Why Was Beirut Nuked?

 On the 4^th of August, the Beirut port was hit with a mini – nuke. In any incident, such as this, one question one must ask is, “who benefits?” The answer is, of course, Israel. Now, the question becomes, – “WHY?” To answer this, it would be wise to go back some 30 years to 1979.

The Camp David Accords was a peace treaty signed between Israel and Egypt, in the aftermath of the 1973 October or Yom Kippur War between Israel on side, and Egypt and Syria, on the other side. To understand any geopolitical issue in the world, it helps to look at things from the perspective of the key players. In this case, we shall look at events from 1980 till now through Israeli eyes – but at a strategic level.

If we look at the map of Israel, we find that it is more populated in the center and on the coast, while the northern area is more agriculture-intensive, and populated by farmers. In the mindset of Israeli strategists, Syria was identified as an adversary quite different from either Egypt or Jordan: “On the Jordanian border we have civilian settlements but no enemy. On the Egyptian border we have an enemy but no settlements. On the Syrian border we have both. If the Syrians get to our settlements it will be calamitous”.

Then we have the supply of water coming from the Golan Heights down into the Galilee. And water is a super-strategic resource in water – dry Israel. Thus, securing and protecting its northern borders was Israel’s top priority.

The Palestinian Issue

Since Israel is a project of the Rothschild family, all major decisions concerning Israel is made by the family member in charge of Israel. They put Begin as the new Prime Minster of Israel in 1980. His mandate was to annex the West Bank and to curtail the blow-back from the Palestinians. At this time, Lebanon was housing a large population of Palestinians who had fled Israel over the previous 32 years. To make sure that the residents of the West Bank do not receive aid and moral comfort from their fellow Palestinians in Lebanon, Israel launched an attack on Lebanon in June 1982, and reached Beirut. Over the next few years, Lebanon and Beirut was turned into a free-for-all grinder. The PLO was driven out and exiled to Tunisia. The Palestinian threat from Lebanon was neutralized.

The Hezbollah Issue

The Shia of Lebanon were the poorest segment and marginalized. When the Shah of Iran was toppled in January 1979, the ayatollah’s repaid the PLO (due to the help the PLO provided to the enemies of the Shah of Iran) by supplying arms and aid to the many Palestinian groups in Lebanon, including some Shia groups. This was the beginning of Hezbollah. The Shia militias played a major role in pushing the IDF back to the Lebanese-Israeli border, and by 2000, Israel completely withdrew from Lebanon.

The Syria Issue

When the Lebanese civil war broke out in March 1975, it soon became obvious to Syria’s ruler, Hafez Assad, that – in order to protect his flanks, and safeguard his country from an attack by Israel, through central Lebanon- he had also to invade Lebanon. And thus began a vicious and dirty civil war, involving various foreign actors from the intelligence agencies of the US, France, Russia and the PLO, the Druze, Israel, Syria, Hezbollah, and various Christian militias. The civil war ended in 1990, on the eve of the First Gulf War.

Also, between 1976 and the late 1980s, Syrian civil society and the military were targeted by the CIA and its proxy force within Syria – the Muslim Brotherhood. These acts of sabotage, assassinations and uprisings took a heavy toll on Syria, in addition to the civil war raging in Lebanon, which Assad was trying to stop.

In March 2003, the US invaded and occupied Iraq. Resistance against the American occupation began within 2 months. US military intelligence found that a lot of aid to the resistance was coming from Russia, and sent to Syria via Lebanon. By this time, Hafez Assad’s youngest son, Bashar, became Syria’s leader, on his father’s death. Tremendous pressure was put on Bashar Assad by the Americans, to shut down this pipeline of aid – all to no avail.

It was at this point that a decision was made to invade Lebanon in order to shut down this pipeline of aid to the resistance in Iraq. A secondary aim was related to the discovery of massive gas fields offshore Israel some of which was in Lebanese waters. Israel was loath to include Lebanon in this bonanza. By crippling Lebanon, through an invasion, Israel would be in a better position to exploit these gas fields. Remember, the Mossad was successful in assassinating the PLO leader, Yasser Arafath, over the same issue.

Cross-border attacks from southern Lebanon into Israel by the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) dated as far back as 1968, and followed the Six-Day War; the area became a significant base for attacks following the arrival of the PLO leadership and its Fatah brigade following their 1971 expulsion from Jordan. Starting about this time, increasing demographic tensions related to the Lebanese National Pact, which had divided governmental powers among religious groups throughout the country 30 years previously, began running high and led in part to the Lebanese Civil War (1975–1990).

Concurrently, Syria began a 29-year military occupation in 1976. Israel’s 1978 invasion of Lebanon failed to stem the Palestinian attacks in the long run, but Israel invaded Lebanon again in 1982 and forcibly expelled the PLO.  Israel withdrew to a borderland buffer zone in southern Lebanon, held with the aid of proxy militants in the South Lebanon Army (SLA).

The invasion also led to the conception of a new Shi’a militant group, which in 1985, established itself politically under the name Hezbollah, and declared an armed struggle to end the Israeli occupation of Lebanese territory. When the Lebanese Civil War ended and other warring factions agreed to disarm, both Hezbollah and the SLA refused. Ten years later, Israel withdrew from South Lebanon to the UN-designated and internationally recognized Blue Line border in 2000. The withdrawal also led to the immediate collapse of the SLA, and Hezbollah quickly took control of the area. Later, citing continued Israeli control of the Shebaa farms region and the internment of Lebanese prisoners in Israel, Hezbollah intensified its cross-border attacks, and used the tactic of seizing soldiers from Israel as leverage for a prisoner exchange in 2004. All told, from summer 2000, after the Israeli withdrawal, until summer 2006, Hezbollah conducted approximately 200 attacks on Israel – most of them artillery fire, some raids and some via proxies inside Israel. In these attacks, including the attack that precipitated the Israeli response that developed into the war, 31 Israelis were killed and 104 were wounded. In August 2006, in an article in The New Yorker, Seymour Hersh claimed that the White House gave the green light for the Israeli government to execute an attack on Hezbollah in Lebanon. Supposedly, communication between the Israeli government and the US government about this came as early as two months in advance of the capture of two Israeli soldiers and the killing of eight others by Hezbollah prior to the conflict in July 2006.

The 2006 Lebanon War, also called the 2006 Israel–Hezbollah War and known in Lebanon as the July War was a 34-day military conflict in Lebanon, Northern Israel and the Golan Heights. The principal parties were Hezbollah paramilitary forces and the Israel Defense Forces (IDF). The conflict started on 12 July 2006, and continued until a United Nations-brokered ceasefire went into effect in the morning on 14 August 2006, though it formally ended on 8 September 2006 when Israel lifted its naval blockade of Lebanon. Due to unprecedented Iranian military support to Hezbollah before and during the war, some consider it the first round of the Iran–Israel proxy conflict.

 Although Washington had given instructions to Israel to invade Lebanon in March 2006, The pretext to invade was precipitated by the 2006 Hezbollah cross-border raid. On 12 July 2006, Hezbollah fighters fired rockets at Israeli border towns as a diversion for an anti-tank missile attack on two armored Humvees patrolling the Israeli side of the border fence. The ambush left three soldiers dead. Two Israeli soldiers were abducted and taken by Hezbollah to Lebanon. Five more were killed in Lebanon, in a failed rescue attempt. Hezbollah demanded the release of Lebanese prisoners held by Israel in exchange for the release of the abducted soldiers. Israel refused and responded with airstrikes and artillery fire on targets in Lebanon. Israel attacked both Hezbollah military targets and Lebanese civilian infrastructure, including Beirut’s International Airport. The IDF launched a ground invasion of Southern Lebanon. Israel also imposed an air and naval blockade. Hezbollah then launched more rockets into northern Israel and engaged the IDF in guerrilla warfare from hardened positions. The conflict is believed to have killed 1,300 Lebanese people, and 165 Israelis. It severely damaged Lebanese civil infrastructure, and displaced approximately one million Lebanese^] and 300,000–500,000 Israelis.

During the first 2 weeks of the war, calls for a cease-fire by the Lebanese and other Arab governments fell on deaf years. When the tide of war turned against Israel, both the US and Israel began calling for a cease-fire- but this time Hezbollah was the one to ignore it. In summary, the IDF launched an invasion of Lebanon with 35,000 troops, along with tanks, jets and naval forces.  All of this to fight an armed militia group, whose forces numbered no more than a few thousand irregular militiamen. Hezbollah was not an army, but managed to defeat one of the most powerful armies in the region. The IDF suffered a loss of 500 soldiers killed, while Hezbollah dead numbered less than 100!!

 America was shocked at Israel’s defeat. This was key to changing the military equation in Iraq where US forces were fighting the Sunni resistance with the aid of Iranian-backed pro-Shia militant groups. Now, the US began to back the Sunni groups in Iraq against any Iran – backed groups in Iraq!

On 11 August 2006, the United Nations Security Council unanimously approved United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701 in an effort to end the hostilities. This resolution was approved by both the Lebanese and Israeli governments. The Lebanese Army began deploying in Southern Lebanon on 17 August 2006. The blockade was lifted on 8 September 2006.  On 1 October 2006, most Israeli troops withdrew from Lebanon. In the time since the enactment of UNSCR 1701 both the Lebanese government and UNIFIL have stated that they will not disarm Hezbollah

The U.S. endorsed Israel’s objectives — viewing Hezbollah as nothing more than a proxy for Iran and Syria. But not only has Hezbollah survived very much intact as a military force; it was able to inflict substantial military and civilian casualties on Israel right until the truce came into effect. Israel has little appetite for keeping its forces in southern Lebanon, where they will become increasingly vulnerable to guerrilla attack. Rather than going after the Hezbollah arms caches, rocket arsenals and bunkers in the areas they control, Israel has ordered its troops simply to defend themselves from direct attack.

The missiles and rockets, whose numbers have grown 10-fold since, remain Hezbollah’s main source of power ahead of a possible future confrontation. In his speeches, Nasrallah stresses his organization’s capability of harming Israel’s home front. He says he can hit refineries and ammonia storage tanks in the Haifa Bay area, as well as power stations, ports and even the Dimona nuclear reactor if the IDF threatens Dahiyeh and civilian infrastructure in Lebanon.

Hezbollah’s missiles (numbering more than 150,000) and rockets can now reach the entire country, not to mention their improved accuracy, even if this only applies to a few thousand of the projectiles. Hezbollah is also relying on the combat experience gained by its officers and soldiers in the Syrian war, vis-à-vis the IDF’s advantages in technology and intelligence. Fighting alongside Iranian and Russian officers in Syria has also helped Hezbollah improve combat techniques while acquiring experience in employing larger formations that include aircraft, armor and intelligence.

The Second Lebanon War remains a resounding failure. Anyone who denies this ignores three reasons for the calm since.

The first is Hezbollah’s embroilment in the Syrian civil war. Ever since that conflict broke out in March 2011, and even more so after President Bashar Assad requested substantial aid from Hezbollah in the summer of 2012, the Shi’ite group has been up to its neck in fighting. Hezbollah has 5,000 fighters in Syria, almost a quarter of its manpower. Around 1,600 have died, with 6,000 wounded.

For the first time Hezbollah has needed a support system for its disabled and the families of the dead. But the first priority of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, as of his masters in Tehran, is to preserve the Assad regime in Syria. Embarking on a war with Israel would divert Hezbollah from its current effort. Losses to the IDF would weaken the grip of Assad and the Iranians on areas still under their control in Syria. Such losses would also expose Hezbollah to attacks by Sunnis in Lebanon.

Remember that over the past decade Iran has helped Hezbollah increase its vast arsenal of rockets and missiles, amounting to 150,000, according to Israeli intelligence estimates. Iran has done so for its own strategic reasons. Hezbollah’s accurate rockets aimed at Tel Aviv and Haifa helped deter Netanyahu as he considered a strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities. But as long as Iran believed Israel might attack, these missiles were kept as a deterrent against Israel.

The Syrian “Regime-Change “Operation

The Syrian regime-change operation began in June of 2011. The cause of this conflict was an oil and gas pipeline going from Iran to the eastern Mediterranean via Syria. Bashar Assad signed a deal with Iran, and turned down Qatar’s proposal for the same deal, thus igniting the war in Syria. In September 2014, Russia intervened and saved the Syrian government from collapse. The various opponents of Assad were helped and funded by the West, Israel, Turkey and the Gulf Arabs.

Starting in 2015, Israel began bombing Iranian shipments of missiles and rockets to Hezbollah forces in Syria. These attacks are ongoing till the present time.

The Middle East Component of the “Fortress America “Plan

After having read the author’s previous article, “America’s Geopolitical Opportunity”, https://behindthenews.co.za/americas-geopolitical-equation-part-1-of-a-2-part-series/ the reader will understand America’s game-plan for the Middle East. To recap, the first is to regime-change the nationalist governments of Venezuela, Cuba and Nicaragua. The US, thus, dominates South America. All the raw materials, energy and consumer markets of Latin America are now fully under the control of the Rockefeller Empire. It will then be in a position to deny its geopolitical rivals (the EU, Russia, China and Iran) access to the raw materials of this continent, and even take over the businesses of its rivals in the continent.

The next step would be to blow-up the Middle East, thus cutting off the flow of oil and gas top its rivals – China and the EU. The blow-up would involve the alliance of the Arabs with Israel against Iran and its allies.

BUT, in order for this to happen, the US will have to REDUCE its military footprint in the region. And, if this were to happen, Israel would be in a corner. The reason is two-fold: the first is that its enemies (Iran, Syria and Hezbollah) are increasing their military power and effectiveness in both equipment and in conducting asymmetrical warfare. The second is the low morale of the IDF troops, especially in the northern border facing Hezbollah.  The current IDF is not like the IDF of the 1960s. The IDF has some of the most modern military equipment in the region, but, it is not the equipment that wins a war, but the quality and morale of its soldiers. And this is a serious problem for Israel’s strategists.

 In view of the above, Israel will have to use any means, fair or foul, to reverse this American trend of downsizing its forces in the region. Rather, Israel wishes to have the US military INCREASE its presence in the region.

The Beirut gambit was just that. A hit on Beirut, using a mini nuke, was used on the 4^th of August. The Israeli gambit failed to achieve its purpose.

On 4 August 2020, a large amount of ammonium nitrate stored at the port of the city of Beirut, the capital of Lebanon, exploded, causing at least 204 deaths, 6,500 injuries, and US$15 billion in property damage, and leaving an estimated 300,000 people homeless. The explosion was preceded by a fire in the same warehouse.

The blast was felt in Turkey, Syria, Israel, Palestine and parts of Europe, and was heard in Cyprus, more than 240 km (150 mi) away. It was detected by the United States Geological Survey as a seismic event of magnitude 3.3, and is considered one of the most powerful artificial explosions in history.

The Lebanese government declared a two-week state of emergency in response to the disaster. In its aftermath, protests erupted across Lebanon against the government for their failure to prevent the disaster, joining a larger series of protests which have been taking place across the country since 2019.

The economy of Lebanon was in a state of crisis before the explosions, with the government having defaulted on debt, the pound plunging, and a poverty rate that had risen past 50%. In addition, the COVID-19 pandemic had overwhelmed many of the country’s hospitals, several of which already were short of medical supplies and unable to pay staff due to a financial crisis.  The morning before the explosion, the head of the Rafik Hariri University Hospital, which served as the main coronavirus medical facility in Lebanon, warned that it was approaching full capacity.

The government-owned Port of Beirut serves as the main maritime entry point into Lebanon and a vital piece of infrastructure for the importation of scarce goods. The Beirut Naval Base is a part of the port.  The port included four basins, sixteen quays, twelve warehouses, a large container terminal and grain silos with a total capacity of 120,000 tons that served as a strategic reserve of cereals for the country. Remember this last point. We will come back to it.

Many were quick to lay the blame on Hezbollah. When one studies the Beirut Port, one finds that different groups control sections of the port. The area of the explosion was not in an area controlled by Hezbollah. In addition, there were many eye-witnesses that saw a fighter jet in the skies moments before the explosion. Further, the use of mini nukes in current conflicts is not new. Mini nukes have been used before, in Fallujah, Iraq, and as well as in Yemen. Those were in areas not so populated as Beirut. Add to the fact that today, there are cameras everywhere- recording. So, enough evidence exists to dismiss this event as an “accident”. What adds credence to this is that this explosion did not remain in the news for long.

 Macron visits Lebanon

Emmanuel Macron is the French President. He became an investment banker in a highly-paid position at Rothschild & Cie Banque, when, in September 2008, Macron left his job as an Inspector of Finances and took a position at Rothschild & Cie Banque.. His first responsibility at Rothschild & Cie Banque was assisting with the acquisition of Cofidis by Crédit Mutuel Nord Europe. Macron formed a relationship with Alain Minc, a businessman on the supervisory board of Le Monde. In 2010, Macron was promoted to partner with the bank after working on the recapitalization of Le Monde and the acquisition by Atos of Siemens IT Solutions and Services. In the same year, Macron was appointed as managing director and put in charge of Nestlé’s (a Rothschild company) acquisition of one of Pfizer’s largest subsidiaries based around baby drinks. His share of the fees on this €9 billion deal made Macron a millionaire. In February 2012, he advised businessman Philippe Tillous-Borde, the CEO of the Avril Group.

 Official documents show that between 2009 and 2013, Macron had earned almost €3 million. He left Rothschild & Cie in 2012. And a few years later, his master-the head of the French Rothschilds – Edmond- put him as the new French leader. This is not something new. The Rothschilds have been in firm control of the French political scene since 1830.

 Macron’s first visit was two days after the Beirut port explosion. The trip would have seen him follow up on France’s as-yet unsuccessful attempts to convince Lebanon’s politicians to establish a government that would implement structural and economic reforms the international community (meaning the Rothschild Empire) has conditioned in exchange for much-needed financial aid.

Macron said he wasn’t there to prop up the Lebanese government: he promised that French aid wouldn’t be syphoned off into the country’s corruption networks, and that he would push for a united pact among Lebanon’s rulers to implement reforms and make the country viable again.

Lebanon is reeling from a horrific economic crisis over the past year that has left at least half the population living in poverty and the national currency a small fraction of its value. It has unsuccessfully negotiated for a bailout with the IMF (another Rothschild entity), and the international community is not willing to give a penny in economic aid. “They repeatedly demonstrate their private interests trump those of the nation and of the Lebanese, no matter the circumstances.” In his visit to Lebanon, Macron – exactly 100 years after Lebanon was founded by colonial France – gave Lebanese politicians an ultimatum to bring in reforms by the end of October, saying that bailout funds would be blocked and targeted sanctions imposed in cases of proven corruption.

Lebanon in the recent past has been crippled by serious economic woes at the center of which has been a currency crisis. This has caused large-scale closure of businesses and soaring prices of basic commodities resulting in social unrest. Damage from the blast alone, estimated at $8 billion, has added to the country’s problems.

 Macron said he wanted to usher in a “new political chapter” and warned that financial assistance to the country was not a “blank cheque”, saying: “If your political class fails, then we will not come to Lebanon’s aid.” Macron has asked for “credible commitments” from Lebanese political leaders, which include an audit of the country’s central bank, and that parliamentary elections be held in six to 12 months. The trip by Macron came at a time when the region’s traditional powers, Saudi Arabia and the United States, have taken a back seat. France is now trying to fill this vacuum.

As Lebanon is a net food importer, the grain silos at the port housed the country’s grain reserves. The blast destroyed this, thus adding more financial and social pressure on Lebanon. This was a calculated move by Israel, acting, as always under orders from the family. It was an act of economic warfare.

What was the actual purpose of Macron’s trip to Lebanon? You have read the surface story. Now, here is the REAL story.

Israel was founded and funded by the French Rothschilsds. Lebanon and Syria became French colonies in 1920. So, France still has a vested interest in these 2 countries. Currently, the greatest threat Israel faces is from Hezbollah. They have representation in the Lebanese government, but they are not the government. Lebanon, for decades, has had a weak central government, with many independent power centers in Lebanon that effectively control some parts of the government.  The resulting “patronage” has turned the Lebanese civil sector into a mass of corruption.

From the Rothschild point of view, Lebanon needs to reduce the influence of Hezbollah within the Lebanese government and the way to do that is to cripple the country financially, and then to ride to the rescue with an IMF (Rothschild ) loan, take control of the Lebanese central bank, and slowly squeeze Hezbollah out of any government positions and influence. The destruction of Lebanon’s grain reserves, as well as the cost of rebuilding Beirut’s shattered infrastructure was meant to add more pressure on the key role players with Lebanon’s political sphere.

Threats of sanctions and so forth have had no effect. Lebanon can smell the hungry vultures circling, and they rejected Macron’s “offer”.

What Next?

Israel failed in its gambit to move the US position.  By hitting Beirut at this moment in time, Israel hoped to stop the US military withdrawal from the region, and its aim was to increase its military presence. Stupid as this sounds, we all know that desperate people do desperate things. The same applies to nations as well. Desperation hit London and Israel. What to do next?  For this, and more, please read our forthcoming article titled “The 2020 POTUS elections was it a Coup?” And, there is much more information in the next few weeks, that will leave you pleasantly surprised. So, hang in there folks!