Opposition for construction, not for destruction [Archives:2007/1104/Opinion]
By: Abbas Al-Dailami
Doubt is of two types, the first one is for construction, which leads to searching for facts and full satisfaction. The second type of doubt is meant for destruction, as it aims to circulate rumors of frustration and despair. This is the difference between the positive and negative doubts. The case is similar when it comes to the expected role to be played by the opposition. An opposition can be for construction, and this leads to exposing mistakes, identifying barriers and overcoming negatives. The opposition may be for destruction and its primary aim is to plant frustration, pessimism and pay harm to the nation and the public interests.
The opposition of destruction destroys itself before anything else, particularly if it got far away from the proper concept of its role. It ignores what is required from it to address the public reasonably and logically, nor does it care for public interests, the national principles and the right of everyone to live in the country and defend its sovereignty and achievements.
There is a huge difference between an opposition holding the scissors of a skilled surgeon having enough knowledge and adherence to ethics of his job and another opposition holding the hammer of destruction. The first type of opposition brings people together on a ground of shared efforts while the second loses what is around it and people look at it as a fool guy setting aflame a ship he is on board because he is not satisfied with its crew.
From this concept, we indicate several achievements reached by the National Unity such as democracy, human rights, including the freedom of expression and the right to organize legal opposition and political parties. We pride the unity democracy which we learned about and understood its principles, regulations, as well as how to exercise it in a proper way. We have to understand and exercise the unity democracy as our predecessors did, and it is not a shame on us to benefit from others' experience.
Of the alphabets of learning about democracy and understanding the proper exercises of opposition is that opposition must be organized for the sake of the national interest, caring for correcting mistakes, exposing negatives, driving forward the development wheel toward construction, competing in the field of development and update and preventing any harm targeting the country and its unity.
Of the ignorance of the principles related with exercising the opposition-related right is that the individual concedes his/her right to live in the country and behave the way he likes on condition this doesn't contradicts the teachings of Islam, the national principles or ethics of the job.
To be clearer, the one who opposes a ruler, government or a ruling party and resorts to what harms the national principles, threatens the social security, divulge military secrets or gratify enemies of the country means that he/she abandoned his right to live in the country. He/she appears bankrupt losing all the ethics of patriotism, thereby causing him/her to face harsh criticism that he/she is no longer eligible to live in the country.
We should make a distinction between the nation, which is the possession of everyone and not the possession of the ruler or his party, on the one hand, and other ideas and approaches we oppose to, on the other.
In the democratic countries, all the people race in the streets to gain the support of voters, and in light of this point, those in the government and others backing the opposition get equal chances in their attempt to win support of voters. Therefore, the Yemeni opposition is extremely foolish since it makes out of the nation's destruction a means for destroying the regime, or exploits any harms to the national interests and achievements in winning support of the public in streets and instigate the public against the regime. In this way, the opposition contradicts expectations of the public and work against the public interests, particularly if it reached the extent of harming the country's sovereignty and stability, as well as values and principles for the sake of which people saved no precious efforts.
It is time for us to learn about the opposition of construction, the type of opposition organized for the sake of the country and its people. We need to make a distinction between nobility of the opposition's role and behaving foolishly in a way harming the nation and its interests and people.
Source: 26 September Weekly.
——
[archive-e:1104-v:15-y:2007-d:2007-11-19-p:opinion]
