Dotting the I’S & Crossing the T’S
The resolution ( Azmi )has wandered in the illusion of determination…..so the good news ( Bishara ) has lost
Written by Nasser Kandil,
It is a misfortune of the writer Azmi Bishara that after five days of his lecture, the process of the Saudi Decisive Storm in Yemen has stopped, and which he considered it despite the consistent similarity between it and the Israeli aggression against Gaza Strip, the only possible Arab presence within a historic response that the Arabs need for a democratic response. It is necessary for Bishara to remind of it since it is his preferred model, so he comes out justifying his acceptance of the available response.
The description of Bishara of the historic response is considered in his lectures as a beginning hope that leads to his arrival to Syria, showing his fear from those who object the democratic transition in the region and their reluctance of the reform projects, while he is justifying its sectarian and eradicative aspect, this response has emerged as a result of transforming Iran” the Arab Shiite” into a sectarian group, and it turns the “Arab Sunnis “ into a sectarian group to repel this threat, but neither Shiites have turned nor the Sunnis, just only the imagination of Bishara wanted to summarize the Shiites and the Sunnis away from Palestine that is still constituting an area in which the ascending force according to Shiites ( Hezbollah ) meets with the ascending force according to Sunnis ( Hamas).
As usual Azmi Bishara presents his attitudes as conclusions by showing the situations in a deliberate ambiguity that ensures an escaping exit for him in order not to be accused of chauvinists, tribalism defending of backwardness, dictatorship, justifying the occupation, and promoting for the entity of occupation which is missed entirely besides to the Palestinian issue from the lecture of Bishara, only as a pretext in the competitive slogans for the public opinion, especially what he described in a detective novelist manner, “the clever Iranian deceit towards the simplicity of the Arab people in adopting the Palestinian issue”, so the Arabs according to him are mere foolish, and the issue was abandoned by the Arab rulers, but that was against their will , so they are oppresses and accused of abandoning Palestine and standing against the resistance, as long as Bishara did not bother himself in explaining the secret of the Iranian secular , political, material support to the resistance’s forces and the abandonment of the Arab leaders of them, even their existential hostility towards the resistance’s forces in addition to their partnership with the Israeli wars against them in order to eliminate them. Bishara knows very well from the royal scenes where he lived in their records and the reports of their diplomacy about what has occurred in the two Israeli wars in Lebanon and Gaza and the famous speech of Tzipi Livni “ They have asked us to crush their bones but do not to stop the war”.
Palestine does not exist in the geopolitical conflict but the geostrategic one, in a area where Bishara devotes his lectures to talk about everything except Palestine, to explain to us absurdly in order not to talk about the sectarianism and the doctrinism. Moreover, he assures his adherence of the democratic pride while he is avoiding the smells of the backwardness and the pollution of the dictatorships’ behaviors, so if you ask him about the conclusion, he says I agree that the national situation is above all sects, and with the democratic transition, because without them there will be many obstacles and which I cannot see them possible in the coming horizon, for that I explain the reality in a realistic way.
In his realistic presentation of the reality, Bishara summarized the scene in the region through three players having new roles, he wanted us to see them similar despite all transitions, to the extent of the suggestion and the hint towards the declaration, that they allied together implicitly and brutally and not concerned about we the Arabs till we avenge using knives of kitchen defending of our honors against its entering to our bedrooms after the midnight ; kitchen’ s knives are the Saudi rule which Bishara has forgot to describe it with dictatorship, because it is a special idiom in his dictionary that is used exclusively during the talking about Syria.
The first player is America which the failure of its military invasion in Iraq and Afghanistan led to a review that ends with the priority of the constitutional thinking to produce pragmatic nationalism, and the search for roles that gives them to the ascending regional countries among its former opponents, such as Iran and Cuba, it does not have capable ground armies as a result of the failure of its wars, while Iran has its army and its Arab militias from Lebanon to Syria, Iraq, and Yemen. Just for that the American relationship with Iran seems to be a relation of having an alliance with a regional agent; its title is the nuclear negotiation in order to justify this alliance and finding solutions for the outstanding problems with the give-and-take concessions.
The second player is Iran which also witnessed transitions; their pivot constitutes a pragmatic national center that combines the reformists and the conservatives which Bishara like to remind us with, that they do not summarize the Iranian scene in which the opportunities of the democratic transition have been frustrated under the blows of the reign of Al Fakih. This pragmatic Iranian nationalism has no problem to cooperate with its American counterpart as has happened in the two wars of Iraq and Afghanistan, but it is an expanding cooperation on the behalf of the Arab ego which has the right to ignite if the American does not treat it as a peer as it treats Iran, and even presents an example of demonstrating the Arab prestige regarding the Iranian expansion on one hand and the American belittlement on the other hand, thus the process of Decisive Storm was.
The third player and the most brutal according to Bishara is Russia which is deprived of all the moral and valorem standards for the account of a third pragmatic nationalism, that is based on gathering the national countries independently from any system that is related to democracy, but supports the dictatorships against the democratic transition and terrorism at the same level, Therefore Russia, America, and Iran are the dilemma of the Arabs. Why Doctor Azmi ? Just because America does not want the military intervention to overthrow Syria, and because Russia and Iran are sharing the responsibilities and the burdens of their support. This is simply the answer without circumlocution.
In confronting these transitions, according to Bishara, the giant of the Arab popular uprising has appeared, it means the Muslim Brotherhood, because Bishara wanted to remind us that the major mistake of America is its dealing with the regime of Al Sisi in Egypt in order to know his hidden knot, conversely the Islamic extremism has emerged from the branches of Al-Qaeda, but the origin is the abuser extremisms “the colonial “which Iran has agitated, and which none of the Arab accepts.
In the heart of this confrontation, Bishara is presenting to unknown friends whom we do not know yet, that Iran is falling apart and will collapse in a similar way to what has happened to Russia after its invasion during the days of the Soviet Union to Afghanistan and after Birostrka Gorbachev. Bishara has tried indirectly in his “realistic presentation” to promote for what he called as the painful concessions which the Iranians have presented in their nuclear program, and to the expansion which the Arabs will not accept in their national structure, he tried implicitly to tell someone “who is not Arab “ Do not be afraid of the Iranian threat.
In the heart of this confrontation, the process of the Decisive Storm has occurred, Bishara said that we do not know its end, but do not tell us ; How do you ally with Saudi Arabia and support it?, because we will tell you how can you justify the Iranian expansion and support the dictatorship in the name of the Arab nationalism, so he presented to us a deal like the way of keeping silent regarding our sin, so we will do the same in return, or as the merchants of Mafia’s deals say turn a blind eye and I will do the same.
The watermelon of Bishara is lost in the scarp track which is led by Saudis, so the glimmer of hope ends before the ink of what he wrote dries.
Our issue is not to discuss whatever has been mentioned in the lecture of Bishara, or his attempts to cover the attitudes with ambiguity through which he can provide impressions and suggestions to hide the real identity of his party, and giving some studied images of its psychological and nerve interactions into the minds and feelings in order to show implicit message that contributes in drawing false consciousness of the identity of the conflicts in the region.
The main task of Bishara’s text is removing Israel from the memory of the Arab challenges, and highlighting the matters like an impossible example for an Arab free secular independent democratic country that stems from the equality in law among its citizens, keeps their national dignity, adopts their national issues and fighting for them, but Bishara tells us from where can I grant you such a country. Before us there is a dictator example that is supported by an Iranian colonial invasion, in contrast of international abandonment, Russian forgiving, and an American neglecting. O Arab the sea is behind you and the Persians are in front of you, so where to escape ? you do not have but the kitchen knives; Saudi Arabia, so turn your blind eye and be pragmatic as your opponents, be in one closed rank behind the commander of the liberal campaign your Master Salman Bin Abdul Aziz, and we will discuss the democratic matter after the war.
Bishara did not tell us how America came to have an understanding with Iran without the Israeli awareness, So does he allow to let us ask how Iran has succeeded in imposing its augustness and made of America its peer although it protects Israel in all over the world, and succeeded alone in forcing them to give up of Israel and accepts it as a reality. The attitudes are clear according to Iran and its allies, which is the first threat at the Israeli eyes,? Are not Iran and its allies and their forefront Hezbollah whom Bishara saw them as an invasion that dismantles the Arab structure from Lebanon to Yemen, and why such of this Israeli interest in the Decisive Storm Process in Yemen, Is all of this an Israeli imagination or misbehavior or is there any advice that can be directed to the Israelis in somewhere?
According to the generation of the nationalists, the compass is simply still Israel, a compass which Bishara wanted to avoid its progress in an attempt for its forgetting. According to this compass we the remnant of this generation, the matters are simply like that; Egypt of Morsi and Egypt of Al Sisi are equal in their attitudes towards Israel, furthermore, the degree of examination and the democratic analysis of Bishara do not concern us, According to this generation Syria is a frontline country against Israel and its army is the last of Arab armies which its fighting doctrine based on building a force against Israel, this explains the secret of prolonged targeting of Israel to this army rather than any other army of the alliance of the Decisive Storm process, Israel is targeting Syria in the heart of this war which its army wages a war against the rebels of Bishara whom are interested in the graces with the leaders of the process as kings and princes.
According to our generation, Hezbollah is a real resistance; its hostility to Israel does not need to be legalized either if the owner of the seal an Arab thinker or a mayor, according to this generation Iran is supporting Syria, Hezbollah, and the resistance in Palestine and at their forefront Hamas Movement, which is branching from the democratic organization that is liked by Bishara ( The Muslim Brotherhood) and from a sectarian structure that does not like the sectarian descriptions which Bishara accused Iran and its intervention with. Iran and Hezbollah are still supporting Hamas which was expelled by the kings and the princes, because the friends’ leaders of Bishara did not succeed in agitating the situation out of its openness to Israel.
Mr.Bishara, The issue is Israel which we did not find any trace of it in your precious lectures; we can understand your descriptions of the matters in the bilateral a democratic movement or a dictator national country, in order to say a democratic movement, then to say the democratic movement has been hindered due to the Iranian expansion’s project, that of none the Arabs accepts. Therefore, take your knives and go behind Ahmad Al-Asiri, and kill thousands of the Yemenis children, women, ole people, young people, and men, But you want us not hear the applauder of Israel ?!
The issue is that the equation which it draws, says that the nationalism wants to assassinate the democracy in the region, so get out of your nationalism and come to have your democracy, but after you finished from the process of Decisive Storm. From the scene of your desert there is one oasis of democracy, who guess will win ?
But unfortunately the resolution ( Azmi )has wandered in the illusion of determination…..so the good news ( Bishara ) has lost.
Translated by Lina Shehadeh,
2015-04-25 | عدد القراءات 1867
