Al-Raissouni to Al-Jazeera Net: The rulers of the Emirates and Bahrain had many options that would inform them of falling into the arms of Israel

Interviewed by Mohammed Amari - Doha

The head of the International Union of Muslim Scholars, Dr. Ahmed Al-Rayouni, said that normalization with Israel is "treason and no justification."

And he considered that the agreements signed by the UAE and Bahrain in recent days with Israel "serve the interest of the occupation and support its crimes against the Palestinian people."

Raissouni added - in an interview with Al-Jazeera Net in the Qatari capital, Doha - "If there is any benefit from the exchanges, agreements and relations, it is sought from countries other than the occupation, rape and criminality that displaces Palestinians, kills them, confiscates their property and homes, and commits the most horrific crimes against them for more than more than 70 years old. "

Raissouni added, "I heard some who used to ask them," And when was a state called Palestine? ", Or they ask," And when was Jerusalem the capital? ", And I tell them when did we have a state called the Emirates? And when did we have a state called Israel with its capital Tel Aviv? Originally it did not exist except in the modern era. "

The following is the text of the interview:

In an article for you a few days ago, you described the rulers of the Emirates and Bahrain who announced the normalization of relations with Israel that they “turned against their religion, split from their ummah, and annulled what they were responsible for,” and you said that they “proved by their behavior that they are not good for the nation, the sect or the dhimma.” Are these not rulings. Cruel against political officials who have worked hard on what they see as the interest of their countries?

In the name of God and praise be to God, of course these rulers first, in my opinion, they did not strive for anything and are not among the people of ijtihad, nor do they accept it.

They were told to do, and they did.

Of course, they were told to do over time, and Israel and America tamed them, guided them, and indoctrinated them for a long time, and in the end this project crystallized in which they turned, as I said against their nation, their religion and their responsibility.

This is not called ijtihad, this in all phases of history and among all nations is called betrayal and betrayal, because they are neither obliged nor needy nor really strive.

How to be diligence in this matter?

They thought for themselves and worked loudly to protect their thrones, chairs, and interests. They found that the best and safest way for them is to be in the protection and protection of Israel.

They do not trust their brothers, their people, or even their apparatus.

These are all now their guards, their spies, and their watchmen on the national and international stage, which are the Israeli and American intelligence.

They chose this despicable way to protect themselves, and they could count countless ways and methods to be strong, confident, and steadfast in their places.

In the past, Omar bin Al-Khattab, may God be pleased with him, was told "I am right, so I slept."

The ruler fortifies himself with justice and the strong positions aligned with his people and nation, and fortifies himself with his popularity.

You say that they protect their interests and chairs, but they say that they preserve the interests of their homelands and peoples, and see, for example, the Emirates now, there are many agreements signed between several Emirati and Israeli banks, and other agreements between different companies and economic institutions, and these agreements will bring good and economic prosperity to the The Emirates and its people, as those who signed it say.

They see that Israel is a neighboring country, and they do not need to go to other countries much further?

The world has nearly 200 countries and no one will object to them if they conclude agreements with fifty or a hundred of these 200 countries, from their neighbors and brothers to other countries such as China, India, Japan and Korea, and there are countries in South America and others in North America, and countries in the north and south of the earth. And nothing prevents them from agreeing with her.

These agreements are not intended for economic exchanges, as these exchanges are in the interest of Israel, and if there is any benefit from the exchanges, agreements and relations, they are sought from countries other than the occupying power, rape and criminality that displaces Palestinians, kills them, confiscates their property and homes, and commits the most horrific crimes against them for more than 70 years old.

Did they not find anything but this criminal gang that kills the Palestinians and occupies their land, their mosque and the holy mosque of the Islamic nation (Al-Aqsa Mosque), in order to achieve economic gains with it?

These so-called economic gains are a lie, and they are indispensable and have countless alternatives before them.

Why do you consider the issue of normalization to be an issue ruled by Sharia?

Isn’t it replaced by political jurisprudence, which must be viewed in terms of right and wrong, instead of the lawful and the forbidden, or the view of right and wrong?

Political and jurisprudential jurisprudence has wide fields, and we are not talking about that. Rather, we are talking about breaching and vetoing peremptory issues and rulings in Islam and even in the laws and customs of sovereign nations.

We do not hold them accountable as if they were striving to deal with Iran or with Turkey or between them, or to unite in one way or another, or to strive hard on banking issues, sales provisions, customs regulation, and so on.

We are talking about a Zionist entity, everyone knows what he did.

He raped Palestine and the Al-Aqsa Mosque, and displaced and exiled millions of Palestinians, including those who are displaced in their homeland in camps other than their cities and towns.

How many massacres committed and how many were killed in wars and assassinations.

How many houses, land and farms confiscated.

Rather, he confiscated water, and even some of what he claims to provide to the Palestinians in terms of rights is a lie. The Palestinians live in racism every day under this occupation, and they suffer from marginalization and murder, and these crimes cannot be subject to Ijtihad.

Those who were printed with Israel supported all these crimes, gave their perpetrators legitimacy and became cooperating with them, and there is no law in the world that establishes impunity even if it is related to the killing of one person.

Neither a law nor a Muslim jurist can say that impunity is possible.

And this Israeli gang did not kill one person only, but rather it killed millions, killed a people, assassinated a homeland, and seized money unlawfully, and then these traitors come and recognize what they consider the rights of this gang.

And I heard some of them asking, "When was a country called Palestine?", Or they wondering, "And when was Jerusalem the capital?" And I tell them when did we have a state called the Emirates?

And when did we have a state called Israel, whose capital was Tel Aviv?

Most of the countries of the region originally did not exist except in the modern era.

They have been printed with this entity and have become friends and allies of it for some time, not only now. We have seen them recover when Israel attacks Gaza, and when it assassinates some Palestinians.

Such issues cannot be the subject of ijtihad, and if this becomes a subject of ijtihad, then neither principle, religion, nor morality remains in this world.

These rulers and those who support them see that this issue is governed by the balance of power, the laws of international relations, and the calculations of interests and political gains, and they say that there is no difference between establishing relations with America, France or Britain, which itself is the same countries that have killed many Muslims, and its establishment with Israel, which is a member state of nations. United.

How do you judge them with the balance of Islamic law when they estimate this with the balance of politics?

As for the balance of power, if they said this about America and Britain, it would have been reasonable to some extent. Has Israel imposed normalization on them?

Did you conquer them and dictate them?

Is she threatening them in their presence?

The answer is certainly "no." America, yes, has a great influence, and Britain has had the merit of finding these people and giving them these Mamluks and Emirates, but Israel does not apply that to it. Yes, it threatens the Palestinians and the Lebanese and by the Jordanians and Egyptians, and only those who cannot reach them Now it is not in its ability to do so.

The issue of the balance of power here is not mentioned and it is only an allegation. As for saying that the relationship with Israel is like the relationship with America and Britain, it is not correct. It is not these countries that occupy an Arab Islamic homeland, nor are they the ones that occupy the Al-Aqsa Mosque, the third of the three mosques, the holiness, status and sanctity of Muslims.

These countries are not the ones that kill Palestinians daily, confiscate their farms and demolish their homes. There are differences.

Of course, if the Muslims had power, they would also impose their will on America and compel it to change its positions, and impose that on other countries that support Israel as well.

Now, only America remains absolutely supportive of Israel, and perhaps in a few weeks this may change as well.

And what if they said that the United States itself imposed on them to normalize their relations with Israel?

It was the one who supervised the two agreements that the UAE and Bahrain signed with Israel, so are they not, then, in the judgment of the helpless compelled?

There are countries of similar size and capabilities in the same region that have not done this and declared that they will not.

Why did the United States not force Kuwait to normalize?

Trump tried and mentioned her by name, and he wanted her to be part of this project, and Qatar is also a small country, so why did it not do this, and has explicitly announced that it will not do so, and an American official commented on that by saying that they understand Qatar's position.

They really understand the countries that retain their dignity, pride and independence, and most Arab countries now either declare or practically practice that they are not concerned with this normalization and no one is obliging them to do so, and Morocco, for example, has a difficult national issue that is pressed against it, which is the issue of the Sahara, and they trade it for their support for it in its desert. To be printed with Israel, yet it was not printed.

Algeria also announced its president two days ago a historic and glorious position, given the context in which it comes, as he said that his country will not participate and will not bless this campaign of normalization and considered that the Palestinian issue is the mother of issues for the Algerian people, and there is also the Sultanate of Oman, and this is a choice for these countries and no one forced it to Change it.

And I mentioned in the article that you referred to in your first question that since 2010 the UAE appeared - and I say it appeared and not started - its alliance with Israel and its bias towards it and began to deal with the Palestinians as enemies, and with the Israelis as brothers and allies.

No one hated them, this is a choice they chose, and if they chose others, America would not be able to do anything for them, because just as there is America in the world there is China and there is Russia and there is Iran and there is Turkey, and these balances are known to all politicians, and these typists chose to be in the arms of Israel.

But there are scholars and advocates who also support these rulers and other advocates for normalization with Israel, and they also have legal arguments and texts that they rely on to justify this relationship, and they see it as part of the legal policy left to the ruler's discretion and appreciation, so they cite, for example, that the Prophet, may God’s prayers and peace be upon him, pawns his shield Of a Jew, who ate the food of the Jews, sold them and bought from them, and had a political alliance with them?

The Arabs and the Jews who spoke about them at the time of the Prophet, may God’s prayers and peace be upon him, were not occupiers of a land or a state. Rather, there were relationships that ranged between adhering to its principles and norms, or breaking them and violating them.

Banu Gereida No one says that they occupied the land they were in, nor Khaybar.

These were there from ancient times and no one disputed with them had it not been for the conspiracies and alliances they entered into with the polytheists, and with themselves and with some of the Jewish tribes, and the polytheists as well. No one can say that they were occupying Mecca, rather they were required to allow Muslims to visit the Grand Mosque because it is a mosque. For believers and monotheists on the religion of Abraham.

There is no occupation by any of these of any land or homeland, yet when they narrowed or broke vows, Jews or polytheists, they obtained what they obtained, and there is no room for comparison and measurement.

The defenders of this approach also sometimes cite some Qur’anic verses, such as the Almighty’s saying in Surat Al-Anfal (and if they are successful for peace, he will be victorious for it), as well as some verses that call for reconciliation, but the UAE and Bahrain do not have a war with Israel at all.

If the Palestinians said these words and assessed some kind of temporary or other understanding, the evidence would have been in its subject matter, regardless of what it requires and what it performs, but these people are funny to say that they make peace with Israel, they are in fact supporting Israel in its war on the Palestinians, as it will now become more fierce. With their money and their political and moral support, they were not at war with Israel, never fired a bullet, or sent a soldier, nor did they have a front with Israel, and therefore citing such texts in this calamity has no meaning and no place, and it is a distortion of evidence and placed it in other places .

In past years, we were witnessing strong popular donations to support Palestine and reject normalization, and we used to see millions of marches in Arab capitals whenever Israel was killed, assassinated, or waged a war, or whenever an Arab regime moved towards coordination or establishing relations with it, but we no longer see this day, is not the nation The Arab and Islamic worlds, with their current reality full of weakness and dishonor, are proceeding rapidly towards reliance on this normalization, and perhaps it will become an inevitable reality?

Which calls for underestimating this normalization, that those who carried it out have no value except in terms of symbolism, as it is said that the so-and-so state and then the so-and-so state normalized its relations with Israel.

What are these such and such countries and what is their value?

Yes, it may have a financial value, especially for the Emirates, as for Bahrain, it has no value of any kind. Of course, we are talking here about these two countries and by that we mean their systems of printing and supporting devices for them.

For this reason, perhaps people are underestimating these individualists in particular, and not the problem of normalization as such.

Moreover, the Islamic and Arab nation in particular has been preoccupied in recent years with several calamities, and ten lean years have passed due to the counter-revolution that has lapsed against all the peoples that have moved against oppression and tyranny, and have also attacked other peoples who were afraid to move.

The infernal machine of Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the Emirates all moved against the people and caused sedition, internal wars, political conflicts and divisions, and this really occupied people, and we do not know when it will end, and I think the signs of its end have begun.

A few days ago, I spoke about the wave of tendencies towards reconciliation and dialogue in a number of Arab cases, such as what is happening in Libya as well as in the recent meetings of the Palestinian factions, and in Mali, Tunisia, and Afghanistan.

All this is in the direction of healing the wounds caused by Saudi and Emirati funds and Egyptian interventions.

It is true that the Islamic world and the Arab world have been preoccupied with these strife, and this affected all other concerns, and not only the interest in the Palestinian issue, it even affected the internal reforms of some countries.

People now call for the priority of peace, unity, non-fighting and non-division.

But all this stagnation and retreat is fleeting and will not continue, and its sin is on those who made it, and the ummah will overtake it and its body is stronger and greater than to change its direction in these actions.

Supporters of these steps of normalization also believe that they achieve a legitimate interest that the Islamic nation has long yearned for, which is to visit and pray at the Al-Aqsa Mosque, as these agreements with Israel will make it easier for Muslims to travel to and pray in the Al-Aqsa Mosque.

Isn't that a positive thing?

Permission to visit Al-Aqsa will be for Muhammad bin Zayed, Hamad bin Isa, their brothers and their family, and their intelligence, and it will not be for other Muslims, this is a definite thing.

Israel will choose those who will allow them to visit Al-Aqsa, and they will praise it, be impressed by it, and promote it, just as it has been choosing normalization visits for years. As for the visits of the peoples of the Islamic world, this will not be.

Even some countries that do not have a visa with Israel, visitors from them are prevented from entering occupied Palestine, and if they enter it, they are prevented from visiting Jerusalem and harassing them, and this is what it does, for example, with the Turks.

So this visit is an illusion, and even if it was real and opened the doors of these visits wide - and this will not be - we are not keen on anything delegated to whomever is accessible, and we overlook the slaughter of Palestine and the Palestinian cause, and we are over-possessing Jerusalem and sovereignty over it.

Among the justifications relied upon also by those who support these normalization initiatives, their saying that the Palestinians themselves coordinate with Israel in security coordination, and they have political and economic relations with it, and even some resistance movements such as Hamas negotiate indirectly with Israel, so why do we accept this from the Palestinians and deny it for Others?

We can turn this question over and say: If the Palestinians are obliged to deal with Israel because they are in it, and it is in them, then what are the people who come from the edges of the Arabian Peninsula and the parts of the Arab world to search for negotiation?

What negotiation are they looking for?

Who obligated them or forced them to do so?

Who did he ask of them?

The Palestinians have their own compelling circumstances that require them to deal with the occupier, some of them carry Israeli passports and documents, and the rest can only move with the permission and approval of the Israeli authorities, until their food and drink enter with the permission of Israel, and the aid and finances that come to them pass through Israeli banks.

This is an urgent reality. Do we want the Palestinians to die of all kinds?

This is an imposed and existing interference between Israel and the Palestinians. As for someone who has nothing to do with Israel and has nothing to negotiate with and wants to measure himself with the Palestinians, this is not correct.

If the Palestinians talk about necessity, they are forced, and if they talk about the status quo, they live its bitterness every day, but Bahrain and the Emirates - or others - have nothing to do with duress nor with the status quo, and they have no geographical relationship with Israel, no borders, or compelling interests that impose upon them a relationship with it.

There are also those who say that one of the architects of this path is a Palestinian and an advisor to bin Zayed who knows Palestine and its reality, and he is the former leader of the Fatah movement, Muhammad Dahlan?

Of course, the traitors are always present, all the time and everywhere, and recently a Libyan brother showed me an old Libyan Arab newspaper that was published during the days of the Italian occupation, and its big headline on the day the resistance and martyr Omar al-Mukhtar was arrested was "The arrest of the criminal and gang leader Omar Al-Mukhtar They used to see him, cheer, congratulate and rejoice.

In any case, people like these are present at all times and times, and despite that, Dahlan does not see that we give him greater than his size, he is a traitor without doubt, a spy and an enemy for his cause and his people, but what exactly did he do on this path I do not think is a big thing, engineering is Israeli and American engineering, and this is what I think.