Normalization with the Zionist entity ... an unforgivable crime !!

                                              Normalization with the Zionist entity ... an unforgivable crime !!

 

Everyone knows that the Zionist movement and the Zionist entity have committed countless crimes against Arabs, Muslims and Jews, reaching the level of crimes against humanity, and the dilemma against which the free people rise up is the efforts made by Zionism and it asks Arabs and Muslims to accept these crimes and to deal with them as if they did not commit any crime, and he  What is called normalization.

 Normalization with the Zionist entity is building formal and informal political, economic, cultural, scientific and intelligence relations with the Zionist entity, and normalization is a handing over to the Zionist entity of its right to the Arab land in Palestine, its right to build settlements, its right to displace Palestinians, and its right to destroy Arab villages and cities, and this is how normalization takes place.  It is surrender and contentment with the ugliest levels of humiliation, humiliation, and surrender of dignity and rights.

 Normalization means making what is not normal normal, and it does not necessarily mean returning things to normal, as some claim.  In statistics and databases there is a scientific term which is "normalization of data", meaning making statistical data more usable in programming and analysis (Normalization of Data) than it was in its raw state before normalization.  Consequently, there is no need to insist on the use of Zionist resistance instead of resistance to normalization, considering normalization as “an alleged return to a certain situation that was once normal,” as some esteemed friends and colleagues go in all good faith.  So normalization is to make normal relations between two parties whose relations are not currently normal, whether they were previously normal or not ... There is thus nothing wrong with using the term "resistance to normalization" to those who resist normalizing relations between us and the Zionist entity.

 Normalization is a rejected approach

  In the language, the word "normalization" comes to the weight of "activation", as it is a process and a continuous process towards achieving an end, not a single, rapid or non-rapid transient step.  So normalization is a method, performance and mentality whose essence is to break the barrier of hostility with the Zionist enemy in various forms, whether cultural, media, political, economic, tourism, religious, security, strategy or others.

 However, regardless of the form, the thrust of normalization with the Zionist enemy remains the same, which is to make the Jewish presence in Palestine a normal matter, and therefore any action, saying, silence or inaction leads to dealing with the Jewish presence in Palestine as a natural matter that carries a naturalistic meaning.

 Normalization is intended to establish normal relations in various aspects: there is political normalization, economic normalization, diplomatic normalization, and so on.  All these aspects are rejected and do not require great diligence, for they are clear and evident, because normalization with the oppressor is unjust, because it is his admission of his injustice, and this is stated in many places: God Almighty said: O those who believe, do not take my enemies and your enemies.  Al-Mumtaminah: From verse 1).  He also said: “My Lord, with what you have graciously blessed me, I will not be the noon of the criminals” (Al-Qasas: 17).

 And the Prophet (PBUH) said: ((Whoever walks with an oppressor to help him in his oppression, knowing that he is unjust, has left Islam)) (Narrated by Al-Tabarani).  And he said: ((He who assists in a conflict with injustice will not remain in the wrath of God until he is removed)) (Narrated by Ibn Majah).  And he said: ((If you see my nation fearing the unjust to say to him, You are an unjust, then you may bid farewell from them)).

 Thus, the Qur’anic texts and the hadiths of the Prophet are available in concert, indicating in their entirety the inadmissibility of the oppressor to his oppression, and this is in fact the position of reason and transmission, known and approved by international legislation, and this is what Islam stipulated.

 Through this criterion, no sane person doubts the prohibition of normalization with Israel, as long as it insists on injustice and insists on the displacement of the Palestinian people and the usurpation of Arab lands.

 Today, Israel does not recognize any human right for more than six million displaced Palestinians in the land, under the pretext that they left a generation or two ago, while they see the right to emigrate at every moment and whenever they want for the Jews whose ancestors may have passed by seventy generations before Palestine, or that their ancestors  They did not even know anything called Palestine, because they had no connection to the inhabitants of this area.

 Let us ask the history and the science of races, were the inhabitants of Palestine African of the black race in order to give the right to the Ethiopian Falasha Jews to immigrate to the land of Palestine?  Or were the inhabitants of Palestine from the Khazars, the Germans, or other races that were given the right to immigrate to Palestine ?!  On the other hand, the Palestinians, whose traces in Palestine extend to thousands of years, are prevented from returning to their lands, homes and farms after they were driven out.

 Thus, it is based on the previous legal texts, and the reality in which the Israeli enemy is moving;  We declare the prohibition of normalization with Israel as long as it maintains its current policy of oppression, oppression, aggression and occupation of the land.

 As for those who compare his relations with "Israel" and the Hudaybiyah peace.  One of the simplest things to say: This comparison is wrong in several ways, including:

 The Hudaybiyah peace is a truce between two enemies, and it is not compared to establishing peace and normalization with an enemy that continues to usurp the Arab land and displace its people, and peace and normalization in this case is not legally permissible, while a truce is permissible.

 Including: The Hudaybiyah peace was concluded by the leader of the nation at the time, and it was one agreement that preserved the nation’s unity and did not enable its enemies to it.

 And the individual agreements exacerbated the nation’s contract, weakened its strength, strengthened its enemies, and enabled the deadly cancer of Zionism to dare to abide by its belief and ideology.  

 Political normalization

 Through reviewing the stages of the Arab-Zionist conflict, we find that the Zionist entity is the one that insisted on the normalization of relations with the Arabs, and that its policy towards war or toward peace focused mainly on normalization, as it is the main and basic guarantee for Israel's survival in the region.  Israel wanted to establish normal relations with the Arabs, so that the Arabs would accept them as part of the region, and neither their existence nor their right to it would be questioned.  Normal relations have levels of ups and downs, but they remain within the logic of political life and not within a hostile logic in which one party targets the presence of the other.  Acknowledging the existence of Israel suffices it with the obsession of demise and falls within the logic of others' defense of its existence and its continuity, and guarantees it the reassurance that the Arabs will not mobilize the ancient history to formulate their current behavior, as the past turns into mere memories that have no way to interfere in the present or the future.

 Israel was always the strongest and tried through its power to subjugate the Arabs, so they were inflicted by repeated defeats until they were unable to follow what they were calling for.  With some enticing incentives, the Arabs gradually transformed absolute rejection into indecision and then to gradual acceptance until we reached the various normalization levels we are now.  It is true that the normalization impulse oscillates, but not within the logic of rejection, but within the logic of acceptance.

 The normalization of relations with Israel does not involve mere establishment of normal relations with it as is the usual relations between the countries of the world that are not in conflict. Rather, it enters the depth of the Arab and Islamic self and has personal and collective repercussions of a civilized and historical character.  It is not normalizing with the aim of establishing relations that did not exist in the first place, such as establishing a relationship between Egypt and Nepal or between the countries of the Arabian Peninsula and Peru, but rather in the sense of reviewing a long history and reconsidering historical, civilizational and religious dimensions.  It does not involve merely mutual or common interests that yield material benefits on two sides, but rather includes self-awareness and an Arabic reading of history, identity and origins.

 Normalization with the Zionist entity does not have a present dimension, that is, it is devoid of psychological extensions and the constituents of personality and identity, nor is it just a temporary slogan with the aim of overcoming the stage of Arab impotence until things are seen and conditions change. Rather, it permeates a person’s awareness of his impotence to root him as a reality that cannot be overcome or overcome.  As if he was addressing the Arab mind and the Arab psyche, saying: “Impotence has surrounded the Arabs, and it is a reality, but an inevitable fate, and that there is no room for them but to surrender to it and bequeath it to their children to become an educational component against which generations will not rebel. It is the practical translation of the consolidation of defeat in the Arab soul, including what that entails.  Conditions of acceptance not reluctant to defeat. "  In other words, it is an introduction to defeat so that the soul does not feel comfortable in an atmosphere other than defeats and defeats.

 Normalization for Israel does not mean merely establishing commercial relations, legations or embassies, but rather it is supposed to include a review of the concepts of conflict and an understanding of history, religious foundations, etc.  That is, it must be a radical process of reversing the Arab and Islamic view of Israel and the Jews, so that a new Arab Muslim will emerge with new concepts that undermine all of the above with its background and circumstances.  If normalization is not like this, then the roots of the resurgence of the conflict remain latent until the time for them to emerge.  If the conflict is to be permanently buried, the assets, roots and foundations of the formation of the Arab Islamic character must be destroyed.  Accordingly, normalization must be a new life approach and programmed in an effective way that creates new educational and moral values ​​that are commensurate with the stage and form the basis of the future.

 Mechanisms of political normalization

 Within this general framework, Israel saw that the most important guarantee for its continued existence is that it will be accepted by Arabs and Muslims as an integral part of the region and that it will be treated as a state that has the right to exist and live in peace and in normal relations with others like any other country in the region.  That is why, since its establishment, Israel has worked towards searching for means of détente with the Arabs and establishing non-hostile, even normal, relations with them.  It has focused its efforts on the Arab street, on the average Arab person, because he is the rest and not the ruler.  Israel considered that its acceptance as a state in the region by Arab leaders, rulers and leaders is not sufficient as a guarantee for its continuation due to the instability of governance in the Arab world and the inability of the leaders to achieve continuity without the intelligence, guns and prisons.  Acceptance by these collapses with the collapse of their leaders and governments, and it is easy to turn acceptance into rejection if the people have not followed the ranks of acceptance.

 For Israel to be accepted as an integral part of the region and to be recognized thus, popular acceptance of it must be present.  It was not easy and there must be breakthroughs that would make friction between them and the various groups of the Arab people possible.  In light of the widespread hostility to Israel in the Arab world, the usual means of persuasion were not available, and they were faced only with the means of violence and destruction.  In doing so, it needed two things: Arab leaders who were not jealous of their nation and their people and could be managed, and military defeats inflicted upon the Arabs that would lead to accumulated frustrations and entrench the idea of ​​surrender.  This is precisely what prompted former Israeli Prime Minister Ben Gurion to consider paying a large financial bribe to any neighboring Arab leader in order to wage war against Israel and be defeated, so the masses absorb the lesson and decide that there is no point in looking for reasons of strength to fight Israel.

 Israel did not have a big problem in finding suitable leaders through several means. The first is that British colonialism did not leave the region without investing some loyalists of Western countries at the expense of Arab interests.  As for those who were not linked by colonialism immediately before leaving, it was possible to work on it with two means of money and women, which have proven effective in neutralizing many Arab leaders and in their recruitment as well.  As for those who managed to escape the reins of the traps, they remained prey to a state of backwardness, which is characterized by poor professional and moral standards, laziness, tribalism, the absence of a scientific mentality and submission.  Whoever deliberately and polarized the Ummah did not suffer misfortune, then he was backward.  That is why the Arabs were not at the level of preparation for an equal war and the overwhelming majority of their battles over the years were bitter defeats, and the series of defeat did not stop except with Hezbollah, which achieved a crushing victory over Israel in 2000.

 It is assumed, according to the general historical logic, that challenge begets challenge and that the vanquished searches for his mistakes in order to destroy them and accumulate the causes of strength in order to defeat his enemy.  However, the defeats at the Arab level had another effect, which is to raise the level of frustration or increase the intensity of feelings of despair, in preparation for accepting the status quo and accepting it to its cause.  The reason for this is that the Arab leaders, who were not destroyed by defeats, and the peoples did not move against them, followed internal policies that prevented peoples from working towards implementing their desires and rearranging their ranks in order to defend themselves and defeat the aggressors.  Arab leaders used their security apparatus and security forces to suppress the Arab people, and used money to buy consciences and enslave people, and they set up administrations ravaged by corruption that shattered many societal and political ties.  They have wreaked havoc and devastation on the Arab land, turning the Arab into a rubble difficult to collect.  Thus, they pushed him to a corner where he could not say "no", and with it approval of all the forbidden things became possible.  If there is still someone who can oppose, then prison awaits him or death without many people regretting his situation.

 The leaders, rulers and leaders brought us to that point that they reached a long time ago and were unable to reveal and publicly adopt it, which is the point of reconciliation with or acceptance of Israel.  These leaders said yes to negotiation and mutual recognition, and people, especially in Occupied Palestine / 67, took to the streets chanting and dancing to celebrate the victory they had achieved in Madrid and then in Oslo.  Despair has worked in the souls and minds of people to the extent that they danced to what they described over the years as treachery and forbidden taboos that could not be taken.

 Thus, Israel relied on two mechanisms to sow despair and frustration, namely, making Arab clinics capable of being defeated, as they adopted a military mechanism of its own that dominates the region.  The Arab leaders, in turn, relied on two mechanisms, namely, verbal alignment with the aspirations of the masses and their preparation for fragmentation and defeats through their internal and external policies.  The Israeli role was integrated with the Arab leadership role, and the situation ended where Israel wanted - namely, to sit at the negotiating table to make peace with it based on mutual recognition and opening the doors to normal relations.

 The official normalization scramble

 Since the entry into force of the Iranian nuclear agreement, the countries of the region began to move in different directions in an attempt to encircle Iran's internationally recognized regional role.  It is noticeable in this context that the Arab regimes continue to follow the Saudi approach based on two main headings: exaggeration of the so-called "Iranian threat" and normalization with the Zionist entity, and by excluding the option of openness and dialogue with the new Iran that Washington and its Western partners have taken to correct the mistakes of the "diplomatic boycott" and strengthen communication with it.  For the sake of "solving other issues," their peoples have missed a historic opportunity for comprehensive cooperation and the exchange of security and economic interests with a country that has regional influence and weight!

 Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Bahrain ... felt after the completion of the historic nuclear agreement with the West that the results of this agreement were not satisfactory to them, which prompted them to fall into the bosom of "Israel", in order to provide them with alleged protection from what they consider the expansion of Iranian influence in the region, in contravention of that.  The rules of political relations that call for an alliance with the countries with which it shares the largest number of common denominators, and thus the chances of achieving interests are much greater. The Gulf regimes saw the Israeli entity as a strong ally despite the lack of the necessary commonalities with it.

 It is a change that is usually followed by other commitments. Israel is no longer an enemy, and therefore there are those who demand from Arab media professionals to open Israeli embassies in some Arab countries ... all the hellish game going on in the Arab world in order to connect some Arabs with Israel, and there is even a race for this purpose, which  Some people call it a fait accompli that must be acknowledged, and they see in it that it is a delay in reaching out to the Israelis ... Arab unity erases its existence, and the one Arab entity changes its form of government if it remains, and Arabism is a word mixed in its opinion and it has left us since it passed away from raising its banner, as for Israel it protects  In his opinion, too, it prevents the fall of its friends and provides them with long life, while it is an unstable entity that draws its strength from Arab weakness, from this Arab other.

 The recent secret visit by Israeli Economy Minister Yuval Steinitz to the UAE amidst tight protection, according to what was revealed by the Zionist enemy media, fully explains the fact of the organic link between Israel and the Gulf states, and indicates the degree of coordination and joint cooperation between the two sides with regard to the work to destroy the Arab countries.  One by one, in addition to trying to work together to weaken any country that stands by the Arab causes, and supports countries facing the Zionist project, especially Iran, especially since the visit of the Israeli official coincided with the entry into force of the nuclear agreement with the West.

 The assertion of the Israeli Channel Two that Abu Dhabi and a number of Arab countries that it called moderate share common interests with Israel seeking to establish an effective partnership with these countries, and that the visit of the Israeli minister is in this direction, also confirms that the Israeli and Gulf agendas prepared to divide the region are the same, and the interests are mutual  Where the rulers of the sheikhdoms see their alliance with the Zionist entity as a guarantee for their survival, while Israel sees the sheikhs as the main path towards liquidating the Palestinian cause, and both sides have one goal, which is to try to destroy Syria as it represents the head of the resistance pyramid in the region.

 However, in investigating the failures and successes on the two fronts of the struggle, the contest between the trenches of reaction and progress, we realize that it was never interrupted even at the height of the reactionary hypocrisy that Saudi Arabia used to call "Arab solidarity" and which Syria knew to be a gateway to lure it into running in the American court, and is looking forward at the same time.  To its becoming a true Arab solidarity and struggle against the Zionist project. What happened is that losing something does not give it. As the successive disappointments of Washington and Riyadh over a third of a century, in reaching the stage of the spread of normalization in the Arab homeland, necessitated breaking Syria’s back, as it is the lever of the national opposition against neglect.  With the land and rights, which has happened since 2011 on the abundance of blood that has been shed, is an American reactionary attempt to undermine the bumpers of the scramble to "Israel", and with the Islamist reactionaries in Libya, Egypt and Syria, the Muslim Brotherhood, known to be reactionary par excellence, is leading them, especially since their defeat in "Balutaj"  Al-Maliki-Al-Sebaei 1954, in front of the progressive national fabric in Syria, that is, the tall edifice in the bumpers of a rush to relieve national responsibility towards the Zionist project.

 The secret Gulf dialogue is continuing with Israel, and their relations have become a practical and undeniable reality, and the scandal of establishing relations with the Zionist enemy no longer raises the shame of the Gulf regimes that strive to relieve international pressure on Israel. Frequent meetings between Gulf and Israeli officials in Tel Aviv, Europe and New York… In 2005  Qatar and Bahrain announced the lifting of the economic embargo on Israel, and in 2006 Hamad Malik of Bahrain appointed a Bahraini Jew, Hoda Nono, as Bahrain’s ambassador to the United States. There are ten Israeli companies that have investments in Dubai, all registered in Cyprus.  Its branch in Britain to establish a camel farm and camel milking center and export it in Dubai.

 And recently, the Arab foreign ministers agreed, in their last meeting in Cairo, to appoint "Ahmed Aboul Gheit" - Mubarak's foreign minister from 2004 to 2011 - as Secretary-General of the League of Arab States to succeed Nabil Al-Arabi. The appointment of "Aboul Gheit" in this position raises many questions, especially  In light of the state of despair experienced by the Arab peoples, the features of which appeared in Morocco's refusal to host the Arab summit, which was scheduled to take place during this month, as well as Nabil Al-Arabi's insistence on rejecting his second term.

 Aboul Gheit’s diplomatic history is full of Arab disasters, the most important and most dangerous of which are: the ratification of Israel’s declaration of war on the Gaza Strip in 2008, and his relentless pursuit to thwart the Gaza summit in the same year, and his close relationship with the Zionist entity, as Aboul Gheit is considered one of the most important tools that he  It is used by "Mubarak" - the strategic treasure of the Zionist entity - and by his intense hostility to the Palestinians, especially the resistance movements, as he threatened the Palestinians to break their legs if they stormed the borders again, and finally it was.

 We are, therefore, facing a new era for the Arab League that will not be better than before, but will be worse than it was, thanks to its new Secretary General and the good relations he has with the Zionist entity, in addition to the fact that its members see in it as nothing but a park for some of its officials, and then we are facing  A university that is dying before the issues of the Arab world and stands with its hands paralyzed in the face of the real dangers of the Arab nation, and in return new blood is pumped into it for the sake of normalization with the Zionist entity and work to transform that first enemy of the Arab peoples into the close friend with whom relations should be in the best condition, and so on.  We will be facing a university for Arab normalization, not a league of Arab states.