Between Islamists, Imperialists and Zionists
Poor Analysis of Nationalists/Communists
ANC, Nationalist and Communist Current
FPR, Forces of Politicizing Religion
CT, Conspiracy Theory
ZAR, Zionist Ashkenazi Regime – (Israel)
The deterioration of Arab Nationalist and Communist (ANC) currents between 1970s 2010 provide valuable chance for the counter-revolution that led to the most dangerous and catastrophic developments in Arab recent history crystallized into two main phenomena:
Arab politics became subjugated and dominated by rulers of oil rental colonized countries
In addition to their role as client states, those rulers use the rent surplus to support three reactionary currents in Arab Homeland:
1) The so-called businessmen class which became an Islamist and “liberal” bourgeois especially in Egypt. Most of their investments were far from production.
2) Many of the unemployed semi-literate youths were recruited, financed and trained to become preachers and terrorist fighters for the sake of Wahhabi and Salafi Islam.
3) The Moslem Brotherhood which was either allies of the ruling Arab regimes or semi-oppressed in comparison to the secular currents.
The final result of these classes, organizations and terrorists is the strengthening of the domination of the core capitalist and Zionist regime over Arab Homeland.
The defeat of ANC currents following 1967 war, and the collapse of the Soviet Union during 1980s did strengthen and facilitate the rise of new Forces of Politicizing Religion (FPR) on the one hand, and failed to educate/agitate the masses against those currents on the other. In other words, the ANC, in fact, lost the masses.
Actually, the reality was more bitter since many of the ANC organizations fell into alliance and dialogue with the forces of FPR which, in turn, cleverly exploited such positive circumstances, and acted as if they are against imperialism, but under the table they were building a secret compromise and strong alliance with counter-revolution. The secular forces failed to realize that, until it became obvious in the last two years of the so-called Arab Spring.
One can define the era from 1970s-2010 in the Arab Homeland as an era that started by compradorization of power and economy in its beginning and adopting neo-liberalism later and until today. It is important to refer to these developments to explain the industrial and agricultural decline (de-development and even de-reformism) of the economies of the progressive/nationalist /secular Arab regimes (Egypt, Iraq, Syria and Algeria). These developments made it easy for the regimes of oil rent supported by their surplus to dominate Arab politics as it is mentioned above.
In this era of compradorization, de-development and political domination by rulers of oil rent countries (especially the Saudi monarchy); Arab Homeland was subjugated to two tiers which deepened and prolonging oppression, dependency and normalization with the ZAR. The two tiers are: Tajweef al-Waa’I, which is a designed policy of repression of political organizations by ruling regimes aiming at liquidating and terminating any opposition especially ones which demand democracy, liberties, development women emancipation, Arab unity…etc. This Tajweef for its final goal of Tajreef al-Tharwah which is the continuous process of the ruling corrupted, crony and parasitic capitalist classes who control people’s wealth, but did not devote any of that wealth for development.
Moreover, the oil regimes spent trillions of dollars importing weapons from the US and another imperialist countries and still unable to protect themselves from the false threat by Iran, and at the same time leading a reactionary war against Syria following their wars against Bahrain and Libya.
A Conspiracy that we Fails to Grasp
Based on direct experience, Arabs in general are most believers in Conspiracy Theory (CT). Others, especially in the west ignore that and accuse us of exaggeration and phobia. I believe that there is always a western capitalist white plan(s) against Arab nation. Conspiracy is only the moment of executing that plan(s).
Part of the capitalist west’s plan against Arab nation is the secret relationship with Moslem Brothers, this in addition to their alliance with the so-called moderate Arab regimes and their enmity against the nationalist regimes.
In 1978, three long interviews were published in MERIP Reports, the US leftist magazine at the time, with Rashid Ghanoushi (Tunis), Hasan al-Turabi (Sudan) and Mahmoud al-Zahar (a Palestine). All three of them confirmed that they did not consider the US as an enemy, and that their problem is only with Israel.
From an ideological and economic point view, one can’t ask Islamists to be anti-capitalist or to believe in development in the interest of popular classes or to deal with class issues and women emancipation. But, what is interesting is that they ignore the fact that the relationship between the US imperialism and the ZAR is tied by umbilical cord. Bothe, US and ZAR are one front.
ANC forces thought that those Islamists were politically backward and unable to grasp the deep relationship between US and ZAR, and that rulers of the Gulf are mere and simply “Beduins” and uneducated. In fact many of them are well educated and all of these regimes are led by secret white colonialists who are not consultants but leaders and commanders.
Developments that follow Arab “Spring ” uncover an astonishing fact that FPR were part of a pact with both imperialism and Zionism and that their rejection of Zionism was a mere manipulation of the masses. These developments show that the FPR deeply believe in the “right” of the ZAR to exist on Palestinian Homeland. They declared that either directly or indirectly.
While, the FRP regime in Tunis escaped the popular demand of adding to the constitution an amendment to oppose normalization with ZAR, the same FRP regime in Egypt declared that Camp David Agreement with ZAR is valid and must be respected by their government.
After the collapse of Mubarak regime in Egypt, the FRP leaders stated that to cancel Camp David we must go to the people. But after they got majority of parliament seats, they changed and argued now that, the agreement was first accepted by the parliament and to cancel it we must go to the parliament again. This was the answer of Mahmoud Amer a leader of Egyptian ruling party in an interview on al-Manar TV (7 March 2013)
This means that they either believe that they will be re-elected for ever or that they will make a coup de tat if they were to lose elections.
Amer said that it is the right of Jews, Moslems and Christians to live in Palestine as they did in the past. He completely ignored the occupation of Palestine by Zionist settlers and the eviction of its people! While another leader, from the first staff in the same ruling party Sa’ad al-Katatni (see
during Mubarak rule, led a demonstration asking Mubarak to let them go to fight Israel. In the same YouTube, Mubarak said: Go, why do you want my permission! Al-Katatni and his party are NOW seeking peace with the ZAR!
Why did this party move from consulting the people to consult the parliament?
It is because they guarantee that its majority will confirm maintaining Camp David Agreement on the one hand, and they might believe that they will influence the masses during their rule to accept that agreement for the long run on the other. But their obvious manipulation is that they knew that the Egyptian parliament during the Sadat and Mubarak administration were not democratically elected and representing the people.
The Washington Post interviewed Issam al-Arian, another leader in Hizb al-Hurriah wal-Adalah, the ruling party in Egypt. To the question: “What about Israel, Will Egypt keep the treaty? He answered: “The state would keep the treaty”. And about their position towards the United States he said: “No. We never talk about America as an enemy”, and about “Israel” he said: “My dream is that we are not going to destroy Israel. If it doesn’t revise its policy against Arabs and Jews, it can destroy itself. My dream is tolive together as we did before the state of Israel”. It is clear that what they are saying is not a personal opinion; it is the political line of the party and the regime.