Skip to main content

Amorphous

According to a report by the Wall Street Journal, the European Union has expanded its sanctions on Syria. The new sanctions target seven Syrian businessmen, one of whom is being accused of acting as an intermediary between the Assad Regime and the infamous ISIS in their oil purchase dealings. The Hayat daily reported that George Hiswany is the middleman for the oil contracts, being close to the Assad clan and quite savvy in the black and blood tainted oil market. This comes as Mr. Assad spilled his heart out to North Korea’s Deputy Foreigner Minister in ameeting on Sunday on how both Syria and North Korea are targets for western powers due to the fact that they both enjoy true independence and face, hand-in-hand, a common enemy who has it as a mission to change the identity of the two people.

The villanization of the western media, politicians and social activists of the above-mentioned regimes is no secret to anyone. Both countries indeed top the black list in American books in particular, and their regimes, policies, regional ambitions and ideological discourse are much much opposed by the West in general. The rhetoric being employed by Al Assad on Arab nationalism, on unity to face the Zionist project, on strength to face imperial powers robbing the middle east of its wealth, on how the USA is behind these uprisings in the Arab world that brought nothing but demise and how dangerous the situation is after militant Islamists have taken weapons, is now in danger. This rhetoric may be attacked after Al Assad is yet exposed another time. Or is it? Will the fact that Assad is buying ISIS oil be something rejected by Syrians? Or will Syrians  discard these allegations as ludicrous and conspiratorial? The dearth of evidence perhaps can clear the name of the regime? Or is it OK to deal with ISIS to stand up to the West and help thy people?

The problem is, given the situation in the Middle East and the enormous amount of ugliness and viciousness and hatred surrounding us, coupled with despair, broken-hearts and dreams and complete desperateness, everything is open to personal interpretation and justification in these grey political and moral fora. Perhaps a desperate Syrian may think - on the ISIS oil dealing issue - that: how is buying oil from ISIS any more evil than buying it from Iran that discreetly funds and trains militias in the region, or Saudi Arabia that has broken many codes of human rights, or Iraq that is run by mafias, or the USA that is the head of all evil and the source of the chaos to start with? Why would Ms. X from Aleppo not be cynical about the EU sanctions imposed on a man who simply is making her life and that of her family easier between by supplying the country with resources, even if the contractor is Satan himself? And why would it not be credible for another person to believe that the sanctions have only economic interests of “legal oil traders and businessmen” in mind, and has nothing, absolutely nothing to do with Assad, Baghdadi, or our friend Hiswany.


As a child I was also told to take a position, make up my mind, stand next to those who have been done harm and as far away from those who inflicted bad on others. Concepts, in my innocent head, took shapes, and had a three dimensional presence even if in pure abstract and theory. Left or right, centre at times, but always somewhere. Perhaps with age and time things lose their shape and place and sort of float around. They take no place in any moral and right and wrong barometers, they can easily sway according to who is defending the issue at hand. So the EU sanctions may have had an impact on some audience who stood right next to the decision, appalled by the barbarity of the dealing. Yet some, or many, are carelessly and cynically gliding through as they listen to Assad eloquently speaking to fellow Korean victims.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Just as Orwell Said

         George Orwell said in his famous book 1984 that “first they steal the words, then they steal the meaning”, accurately foreseeing the political actions of world leaders and their manipulation of public opinion. His words are ever so precise once one examines the vocabulary applied by a number of world leaders when describing the policies and regimes of troubling countries: axis of evil, war on terror, terrorist killers, harbourers of fundamentalism etc. Ironic it is to see how those who were once described to have been allies with Satan himself seem to show good will in a matter of very few years. Iran is one very good example of this. The Persian nation has come out as a winner in the Geneva talks that were held in October, where not only did it get applauded for the concessions it offered, but it also ensured the west’s acceptance of its regional weight. Everyone seems to be more relaxed after the negotiations and a new round of talks has been set for November.  

Pan-Arabism vs. Middle Easternism?

             A rab Nationalism, a romantic concept that moved poets to write ballads, intellectuals to preach volumes, activists to passionately organize and the masses to cheer freedom. A concept introduced by students at the American University of Beirut in the last phases of the ageing Ottoman Empire and studied in secret societies. This concept developed and led, under western planning, to the Great Arab Revolt in 1916. The slogans of Arab revival and freedom from Ottoman tyranny swept the Arab nations, where hopes of independence and self-rule were promised by the restoration of Arab control over the area. Then problems arose. Who are Arabs? What is an Aran nation? How does it extend geographically? Is it an area that encompasses people who speak the same language and share the same history? If so, why did the Lebanese Maronites reject the concept of Arab nationalism and insist on a Lebanese identity? Why did the Egyptians hesitate before including themselves under th

Wishing You a New MENA

Journalist and author of A nd Then All Hell Broke Loose: Two Decades in the Middle East   said that “Everything changed with the First World War. The Middle East was reorganized, redefined, and the seeds were planted for a century of bloodshed.” He was not entirely right. Bloodshed lasted more than a century actually. Here we are in 2019, and the Middle East and North Africa region – the infamous MENA – is still a boisterous, rowdy zone of political recrimination, military coups, conspiracy theories, historic reminiscence, oil squabbles, and religiously-infused rhetoric. Blood shed of course as well. Well, here we are.  Algeria is set to head to the polls in April. President Abdelaziz Bouteflika will likely secure a fifth mandate. If not, Algeria’s powerbrokers, mainly the military and powerful business elites will enter into an expensive bargain of security versus social and economic stability. Having vested the long-enjoyed tranquillity on a political figure, rather than a