Diplomatic theories of “ Al-Jubair”

Written by Nasser Kandil,

The Saudi speech which the Arab Ministers of Foreign Affairs repeated after their leader Adel Al-Jubair the philosopher of the Arab diplomacy, and the maker of its new concept of the Arab national security based on two things, first, the accusation of Iran of interfering into the internal affairs of the countries that respect the principle of non-intervention, Second, beholding Iran the responsibility of igniting the sectarian situation in the region and agitating it. The intervention within the internal affairs for condemnation is a right for those who exclude themselves, but it is a fragile talk that can be refuted easily since the people know about how Saudi Arabia interferes in each of Yemen and Syria. Under the name of protecting the opposition it calls to drop the legitimacy in Syria and under the name of protecting the legitimacy it destroys Yemen and kills its people, the principle which Saudi Arabia applies on Yemen is condemning it in Syria and vice versa.

If we accept the equivalence of Saudi involvement with the Iranian intervention in Yemen and Syria, then the difference becomes formally at best conditions. Iran supports an opposition against a legitimacy, and a legitimacy against an opposition as Saudi Arabia does, with one difference is that when Iran supports the opposition it does not call to overthrow the regime but it is satisfied with calling to its fair in the elections, and when it supports the legitimacy it calls for the participation of the opposition in one government of a national unity and resorting to elections, while Saudi Arabia when it supports the opposition it calls to overthrow the regime peacefully otherwise  the military choice, as Al-Jubair has said about Syria, and when it supports the legitimacy it wants the crushing of the opposition as Al-Jubair has said about Yemen, where there is no place for Al-Houthis and the group of Ali Abdullah Saleh within the future of Yemen as an opposition, as there is no place for the Syrian President and his regime in the future of Syria as a legitimacy, in both cases Saudi Arabia wants the rule of one color which is its color which means the color which belongs to it in the two countries and without criteria, it wants to give  the control of ruling to the opposition in Syria and preventing the opposition from participating in the rule in Yemen, in both cases in order to avoid the elections because it knows that its allied ruler here and the opponent there will lose in voting.

To say that what is right for Saudi Arabia is not entitled to Iran because the Saudi intervention occurred under the Arab coverage which Iran stands outside it, is denied by the history of the Saudi interventions from Afghanistan to Yugoslavia through supplying what were known as “Mujahedeen” and which today are called “ Al-Qaeda Organization” under the pretext that the Islam which Saudi Arabia considers its dominant identity to its Arab affiliation is cross- nationalities. And under the name of this Islam which surpassed the Arabism it fought the Arabism of Gamal Abdul Nasser and has allied with the Shah of Iran.

The second pillar on which that Arab speech depends is that the region has not known the tensions and especially the sectarian ones but only after the victory of the revolution in Iran, this was due to Iran’s resorting to destroy the national unity in the Arab countries by agitating a sectarian component that it used against the Arab governments. Formally the speech seems logical and consistent for those who neither know the history nor the political geography of the region, the talk here is away from Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and the rest of the Gulf countries which their governments deny the presence of a crisis among their national components, and which consider all the internal tensions are intended by isolating groups that are funded by Iran and are mobilized and trained by Hezbollah, while the harmony reigns in the relations among the sects and the doctrines as Al-Jubair the philosopher of the diplomacy said, so where is the tension

The history has shown that the revolution has triumphed in Iran in 1979 and it was barely passed a year of its victory till three things have happened, first Iran the fresh revolution which has recovered of its wounds has sent the most important supposed friendly message to the Arabs, its title after overthrowing the regime of Shah the announced ally of Israel “ the first enemy of the Arabs “ it gave the embassy of Israel to the Palestinian liberation organization and raised the flag of Palestine after dropping the flag of Israel and closing the embassy of Israel immediately after the victory of the revolution. Second, the escalation in the American-Iranian relations after the repercussions of the breaking of the Iranian students into the embassy of the US in Tehran and the detention of who was there as hostages, as well as the failure of Washington in organizing tens of the military and the security processes against the revolution for resolving the issue of the hostages by force. Third, an American Gulf understanding on supporting and financing a war that is waged by the current regime in Iraq, and neglecting the deep differences among the three parties; the governments of Gulf, America, and the Iraqi regime, which stemmed from the history of doubts suspicions, and anxiety and which culminated by the repercussions of the Israeli bombing which has been occurred by an American coverage and through facilities from the Saudi airspaces for the Iraqi nuclear reactor in Summer 1980. This was the war which has destroyed Iraq and Iran; it was financed and given the coverage by the Gulf through repulsive sectarian speech that has been translated in Iraq and inside the countries of Gulf through killings, deportation, and persecution and where the world newspapers were filled at that time with its facts.

Any rational knows that Iran which has come out of a stormy and fresh revolution cannot bear the consequences of entering the war, and knows that the Iraqi-Iranian war was by Iraqi, Gulf, and American decision to destroy Iran and repress it in order to meet the American need and interests, but the most important is that this observer will know simply that the absence of the speech which justifies this war has made the sectarian title is the official speech of Gulf for the war against the calls of Iran for unity, as was the Islamic speech against the Arabism of Gamal Abdul Nasser and as the Arab speech of the Gulf after the sectarianism and the Islam have become a burden on them, what is left is to ask, isn’t Iran which came out of the war without grudges and hatred, and has forgiven those who were conspiring against it, that was proven by facts,  is the same Iran which tried to bury the sectarianism, while the ruler of the Gulf are those who are seeking to agitate it?

In the talks about the sectarianism and Iran as long as the geniuses of the Arab diplomacy and their philosopher Al-Jubair are praising the strength of the national unity in the Gulf countries and the state of communal harmony among the sects, the talk is confined in two cases Iraq and Lebanon. In Iraq Al-Jubair and his followers do not ignore that the settled referentiality in Najaf is the party which led the confrontation against the previous regime in Iraq and that this referentiality did not follow or pledge allegiance to the Wilayet Al-Fakih which Al Sheikh Nimr Al-Nimr has been executed on charge of his allegiance, but the referentiality in Najaf is still has the major control in the religious and sectarian influence in Iraq. While in Lebanon the observers know that the Iranian support and the Iranian influence that resulted cannot be separated of the state of the resistance against the Israeli occupation, which the Gulf and all the Arabs except Syria have delayed in its support and advocacy, therefore the secret of hostility toward Iran and Syria according to the Gulf and who is beyond Gulf is through this support and advocacy.

On the contrary can the philosopher Al-Jubair answer the question about his sectarian explanation of the Iranian behavior with Hamas Movement and the size of the support which has presented to it and which the Arab governments have feared of keeping up with it with the less even when Hamas has positioned within the confines of these governments on the basis of the referentiality of Muslim Brotherhood of Hamas toward Syria, as well as the future of the wars and the crises in the region, moreover the generous Iranian support did not stop at the time of sanctions and blockade, and despite the political dispute the flow of support is still in Hamas Al-Qassam troops, while the speech of Hamas remains ensuring its sectarian Brotherhood identity which made of Qatar its Gulf capital and of Turkey the ally of Gulf in Syria as a public referentiality

The simplest question according to the science of Al-Jubair is how was the state of the Arabs after the victory of the resistance in 2000 after the liberation of the Southern of Lebanon and the outbreak of the uprising in Palestine, and who was the victim of lifting the photos of Al Sayyed Hassan Nasrollah in Al Azhar and at the universities of Egypt and Gulf and which found their place in the houses of the Arab citizens in addition to their supporting demonstrations of Palestine and its uprising from Tangier to Manama ? Who has unsheathed the sword of the sectarianism to bury this state which through the investing on it, Al-Jubair could issue an Arab statement that condemns Hezbollah?

It seems that the phase of algebra has ended and began to phase of Al-Jubair ‘s science !

Translated by Lina Shehadeh,