May 10, 2011

☫ Saudade of reality

Analysis  The wave of GCC failures, now strikes Yemen
Saudade of reality

Saudade is a unique Galician and Portuguese word roughly explained as,

A feeling of nostalgic longing for something or someone that one was fond of, and which is lost. It often carries a fatalist tone and a repressed knowledge that the object of longing might really never return."

Enrique Ruiz (Discriminate or Diversify)

The Saud Family: Astray From Reality

It was February of 2011, and the popular will of Egypt had the dictator Hosni Mubarak clinging to a rope. As soon as Mubarak's rule had began in 1981, the founder of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatallah Ruhollah Khomeini, was consistently condemning the illegitimacy of the foreign-appointed Pharaoh and his state apparatus (ZK). 

Thanks to the 'international community' whitewashing of the brutal regime,  Egyptians would need 30 years to take things into their own hands. With a delay of three decades - and only once things became too obvious to be silenced any longer - our most notorious Western NGOs finally echoed Khomeini's calls of the 1980s, and even Washington saw itself forced to fold behind few days later. Most likely not because of a concern for freedom or democracy, but fearing blowback.

And therefore, at the height of the protests in Tahrir square, only the most enthusiastic supporters of  Mubarak's secularist regime were left to undermine the realities of the revolution. Al Arabiya, one of the official voices of the Saud family and partner oil emirati regimes (a Saudi-sponsored partnership called GCC - for Persian Gulf Cooperation Council) was one of the last media outlets coming into the aid of the ailing Egyptian dictatorship (example: Nur ein Wort).

This was not even new for 2011, as the Saud family was the first to give shelter to the dictator freshly overthrown from Tunisia (Nur ein Wort).

Saud-ade Of Reality Ensues

The GCC's calculated omissions and distortions of events surrounding the Arab revolts were only warming up with Egypt.

When the time came for Libya, the false reporting of Western media to justify a military intervention on the African oil-rich country (PhilStar) were seized by Jordan and GCC members (UAE and Qatar) to test the toys - fighter jets and weaponry - that they had received as a reward for fueling the US military industry. While seeking for a share in the oil contracts of a to-be fragmented Libya, they ignored that they were embarking into a much deeper entanglement.

By the time the most gross brutalities ensued against the protesters in Bahrain, the GCC rushed to blame Iran of interventionism, and to play the sectarian card, a card learned from their arms' suppliers. Ironically, using it as an excuse to militarily invade Manama and help  the Khalifa monarchy there further crush the Bahraini people (Morning Star). People who have received no millionaire contributions from Washington to protest in regime change attempts, especially since the US Fifth Fleet feels so comfortable under the Saud-Khalifa protection in the waters of the Persian Gulf small island. Yet no matter how brutal the oppression, which latest victim has been a 6-year old kid (NBC), the GCC has certainly gambled -and wildly-  against the reality of a country where Shias who are denied political rights and social participation, and Sunnis who recognize the injustices and lack of self-determination, form a certain overwhelming majority.

Once the millions of dollars that the US State Department poured into Syria regime change attempts since Bush's times (Washington Post) finally bore some fruits, the GCC once more saw another chance to prove itself useful to the aims of the Tel-Aviv regime at crippling the Resistance (Nur ein Wort). With former Mossad chief admitting that the protests are helping Israel (Haaretz), the Saud begin to show signs of frustration via Al Arabiya's calls for faster and more resolved actions from the international community against Al Assad (Al Arabiya). Although it is not clear what is to come from the foreign-hijacked unrest in the Levant, Al Arabiya has given continuity to its practices, by showing the protests in Bahrain as if they were in Syria (Al Arabiya), proving the dishonesty on which the GCC relies to achieve political goals.

Most recently, in a new attempt to legitimize Washington's occupations in the Middle East and Central Asia, Al Arabiya has spread a fake picture of Bin Laden's death throughout the Arab world (Nur ein Wort). Something that proves instrumental for Obama's ambitions to justify further military intervention and drones' bombing of innocent civilians in Pakistan for the sake of keeping the war "on" terror fresh.

One episode after another, the Saud and emirati regimes have tried to portray themselves as an influential regional power, but having no other result than getting caught up in extremely unpredictable scenarios - with high chances of backfiring in some of their own regimes - and needing to display their deceptive manners in the open. All of this only helps to gradually awaken the Arab people and to bring down the mirages that the occupiers of Hijaz badly rely on.

Yemen: The Latest Chapter

In their most recent estrangement from reality, the Saud family and its GCC cousins claimed themselves credible brokers of a deal between the protesters in Yemen and the dictatorship of Sanaa. The deal was to give immunity to the outgoing Saleh, for his three decades of abuse of power, and partner in crime to the GCC just last year, when Saudi fighter jets rushed to slaughter Yemeni civilians and Houthi rebels who sought to oppose the Al-Qaeda-breeding US-backed regime (Nur ein Wort).

But at the last minute, Saleh betrayed his former associates, and backed out from signing the deal, showing how the secular nationalisms that run through the GCC are to incessantly undermine every attempt for the organization to portray itself as an influential power, or at least one that could be of any use for its foreign managers.

The many ways in which the Saud family and partner monarchies have alienated themselves from reality and regarded God - if they even believe in God - as negligent as their own selves, is bound to cost them dearly sooner or later. The lessons on what is the ultimate fate of those who sought to impose their personal and foreign-imported whims onto their peoples is carved now all around them, whether by looking West to Tunisia and Egypt, North to Turkey, or East to Iran.



Sara Haj said...

All respect and love to the Turkish people. But role of their government is questionable. Any rule that plays a "western approved role" is questionable. It's interesting how Erdogan & his government were promoted via the Saudi media (and the western one indirectly) in an extremely "heroic & angelic way" while at the same time the demonization of the Islamic Republic goes on (the comparison is very relevant and aims at much ..)
Turkey's "under the table" role in both Bahrain and Syria is very questionable. It's true that Erdogan had a beautiful statement condemning Al Khalifa, but the fact is that he went to Najaf in a mission to offer a "sectarian deal of swap" between Bahrain and Iraq "sects" .. A role totally questionable!

Germán said...

This article doesn't even mention Turkey. But what you are saying you are saying it basing it on speculation (at least here, where you have provided no facts to your claims).

For as you yourself state, the tangible from Erdogan has been laudable and opposed to the oppressors of Arabia, and his role in his country has clearly bothered the traditional kemalists who are also unambiguously on the side of the oppressors of Arabia and their architects in Tel-Aviv and Washington.

If you don't back your claims, you become a speculator, which is frowned upon in Islam. And especially in the animosity to undermine someone whose tangible contributions have only been for the better, particularly in the Shia-Sunni dialog.

Sara Haj said...

You did mention Turkey at the very last line of your article in a way that makes it a "bothering" body same as Iran and the current Arab revolutions are and this is out of fact and can be noticed easily via certain policies as I stated above.
I find it really "funny" that one has to come up with "links, articles, online sources" for every (what you say) "claim" he/she states. After all, ALL medias are promoters of policies and opinions even through much of their analysis in a way or another including definitely your article where you referenced many hired medias.

Germán said...

Many apologies sister, you are right :) I did mention Turkey.

Why do you find it funny that one has to prove his/her points to the things he/she says, especially when accusing another Muslims? It is not funny, it is the way of Islam, to behave reasonably. Otherwise, any discussion would be an utter mess of opinions flying from one side to the other with no end in sight. And who could ever profit from that? No side, I believe.

Exactly, I reference the media that is opposed to my views, because this gives more validity to what I am saying. This is something I learned from the Shia school of jurisprudence which proves its arguments even by referencing Sunni hadiths. And this makes its arguments stronger, not undermined.

Sara Haj said...

Every knowledgeable person knows that certain important, long-termed policies/plots are not at all expressed via medias but rather many deceptive means are hired.
Anyway, I am not promoting animosity here. however, I believe we should be aware of all sides of the stories and all over/under table plots, moves, and policies so that we don't "mix things" together

Germán said...

I don't understand the aim of your first paragraph. Are you saying that proving views from an opponent's side does not make for a stronger argument? This goes against logic. Please don't use speculative language and stick to reason. When Shia scholars use Sunni hadiths to prove their own points, that doesn't mean they are giving authority to the Sunni hadiths, but giving authority to their own arguments. Do you claim that deceptive news headlines are a worse evil than corrupted hadiths?

You are promoting animosity when you accuse someone without bringing a single proof, particularly against a Muslim whose tangible measures have all been laudable. Again I recommend you, for the improvement of the quality of your own debates, to stop the speculative language. If you want to accuse someone bring your proofs. Otherwise you are indeed mixing things together and bringing in a chaos of opinionated statements with no backing to them.

And I tell you all of this not because I want to prove you wrong, but because you are an intelligent, critical and informed person, and the whole world would profit if you made an effort to elevate the quality of your opinions by nurturing them with reasonable proofs. So that even your enemies would be forced to agree with you.

Anonymous said...

Well said German...

Post a Comment

Have your say ! (Criticism highly appreciated)