Search This Blog

Saturday, April 01, 2006

Who is against who ?



Why Americans refuse to support Hamas despite being elected by the people and being “Democratic”? In the same time they claim supporting Democracy in the Middle East..!!! Is the united states really against Hamas or it is merely trying to give Hamas more popularity?
This way, they guarantee that people elect Hamas. As long as the US is against Hamas, Palestinians will automatically elect whomever organization that oppose the US. Can any political analyst deny that the US is well aware of the fact that with holding aids to Hamas will only increase Hamas popularity..?

Why did America raise the issue of Democracy in the Middle East? Does Americans really believe in Democracy? Or this is a way to allow them to intervene more in the internal affairs of the Middle East. Americans are the very same people who supported those regimes so, why they are flipping against them? are they trying to arm twist those regimes? Or it is a call for the people to rise to change the governments and bring new faces, furthermore, is this call for the best interest of the people or for the best interest of the US?

What is the Democracy that America wants? Is it the Democracy that guarantees that people would think the same way Americans want? Is it the Democracy that give birth to people like Dr. Rice and Colin Powel, the colored black people who are strong defendants of American values despite belonging to ethnic group long known for the deep hate to the white race who typically rules the US. Does the united states make deals with corrupt opposition leaders and buy them early when they are worthless and them back them up, then they can sell themselves to the people as savers so the US guarantee that even the people’s choice is always will be within the cards that are already in her hands ? Ayman Nour…?!!!!

What is the exact relation between the US and Moslem brotherhood, Hamas, and Iran? Does the United States make deals with all the players of the game? Iran in particular deserves probably several posts trying to analyze its exact relation with the US.

Who is Honest in the current political playground? Definitely not the current regimes. But did the US already buy all the other alternatives and we are stuck with all-bad choices. It is definitely a confusing situation, and all choices are surrounded by uncertainty. Is this also planned or not?

The whole scene now is hazy and convoluted; it is very difficult to be certain about the real intentions of any current political figure. The real problem of this whirly random situation is that it may result in new leadership that is no better that the current.
This is not a call for accepting the status quo - I believe that change is not a choice, it is a necessity - but it is a call to try to deeply examine and question all the current political options in Egypt. Probably our best option is not available yet on the current political scene.....!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


To be cont
inued.........

4 comments:

Boring Lips said...

First of all, this really is an amazing post. Its comprehensive style and abstract content make it such a unique post.
Second, I will comment only the first paragraph this time, then, I will comment the remaining ones later. This is so because there are many important issues implied in the post, thanks to the author.

The author's paragraph:

'Why Americans refuse to support Hamas despite being elected by the people and being “Democratic”? , in the same time they claim supporting democracy in the Middle East..!!! Is the united stats really against Hamas or it is merely trying to give Hamas more popularity? , so they guarantee that people elect it as long as the US is against the organization based on the fact that Palestinians will automatically elect whomever organization that oppose the US. Can any political analyst deny that the US is well aware of the fact that with-holding aids to Hamas will only increase Hamas popularity..?'


It is not an illusion that the USA knows that by ignoring and standing against Hamas the latter gains popularity in both the Arab and Islamic worlds. I think the American situation leads to one of two main scenarios:

1) The USA uses Hamas situation to achieve both hers and Israeli advantages.
2) The USA does not want any sort of solutions for the Palestinian-Israeli situation.

The first scenario:

By eliminating any diplomatic relationship with Hamas, thus, refusing any of Hamas proposals or plans, it gives the Israeli a great chance to operate individually, as there is no Palestinian political organisation whom they can work with. Substituting relationships with Hamas by extending relationships with Abo-Mazen to become their follower. This follower is not given a lullaby though. He is given a couple of threatening rockets instead. Given the chance, Israel claims more rights on land and in universal media. As time passes and in these typical Arabian conditions, these claims become rights.

As Hamas followers realise that they brought nothing to the Palestinian hands but only consolidated the Israeli rights, it becomes apparent to the Palestinians that the radical Islamic trend is not the appropriate choice. An impact which is overwhelming for Arabs who already doubt any other trend. When this is combined with the past great failures of each Palestinian political organisation, it is evident to the Palestinians that the solution relies in any of the American, Israeli or Western peace proposals already refused former. But who knows? Maybe another fine proposal comes to light! Or will Israel work solely, surely with the USA, to achieve a customised peace treaty?

The second scenario:

As Hamas neither gains any of the Palestinian rights nor achieves any of the radical Islamic visions, the idea of the uselessness of the radical Islamic trend is now solidified. For there are no educational, scientific, industrial, political or societal growth plans in most Arab countries and if they are present in a country, this country is defined by the USA, the West or Israel as an economical drive for them or as a drive for political advantages, the Arab are confronted with a pre-set game of fighting themselves. The game is that Arabs will be working on finding a solution for the struggle, with no set of organised or appropriate plans due to their lack of civilisation. I am not claiming that civilisation is the American and the European current state, however, they are well systematised – a thing which is absent the Arab world. This is not the issue here anyway. Through the struggle and its conditions the Arab peoples will either become more ignorant and poorer and they will never show openness to the outside world, or with the American cultural penetration of the Arab world they lose their identity, which is already distorted.

Either ways, the USA supports and puts her allies of kings and presidents in power, but in the same time she brings them to the line too. The reason for this is that the struggle is their last remaining resort to enjoy ruling the Arab citizens, the kings' and presidents' sheep.

The second is more of a general statement but it could, typically, be fitting for the Palestinians too.
The two scenarios are recursive and do overlap. The second also may be preceded by the first or it may be applied on its own right.

The most significant issue to realise is that any sort of international conflicts concerns power, which in turn, leads to associated rights, even fake or artificial ones. Also, any international conflict, usually, has ideological references. It doesn't matter which ideological reference is righteous. What really matters is how to defend your claims, so, eventually, they may become the standardised rights. Here is where power strengthens itself; power fights for more power – for more rights.

Power in this context is not of a hierarchical form. It roams around and only smart players make use of it. However, the game has rules, such as, wealth, public awareness, social orders in different countries and so on. For example, the most powerful country in the globe, the USA, became that weak in Iraq.

The claimed democracy is a game which is a tool used to yield more advantageous situations for the interest of the USA. It is a power game stems from an ideological and cultural background Which I will try to cover later.
This article is of a limited scope. It serves as a structural model of what might take place, however it does not take dynamic aspects into account, such as, other players. It would be to long to be a blog post.

In later posts I will comment the remaining paragraphs.

This is what I think. Let me know about your thoughts and give me feedback.

Let's Talk

Lago Di Como said...

I strongly believe that change is inevitable. However, I can see no hope in the near future towards any good with the current status of the youth in the Arab world. So, most probably things will only get worse untill the prevailing "Power rules" and "Ignorance Wins" principles lead us to complete chaos and everything is out of the current ruling regimes' hands.

Interesting writing style, organized flow of ideas, thoughtful inquisitions.

El3en Elsehrya said...

For Boring lips,
Just one word.
"Stunned" by the analysis, Keep up this good work, and I want to see your post and if you do not, I will just copy and paste what u wrote as a post.


For Lago Di Como,
First of all, very interesting name, and what a co-incidence . I have been to lake Como myself in 2004.
Anyway, even if I agree with what u said, i do not want this tone to support the current despair, because even if the change is distant, it has to start anyway, it might be long years before it happens, there might be multiple failed attempts for change. but only it will happen when someone decides to start it and say, hey I do not care if I am gonna fail or succeed I am gonna start anyway.
But, may be you are right cause that person is not here yet

Lago Di Como said...

i know this is such an interesting name for u & i know you have been there in 2004.