A prominent Palestinian religious leader slammed the Gulf States for normalizing relations with Israel by claiming that the Abraham Accords are based on the “false Zionist narrative” that the Jewish Temples once stood on the Temple Mount.
TEMPLE MOUNT SERMON SLAMMING “ZIONIST NARRATIVE
In a sermon on Friday, Sheikh Ekrima Sa’id Sabri, the former Grand Mufti of Jerusalem appointed by Yasser Arafat and the current head of the Temple Mount Islamic council, warned that Israel has been successful in marketing the “Zionist narrative” that the Al Aqsa Mosque is situated on land that was once part of the Jewish Temple.
Sabri warned that Israel had succeeded in persuading some Arab leaders to accept the “Zionist narrative” of Jewish Temples once standing on the Temple Mount. Sabri claimed that it was this false narrative that led to the normalization of relations between the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain with Israel. On the other hand, he condemned the incompetence of Muslims in marketing the Islamic narrative by clerics and the media.
The Sheikh warned that the “occupation” and the settlers are working to take over specific places in the al-Aqsa. In this statement, Sabri is incorrectly using the term “Al Aqsa’ to refer to the entire Temple Mount rather than just the silver-domed mosque at the southern end of the Temple Mount complex.
Sabri claimed that Israel did not respect the sanctity of Al-Aqsa, He claimed that Israel is working to sever the ties between Muslims and the site by creating “delusions” among “settlers” (Jews who live in Judea and Samaria). According to Sabri, this illusion was built around a false narrative that “Palestine” was the land that Jews had a right to, and that the Temple will be built on the ruins of the Al-Aqsa Mosque.
According to Sabri, Israel’s “greed” does not stop and is also reflected in daily “infiltrations” to Al-Aqsa in an attempt to impose a new reality. Again, since Jews are not permitted to enter the Al-Aqsa Mosque, it is clear that Sabri is using the term ‘Al-Aqsa’ to refer to the entire Temple Mount.
FALSE ISLAMIC NARRATIVE
Dr. Mordechai Kedar, a senior lecturer in the Department of Arabic at Bar-Ilan University, unpacked Sabri’s comments, noting the tenuous connection between Islam and the Temple Mount.
“There is no mention of Jerusalem or the Temples in the Koran,” Dr. Kedar said, “The Koran does relate that Allah told the Jews to go into the land and they refused. This is, of course, the Biblical story of the spies after the Exodus from Egypt.” Though the Jewish Temple are not explicitly mentioned in the Koran, they are undoubtedly the basis for the Muslim presence at the site.
“However, Jerusalem is referred to in the hadith as Bayit al-Maqdis, which is the Arabic translation of the Hebrew, ‘Beit Hamikdash’ (house of the holy, i.e. the Temple), Dr. Kedar said. “No doubt this is what the Jews called the Temple Mount and the Arabs took this and translated it.”
Islam and Judaism
Dr. Kedar emphasized that the current conflict leading to a Muslim ban on Jewish worship at the Temple Mount was not always the case.
“In the seventh century, Jews viewed the beginnings of Islam as a sign the geula (redemption) was coming,” Dr. Kedar said. “For hundreds of years, the Byzantine Christians barred the Jews from entering Jerusalem. In the seventh century, the new Muslim religion allowed Jews to come to Jerusalem. Jews viewed Islam in a positive light as it resembled Judaism, having taken many elements including Biblical stories from Judaism.
“This positive Jewish attitude was reciprocated by the Muslims as the Jews were not trying to establish a Jewish state on Muslim land. Jews were everywhere in Arab and Muslim countries and the Arabs viewed them as the elite. There is a hadith that relates how Jews were permitted to bring incense to the area of the Holy of Holies on the Temple Mount in the eighth century.”
During the Ottoman Empire, there were periods when Jews not only prayed on the Temple Mount, but the Jews were permitted to burn incense to be burned on the rock inside the Dome of the Rock where the Holy of Holies once stood,” Dr. Kedar said. “This was because it was based on Islamic sources. This should have been the status quo.”
Dr. Kedar explained that the Abraham Accords did not refer to Jerusalem at all, and this is hugely problematic for the Palestinian leadership.
“The Jerusalem issue is much less important to the Gulf States, which is a matter of enormous concern for Sheikh Sabri,” Dr. Kedar explained. “Jerusalem and the Temple Mount are at the epicenter of the Palestinian story. Without Jerusalem and Al Aqsa, the Palestinian issue has almost no meaning. It is like whiskers without a cat. This is why they keep repeating the allegation that the Jews have no connection to the Temple Mount or Jerusalem even though this flies in the face of all recorded history.”
“In Islam, religion is used to give legitimacy to political issues. The Saudis do this, as does Iran and Turkey. Religion and politics in Islam are inseparable. Islam without political power is nothing.”
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan on Thursday implied that Jerusalem belongs to Turkey, referring to the Ottoman Empire’s control over the city for much of the modern era.
“In this city that we had to leave in tears during the First World War, it is still possible to come across traces of the Ottoman resistance. So Jerusalem is our city, a city from us,” he told Turkish lawmakers during a major policy speech in Ankara. “Our first qibla [direction of prayer in Islam] al-Aqsa and the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem are the symbolic mosques of our faith. In addition, this city is home to the holy places of Christianity and Judaism.”
The Ottoman Empire ruled over Jerusalem from 1516 to 1917. Modern Turkey, its successor state, has long stressed its enduring connection to the holy city, regularly condemning Israel’s alleged efforts to “judaize” it and the US administration’s December 2017 recognition of it as Israel’s capital.
Jerusalem has been the capital of Israel since the country’s founding, and the Jewish people have thousands of years of history in the city, backed up by extensive archaeological finds.
During a lengthy speech at the opening of the Turkish parliament’s new legislative session, Erdoğan spent several minutes lamenting the fate of Jerusalem and the Palestinians’ plight.
“Another crisis that our country and our nation carefully follow is the oppression of Israel against the Palestinians and the indifferent practices that disregard the privacy of Jerusalem,” he said toward the end of his address.
“The issue of Jerusalem is not an ordinary geopolitical problem for us. First of all, the current physical appearance of the Old City, which is the heart of Jerusalem, was built by Suleiman the Magnificent, with its walls, bazaar, and many buildings. Our ancestors showed their respect for centuries by keeping this city in high esteem.”
The Palestinian people have been living in Jerusalem “for thousands of years,” but they were occupied and had their rights violated, the Turkish leader went on.
He went on to vow to “pay close attention” to the Palestinian issue.
“We consider it an honor on behalf of our country and nation to express the rights of the oppressed Palestinian people on every platform, with whom we have lived for centuries,” he said. “With this understanding, we will follow both the Palestinian cause, which is the bleeding wound of the global conscience, and the Jerusalem case to the end.”
The Israeli Foreign Ministry declined to comment on Erdoğan’s speech.
Today is Monday, September 28, 2020. It is Day 264 of the grace period declared by one of the kings of the Medes and Persians, the supreme leader. of Iran.
If the north push of the Persian Ram takes the IRGC forces into eastern Turkish territory, how much resistance might it find there?
One clue we have in Daniel 8:7 that the IRGC may very well be occupying Turkish territory is the use of the word “enraged.” That word means to be personally embittered. The same word was used to describe Esau’s feelings toward Jacob after being cheated of his birthright. A Sunni Muslim leader would be enraged that a Shia Muslim military was invading his territory.
In an earlier post it was shown that the Turkish military, though formidable, might be tied down in part facing the Russian military in a regional conflict at the time the Second Signpost begins.
Albania versus Serbia is one potential conflict, in which Turkey could become tied down, facing Russian troops.
Libya is another.
Now we may have a third regional conflict that might tie down the Turkish military against Russia. Conflict between Christian Armenia and Muslim Azerbaijan has exploded in recent days.
Turkey supports Azerbaijan, while Armenia has a military agreement with Russia.
The fight involves Nagorno-Karabakh, a region of Azerbaijan peopled mostly with Armenians. Nagorno has been attempting to break away from Azerbaijan, and Armenia has been helping them. Of course, Azerbaijan wants their territory back.
When he dedicated the Temple he built on Mount Moriah, King Solomon prayed that God’s house would be a center of prayer for all the peoples of the world. Now, in the wake of the recent Abraham Accords – the normalization agreement entered into by Israel, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain – the possibility exists that Solomon’s aspiration could be recreated.
In the wake of the recent Abraham Accords, the possibility exists that for the first time we could soon be seeing Muslims and Jews side by side on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem prayer together.
As we have always told you, everything in bible prophecy relates to Israel in general and to Jerusalem and the Temple Mount in particular. Jerusalem in the crown jewel because it is the place where God has placed His Name, so naturally, it is also the place that Satan wants to take for his own. Luke 21 shows us the time when he will indeed get his hands on it for a little while, and the Abraham Accords is what’s going to make all that possible.
“But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you. For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night. For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape.” 1 Thessalonians 5:1-3 (KJB)
The reason why Israel and the Palestinians have never made peace is because they both claim Jerusalem as their capital, and neither side is giving up on that. President Trump advanced Israel many steps forward when the United States officially recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel in 2017. But even that did not fully seal the deal, so another way had to be devised. The Abraham Accords, to use football parlance, is the perfect ‘end run around the middle’ to make a peace treaty between the Jews and multiple other Muslim nations, sidestepping the Palestinians and forcing them to the table. Touchdown! And even though bible prophecy has warned about this for 2,000 years, it seems to have caught everyone unawares. You will never get past or even catch up with that dusty, old, archaic King James Bible. Winner and still champion.
“For thus saith the LORD; We have heard a voice of trembling, of fear, and not of peace. Ask ye now, and see whether a man doth travail with child? wherefore do I see every man with his hands on his loins, as a woman in travail, and all faces are turned into paleness? Alas! for that day is great, so that none is like it: it is even the time of Jacob’s trouble; but he shall be saved out of it.” Jeremiah 30:5-7 (KJB)
But while the Jewish writer of the Jerusalem Post articled cited below is rejoicing over the prospect, bible believers know that what’s coming is the false peace and safety that will lure the Jews into the end times honeypot of the time of Jacob’s trouble. In fact, the Jews are in the trap already. The Abraham Accords is not the Daniel 9:27 covenant, but guess what? It leads you straight there. The time of Jacob’s trouble is very, very soon, so that means that the Pretribulation Rapture of the Church is even sooner. Prepare to fly, Flight #777 ready for takeoff.
“When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:) Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:” Matthew 24:15,16 (KJB)
All eyes might be on the Temple Mount after the UAE-Israel Abraham Accords deal
FROM THE JERUSALEM POST: When he dedicated the Temple he built on Mount Moriah, King Solomon prayed that God’s house would be a center of prayer for all the peoples of the world. Now, in the wake of the recent Abraham Accords – the normalization agreement entered into by Israel, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain – the possibility exists that Solomon’s aspiration could be recreated.
Part of the avowed rationale for the accords was to create enhanced access for all Muslims to worship at al-Aqsa Mosque. This was lofty, with humanitarian intent, and a realpolitik gesture designed to discredit both the reflex accusation that Jews were somehow attacking al-Aqsa and were “Judaizing Jerusalem.”
HOW MIGHT THIS SOLOMONIC VISION OCCUR? QUITE SIMPLY BY HAVING VARIOUS EMIRS AND IMAMS FROM THE GULF COUNTRIES COME TO THE TEMPLE MOUNT TO PRAY. WELL, A BIT MORE THAN THAT.
It would be one thing, not terribly noteworthy, for these leaders to make a ceremonial appearance at al-Aqsa. That, of course, would be a validation and proof of the benefits accruing to Muslims for entering into the accords.
HOWEVER, IMAGINE NOW IF THOSE SAME LEADERS WERE TO STAND ON THE OPEN SPACES OF THE TEMPLE MOUNT, ALONGSIDE JEWISH LEADERS, RELIGIOUS AND POLITICAL, TO PRAY TOGETHER.
Putting aside the exact choreography and logistics, the thought and the image are nothing short of breathtaking. Talk about beating swords into plowshares! The reality of Muslims praying alongside Jews sends an unmistakable message of reconciliation and harmony that should thrill every person who is interested in peace. A logical question would likely be why this would happen in the first place. To answer that, we must first and foremost remember that this is the Middle East, where few things are straightforward or as they seem.
In that regard, we have to see the same combination of lofty intent and hard bitten political considerations operating here, as they do in the statements mentioned above about Muslims being free to worship at al-Aqsa. Politically, each side gets to use the other for its purposes, and each side knows and approves that the other is doing so. As such, there are parallel motivations, but they both involve sticking a finger in the eye of the Wakf Islamic religious trust, and by extension the Jordanian rulers, the Hashemites. The more historically interesting story concerns the Emirati motivations. Here we are dealing with “inside the Beltway” Muslim political/theological infighting that has been going on for more than 1,300 years.
THE ISSUE is the relative primacy of Mecca and Jerusalem for Muslims. It is well known that Jerusalem is never mentioned in the Koran, and its significance is based on various Hadiths, commentaries, that retrospectively grant Jerusalem significance.
The historic motivation for granting Jerusalem significance came from the Umayyad Caliphate, based in Damascus, which was involved in a primacy struggle with the leadership in Mecca. Elevating Jerusalem became a way to elevate the Umayyads in their quest to be seen as the rightful inheritors of Muhammad’s mantle. This elevation involved not only building both the Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock shrine, but in accordance with the Aqsa interpretative significance as the “furthest mosque,” one on par with the mosque in Mecca.
So there has been rivalry and some bad blood all these millennia about this, and now in a deliciously ironic twist, the Emiratis – on behalf of their cousins, the Saudis – get to strike a blow against their longtime rivals, the Hashemites of Jordan.
Simply stated, by standing on the Temple Mount and praying alongside Jews, these Muslims are sending the unmistakable message to the Muslim cognoscenti of “Look. Would we EVER allow Jews to pray in the Kaaba? Or even to show up there? Of course not. Why? Because the Kaaba is of supreme holiness.” Supreme also means greater – as in greater than Jerusalem, greater than the province of the Hashemites.
SO INTERFAITH PRAYER NOT ONLY SENDS A GREAT MESSAGE OF TOLERANCE TO THE WORLD, BUT ALSO CLEARLY ORDERS INTRA-MUSLIM THEOLOGICAL PRIORITIES.
For the Jews, prayer with the Muslims by definition means that Jews themselves are actually praying on the Temple Mount. This strikes an enormous blow against the Wakf-demanded and imposed status quo of no Jewish prayer on the Temple Mount.
DOES ANYONE think for a second our prime minister, a vocal defender of the status quo, would decline to worship alongside Emirati leaders on the Temple Mount? Of course not. And would the Wakf or the Jordanians dare take him to task?
For reasons of their own concern, Emirati leaders would help normalize the Jewish presence on the mount, and not only tolerate, but also participate in Jewish prayer. And with such a hecsher (the kosher stamp), the status of Jewish prayer on the mount might just be permanently altered. The response to all of this might be that I have just spun a fanciful scenario replete with wishful thinking. Perhaps, but couldn’t the same be said two years ago about the Abraham Accords themselves?
We are living in a time of tectonic shifts, both good and bad. The shift that I envision and hope for would be profoundly positive. King Solomon would be tickled pink to look down and see it all play out.
Over recent weeks, fears of a World War 3 outbreak have been raised following the ongoing territorial disputes between Turkey and Greece. Ankara deployed the Oruç Reis vessel to the Mediterranean Sea to search for oil and gas.
After being escorted by gunboats, Greece called for Turkey to stop the “illegal activities”.
Although Nikos Dendias, the Greek foreign minister, insisted Greece wanted to work with Mr Erdogan, he argued only when the threat to the territorial integrity of the island nations was lifted.
In his latest column in the Independent, former British politician Denis MacShane said Turkey is Europe’s “biggest threat” by threatening almost everything Europes says.
He wrote: “By far the biggest threat to Europe – in terms of a foreign power that is threatening EU territory and almost everything Europe says it seeks to protect as its values – comes from Turkey.”
Mr MacShane went on to say he believes the main problem for Greece is Germany’s refusal to take a clear line.
He said: “The main problem for Greece is the refusal of Germany to take a clear line.
“German and EU hand-wringing on Turkey was confirmed in an interview with the main Greek paper Kathimerini when the director of the German Council on Foreign Relations, Daniela Schwarzer, also a special adviser to the EU foreign policy supremo, Josep Borrell, said proposals to put pressure or sanctions on Erdogan were ‘complex in a number of ways: whether they should be imposed, to what extent, under what terms – and under what terms they should be lifted’.
“She added; ‘We have not yet reached the point of broad and deep sanctions’.
“In many EU capitals, the Greece-Turkey dispute is complicated, arcane and lost in every sense in many mists of history.”
Tensions intensified last month after Greece announced plans to expand its maritime borders in the Aegean Sea, sparking fears it could lead to war.
Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Athens is allowed to double its western territorial waters with Italy to 12 nautical miles.
It is believed, Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis is wanting to extend its borders on the eastern side with Turkey.
Turkey’s foreign affairs minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu lashed out at Mr Mitsotakis’ plans claiming it will be the cause of war.
The dispute between Turkey and Greece has reached as far as France with Mr Erdogan lashing out at the French President Emmanuel Macron.
The Turkish leader claimed Mr Macron was pushing Greece into taking “wrong steps” in the region.
In response to this, Mr Macron urged for peaceful dialogue between the neighbouring countries and NATO allies.
Mr Macron wrote: “The situation in the eastern Mediterranean is worrying.
“Turkey’s unilateral decisions on oil exploration are causing tensions.
“These must end in order to allow a peaceful dialogue between neighbouring countries and allies within NATO.
“I have decided to temporarily strengthen the French military presence in the Eastern Mediterranean in the coming days, in cooperation with European partners including Greece.”
At the end of August, EU member states agreed to issue sanctions against Ankara if they refuse to deescalate tensions on the region.
EU top diplomat Mr Borrell said: “We (the EU member states) are clear and determined in defending the European Union’s interests and solidarity with Greece and Cyprus.
“Turkey has to refrain from unilateral actions.
“This is a basic element to allow the dialogue to advance.”
He went on to say “the most pressing and urgent thing is to solve the question of the drillings and the presence of Turkish boats in Greek and Cypriot waters”.
In an interview with told Qatar’s Al-Araby TV last Tuesday, Fatah (PLO) Central Committee Member Azzam al-Ahmad warned Arab nations against the Abraham Accords, claiming that Israel aspires to dominate the entire region. The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) translated and reported on the interview:
Euphrates to the Nile
“We hope that the people [of the UAE and Bahrain] will restrain [their leaders] and make them reconsider what they have signed. Do not destroy yourselves and the future of the entire Arab nation,” al Ahmad said. “We are defending Mecca, Baghdad, Cairo, Amman, and Damascus. This is our destiny as Palestinians. We are the Murabitun in Jerusalem who defend it from the Zionist territorial designs from the Euphrates to the Nile. We will continue to serve as the spearhead in the confrontation against the American administration and the Zionist movement.”
Defenders of the faith
Literally meaning “defenders of the faith”, Murabitun is a term used to describe several historical and currently active trans-Arab Jihadist groups.
“We will continue to serve as the spearhead and will continue to persevere and fight,” al-Ahmad concluded. “We have been fighting for over 100 years in defense of the Arab nation and the Islamic and Christian holy sites.”
Biblical description
Al Ahmad’s reference to the Euphrates and Nile is based on the Biblical description of the land promised to Abraham’s descendants.
On that day Hashem made a covenant with Avram, saying, “To your offspring I assign this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the river Euphrates: Genesis 15:18
The precise boundaries of the promised land is a complicated subject that changed drastically throughout the 5,000-year history of the Jews in the land. The description in Genesis is, in fact, the first of three Biblical descriptions of the borders of the land God promised to the Jews.
A detailed description is outlined in Numbers chapter 34 for the purposes of establishing regions ascribed to each tribe. These borders are repeated in Ezekial chapter 37.
The final description of the borders is the territory that will be acquired in stages.
I will not drive them out before you in a single year, lest the land become desolate and the wild beasts multiply to your hurt. I will drive them out before you little by little, until you have increased and possess the land. I will set your borders from the Sea of Reeds to the Sea of Philistia, and from the wilderness to the Euphrates; for I will deliver the inhabitants of the land into your hands, and you will drive them out before you. Exodus 23:29-31
The precise borders of Israel as described in the Bible is a complicated study and the actual borders have changed drastically over the 5,000-year history of the Jewish People in the land. In his interview, al-Ahmad repeated a trope frequently used by anti-Zionists to portray Zionism as having a regionally imperialist agenda. This concept of Israeli expansionism was even cited by Osama Bin Laden as one of the reasons for his terrorist war on the US, which he perceived as supporting this agenda.
Biblical context
In the Biblical context, the description of the borders of Israel as described in Genesis is referred to as Eretz Yisrael HaShlema (ארץ ישראל השלימה; the complete land of Israel) though it is usually translated inaccurately as ‘the Greater Israel” vision, implying an extremist political agenda.
Boundaries of Israel
Rabbi Yisrael Ariel has written several books and atlases widely recognized as authoritative on the subject of the Biblical and historical boundaries of Israel. He has also been criticized for views which his detractors claimed are dangerously extremist on the same subject.
“Israel is working to sign an accord with Kuwait,” Rabbi Yisrael stated, noting that the Torah warns against making deals with the inhabitants of the land.
You shall make no covenant with them and their gods. Exodus 23:32
Kuwait
“Kuwait is, in fact, included in the borders of the land promised to Abraham, which includes all the territory from the Euphrates to the Persian Gulf. There are regions that are unclear or debatable, but other areas are clearly part of this.”
Tel Aviv vs Iraq
“We are commanded by the Torah to settle in every area that God told us to dwell in,” Rabbi Ariel said. “It is certainly forbidden for us to relinquish land which is not ours to give away. In this regard, there is no difference between Tel Aviv, or Jerusalem, or any other land within these borders.”
Jewish sovereignty
Rabbi Hillel Weiss, the former spokesman for the Sanhedrin and the head of the Organization of the 70 Nations, acknowledges that Rabbi Ariel’s interpretation of the Biblically mandated borders of Israel was undoubtedly accurate while noting the implications were even more complicated. Rabbi Weiss prefaced his statements by emphasizing that it is forbidden to divide the land of Israel or to relinquish territories already under Jewish sovereignty.
Joshua ben Nun
“It is permitted, under certain circumstances and in specific manners, to make agreements with the inhabitants of these territories,” Rabbi Weiss said, citing the path endorsed by Rabbi Meir Kahane, the founder of the Kach political party. “Rabbi Kahane, who was considered far-right in matters of Israeli nationalism, based his policies on Biblical precedent. Before waging his campaign to conquer Israel, Joshua ben Nun sent letters to the inhabitants of the land, offering them three options: to come to amenable terms with the Children of Israel, to emigrate, or to engage in battle.” Rabbi Weiss emphasized that coming to terms required accepting the Noahide laws which included rejecting idolatry and murder.
“We are not required to be zealots and there are solutions,” Rabbi Weiss said. “In any case, before engaging in war there must be an attempt at peace making. This is certainly true in the case of the modern state of Israel and its current neighbors so long as it is not based on dividing the land currently under Israeli sovereignty.”
Evil political agendas
“Unfortunately, in the current political environment, the political mechanisms are not structured to encourage true peace between nations. The United Nations and European Union are focused on encouraging unjust and evil political agendas and it is not true of a politically correct vision of peace, which is no peace at all..”
The recent normalization deals between Israel, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain have fundamentally shifted the region’s alliances. Both Gulf countries maintain close ties with Saudi Arabia, and speculation abounds as to whether or not the Saudis will be the next country to formalize ties with the Jewish state. While Israel may be on the verge of cementing a close alliance with major Sunni Arab states in the face of a common enemy with Iran, at the same time, concern is also growing about a possible nuclear race in the region with China’s help.
A recent report in The Guardian indicates that Chinese geologists say Saudi Arabia may have enough uranium ore reserves for the domestic production of nuclear fuel. At the same time, a Wall Street Journal report said that Western officials have grown concerned about nuclear cooperation between China and Saudi Arabia in the construction of a facility for extracting uranium yellowcake from uranium ore. This facility is being built with the assistance of two Chinese companies. Similarly, The New York Times reported that Western intelligence agencies are “scrutinizing” the Saudi’s work with China to develop nuclear expertise as a cover towards the development of a nuclear weapon.
Dore Gold, president of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, told JNS that the Saudi-Chinese relationship has existed for many years already. In the 1980s, Saudi Arabia reached out to China because it wanted to obtain Chinese missile technology.
“They acquired from China some of the longest-range ballistic missiles in the Middle East,” he said. “So we have been there.” But Saudi nuclear capability, even if for peaceful purposes, could still place the Saudis at the threshold of nuclear military capability, which has Israel greatly concerned.
Gold said “one of the challenges for diplomacy is to try and make some of the moderation in Saudi behavior more permanent, and I don’t think we’ve done that. As much as Saudi interests have changed, it is a reversible change. We have to make sure that it has a higher degree of permanence.” While Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) has demonstrated an interest in moderation by creating distance from the extremist Wahhabi ideology of many of Saudi Arabia’s top clerics, it remains unclear whether or not his influence will hold.
According to Gold, Israel and Saudi Arabia “need to take the mutual threat we both face and create a basis for a quasi-alliance, but I’m not sure we are there yet. Relationships with countries you don’t have diplomatic relations with are usually held very tightly in the hands of whoever is the leader. The question is how you make it permanent.” That question could be answered soon if reports are true that Saudi Arabia will eventually sign a normalization agreement with Israel. Making such diplomatic relations permanent “could be an agenda item for the U.S. and Israel to work on after the American elections,” said Gold.
‘Chinese companies less hostile’ towards developing nukes
So why did the Saudis turn to China, of all countries, for assistance with its nuclear program, especially since China has helped Pakistan and Iran in the past? According to Saeed Ghasseminejad, a senior Iran and financial economics adviser at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, the Saudis probably have two reasons to go to Chinese companies.
“First,” he told JNS, “if they decide to move towards military nuclear capabilities, China and Chinese companies will be more accommodating or at least less hostile towards such a move.”
“Second, the Kingdom is trying to diversify, if not realign, its strategic foreign partnerships,” said Ghasseminejad. “Working with China on this strategic project is another sign that China and Saudi Arabia are strengthening their bond.” Bin Salman has said that he would not pursue the nuclear option unless Iran achieved the bomb, which it still has not; however, he has started working on nuclear capability nonetheless. Why?
“In 2015, [former President Barack] Obama signed a deal with Tehran that gave Tehran a patient pathway to a nuclear bomb and gave it an industrial large-scale nuclear capacity, which could quickly turn into a military program,” recounted Ghasseminejad. “The Democratic Party still insists that the [the deal] is the golden standard of nuclear non-proliferation agreements, and they want to go back to it. Saudi Arabia, as a longtime U.S. ally that does not chant ‘Death to Israel,’ obviously wants at least what Iran got.” “Also,” he added, “for decades, Riyadh and Washington had a deal where Saudis bought U.S. goods and weapons, and helped Washington in managing the oil market, and Washington defended Saudi Arabia.”
However, Ghasseminejad said that recent U.S. actions by both the Obama and U.S. President Donald Trump have made the Saudis more cautious of solely relying on the United States. “Obama actively tried to undermine the Saudis in favor of Tehran, and Trump did nothing when the clerical regime targeted the heart of Saudi’s oil industry,” he said.
He went on to explain that if an administration run by 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden “will offer Tehran the same patient pathway to a nuclear bomb, and neither Republicans nor Democrats guarantee Riyadh’s security, then the kingdom probably perceives that having nuclear capability is an option, if not the best option, to deter the Islamist regime in Tehran from further and more severe aggression in future.”
Saudi Arabia is having a ‘Shah-moment’
Israel is naturally concerned after it warned the Obama administration that the nuclear deal with Iran would start a Middle East arms race, that now its worries are coming to fruition. Now, Saudi Arabia believes that it needs nuclearization to counter Iran. Who is to say tomorrow it won’t be pointed at Israel?
“Israel is right to be concerned,” said Ghasseminejad. “The Middle East today is full of unstable governments, radicalized societies, apocalyptic militants and messianic politicians.”
Ghasseminejad noted that while the Saudis may currently be a friend of Israel, “MBS is having his Shah-moment.”
As Ghasseminejad described, in the 1960s, the Shah decided that “modernizing the country required weakening the monarchy’s traditional allies and broadening the middle class as the support base for a modern monarch. It was an absolutely successful plan that modernized the country at a fast rate but led to a political disaster. Two decades later, the clergy turned on him and the middle class left him alone and joined the revolution.”
“MBS is following the same plan,” observed Ghasseminejad. “He may succeed in avoiding the Shah’s fate, but it is also possible that he won’t. As a result, it is essential to make sure the conservative kingdoms of the region will not be replaced with a radical Islamist regime, and if they do, their successor will not get their hands on nuclear weapons.”
What happens when the Middle East goes nuclear? Will there be a way down from the ladder at that point? “A nuclear Middle East will be a ticking nuclear bomb,” said Ghasseminejad. “Some may hope that the imminent threat of a nuclear Armageddon will curb the apocalyptic urges of religious fundamentalists in the region. That is a gamble no sane person should accept.”
The normalization of relations between Israel and Bahrain constitutes another significant and painful blow to Iran’s soft belly. However, unlike the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Bahrain is of particular historical, religious and political importance to Iran. Bahrain was once under Persian rule (1602-1783) and as Iran’s 14th province sent representatives to the Iranian Majlis (parliament). A Sunni minority rules the Shi’ite majority in Bahrain, and part of the population is Persian in origin. In recent years, especially during the tenure of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad but also before, there were calls to restore Bahrain to Iranian rule.
Bahrain, a member of the Gulf Cooperation Council, is located right in the middle of the Iranian “lion’s jaws.” It hosts the U.S. Navy’s main naval base in the Gulf region, home to the Fifth Fleet, and representatives of the Royal British Navy. Bahrain effectively serves as a microcosm for the “great processes” and shake-ups in the Middle East that have gradually unraveled the old order, narratives and paradigms (Sykes-Picot, land for peace, pan-Arabism). These are being replaced by a new regional order represented by the U.S. “Peace to Prosperity” vision and economic prosperity.
Since the outbreak of the “Arab Spring”—and even long before it—Iran has acted with perseverance, principally via its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, to destabilize the Bahraini Kingdom and bring down its minority Sunni rule. The decision by Bahrain, with the backing of Saudi Arabia, to normalize relations with Israel is expected to lead to an increase in Iranian subversion efforts in the kingdom through local Shi’ite terrorist groups and the Shi’ite opposition parties, with assistance from the Lebanese Shi’ite terrorist group Hezbollah. Leading Iranian media, such as Kayhan, which reflect the opinions of the country’s Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, are already inciting Bahrainis to take up arms to protect their rights. Kayhan declares that Bahrain will be the first of the Gulf states to fall, and that “the storm against Israel is rapidly approaching.” “A shameful move that will result in serious consequences” As in the case of the establishment of relations between Israel and the UAE, senior Iranian officials in Iran’s Foreign Ministry were quick to condemn the move by Bahrain, defining it as “shameful” and harmful to the Palestinian people.
“This shameful act by Bahrain,” the spokesman continued, “slaughters the Palestinian ideology and the decades-long struggle and suffering of the Palestinian people on the altar of the American election. Undoubtedly, the oppressed and freedom-seeking people of Palestine and the freedom-seeking Muslims of the world will never accept the relations with the usurper and rebellious regime of Israel, and this shameful act will forever remain in the memory of the oppressed nation of Palestine and the freedom-loving nations of the world.” The spokesman also warned of “an infringement on the security of the region by the Zionist regime” and said that “responsibility for such intervention rests on the shoulders of the Bahraini government.”
Hussein Amir-Abdollahian, an adviser to the chairman of the Majlis, tweeted that “Bahrain will be facing difficult times” as a result of its decision to make peace with Israel. “The Bahraini regime’s compromise w/ #Israel is a great betrayal to the Islamic cause & Palestinians. The imprudent leaders in UAE, #Bahrain must not pave the way for the Zionist schemes. They should learn lessons from history. Tomorrow is late! The U.S. lifeline has worn out for years,” he wrote.
A Foreign Ministry spokesman also said that in trying to drive a wedge between the Bahraini government and the Bahraini people, “the Government of Bahrain made a fundamental mistake by preferring to find refuge in the lap of the occupying regime of Jerusalem instead of gaining legitimacy from its people” and by “sacrificing the ideal of noble Palestine to the internal American elections.”
IRGC: Bahrain’s Shi’ites will not permit normalization with Israel
The IRGC’s foreign relations office issued a bellicose statement on its website calling for rebellion and citizen protests in Bahrain. The IRGC Quds Force, true to its intentions, will enforce the execution of such protests, including violent expressions and attacks by its terrorist proxies.
“The executioner ruler of Bahrain should await harsh revenge of the Mujahideen [Islamic fighters] aiming to liberate Quds [Jerusalem] and the proud Muslim nation of this country,” said the statement. It went on to state that “the shameful measure by [King of Bahrain Hamad bin Isa] Al Khalifa and the dependent regime [stooge] ruling Bahrain in establishing relations with the Zionist regime against the wishes and ideals of that country’s Muslim nation is a big idiocy void of any legitimacy, and it will receive suitable responses.”
Elsewhere, the statement said, “The domino effect of normalization of relations with the Zionist regime—which is through the rulers of certain Arab countries and the engineering of the White House and the hated and unwise U.S. president—follows their imposition of humiliation on Muslim nations and looting of their resources and wealth.” Claiming that the U.S.-Gulf objective is to make the Palestinian territories safe for Israel, the IRGC declared this project will never be fulfilled, and, on the contrary, will give Muslim nations a stronger determination to “eliminate the cancerous tumor, Israel.”
The statement warns “Al Khalifa and other arrogant traitors to the Bahraini regime against opening the gates to the entry and influence of the Zionist regime into the strategic area of the Persian Gulf and the Oman Sea.” It goes on to say that those who assist the United States and the “Zionist regime” will be targeted by the “holy rage and burning revenge” of the Islamic nation, and especially “the Shi’ite residents in Bahrain, who raise the banner of Imam Hussein bin Ali [a symbol of Shi’ite martyrdom].”
Press TV, the Iranian propaganda channel in English, and al-Alem TV, which broadcasts to an Arab target audience, echoed the calls against the agreement, especially from protesting citizens of Bahrain. “The agreement is treason” and “Bahrain opposes normalization” were press headlines. Kayhan newspaper’s editorial declared, “It is all too obvious that the pirate regime in occupation of the Persian Gulf island state of Bahrain has signed its own death warrant by establishing ties with the illegal Zionist entity.”
Bahrain’s Shi’ite opposition party: A “betrayal of Islam”
Bahrain’s largest Shi’ite opposition party, the Al-Wefaq National Islamic Society (Jam’īyat al-Wifāq al-Waṭanī al-Islāmīyah) or the “Bloc of Believers,” acted in the spirit of its patron, Iran, and called the government’s relationship with the “Zionist enemy” (Israel) a “crime.” The party declared that the deal was illegal and that the rulers of Bahrain had no authority to take such a move, which it called “a betrayal of Islam and Arabism, a deviation from the broader Arab and Islamic consensus and harm to the Palestinian people.”
Saraya Wa’ad Allah (The Promise of God), an Iranian-backed military wing of the Bahraini Shi’ite opposition group, was the first to officially react to the peace deal. “This false normalization is nothing but an update to the enabling of this cancerous tumor in the body of the [Islamic] Ummah, and it is rejected by reason, Sharia law, and the people,” it said in a statement. On Sept. 16, Saraya Wa’ad Allah announced the creation of Saraya Suhada al-Quds (martyrs of Jerusalem) to fight the “the Zionist presence in Bahrain.”
Bahrain, Iran’s 14th province
Iran claims sovereignty over Bahrain and produces historical references to it from time to time. Bahrain was under Persian rule from 1602-1783, following an 80-year Portuguese occupation. In 1799, the House of Khalifa moved to Bahrain from Qatar, and they maintained a protectorate status to the British. After the end of the 1960s, Britain decided to withdraw its forces from the Gulf, and Iran renewed its claims of sovereignty over the island. However, in a 1970 referendum, the people of Bahrain were required to decide between independence and becoming part of Iran. They chose independence. The Iranian Shah ceased to raise the issue, but after Iran’s 1979 Islamic Revolution, Tehran put it on the agenda from time to time. In a dispute with the UAE, Iran also claimed sovereignty over three islands (Abu Musa, Greater Tunb, and Lesser Tunb) near the strategic Strait of Hormuz.
Iranian officials continue to argue that until its independence, Bahrain was the 14th province of Iran and was even represented in Iran’s Majlis. They also sharply criticize the Shah’s “shameful” decision to give it up. For example, Hossein Shariatmadari, editor-in-chief of Kayhan and a close associate of Iran’s leader, stated in July 2007, “The governments of the Gulf states were established as a result of the direct interference of global condescension [western powers] … And were accused by their people of collaborating with the Zionist entity … They know full well that the earthquake that shook Iran [the Islamic Revolution] would bring [sooner or later] the collapse of their illegal regimes.” He said it was not his personal opinion, but that of the Iranian and Bahraini people.
These statements, which undermined Bahrain’s Arab identity, its independence and sovereignty, although rare, feed the Bahraini concerns about Iran’s continued subversion and repeated attempts to overthrow the monarchy.
For Iran, Bahrain is a critical and charged issue, and over the years it has been trying to incite the Shi’ite majority’s protests against the Sunni rule. The Bahraini decision to move toward normalization with Israel is also linked to internal developments within Bahrain and fears of the kingdom’s ongoing Shi’ite protests. The Shi’ite majority (70 percent) calls from time to time and with varying intensity to challenge the Sunni royal family. The normalization of relations with Israel is yet another sign of the profound transformation reshaping the political and social landscape of the Middle East and redefining the region’s relations with the United States and Israel, in particular under Iran’s shadow across the Sunni-Shi’ite and Arab-Persian divide.
Iran flipped the Arab Spring into an Islamic awakening
With the outbreak of the Arab Spring 10 years ago, the popular protest swept the Arab world, including Bahrain. Bahrain encapsulates the weaknesses of the Arab world in the face of Iran’s growing projection of military power. At the same time, differences appear within Bahrain’s Shi’ites. They are still divided over the sources of Shi’ite religious authority (embodied by Supreme Ayatollah Khamenei or his rival Ayatollah Sistani), as well as ethnic and religious rivalries—Persians, Arabs, Shi’ites and Sunnis. In the dramatic course of normalizing relations with Israel, it appears that Bahrain openly chose the American shield against Iran’s looming shadow, showing the disconnect between normalization with Israel and solving the Palestinian problem. Washington is considered the kingdom’s main ally. The U.S. Fifth Fleet Command operates in Gulf waters as a counterweight and a deterrent against Iran.
Bahrain is the arena of a major conflict in the Gulf between two major regional forces. Iran (Shi’ite), which still sees itself as defining, representing and leading the “new regional order” or the “Islamic Spring,” the one that was supposed to rebuild its vision on the ruins of the old American/Western order and the Arab regimes supported by it. Since the Arab Spring, Iran has tried with only partial success to exploit the weakness and fragmentation of the Arab countries (Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon). With these countries primarily busy maintaining their stability and understanding the U.S. position toward them, Iran has been increasing its political and military involvement. On the other hand, Saudi Arabia (Sunni) is involved in a desperate battle (including in its own backyard in Yemen) to preserve something of the old order that is crumbling under its feet.
The confrontation with Iran
During the Arab Spring in 2011, Saudi Arabia dispatched to Bahrain the Peninsula Shield Force to prevent Bahrain from falling into the hands of the Iranian-backed Shi’ite majority. It was sent to the kingdom in the framework of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) Defense Agreement to assist Bahrain in protecting its “vital facilities and interests” and, in fact, prevented a coup in Bahrain.
In doing so, Saudi Arabia signaled that it was ready to confront Iran and showed a new face to its historic rival. The fall of Bahrain to the Shi’ites—for which Tehran pushed 10 years ago—would have granted Tehran direct access from the east (Bahrain borders with Saudi Arabia) into the heart of the Sunni world. Later, with the Shi’ite Houthi rebels, Iran managed to gain a foothold on the southern border of Saudi Arabia, in Yemen. Iran is constantly working on strengthening Shi’ite parties in Bahrain, such as the al-Ashtar Brigades. With the help of the Lebanese Hezbollah, Iran incites these parties to protest, even violently, against the regime.
As part of the Iranian campaign, Grand Ayatollah Sheikh Isa Ahmed Qassim of Bahrain issued a stern statement opposing the normalization of relations between Bahrain and Israel. Sheikh Isa supports the absolute theocratic rule of Khamenei (Velayat-e faqih) and even relates to him as the venerated Imam Hussein of our times. Iran also tries to weaken Shi’ite parties that support the Quietist Shi’ite model (separation of political and clerical power), which finds expression in the model of power in Iraq and its main representative, the Grand Ayatollah Ali Ayatollah Sayyid Ali al-Husayni al-Sistani and even some of the Shi’ite clerics in Lebanon, such as Muhammad Husayn Fadlallah, before his death in 2010. Following Bahrain’s announcement to normalize its relations with Israel, Iran blatantly called on the Shi’ites in the kingdom to come out and demonstrate against the “betrayal,” as reflected in the statement issued by the IRGC and other Iranian spokesmen.
Iran is concerned that Shi’ites in Iraq, in Bahrain and other Gulf countries, Lebanon and even Iran may shift their support to Ali al-Sistani’s brand of Shi’ism. Therefore, Iran tries to strengthen those Shi’ite clerics who venerate Khamenei. Iran also tries to nurture in Bahrain’s Shi’ites, some of whom are of Arab and others of Persian origin, a unique Shi’ite identity and affinity to the Iranian leader. In this context, Iran provides them generous financial assistance, helps Shi’ite organizations, and even provides weapons to some, with the assistance of Hezbollah.
Iran does not suffice with words and works vigorously to destabilize Bahrain, mainly through the recruitment and incitement of its Shi’ites, and Hezbollah fighters in Lebanon (and modeled on local Shi’ite militias in Iraq and Yemen). This way, Iran advances its interests and prepares the ground for overthrowing the government in Bahrain using secret intelligence-gathering cells and organizing Shi’ites to protest and acts of subversion.
The Malik al-Ashtar Brigades
In this context, in 2013, the Quds Force of the IRGC were behind the establishment of the Islamic Resistance in Bahrain, along the model of Hezbollah in Lebanon. The Malik al-Ashtar Brigades, also called Saraya al-Ashtar, aims to overthrow the Bahraini monarchy.
The IRGC even provided the al-Ashtar Brigades with explosives, weapons and training, some of which took place in Iraqi camps. The terrorist organization carried out several attacks, including assassinations and car bombings, against Bahraini security forces and security targets, in which police officers and members of the security forces were killed. One of the police officers killed in a terrorist attack carried out by the organization in 2014 was a UAE policeman, stationed in Bahrain as part of the forces sent by the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) in 2011 to suppress an attempted coup. Since July 2018, the U.S. State Department has included the al-Ashtar organization in its list of terrorist organizations. Following extensive and ongoing counter-terrorism activities by the Bahrain authorities, it was discovered that several of the organization’s operatives had found refuge in Iran. Bahrain’s security forces have arrested some of the organization’s operatives, and some of them have been executed.
Many diplomatic cables revealed by WikiLeaks pointed out to senior U.S. officials that the Bahraini monarchy and other Gulf states, including Saudi Arabia, were deeply concerned with both the political (“Bahrain is a part of Iran”) and military (nuclear and naval) threats posed by Iran. Bahrain is also concerned about subversion of its government, and the growing Iranian impact in the region, especially in Iraq and the Gulf. It was discussed in the cables that Bahrain and other Gulf states needed to formulate a regional Arab response and creation of the international umbrella to protect from those threats.
Bahrain accuses Iran of aiming to overthrow the regime, the way it attempted to do in the early 1980s, and again in 1994 when it established Hezbollah in Bahrain and even trained its operatives in Syria. In 1996, Bahrain uncovered on its territory Hezbollah cells, called Hezbollah Bahrain. These cells were inspired by the Lebanese Hezbollah and were established with its assistance. Earlier in 1981, security forces in Bahrain unveiled the Islamic Front for the Liberation of Bahrain, which was trained and financed by Iranian intelligence and acted to stage a coup.
The Iranian method of operation is similar in any country where there is a Shi’ite majority or minority. It recruits the Lebanese Hezbollah, which possesses the knowledge and experience it gained fighting against Israel and in Syria, and trains the operatives in Lebanon and Iran. Iran operates the Quds Force and official Iranian institutions that work to locate, recruit and train local operatives, who will constitute future Hezbollah cells. This way, Hezbollah Al-Hejaz, the Hezbollah movement in Iraq, Hezbollah Bahrain (al-Ashtar Brigades) and others were established.
Bahrain considers Lebanese Hezbollah to be a terrorist organization. In the past year, Bahrain has also taken a series of measures and imposed financial penalties against Iranian individuals and banks suspected of laundering money and transferring it to support terrorism or to circumvent sanctions in the kingdom. In August, Bahrain also set up a committee to fight terrorism and extremism, with an emphasis on stopping funding of these organizations.
Convenient infrastructure for subversive activities
Since the outbreak of the Arab Spring, Iran finds in Bahrain a convenient infrastructure for political-religious subversion. Firstly, the proximity to Iran greatly facilitates Iran’s ability to assist Shi’ites in Bahrain. Secondly, the Shi’ite population (the Persian part) has become more attentive to Iran in recent years, in light of its disappointment with Bahraini reforms designed to weaken the Shi’ite opposition through its inclusion in a kind of toothless parliament. The successes of the Shi’ites in Iraq serve as a kind of encouragement to the Shi’ites in Bahrain.
Thirdly, regional and international circumstances contribute to the “increasing hunger” of the Shi’ites: the democratic elections in Iraq, the results of which reflected the Shi’ite majority there, the strong position of Hezbollah in Lebanon after the Second Lebanon War and its political establishment in Lebanon, the successes of the Houthi rebels in Yemen and their steadfast stand against Saudi Arabia, including the capture of the Yemenite capital Sana’a. Fourthly, Iran continues to exploit the collective weakness of the Sunni Arabs in the absence of a leading power core, for example, the symbols of Saddam Hussein in Iraq, Hosni Mubarak in Egypt and to some extent, Hafez al-Assad in Syria. This way, Iran is trying to use the vacuum to direct changes in Bahrain the way it desires.
Shi’ite social networks in Bahrain and their affiliation with Shi’ite social networks in countries with a majority Shi’ite population played a key role during the attempted coup during the Arab Spring in Bahrain in terms of spreading and inciting protests, as well as coordinating with Shi’ite parties outside Bahrain. Bahraini bloggers (some of whom have been arrested by the authorities), opposition forums and websites have also been active during previous rounds of protests against the regime during 2007 and 2008. A unique feature of Bahraini virtual space is that it is a part of the broader Shi’ite context and affiliations. In cyberspace, Bahraini Shi’ites find “sympathetic ears,” words of encouragement and practical advice, as well as ideas common to Shi’ites in a broader context.
The Shi’ite protest in Bahrain resonates in Hezbollah’s forums in Lebanon. Images and videos uploaded in Bahrain echo in Hezbollah’s blogs and forums in Iraq and vice versa. This way, inspired by Iran, a kind of “Shi’ite virtual fraternity” is created, which in the end finds expression far beyond the virtual. Iran’s hopes for a speedy overthrow of the Bahraini monarchy were quickly dashed. Iran had hoped that Bahrain would become another link in the series of what it has defined as “divine events” since the beginning of the 21st century, including Israel’s withdrawal from Lebanon, the Second Intifada, the Second Lebanon War and “Operation Cast Lead” in Gaza.
During the Arab Spring protest in Bahrain, Khamenei stressed that the Bahraini struggle is similar to the struggle in other Arab countries and should therefore be supported. In a propaganda message issued by Khamenei, he also emphasized that Iran supports Bahrain not because of Bahrain’s Shi’ite majority, but the way it has been supporting the Palestinian struggle for the past 32 years. In his message, he said, “We do not differentiate between Gaza, Palestine, Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, Yemen—tyranny everywhere is doomed to failure.” In 2011, the Iranians made similar claims to those made today in the face of the establishment of relations between Israel and the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain, according to which the United States has nurtured the monarchies in Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates to maintain its dominance in the region.
Mohammad Ali Jafari, former commander-in-chief of the IRGC, pointed out in April 2011 that the common denominator of all revolutions against the “corrupt rulers in the region” is the loyalty of these rulers to the United States and Israel. He emphasized that “the residents of Bahrain cannot tolerate such humiliation.” The Saudi military intervention in Bahrain was defined by the IRGC commander as a “strategic error” that would bring Bahrain’s end closer.
A strategic shift in the regional power equations
The normalization of diplomatic relations between Israel and Bahrain and the UAE reflects strategic developments in the region, some resulting from the Arab Spring and some deriving from the Gulf states’ growing concern regarding Iran’s lengthening regional shadow. The Gulf states have decided to rely on the United States (and Israel), in stark contrast to Tehran’s repeated declarations that Gulf security should be in the hands of countries on its shores.
Iran had hoped and still hopes that it will be able to translate the shock waves of the Arab Spring and the continued weakness of the Sunni Arab camp into a Shi’ite-led Islamic awakening, whereby it takes the central place in the leadership of a new Middle East. Against this backdrop, Iran will continue to present itself (with Turkey breathing down its neck) as remaining true to the Palestinian vision of “liberating Palestine from sea to river” and to head the resistance camp, emphasizing the betrayal of the Palestinian people by the Sunni Arabs.
Faced with the stinging normalization decision by Bahrain—a country with a Shi’ite majority—Iran will further emphasize the growing influence of Shi’ites in the region. The Shi’ites, who Iran believes have lived since the dawn of Islam with a constant sense of degradation by the Sunnis, are now inspired by each other and the Shi’ite successes in Lebanon, Iraq, Iran and Yemen. They aspire to take a historical place of honor that will lead the Islamic world in a new Islamic world order.
For Iran, the Bahrain campaign is not over yet, but has merely entered a dangerous new phase. Iran’s attempts to destabilize Bahrain, via the Shi’ite majority and terrorist organizations recruited from within and aided by the successful model of the Lebanese Hezbollah, all suggest a violent future. Iranian propaganda is already inciting the Shi’ite majority against the normalization. Bahrain has many Iranian-inspired terrorist cells, established during the era of Quds Force commander Gen. Qassem Soleimani.
Another question is whether Iran, motivated by a genuine fear of a “Zionist presence” in the Gulf, will attempt to carry out a Crimea-style invasion of Bahrain to restore what it believes to belong to Iran, risking a direct confrontation with the United States. It is likely that Iran has discussed such a scenario and has contingency plans to implement it. Iran also sees Bahrain as a springboard to drive its influence into Sunni territory and to encircle Saudi Arabia from Iraq (northeast), Yemen (in the south) and Bahrain (to the east) through Shi’ite-majority countries. In addition, Iran could stir up the oil-rich eastern part of Saudi Arabia, where there is a large Shi’ite minority.
President Donald Trump at a joint news conference with PM Binyamin Netanyahu in the White House on Tuesday, Sept. 15 disclosed that 5 or more nations are ready to sign peace with Israel after the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain. “They all want peace; they’re tired of war. Israel is a very strong country militarily, but it also wants peace, he said.
Trump and Netanyahu spoke to reporters ahead of the signing ceremony with the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain foreign ministers. Trump added: “Even Iran is ready to discuss a deal – their GDP is down by 27pc. I told them to wait until after the (US presidential) election. I will make a deal that is great for Iran and make it a very rich country. very quickly.”
Asked about the sale of F-35 stealth planes to the UAE, Trump brushed the question of by saying that was “easy.” He stressed that that US relations with the UAE were very good. Asked whether the Palestinian issue is touched upon in the two documents, whose contents have not so far been revealed, the US President promised that the Palestinians would absolutely gain too. “We are the talking to the Palestinians,” he said. According to one source, the reference in the peace documents will be on the lines of “two states for two nations,” without concrete steps. DEBKAfile reported earlier.
Trump and Netanyahu spoke to reporters ahead of the signing ceremony with the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain foreign ministers. Trump added: “Even Iran is ready to discuss a deal – their GDP is down by 27pc. I told them to wait until after the (US presidential) election. I will make a deal that is great for Iran and make it a very rich country. very quickly.”
Asked about the sale of F-35 stealth planes to the UAE, Trump brushed the question of by saying that was “easy.” He stressed that that US relations with the UAE were very good. Asked whether the Palestinian issue is touched upon in the two documents, whose contents have not so far been revealed, the US President promised that the Palestinians would absolutely gain too. “We are the talking to the Palestinians,” he said. According to one source, the reference in the peace documents will be on the lines of “two states for two nations,” without concrete steps. DEBKAfile reported earlier.
PM Binyamin Netanyahu to meet President Donald Trump tete a tete on Tuesday, Sept. 15 shortly before the ceremonial signing of diplomatic accords with the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain. The latter are represented by their foreign ministers, Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan and Abdullatif bin Rashid Al Zayani, respectively.
While the two accords, brokered by President Trump, represent a historic breakthrough to Israel’s acceptance by its Gulf neighbors, they are legally different: With the UAE, the prime minister is signing a “peace treaty” predicated on parliamentary ratification, and with Bahrain, a “declaration of peace,” which is a solemn commitment to peace. Netanyahu’s office has indeed announced that the pact with the UAE will be brought before the government and referred to the Knesset for approval. The precise contents of the two papers have not been revealed.
The official ceremony takes place at 12 p.m. (7 p.m. Israel time) on the White House South Lawn, followed by speeches by the leaders and the playing of the countries’ national anthems. Some 700 people are invited to a grand dinner event.
“We’ve worked on this for many years,” Netanyahu said when he flew out to Washington. “This is a massive turning point in the history of Israel, as well as the history of the Middle East. It will have a huge and positive impact on all Israelis.” He added: “I promise you, from what I see here, that more countries are on the way.”
All Israelis were meanwhile condemned at the end of this same week to spend the High Festivals from Friday under a full lockdown in the face of a major surge in coronavirus infection.
The Abraham Accord Israel will sign with the UAE will be a peace treaty, Netanyahu said Monday.The agreements could usher in a seismic shift in the Middle East. If Saudi Arabia were to follow, this would have major implications for Iran, Syria, and Lebanon. Experts believe other Muslim countries that could soon establish ties with Israel include Oman, Sudan, and Morocco.
The signing of the Abraham Accord comes after months of diplomatic work spearheaded by Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, who led the negotiations.
At Noon today in the White House, Israel will sign the historic Abraham Accord peace treaty with the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain, which will be live streamed right here on this page. The Abraham Accord is what we believe is the foundation stone of the coming Daniel 9:27 covenant that will be confirmed by Antichrist in the days after the Pretribulation Rapture of the Church takes place. If you’re thinking about getting something done for the Lord before Flight #777 takes off, you better do it now.
“And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.” Daniel 9:27 (KJB)
Interesting article on the Jerusalem Post today saying that while sale of advanced F-35 fighter jets to the UAE is not part of the Abraham Accord, creating a Palestinian state is. The Abraham Accord document references a two-state resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, so when Israel signs it, they do so knowing they are agreeing to not only give up dreams of annexation of Judea and Samaria, but to create a Palestinian state as well. This is why we say that the Abraham Accord is the foundation of the coming Daniel 9 covenant with Antichrist.
Israel to Sign Historic Abraham Accord With UAE and Bahrain at White House Tuesday
FROM CBN NEWS: Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is in Washington Tuesday getting ready to sign two historic diplomatic deals with the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain. President Donald Trump will preside over the signing ceremony, which will take place at 12 p.m. ET on the White House’s South Lawn. Netanyahu and Emirati and Bahraini foreign officials will sign the deals before a crowd of more than 700 people. The deal Israel will sign with the UAE will be a peace treaty, Netanyahu said Monday. It was previously unclear if the deal will be normalization or peace since Israel and the UAE have never been at war.
The deal Israel will sign with Bahrain will be a declaration of intent to make peace with Bahrain. This is because there was not enough time to draw up a full agreement since Friday when ties between Bahrain and Israel were announced, The Jerusalem Post reports.
The peace treaty with the UAE will have to be brought before a vote in Israel’s cabinet and then the Knesset after Netanyahu signs it. The treaty will only be finalized after it is approved by the cabinet. Meanwhile, Israel’s declaration with Bahrain is just a joint statement that does not need Knesset approval.
TRUMP WILL SIGN THE ISRAEL-UAE AND ISRAEL-BAHRAIN DEALS AS A “WITNESS” OR “OBSERVER.”
In addition to the individual bilateral agreements Israel will sign with the UAE and Bahrain, all three countries will sign a trilateral document. The specific details of the deals have yet to be revealed.
“WE HAVE WORKED ON THIS FOR VERY MANY YEARS,” SAID NETANYAHU. “THIS IS A GREAT TURNING POINT IN THE HISTORY OF ISRAEL AND IN THE HISTORY OF THE MIDDLE EAST. IT WILL HAVE A GREAT AND POSITIVE EFFECT ON EVERY CITIZEN OF ISRAEL. I ALSO PROMISE YOU, ACCORDING TO WHAT I SEE HERE, THAT ADDITIONAL COUNTRIES ARE ON THE WAY.”
Before the signing ceremony, Netanyahu and Trump will hold a bilateral meeting at the White House and then leaders from all four countries will meet. The signing of these so-called “Abrahamic Accords” comes after months of diplomatic work spearheaded by Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, who led the negotiations.
“These agreements are a huge accomplishment for the countries involved and have led to a tremendous sense of hope and optimism in the region,” said Kushner. “Instead of focusing on past conflicts, people are now focused on creating a vibrant future filled with endless possibilities.”
The agreements could usher in a seismic shift in the Middle East. If Saudi Arabia were to follow, this would have major implications for Iran, Syria, and Lebanon. Experts believe other Muslim countries that could soon establish ties with Israel include Oman, Sudan, and Morocco.
The Palestinians have strongly condemned the deals and consider them a stab in the back. While the UAE has said Israel agreed not to move forward with its contentious plans to annex up to 30% of the West Bank, biblical Judea and Samaria, Netanyahu has insisted that annexation remains on the table and is merely suspended. The UAE and Bahrain will become the third and fourth Arab countries to make peace with Israel, after Egypt and Jordan.
Revelation 1:3 "Blessed is the one who reads aloud the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear, and who keep what is written in it, for the time is near".
Tommy Settipani,
Watchman for Christ
Recent Comments