Reflections on the Dialectics of Blood and Politics and Paradoxes in the Syrian Scene

Reflections on the Dialectics of Blood and Politics and Paradoxes in the Syrian Scene

By Dr. Hussein Yamani, Writer and Researcher in International Economic Relations.

Politics Over Blood: Paradoxes of Alliances in the Syrian Scene. Let us look at some scenes that occurred in Syria with the standard of awareness and a unified benchmark of comparison, not a standard that serves one party over another. Let us reflect on this matter.

First, if we go back to history, to the French occupation of Syria, children and the elderly were killed, and the honor of women was not spared. Syrian women were killed and raped, and trees and stones were destroyed. It was a flagrant violation of human rights at that time under the concept of colonialism, expansion, and seizing the country's resources. Even the French leader Gouraud stood at the grave of Saladin, kicked it with his foot, and said: Here we are back, O Saladin. An insult across history. Destruction from this occupier did not stop; rather, this occupier still supports all forms of the ongoing occupation on our land, as it is the primary supporter of the Zionist occupation in our region and the first supporter of their project for expansion and establishing so-called Greater Israel.

Al-Sharaa set all these differences aside and headed toward Paris to draw closer to France, under what pretext? Diplomatic relations through which we seek to strengthen ties and build a new Syria.

Let us set this scene aside and move to another.

America, the only evil on this earth. There is no corruption on this earth in which it does not have a participating hand. In fact, most of the terrorist bombing operations that occurred in the Middle East were with primary support from the Zionist-Americans. They were aware of all these movements, and they were the ones using them to fuel internal conflict so that we would fight among ourselves, for brother to kill brother. They were moving the scene as they wished.

They entered Iraq and killed children and women. More than a million children were killed in Iraq, according to recent statistics, and perhaps there are other unmentioned statistics, and we do not know what happened. They also destroyed Iraq and handed it over to the rival of the Sunnis, not out of love for the Shiites, but for more internal infighting. They enjoy seeing Muslim blood shed on this land.

After that, they entered Afghanistan and participated in every fitna in the Arab world without exception, killing children and women and destroying trees and stones. Al-Sharaa was among the first to rush to the White House, boasting of his relationship with America under the pretext that he wanted to build a new, strong, and cohesive Syria, and that diplomatic relations do not look at the differences of the past.

Let us set this scene aside and go to Russia.

Russia is the first partner in Bashar al-Assad's crimes in Syria. Russia was the one engineering, sending, planning, defining targets, bombing, and striking. All the blood of our people in Syria was shed with the strong participation of the Russian regime, which stood firmly with Bashar al-Assad. Let us put it differently: Russia is the other face of Bashar.

Despite all that, Al-Sharaa rushed with all his might to Russia to document relations, under the pretext that he wants to see a new Syria free of differences and does not want to look at the mistakes of the past. Let us build Syria in its present and look to the future.

Let us set this matter aside.

Let us come to the Shiites. The Shiites also committed crimes in Syria, killing children and women, and no one denies this criminality. But what we deny now, which does not fall within the three standards we mentioned, is that there is no regulation of interests between Syria and Iran.

At least the enemy between us and you is one, so why do we not cooperate regarding this enemy? While the enemy between Syria and Russia is different, between Syria and France is different, and between Syria and America is different. Rather, there is one partner. Notice how the equation has become: there is one partner, which is the Zionist occupation.

How can I document relations with them to support the Zionist occupation in Palestine and not forget the wounds in a battle with the Shiites, while I forgot them in a battle with France, Russia, and America? Is this not considered a negative perspective? Is this not a double standard?

The strange thing is that when the discussion reaches the Shiites, Takfiri slogans are raised, and ideological differences are invoked, and society rages that these are the source of terrorism and the most hostile people to us through the scale of blood and creed. But the same question: Are not France, Russia, and America the real core of the matter in the scale of blood and creed? Did they not attack us? Why did we drop these slogans in our relations with them and raise them in our relations with the Shiites?

This can only be understood as one thing: the true compass in our region is not moved by patriotism, principles, interests, or a new Syria, but by the Zionist-Americans. They are the ones who know their interests and want Syria to be according to their vision, built based on their interests.

Someone might ask: What is the relationship between the United States and Russia? Yes, the superficial and known relationship is that they are at war, but internally there are mutual interests. There are divisions of the Syrian cake. Perhaps there were warnings from Russia that if there were no relationship with the new regime and no interests between them, it would intervene with all its might so that this regime would turn into a spark that harms them. Thus, it was necessary to divide this cake.

When will we wake up from our intoxication, emerge from our heedlessness, and realize that the Zionist-Americans are our arch-enemy? They are the ones who came to fix their pillars in the Middle East, and they use rulers as chess pieces, moving them as they wish.

If the ruler follows the Zionist-American plan and maintains their interests in the region, they bless him, welcome him, and call for following him. If the ruler differs with them in this matter and demands freedom, they label him a terrorist.

This is the harsh and bitter truth. Unfortunately, you find that we, as a herd policy, follow everything America plans. America tells us this is our enemy, so we say this is our enemy. America tells us this is our ally, so we say this is our ally.

In the end, we are building the Zionist-American project by following America's policy in the region.

Look at the Arabian Gulf. It has become legitimate targets for Iran. Why? Because our lands are full of military bases that did not come to protect our countries, but came to protect the Zionist project in the region. All radars and missile defenses have been moved from the Gulf to the land of occupied Palestine to defend the occupation, not to defend the land of the Gulf.

Why? Because they do not seek to protect the Gulf, but primarily seek to protect the Zionist occupation.

When will we realize these things? When will we have jealousy for reality? When will we build our nation with our own hands and not with the hands of the Zionist-Americans?

As long as we cling and hold onto this treacherous enemy, by God, we will not be liberated; rather, he will create conflicts and differences in every period to keep this region in constant struggle.

We ask God Almighty to unite the word of this nation, to keep us away from the treacherous Zionist-Americans, and to establish the rule of God on this earth as God is pleased with us.

This article is in the path of Allah.

And our final prayer is: All praise is due to Allah, Lord of the worlds..