To clarify, there must be a distinction between Islam as a faith—a personal belief system that adheres to its ethical guidelines—and the transformation or deviation of religion into the constitution of a political party or organization that interprets it according to the views of its leaders. These leaders may be agents of the West or even the East; it makes no difference. I call these forces and systems the “Forces of Politicized Religion FRO. Accordingly, when more than one decide as a group to interpret religion and consider it their constitution they will oblige others to follow them even, but mainly, by force.
I have been challenged and attacked by many followers of these groups and systems, claiming to be Muslims. I always say: “They are Muslims for their leaders, not for Islam.”
These systems and forces, in their latest campaigns against Urobah, have spent 2 trillion dollars against the Arab republics, claiming their regimes are heretical! They also spent billions against Syria, and just two years before Damascus fell, Qatar alone spent 137 billion dollars (as stated by Hamad bin Jassim, Qatar’s former Foreign Minister, who holds the belief that “Arabs are sheep”). Baghdad, Tripoli (Libya), Damascus, Southern Yemen fell, Algeria trembled, and Egypt collapsed like the skin of a bull.
These forces and regimes are fundamentally sectarian and tribal, not Arab or Islamic. They believe in power and money, and they care not how they obtain it—including by collaborating with any side that provides it. In return, they offer the nation. For them, the homeland is a mere place, but not one that must be controlled. The foreigner may rule the land, while they maintain control over the people and the nation’s wealth, receiving a share of it. This aligns with the Trickle-down Economic Theory.
The mentality and culture behind this are rooted in the mindset of the desert Bedouin, who easily folds up his tent, places it on a camel, and moves from one patch of grass and water to another. This is the mentality and culture of the Gulf rulers, the Muslim Brotherhood, Sunni liberation movements, the Shia “Dawah” party, Al-Qaeda, ISIS, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), and others. This clearly shows that all of them believe in sectarianism, not religion, not the nation, and not the homeland. Therefore, they fight among themselves and see no problem in cooperating or even collaborating with foreigners.
Because they have aligned themselves with the West, the creator of terrorism, they have been moved from Libya to the Levant, from Iraq to Mali, from Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the UAE to Afghanistan. And from everywhere, they have come to Syria.
The most dangerous thing about them is that they consider the land itself—not what is beneath it—as the property of God. Therefore, they concede its ownership to foreigners. This is how they interpret the phrase “The kingdom ownership belongs to God,” despite the correct understanding being that “everything will return to God in the afterlife, but humans use it in their lives.” According to their belief, oil and everything beneath the earth, like the gold in Sudan (which was applied during the rule of the Islamist Omar al-Bashir and Hassan al-Turabi, who implemented sharia law, leading to the separation of South Sudan), belongs to whoever discovers and extracts it. Hence, they resent the West, which extracts oil, and give it most of the proceeds. The latest payment, just two months ago, was 5.5 trillion dollars to the foolish Trump, a payment tied to murder and debauchery. Yet, Qatar was bombed, and Qatar’s ruler Tamim was satisfied by Trump’s false statement, “The aggression will not be repeated!” The one who guarantees the non-repetition is the one who started the aggression, whether with American planes piloted by Americans or “Israelis”. Nonetheless, the 57 Arab and Islamic rulers gathered in Doha to weep.
Furthermore, based on their submission and their inability to understand “the kingdom belongs to God,” or their betrayal of the nation, Western scholars have written in development studies what is even uglier: “How come our oil was found in their land?” Of course, this deepens the submission of these Arabs, who are satisfied only with money and power over people.
When rational and scientific analysis doesn’t convince many of them because they refuse to be convinced and don’t read history, they don’t object to Turkey’s occupation of Syrian lands from 1923 to 1939—Antakya, Gaziantep, and Alexandretta—lands that were granted to Turkey by France. Accepting this means that these forces believe Syria’s land belonged to France, and France had the right to give it to Turkey. But how can you be a Muslim and consider another Muslim your brother, while he occupies your home?
Today, analysts in Lebanon are calling for Turkey to confront the Zionist Entity in Syria, even though Turkey has already reached Homos through occupation! They act as though if Turkey were to confront this Entity—which it will not—it would return the land to the Syrians!
This is true for the leaderships of the Sunni sect, while in the Shia sect, they consider Ahvaz (Arabistan) as part of Iran, even though Britain was the one that gave it to them. Today, the sectarian rule in Iraq divides the country between Iran and the U.S. So, when Rumsfeld told Muwfaq Al-Rubaie: “You lied to us, we understood that Iraqis supported Saddam,” he replied: “Yes, but we want to rule.” In other words, they don’t want a homeland.
For these sectarians, God is France and Britain. This is how the Sunnis allowed Turkey to occupy Syrian land, and how the Shia allowed Iran to occupy Iraq land. Terrorists, supported by the West and Zionism, and these FPR, have occupied Syria and offered its land to the Zionist Entity, whether through annexation, military control, or by installing agents. But even dismantle and distribute Syria between the Zionist Entity, the Turks, the Zionized Kurds and the imperialist USA,
This also paved the way for aggression against Yemen. Still, these forces cheer and celebrate with the jihadist leader, Al-Julani, as President, just as the 56 Arab and Islamic authorities welcomed him in Qatar after the Zionist aggression.
Shouldn’t these people at least apologize, or let’s say, someone like Khaled Meshaal, who saw Damascus’s fall at the hands of Al-Julani as the beginning of Jerusalem’s liberation? It’s painfully laughable to bestow this title upon him, “Khaled” and “Meshaal”! But for whose benefit?
____________
The opinions and views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Kana’an’s Editorial Board.