To avoid any confusion; I must initiate this short discussion by emphasizing that I make an informed distinction between criticism and approach, highlighting problems, structures, groups, and forces, and condemning violations and crimes based on accurate facts, and between direct satire and dogmatic, nihilistic, and stereotypical positions.
My position will always remain in favor of freedom of expression, and with the right of people to comment on events, structures, entities, and groups, and criticize them in all circumstances, and without restriction or guardianship. This cognitive engagement is one of our safe ways towards development, bringing about change, and emancipation in ideas, perceptions, and practices.
Through my experiences, despite their simplicity and humility, I believe with certainty in the importance of dissimilarity and diversity, in all areas of life without exception, for the development, growth and strength of societies. Therefore, I am shocked by the similarity among the most general intellectual, political, cultural and social currents and trends that make up our societies, in approaches and means, in methods and mechanisms for constructing facts, ideas and conclusions. Even conformity in the collective mentality that complies with the spirit of the fatwa, and in practices, while the space for difference and diversity is limited to the parameters of the claims made, and in the overall stances.
Hence, my attempt to approach, in this article, the perceptions of some Arab writers in their dealings with issues of the war in Gaza, Hamas, the other Palestinian factions, and all the mechanisms of interaction with developments since the “Al-Aqsa Flood” operation - is an opinion, a comment, and a critical position within the framework of freedom of opinion, expression and criticism on one of the main “public affairs issues” in our Arab region. So it is not value judgments to condemn those who hold those positions, or reinforce stances that contradict them, including my own positions and opinions.
In my opinion, many of the champions of “enlightenment,” “pragmatism,” and “Arab moderation” were involved in the mission of satirizing “Hamas” and the other Palestinian factions, as ready-made justifications for all of the “East’s complexities, defeats, calamities, setbacks, cries, and grievances. It is as if it is an exceptional opportunity that must not be missed to purify oneself from the stigmas and taboos of the Eastern homeland, as a requirement, perhaps, that helps one integrate into the center of the white man, his world and his secrecy. Necessarily the genius, the superior, the leader, the guardian, the inspirer, and perhaps as a requirement, helps win the race to qualify for the blessings, recognition, permission, and opportunities of the God of the “new civilization.”
What is mystifying and perplexing is that this Siamese “Conjoined twins” to the “white man” scheme, the conveyor of the legacy of colonialism and its dark files, and identification with its extremely poor narratives, postulates, and teachings, and with its front lines, and with its battles and conquests, rough and soft, crossing continents, societies, and cultures. - It is not based on coherent and logical foundation
ns, within the framework of a natural and consistent path of accumulation, during which knowledge, experiences, expertise and values have grown and developed. Rather, the reason for that attachment, identification, and sincere and absolute faith in its entirety, and in the best of cases, is pure absolute embrace and complete submission to the teachings and verses of the gods of the new civilization, which dominates the global system that has been leading humanity for nearly a century from massacre to holocaust, and from disaster to catastrophe. As a result, this system dominates our planet through intimidation, terrorism, coercion, subjugation, injustices, discrimination and extermination neither by the strength and permeability of values and ideals, nor by the creative conquests it achieves for humanity.
Looking at examples of these stances appended with the signature of Arab names that define themselves as “enlightenment”! by examining their contents, vocabulary, and trends, we find that, in their entirety, they are nothing more than satirical positions that focused on all issues of the war in Gaza, including the issues of the Hamas movement and other Palestinian factions, on condemning the Palestinian side and holding him exclusively responsible for everything that the situation in Palestine led to, considering that history had just begun on October 7 (bloody, horrific, catastrophic, and inhumane). Accordingly, it adopted the passage and circulation of all misleading and fabricated information passed by war propaganda (Israeli and American), regarding the systematic and deliberate war crimes committed on a large scale in the Gaza Strip and the entire area of the State of Palestine, including those horrific crimes that affected medical facilities and staff in the Strip, most notably Al-Shifa Medical Complex.
It is also an endeavor that focused on accomplishing the mission of fabricating weak justifications for war crimes, violations against humanity, genocide, and crimes of collective punishment, in order to evade the legal, moral, and criminal consequences of those serious crimes. These miserable attempts reveal the nature of the “predicament” in which “the victorious” Israel and all of its supporters and accomplices are stuck. It also is a predicament that “Israel” and “America” and all of its supporters and coconspirators will bear as “perpetrators” for many years to come.
The main headlines of that impasse: investigations, facts and incidents, atrocities and crimes, arrest warrants, trials, survivor and witness statements, evidence, confessions, accountability, redress and reparations.
These positions were nothing more than dogmatic, fanatical rhetoric, calling for excitement and interaction with lightness and vulgarity, as their proponents dealt with the most sensitive and complex public issues, for tens of millions of people, with the highest levels of lightness, improvisation, and flatness, and in a way that lacked the minimum level of sensitivity, prudence, and intelligence. This made it match, in its contents, vocabulary, lightness, simplicity, and vulgarity, with what is issued by “Avichay Adraee” and his organization that addresses the Arab public, within the function of the Israeli army’s war propaganda.
One of the gross ironies of these positions is the labeling of the Hamas movement as a terrorist which is based on the empty classification’s problems related to the broad and generally undefined term “terrorism,” in addition to the lack of standards and mechanisms for inclusion, condemnation, and accountability. Not to mention the lack of standards and mechanisms for inclusion, condemnation, and accountability, in addition to the unilateral, malicious, and political action taken against it, and the peculiarities of the elements of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, which are exceptional with all their inputs, elements, and facts.
Moreover, the adaptation of that perspective, in that vulgar image, lacks objectivity, accuracy, integrity, and a minimum of acumen and understanding. These reservations regarding the concept of “terrorism” and all the serious problems that have marred all American and Western dealings, invasions, and adventures under its title in the context of “fighting terrorism” have raised prestigious Western centers and institutions after in-depth studies, approaches, research, and evaluations.
These positions expressed grudges, impressions, and emotions, and their “enlightenment” owners fell into all the imbalances they condemned in the discourse of traditional structures, under the pressure of the demands of easy stardom on social media networks. Perhaps, or under the pressure of impulses of resentment, maliciousness, hatred, and rejection, in isolation from the requirements of working on approaching events, variables, phenomena, and problems with scientific methodologies that provide solid conclusions that are devoid of whims, emotional and emotional feelings, and any other directing influences.
The accumulation of frustrations about the positions of a group of Arabs in the name of modernization, enlightenment, and civilization regarding many issues of the war in Gaza, and many other issues, has contributed to creating a real setback, which has caused severe damage to the long, tireless struggle of our societies to accumulate paths of enlightenment, modernization, and civilization.
These stated positions are completely different from approaching and criticizing the issues of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, in all its stages, and approaching and criticizing the issues of the Hamas movement, the other Palestinian factions, and all the structures in our societies, including all the implications under titles such as: “The armed struggle” for National liberation and the "right of legitimate defense."
Therefore, these approaches are a right and a duty, in all circumstances, with an objective and scientific methodology, devoid of prior stereotyping, and based on accurate inputs and in-depth research and analysis, which makes them worthy of examining their contents, extracting them, benefiting from them, and respecting them, even in the event of disagreement about them.
Beyond that, the impact of contribution not only depends on objective, systematic, fair, prudent and responsible approaches to the public issues that approach it within the framework of the public good. Rather, it also represents, in addition to the person working on it, his credibility and legal weight as an individual or as an entity, and as a movement and orientation. If there is enough in integrity, and in the system of values and ideals to adhere to scientific and objective research methodologies, then in intelligence, logic, feasibility, and competitiveness, there is enough to adhere to its highest principles, standards, and determinants.
Reading articles critical of Hamas on the pages of the New York Times by Thomas Friedman, or on the pages of the Washington Post by Fareed Zakaria, or by any other writer on the pages of Foreign Policy, Le Monde, or The Guardian, or even on the pages of Yedioth Ahronoth, brings the issues of the Arab-Israeli conflict closer together and includes clear positions. It criticizes Hamas and the Palestinian factions because they are approaches that adhere to an acceptable degree of objectivity and systematic analysis, which makes them worthy of reading and paying attention to their contents, perspective, and angles, and worthy of benefiting from their facts and arguments, regardless of the extent of agreement or disagreement with them.
In a broader context, I can say, through careful follow-up of issues of public affairs, that the accumulation of frustrations with the positions of a group of Arabs, in the name of modernization, enlightenment, and civilization, regarding many issues of the war in Gaza, and many other issues, contributed to creating a real setback, which caused severe damage to the struggle. Our societies, diligent and long-term, to accumulate ways of enlightenment, modernization, civilization, civilization, liberation and emancipation.
The only positive thing about this setback, with all its introductions and effects, is that it added to the experience of our societies, which helps them to distinguish between the conclusions, positions, means, and contents of the researcher, the social reformer, the one who carried the message, the fighter, and the sincere person, and the positions, means, and contents of the opponent, the competitor, the schemer, the avenger, or the employee for the benefit of other actors.
The truth is, despite the fact that I am radically different from the Islamic currents, and despite the fact that I am among those whose awareness has settled on the values of civilization, advancement, modernization, openness, human rights, democracy, and the rejection and combat of violence, extremism and hatred, I chose to work on those principles and guidelines. Despite that, I have found myself confused more than once, in the face of the positions of a number of Arab enlighteners. The most recent of these attitudes related to the war in Gaza, which were drawn into the means, contents and tactics of agitation and propaganda, to the extent that made me wonder more than once: What is the difference now between what radical and fanatical preachers say and what the enlighteners and modernists utter?
In conclusion, I hope that the day will never come when the slogan: “No voice rises above the voice of enlightenment and pragmatism” is raised.
