Saudi-Egyptian-Jordanian axis in service of the Zionist solution (Part 1 of 2)Diplomacy to disarm resistance [Archives:2006/970/Opinion]

August 7 2006

By: Mohammed Abdulhakim Diyab
One does tangibly feel the impact of what is happening in Lebanon on the political and practical life in Egypt. The resistance has restored the prestige to the approach of resistance, and its culture.

What the Egyptian Government has done to distract attention away from gains of the resistance has given a reverse effect. They created waves of resentment for raising fuel and energy prices and tickets on public buses and railways at percentages nearing 50 percent. The prices of other commodities and goods are also on the rise. There is a deep and degraded view towards the ruling group as being a domestic colonization and thus more dangerous than the foreign occupation. Overnight the resistance has become a goal many Egyptians seek to follow in accordance with the Lebanese style.

An observer feels that the great majority of the people look at the battle of the resistance as its own and their prime concern is exploring the means by which to offer support and help. We in this regard cannot ignore the existence of certain pockets consisting of individual humans, putting on white gowns and growing thick beards, refusing to support the resistance and displaying a sterile and prejudiced understanding of what is happening on the ground. They consider it a sectarian act. Those do not possess any alternative to sectarian fanaticism in their visualization of the ideal example of resistance. They give sectarianism priority to affiliation to the homeland or the nation or the people. This is the behaviors and belief of recluse Salafi groups preferring to follow the orbit of any axis they enter or that is led by Saudi Arabia. Whether those pockets are aware or not of, they have entrenched themselves with the Zionists.

Many sites have changed into beehive-like workshops in expression of the large-scale support for the Lebanese resistance and the Hezbollah and into practical steps and measures. This support is not portrayed in the media in the required manner and level. The important thing is that the unions of journalists, lawyers and physicians, the federation of Arab lawyers and Kifayah movement have conducted activities in support of the resistance. It is rather difficult to find any national movement or an individual absent from those activities, especially activists from the new groups adopting the change that emerged in the past two years. It has been noted that the organizations financed by American, Canadian and European sources remained with a marginal role and some of them sufficed themselves to issuing weak statements and the same case was that of the ruling party, repeating superficial words attributed to war strategists and expert analysts, supporting the Egyptian conniving official stand and describing a confrontation with the Zionist state as adventure and a kind of dreams as well as considering any military stand in support of the resistance as irrational.

The solution submitted by the ruling party is a continuation in conceding the power of the Zionist state and not to confront it. Many have ridiculed the stance because it contradicts the situation, as the Hezbollah party is dealing blows deep inside the Zionist state. Questions are raised about the inability of most of the Arab armies to combat the Zionist occupation and other questions about the justification of spending on training and arming armies that have nothing to do with defending the homelands or liberating them besides admission of the official Arab rhetoric of defeat in avoidance of engaging in any battle.

Some express the view that there is no justification for existence of armies and no need to spend on them as long as they do not provide safety for their citizens or defend their peoples. The problem now is that the Lebanese resistance and Hezbollah caused the loss of confidence in many of the armies. Armament of those armies is deducted from budgets scheduled for food, clothing, education and health for using them for providing safety, whereas they are not used in these circumstances of danger. It means these armies are not meant for defense or standing up to danger threatening the nation, but are changed into tools protecting the enemy when they need them in facing the danger of independence. The enemy can use them in disarming the nation, not just the arms of the resistance. As the official Arab system did in financing the wars waged against the Arabs in the past two decades and some of those Arab states accepted to take part in and offer all means of support for the invasion of the region, the current stand is the obedience to the scheme drawn up by the American administration to fight the resistance. It is a scheme scheduled to be implemented at several levels.

Mohammed Abdulhakim Diyab is a writer and political analysts from Egypt. He is a prominent member of the Arab National Congress.