman, produziu um artigo de opinião que correu o mundo ocidentalizado. O título em inglês é “Trump kills Iran’s most overrated warrior”. E a linha de apoio afirma. “Soleimani pushed his country to build na empire, but drove it into the ground instead”. (neste link:

16 de janeiro de 2020, Bruno Lima Rocha (Bruno Baaklini na ascendência árabe-libanesa)
Diariamente somos surpreendidos pelo exagero na prepotência e na capacidade de desinformar, fazer circular ideias equivocadas, enfim, “mentir com algum estilo”. A estas técnicas de manipulação de audiências massivas - embora circular e muitas vezes temporária – o Império e seus aliados vêm denominando de “disputa narrativa ou disputa pelo controle da narrativa”. Como em todas as guerras, a primeira vítima é a verdade, na guerra híbrida de 4ª geração o padrão é o mesmo. Vejamos um exemplo de inversão de prioridades e denominações pejorativas para fazer valer uma tese falsa, onde quem reage agride e quem agride se torna apenas “preventivo”.
No dia 03 de janeiro de 2020 ainda antes da resposta iraniana ao ato terrorista autorizado pelo presidente do Império Donald Trump, o célebre articulista e ex-editor do New York Times, Thomas Friedman, produziu um artigo de opinião que correu o mundo ocidentalizado. O título em inglês é “Trump kills Iran’s most overrated warrior”. E a linha de apoio afirma. “Soleimani pushed his country to build na empire, but drove it into the ground instead”. (neste link:
Em nosso país, o texto do autor da infame ode à mundialização capitalista, o best-seller neoliberal "O mundo é plano" (editado no Brasil em 2005), foi traduzido e publicado (postado) no jornal Folha de São Paulo e depois reproduzido em diversas publicações na internet. O Principal veículo da família Frias fez circular a ideia de Friedman - o Thomas, que propagandeia também o Milton, mesmo que de forma dissimulada - ao afirmar a "burrice" iraniana. O título em português é “General iraniano morto em ataque americano era burro e superestimado”. (neste link:
Quando Friedman se refere ao major-general Qasem Soleimani (1957-2020), refere-se ao Estado persa, considerando que o militar assassinado por ordem de Trump se reportava diretamente ao Líder Supremo, o Grande Aiatolá Ali, logo se trata do mais alto nível decisório do país. Para ele, Thomas, o Irã seria "burro" porque não seguiu aproveitando o bom momento de crescimento econômico advindo das negociações multilaterais coordenadas pela ONU. Nestas a administração Barack Hussein Obama - com John Kerry à frente do Departamento de Estado - aliviaram uma parcela importante das sanções e do bloqueio econômico. As negociações para controle da pesquisa atômica se deram em 2015 – com a participação intensa da diplomacia brasileira à época – implicando em um crescimento econômico de 12% em 2016.
A "burrice" seria não seguir o boom de sua própria economia com mediana complexidade e se "aventurar" a ampliar a atuação na política regional no Oriente Médio. Para Thomas Friedman, ser "inteligente" é ficar "bem comportado", de maneira quieta, acatando a hegemonia fática de Arábia Saudita e Israel, e não participando de conflitos onde operam seus principais aliados. Enfim, a "esperteza" seria entregar o xiismo ampliado à própria sorte, incluindo a relação com o Hezbolá na defesa da soberania nacional libanesa. “Inteligência” poderia ser ajudar a entregar a Palestina às traições da Autoridade "Nacional", o cerco à Gaza e a ocupação da maior parte da Cisjordânia, incluindo o roubo de terras e valiosos recursos hídricos. "Sagaz", para Friedman, seria portar-se como Egito após a traição de Camp David ou quiçá como os hachemitas do Reino da Jordânia, inventado pelos ingleses.
Poucas vezes li algo tão cínico, menosprezando tanto as capacidades do Estado persa como superestimando os países "ocidentais", dentre os quais Israel se inclui sem sê-lo. De maneira alguma estou "defendendo" o Irã dos aiatolás de forma incondicional. Sou crítico - muito crítico por sinal - de sua política doméstica assim como me oponho à relação com a maioria sunita na Síria. A defesa da democracia política, das liberdades religiosas, da equidade de gênero, do federalismo étnico-cultural e de uma economia com base cooperativa rumando a um modelo socialista adequado ao Oriente Médio não encontra eco no cinismo de Thomas Friedman.
Eu insisto se fosse uma crítica humanista com honestidade intelectual, deveria separar os níveis de análise. A defesa da democracia social no Irã não nos impede de entender alguns acertos de sua política externa. Queria ver um Irã de plenos direitos para homens e mulheres, sunitas e xiitas, persas, árabes, azeris, balochis e curdos. Só não quero ver um Irã destruído pelos gringos e nem com um governo fantoche da Casa Branca.
O articulista do New York Times compara o Irã com uma força imperial na região. Em patre sim, Teerã exerce projeção de poder, mas essa é a norma das relações internacionais e não a exceção. Em termos gerais, o autor do livro “De Beirute a Jerusalém” (editado em 1989, facilmente encontrado em português) critica a única das quatro potências regionais (Israel, Arábia Saudita, Turquia e Irã) que enfrenta diretamente os cruzados ocidentais e não adere de forma completa aos russo-bizantinos.
Logo, a "burrice" dita por Thomas Friedman é a vontade soberana de exercer relações exteriores por parte de um país independente com assento na Assembleia Geral da ONU. Ou o ex-editor do jornal mais prestigiado dos EUA também considera que países independentes e com vontade própria sejam "burros", devendo os povos do mundo se resignar a condições subalternas de capitalismo periférico?! Inteligente é a adesão ao imperialismo dos Estados Unidos ou quem sabe, à projeção de poder imperial de China é Rússia?! Foi "burrice" a independência da Argélia através de sua guerra de libertação? É uma "estupidez" lutar pelos direitos inalienáveis de cerca de sete milhões de palestinos vivendo sob o cerco, ocupação militar e apartheid impostos pelo Estado de Israel sendo estes últimos também financiados por Washington? Foi a “ameaçadora” presença do Irã no Líbano e na Síria que “forçou” Israel a influenciar o governo do Império e mudar sua política na região? O argumento absurdo contido no texto é esse.
Será que Thomas Friedman considera uma "burrice" do Reino do Qatar a afirmação de sua política externa independente, coordenando esforços comerciais e produtivos tanto com o Irã como com a Turquia? Seria pelo "raciocínio" do colunista um "despropósito" a existência de um conglomerado de comunicação de altíssima qualidade como a Al Jazeera?
Pela "lógica" de Friedman, a luta Federalista e Socialista do Curdistão é outra "estupidez" já que para tal a esquerda curda precisa enfrentar ao menos duas potências regionais simultaneamente. Poderia seguir em exemplos diversos desta caricatura de análise, mas creio já haver atingido o objetivo.
Thomas Friedman não quer analisar nada, é pura guerra de propaganda, disputa pelo controle da narrativa e a apresentação de "estórias" embaladas por preconceitos supostamente sofisticados de quem o lê. A grande “burrice” de Thomas Friedman é superestimar suas próprias versões, as quais se forem verdadeiras, são simplesmente “vazamentos” combinados de relatórios de inteligência. Melhore seu desempenho senhor colunista do Império, porque essa desinformação forçosa não emplacou.
A primeira versão deste artigo foi originalmente publicada no Monitor do Oriente (
Bruno Lima Rocha (Bruno Baaklini na ascendência árabe-libanesa) é pós-doutorando em economia política, doutor e mestre em ciência política; professor nos cursos de relações internacionais, jornalismo e direito. (para E-mail e Facebook) / (textos, áudios e vídeos atuais) / (para todo o acervo contemporâneo) / (acervo do portal de 2005 ao final de 2018) / (grupo de envio de conteúdo pelo Telegram).

This page has not been translated into 한국어 yet.

This page can be viewed in
English Italiano Català Ελληνικά Deutsch

Neste 8 de Março, levantamos mais uma vez a nossa voz e os nossos punhos pela vida das mulheres!

Neste 8 de Março, levantamos mais uma vez a nossa voz e os nossos punhos pela vida das mulheres!

Mashriq / Arabia / Iraq

Tue 07 Apr, 07:15

browse text browse image

460_0___30_0_0_0_0_0_whatsappimage20200229at16.jpg imageSuriye’deki Savaş Büyüyor Mar 05 04:17 by Devrimci Anarşist Faaliyet 0 comments

whatsappimage20200229at16.33.jpeg imageDAF's statement on Syria War and Refugee Crisis of the State Mar 03 17:22 by DAF 0 comments

textUS refusal to withdraw troops from Iraq is a breach of international law Feb 08 22:27 by Andrew G Jones 0 comments

textUS Announces Three New Bases in Iraq After Iraqis Demand Full Withdrawal Feb 03 20:22 by Alan Macleod 0 comments

friedman_nytimeas_soleimani.jpg imageThomas Friedman e a desinformação da “burrice” Jan 16 20:34 by BrunoL 0 comments

anarlogo.png imageΓια τη δολοφονία ... Jan 16 18:06 by Anarchist Era Collective 0 comments

iran_usa_duel___hassan_bleibel_1.jpeg imageLa competencia entre Irán y Estados Unidos por Irak Jan 10 03:50 by Zaher Baher 0 comments

killingqassemsoleimaniescalatesusirantensions.jpg imageO atentado contra o general Soleimani e as mudanças no cenário do Oriente Médio Jan 08 08:36 by BrunoL 0 comments

iran_usa_duel___hassan_bleibel.jpeg imageThe competition between Iran and United States over Iraq Jan 06 20:49 by Zaher Baher 0 comments

460_0___30_0_0_0_0_0_iran_usa_duel___hassan_bleibel.jpg imageΟ ανταγωνισμός Ι`... Jan 03 20:48 by Zaher Baher 0 comments

Painting by Janet Biehl imageRojava after Rojava Dec 27 23:46 by Fouâd Oveisy 0 comments

textEverything you were told about the Syrian war was wrong – until now Nov 09 18:08 by Robert Fisk 0 comments

boycottturkey1024x551.png imageOur solidarity outside of Turkey and Syria is continual boycott of the Turkish Products an... Oct 22 19:16 by KAF 0 comments

defend_rojava.jpg imageRecortes e apontamentos sobre a invasão otomana-salafista iniciada em outubro 2019 contra ... Oct 20 12:03 by BrunoL 0 comments

textSolidarité avec le peuple au Rojava, dénonçons l’État turc et les alliés des Etats-Unis Oct 15 01:12 by Forum Anarchiste Kurdophone 0 comments

textTrump is right to take troops out of Syria. Now they must leave Iraq and Afghanistan. Oct 14 21:23 by Simon Jenkins 0 comments

baghdadprotestiraq.jpg imageSolidarity with the mass protests in Iraq Oct 12 14:49 by 
Kurdish-speaking Anarchists Forum (KAF) 0 comments

_.jpeg imageSolidarity with the popular movement of Iraq Oct 12 14:46 by Kurdish-speaking Anarchist Forum (KAF)


human_shields_assembled_at_the_serekaniye_border_before_the_invasion._photo__anf_english.jpg imageSolidarity With People In Rojava, Denouncing Turkish State And United States Allies Oct 11 02:00 by KAF 0 comments

71299580_1091631047697904_8826639731560284160_n.png imageMediterranean meeting Sep 18 18:04 by KAF 0 comments

textBenjamin Netanyahu’s Other Charges: Crimes Against Humanity in Gaza Mar 07 03:59 by Chiara Cruciati 0 comments

17883951_10154982962526900_1731651346826620226_n.jpg imageCurdi Sotto Tiro Jan 18 02:57 by Gianni Sartori 0 comments

kurds1_3003011b.jpg imageRequiem for Rojava Dec 21 07:41 by Khaled Aboud 0 comments

kurdssaudi.jpg imageThe Saudi-Kurdish love affair Dec 07 14:03 by Khaled Aboud 0 comments

textPicking up the pieces: How Syrian society has changed Sep 26 13:53 by Synaps Network 0 comments

172090_600.jpg imageThe naked emperor and the new Syria Sep 18 23:12 by Khaled Aboud 1 comments

basra1.jpg imageLes manifestations dans la ville de Bassorah, au sud de l'Irak, continuent Sep 14 05:30 by Zaher Baher 0 comments

21707514_0.jpg imageThe battle of Idlib Province in Syria is decisive and crucial for the future of Rojava Sep 08 07:15 by Zaher Baher 0 comments

unity.jpg imageΘέση πάνω στο παλ ... Aug 23 23:06 by Unity-Ahdut-Al-Wihdeh 0 comments

afrinocupacionturcalatinta.jpg imageLas cifras escalofriantes de la ocupación turca de Afrin Aug 10 17:01 by Leandro Albani 0 comments

more >>
© 2005-2020 Unless otherwise stated by the author, all content is free for non-commercial reuse, reprint, and rebroadcast, on the net and elsewhere. Opinions are those of the contributors and are not necessarily endorsed by [ Disclaimer | Privacy ]