Palestinians pray Friday at Al-Farouq Mosque in Gaza, which was demolished by the Israeli aggression (French)
We are undoubtedly struck by the abundance of talk about Gaza after the war, and its scarcity in relation to the Arab world.
This abundance was accompanied by talk about changes within Israel itself, as well as other parts of the world, while the door to ijtihad remained almost closed with regard to our surrounding world.
I do not rule out that this is due to the limited scope of dialogue in our country for understandable reasons.
I exclude social media and other modern platforms that have allowed broader freedom of expression.
We will need to “edit” the situation before going into details, and by that I mean trying to scrutinize the scene in order to determine the origins and roots of the topic.
This is because the ongoing conflict is not between Israel and Hamas or Yahya Sinwar, as some are trying to portray, and it may be true to say that it is between Israel and the Palestinian people, but that depicts one side of the scene, and not the essence of the truth.
This is due to the rush of most Western leaders, led by the American President, to stand by Israel from day one and Washington’s insistence on using its veto to prevent the Security Council from issuing a ceasefire resolution (four times), while flooding Israel with military and political support to continue killing, destruction and extermination. All of this sheds strong light on the truth, which justifies us to say:
The Western regime, with its institutions, principles, and political and moral values, waged a fierce global war against the Palestinians, Arab Muslims, and Christians, and Israel was its agent in that.
I am talking here about the “Western system” and not all Westerners - taking into account the tens of thousands who regularly demonstrate in many Western cities demanding a ceasefire.
These people could not take to the streets except because the communication revolution allowed them to follow for themselves the war of extermination that was broadcast on television for the first time in history, revealing the true face not only of the Israeli occupation that has been ongoing for 75 years, but also the true face of the white man’s civilization, which the French philosopher’s description brings to mind. Roger Garaudy called him "white evil."
**
I have something to say about the silent part of the scene, by which I mean the Arab world after Gaza.
Although the fighting is still ongoing and its results have not yet crystallized, the historical depth of the resounding event that has been taking place for nearly five months provides us with a framework to discuss the issue from several aspects.
We see echoes outside the Arab world.
There is talk about Israel's aspirations and settlement expansions in Gaza, and its expansion beyond its borders to be a bridge between Asia and Europe.
There is other talk about the chances of the American President in the elections to renew his presidency, as well as the open discussion about the international system and its institutions, and the share of the countries of the South that have flourished in Latin America and Africa, the latter of which rose in popularity after South Africa’s initiative before the International Court of Justice to accuse Israel of genocide, thus defying the United States. And Israel.
The voice of Namibia rose loudly, as it renewed its demand that Germany be properly compensated for the crimes of genocide it committed against it at the beginning of the twentieth century, and voices were echoed in Australia, whose indigenous population (the Aboriginals) renewed their demands for their rights from the immigrants who came to their country during the time of British colonialism.
Despite the importance and diversity of these echoes, I claim that other experts and researchers have not stopped discussing them, and are continuing to do so, while the Arab world has remained outside the picture even though it lies at its heart. Therefore, I consider that my contribution, despite its modesty, could be a call to stir the waters. Stagnant and alert us to the interactions and variables we are facing.
**
Regarding the future of the Arab world, there is something known and unknown.
The most prominent information is the frequency of officials’ talks about the two-state solution, an illusion whose roots are inspired by the decision to divide Palestine with the Jews in 1947, when their numbers at that time did not exceed 6% of the population.
They were allocated 58% of the land, while the Palestinian majority, who own the land and have lived on it for hundreds of years, were given 42% of it - a decision that was not implemented on the ground.
Then some of it was waved back in the 1993 Oslo Accords, and this has remained Israel’s practice in all negotiations, as it uses evasive words, through which it takes and does not give, while it continues to seize the land, and empower the settlers with support and funding from Washington all the time.
As for the unknowns, they are the options for managing the Gaza Strip, in addition to a plan mentioned by the Washington Post that serves Israeli expansion and empowerment through penetration and normalization with soft areas of the world within a framework called the “New Middle East.”
In addition to changing the geography of the sector to activate new plans that are being implemented.
What is observed in this regard is that the Arab regime remained silent and watched, whether in the few that normalized relations with Israel, or those that did not publicly engage in normalization, and it seemed that the majority followed a policy of self-distancing, if we use the common term in Lebanon, and were content with statements and media speeches that did not Go beyond condemnation and denunciation.
This silence was like the empty half of the cup, so to speak, but the anxious and dissatisfied people who were suppressed in the beginning appeared strongly in the second half of it. It is true that their voice was not heard, but 82% of the masses continued to follow the events in Gaza on television day and night. As indicated by Arab public opinion polls, the voices of the masses were either suppressed or obscured, while the voice of disassociation remained the only one that rang out all the time.
It seemed that one of the important results that resulted from the successive earthquake of October 7 was that the gap widened greatly between the regimes and peoples that took the initiative of the atrocities taking place, and then were unable to carry out their duty, which raised the indicators of discontent and anger that were initially focused on the governments. The West has sided with the killing of Palestinians, the destruction of their lives, and their displacement. This is dangerous soil that calls for many questions about its expected consequences in the Arab world.
**
If we have followed what happened in Gaza hour by hour, the repercussions of the future remain unseen, and I have no doubt that Israel and its human-devil allies have prepared their equipment to deal with it.
This reminds us of what happened to the Arab Spring revolutions in 2011, which surprised everyone and restored the spirit of the Arab national forces before it was aborted by measures whose results became apparent, even if their backgrounds have not yet been revealed to us.
The trumpets of the counter-revolution are still cursing what happened at that time, and they do not remind us of that bright spot in contemporary Arab history.
To refresh memory, if we try to follow the two events - the spring and the flood - we find that there is similarity in some aspects and discrepancy in other aspects, which I summarize as follows:
The two events had a resonance throughout the world, and they emerged from the womb of anger and suffering that differed in nature and degree, but the agreement between them remained related to the longings for justice and freedom.
Although the injustice was widespread in both cases, in the Arab case it seemed to emanate from our own people, and in the second case its source was foreign immigrants who usurped the land and displaced its people. The surprise was a common feature that had not occurred to anyone, except that in the first case it was a spontaneous and unplanned mass movement. In the second case, it was the result of careful planning that took years.
For this reason, the Arab Spring did not have a head to lead and guide it, while the Palestinian uprising was led by the resistance, with Hamas at its head.
Just as the counter-revolutionary forces mobilized in secret to abort the Arab revolutions, and succeeded in doing so, the Western regimes led by the United States played the same role, when they rushed publicly to support Israel and enable it to suppress the Palestinian uprising.
Questions still arise about the role of the counter-revolution elements who conspired against the Arab Spring, and the truth about their ambiguous position regarding the Al-Aqsa flood, especially since some of them are people of normalization who belonged to the dubious Abrahamic heresy.
**
Anyone who concludes that I have not answered the question of the future of the Arabs after the end of the war will not be mistaken, which I admit for a fundamental reason.
It is that I do not have an answer, and what I sought does not go beyond simply asking the silent question to open the door to discussion about it, in our Arab surroundings, which is the arena of conflict and its subject at the same time.
It is inevitable to admit that I am not the only one who is puzzled by the answers to questions about the future and its possibilities in the Arab world, not only because it is a difficult and difficult topic, but also because we do not know the true maps of that world, which is shrouded in mystery.
We do not know how politics is made there, and we do not have, in Egypt at least, any declared measurements of public opinion.
What we have is either undeclared internally, or measurements are declared externally.
However, we know two things: the first is that the Arab system remained absent throughout the ongoing war, and the second is that the performance of the Arab countries remained within its minimum limits until it became shameful when compared to some African or Latin American countries, which resorted to actions in confronting Israel, while efforts The Arab countries did not go beyond television statements and sayings.
I appreciate the necessities and understand the political calculations that did not prevent other countries from carrying out their duty to reject aggression through usual diplomatic methods, but Arab disappointment was not expected.
In other words;
The feelings that spread across the Arab world may translate into unexpected practices, unless a real effort is made to absorb the anger of the masses who are intended to stand by and watch the scene of genocide.
The tragic scene of genocide and starvation using the same methods used since Oslo constitutes a disappointing shock as it does not reflect the new reality after October 7, not to mention that it does not provide the minimum level of preservation of right, dignity and honor.
The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of Al Jazeera.