Press TV reports that the Political Leader of Hamas Khalid Meshaal has called on Arab countries to forge stronger ties with the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Arab and Islamic countries should consolidate their unity and distinguish friend from foe, he said while addressing a ceremony held in the Syrian capital, Damascus, to commemorate the demise anniversary of the Founder of Iran’s Islamic Revolution, the late Imam Khomeini.
He stressed the importance of achieving real reconciliation between Islamic countries.
Meshaal envisioned new prospects in the region, which promised the victory of the forces of resistance over enemies.
——-
Commentary: this is a very interesting and highly significant event as it proves that Hamas has taken a fundamental strategic decision to openly ally itself with Iran. This decision, in turn, indicates that Hamas has reached a number of highly significant conclusions:
1) Syria cannot be trusted by the Resistance
2) the Shia/Sunni divide is not nearly as important as some would like it to be
3) Hamas now is openly defying the Wahabi/Salafi extremists, al-Qaeda included
4) Hamas is distancing itself from its hardline Sunni roots (Muslim Brotherhood)
5) Tehran has now become the center of the Resistance of the entire Middle-East
The USraelians have been making accusations for a while already about Iran supporting (or, as they would say, being “behind”) Hamas. I had seen no evidence of this until Meshaal’s trip to Tehran and his meeting with the Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Frankly, I was dubious that Hamas would have the wisdom to overcome the traditional anti-Shia and anti-Persian prejudices which are so common in the Sunni Arab world (and which are only exacerbated by the situation in Iraq).
Hamas’ strategic “redirection” to an open alliance with Iran is therefore a major seminal event which will, hopefully, lead to a broader anti-Zionist alliance in the Middle-East.
First there was the alliance between the Shia Muslim Hezbollah with the Christian Free Patriotic Movement of General Michel Aoun. Now the Sunnis of Hamas are joining the united anti-Zionist front making it, for the first time, a truly multi-confessional Resistance movement. Hopefully, this will set an example for the Iraqi Sunni and Shia Resistance movements in Lebanon who, sooner or later, will have to forge a common front against the Occupation.
There are also many big loosers here: the Wahabi/Salafis extremists which are now becoming basically irrelevant. Ditto for their Saudi patrons. Then the old, almost prehistoric, secular movements such as the Baathists, the PLO and Fatah, of course, but also the Arab League and the OIC and the rest of the entire structure put in place by the imperialist powers to dominate the Middle-East. All of them are essentially becoming irrelevant: at best they are useless bystanders; mostly they are an integral part of the problem.
Hamas’ strategic decision is very, very good news indeed. To paraphrase Condi’s words, we are witnessing the birth of a new Middle-East, although not quite the one she was hoping for. With an attack on Iran now probably inevitable and imminent, the Resistance has resolved all the issues which could have weakened it and it is as ready as it could ever be to stand up to the Empire’s onslaught.
(Needless to say, the corporate press is not reporting a single word about all this. This is arguably the biggest story in the Middle-East for a long while, and nobody is noticing it. Scary, bizarre, freaky, and pathetic I think, but also predictable)
Just a point about Sunni vs Shia in the broader Arab world.
During the July ’06 war an extremist Saudi Cleric issued a fatwa against Hizbollah. Immediately, Egypt’s Muslim brotherhood condemned the Fatwa an announced solidarity with the Hizb. Mass demonstrations were held on Hizb’s behalf.
Even more significantly, the MB in Egypt came out in support of Hizb against the Siniora government during the May conflict.
The Egyptian **government** fears Iran and Hizb, not because they fear any aggression, but because they know their own public admires Shiite Iran and despises (allegedly) Sunni Mubarak.
I’m less familiar with Jordan but I suspect its similar.
You are correct. This Shia/Sunni divide is not quiet as big as some would want it to be (say in Tel Aviv or Washington). Still, the Wahabi nutcases (like al-Qaeda) are still hell-bent on calling the Shias “Rejectionists” and even idolaters – so its not like all is rosy on that front either. But the trend is, I hope, towards a fundamental shift from confession-based alliances to the pragmatic of a united front against the Zionist occupation of Palestine and the US occupation of Iraq.
I can already see the Neocons and Likudniks playing this up as a validation of their “concepcia” argument that Hamas-Hezbollah-Syria-Iran form a unifed “web” of terror. My guess is that they know war is coming and are being forced into such relations.
-AA
Those coward Idiots can not decide for themselves , they can not decide now that America is calling Iran axis of evil and planning to destroy it , the cowards in the Arab world take their orders from washington. Algeria used to have a mind of its own and i used to be proud of my country but im seeing obvious signs that it is following the herd .
Saker
there are plenty of Hadiths that forbid ANY muslim to call another muslim an idolater, Prophet Muhamed (PBUH) asked once someone if he had opened someone s heart to see that lack of faith , so they are forbidden to do so , and leave the Judgement for ALLAH . and those who doubt anyone s faith may be harming their own faith according to the hadith too .
Some very good analysis Saker that I happen to concur with.
I want to ask you, what do you think about the lack of Syrian reaction to the Israeli strike on its alleged nuclear site? And do you think that USrael is taking this lack of reaction as a green light to attack Iran’s nuclear sites expecting possibly little or no response? Do you think that Imad Mugniyah’s assassination in Syria plays into this at all?
I posted a comment on this thread yesterday, but it seems to have disappeared, along with Tony’s earlier comment?
@mari:
what do you think about the lack of Syrian reaction to the Israeli strike on its alleged nuclear site? And do you think that USrael is taking this lack of reaction as a green light to attack Iran’s nuclear sites expecting possibly little or no response? Do you think that Imad Mugniyah’s assassination in Syria plays into this at all?
Dear Mari,
First, I want to welcome you on my blog; I think it is the first time you post here, right? I hope that you will post more often. Your questions are very interesting ones which I can only give short answers to here, but I encourage you to look through my previous articles on this blog as I have addressed them in some details in the past. Here are my short answers:
1) I am not sure what to make of the Syrian lack of reaction. If there had really been nothing at that location the Syrians could have invited the foreign press corps to that location and have a big laugh about how stupid the Israelis were. They did nothing of the sort and that leads me to believe that there definitely was something there. What? Well, most definitely NOT some secret nuclear program research facility (that theory is really laughable), but possible some missile storage complex, or some command and control facility, I don’t know. What is sure is that the Syrians are in no position to talk back or otherwise threaten Israel. So they took the strike for what it meant: the Israelis are the bosses here and you guys better heel before we whack you hard.
2) No, I don’t feel that the strike in Syria says anything about what Iran could do. Iran is in a totally different category from Syria, and I would argue that even Hezbollah is, in reality, way more powerful than Syria. Both Iran and Hezbollah can literally cover Israel with missile strikes and neither Iran nor Hezbollah have any fear at all of the Israelis. And, of course, Khamenei and Nasrallah are exceptionally intelligent, principled and courageous leaders, whereas Assad is just a spineless playboy much more similar to, say, a Hariri. Iran might decide not to respond to a limited US attack, but not because it is weak of fearful, but because that would be the better political strategy. But there is no doubt in my mind that the leaders in Tel Aviv and Washington fully understand that Iran is more than willing to taken them on and that, unlike them, it has what it takes to fight a long war.
3) I am convinced that Mugniyeh was killed with the complicity of the Syrians. There is no doubt in my mind whatsoever about this. I am not at all sure of why the Syrians would do this. I could speculate, of course, but whatever the reason, the fact remains that the Syrians were accomplices.
I have to tell you that I am certain that Assad will stab the Resistance in the back as soon as the USraelians offer him a good price for it. And Hamas knows that too (No wonder that after the Mugniyeh murder Meshaal decided to take a trip to Tehran).
Have you paid attention to the trip the Syrian defense minister made the Iran recently? It is my gut feeling that behind the facade of diplomatic smiles and cooperation agreements the Iranians gave a clear warning to the Syrians that they better think long and hard before openly joining the USraelian empire.
As Tony often says, there will come a day when Assad will address the Israeli Knesset and thereby seal his sellout. I think that Iran, Hezbollah and Hamas all understand this and that they are preparing for this.
I hope that this answers your questions. If not, please let me know.
Kind regards,
The Saker
Saker, I think Assad *would* sell out if the price is right, but do you think the Israelis will ever offer that price? i.e. tho Golan up to the Galilee? I’m thinking it may be better if Israel gains a Likud government (and sadly a McCain government here) just to be safe.
Then Assad will not be able to sell out. As for the ‘West,’ I think their plan was to topple Syria. No need for any deal. Its only after Iraq proved so disastrous that they began to contemplate any deal at all and then only offer the fewest crumbs possible.
Also, Syria realizes that the stronger Iran and Hizbollah are, the better the deal they can get.
@Lysander: well, its not like the Israelis need to pay the price alone: the USA will, as always, gladly, thankfully, pay for them. What the Israelis have is the stick of unleashing the Empire on Assad if he does not behave. The carrot will be provided by the USA, of course.
As for the Golan Heights, I don’t think Assad gives a rat’s ass about it. His grandstanding on this is just part of what is needed to impersonate an Arab patriot, but in reality Assad cares only about one thing: power. The Golan Heights are just another element in his never ending quest of remaining in power.
Sure, the Golan Heights would figure at the top of Assad’s sellout price, but only because getting them back would make him look good, or so he would think (Nasrallah got south Lebanon back without ever negotiating or, much less so, selling out. Any Arab understands that).
If we end up with a McCain administration God help us all. The guy makes Dubya look smart, articulate and almost educated. I sure hope that this puppet-masters will “Reaganify” him, i.e. keep him away from any real decision-making (as was the case with Reagan in his last years at the White House). But even if McCain is in the White House the Imperial High Command is in Jerusalem and the US foreign policy will be determined in Israel. So McCain or no McCain, its the folks in Israel which will call the shots (even literally) on Syria and the rest of the Middle-East.
You are totally correct about Iran and Hezbollah raising the price of a Syrian sellout. My guess, and its only a guess, is that a US attack on Iran will happen long before any major development on the Syria/Israel front. I guess that all players are now waiting to see what happens after the strike takes place.
But your guess is as good as mine.
Cheers!
The Saker
PS: thanks for your frequent and always insightful comments here. I very much appreciate your posts!
Firstly, I’m not sure that Syrian non-reaction to September’s Israeli strike is a sign of weakness. Inviting international press or inspectors in would:
a) have put them on the defensive at a time when Israel (which had made an unprovoked strike on another nation’s territory) was the guilty party; and
b) not have solved anything. After all, Iraq and Iran both allowed extensive inspections of their ‘facilities’ without calming hte hysteria over their ‘weapons programmes’. So IMHO the Syrians were right to remain stumm.
As for Assad, I really cannot see how he could survive any deal with Israel which did not involve a FULL return of the Golan. Even Sadat – widely viewed as a traitor in the Arab world – got ALL occupied Egyptian territory back in ‘return’ for a ‘peace’ deal with Israel. Since there is little prospect the Israelis will consider a full return of the Golan (which turns into no prospect if, as seems quite possible, a Likud govt regains power) I don’t think we need contemplate an Israel-Syria peace any time soon.
Thank you for the welcome Saker. I am sure I will now be visiting your site often for news and analysis of that news from you and others who post here.
I just wanted to share with you all the following powerfully written piece:
Collateral Damage
What It Really Means When America Goes to War
By Chris Hedges
http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/174939/chris_hedges_war_and_occupation_american_style
In solidarity with the truth shall set you free…
I apologize as the entire website address did not appear here, therefore I will post it in two parts:
http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/174939/chris_
hedges_war_and_occupation_american_style