Which is worst, madman Assad gassing his own people to remain in power or suicide attacks by Islamist terrorists to impose Islam? In the Middle East, it should not be about “either” or “or”. It should not be if not the terror of the Islamists then it will be the terror of madman Assad, or the other way around. Minorities beware.
The same goes in Egypt where it should not be about Mubarak or Morsi; one who calls for Jihad and the other who oppresses his people, which feeds the masses into the Islamist nets.
The Arab League and Iran want the argument to bivouac between their two evils, in order to avoid the discussion around the rule of law, Democratic values, and regime change. All Arab or Muslim arguments swing between two-dimensional anomalies. Between Iran and Saudi Arabia, between Hezbollah and Hamas, between Assad and the Muslim Brotherhood. It is no accident. The Arab League and Iran want everyone to believe these are the only options available in this part of the world.
Grant you, Wahhabi Saudi Arabia is waging a battle within a battle by fighting the Muslim Brotherhood, but the larger framework remains a battle between Sunni Islam and Shia Islam.
When the Arab Spring showed us the real reasons why the Arab masses were rising (i.e. economic parity, jobs, and transparency), almost the entire Arab League member countries, in addition to Iran, conspired to turn it into an argument between the Islamists or the ruthless rulers by making Islam the centerpiece of the uprising. It matters not which side any member selects as long as they do not select the color that paints these regimes as the tyrannical rulers unable to relieve their people from the choke-hold they have on their economies.
Selecting any other option diminishes the value of the regimes in any Arab country or Iran by highlighting their shortcomings. This means taking sides between a Morsi or a Mubarak, an Assad or the Muslim Brotherhood without thinking that neither is the answer to a better region. Leaders like Mubarak or Assad are conveyor belts to the extremism of Iran and Saudi Arabia. Iran could not be any happier for the sectarian war Assad is waging, and so are the Salafis Saudi Arabia backs secretly.
Don’t you find it odd that both Iran and Saudi Arabia, the most egregious countries when it comes to the protection of the minorities, back both Assad and Mubarak? Not really. Both countries could care less what Assad and Mubarak stand for today as long as their confrontation remains on course to spread the extreme Islam both wish to impose upon us when one side wins over the other. Why would Saudi Arabia support a Mubarak-like figure, who would protect the Copts, when at home Saudi Arabia beheads or chases all Christians away? Because patience is a virtue. Eventually, they will come for all the minorities in the Middle East, and so will Iran. Minorities beware.
It matters little who wins because the winner will kill, or chase away, all the Christians and all the Jews, and the rest will have to convert while dancing in the winner’s circle. Minorities beware.
If you believe the minorities are safe with Saudi Arabia or Iran just because they back Assad or Mubarak, you need to have your head examined. Both countries have higher priorities to tackle today, which also seems to make us forget who they really are.
The Arab League and Iran are leading us by our nose, and in spite of all common sense, by selecting the arguments for us to remain centered between the two evils. Yet, the smartest people take one side or the other unaware they can empower a different narrative.
For example, refusal to take sides by refusing both sides publicly empowers the other options Arab rulers and hardcore Islamists loathe considering. Silence is unhelpful in this case because the Arab League and Iran control the narrative. Thinking they will self-destruct in Syria without considering the possibility of one winner is shortsighted. The Iranians tiring from the Iran-Iraq war did not tire them so well, did it now? It made them stronger and far more dangerous. Minorities beware.
Article after article, and comment after comment, on popular websites, drive the argument towards “either” or “or”. It is high time to consider the complexities of the Middle East with an eye towards the role of each player and its ultimate agenda centered on either the end of the world for their Messiah to rise or control of the world by a Caliphate. End of the world or control of the world. It cannot get more sinister than that.
By considering the two options in Mubarak or Assad, we are in fact arguing for either the end of the world or its control by a Caliphate. Both regimes can only survive with their mentors deciding for them.
Start considering any other narrative but those selected by the evil players of today, and start writing or commenting on them.
COMMENTS