by Abdenur Prado - posted Friday, February 11, 2011
The West finances dictators in the Middle East and the Arab world for over a century.
pro-democracy demonstrations against dictatorships supported by the West in the Arab world, shows once again the immense hypocrisy of our leaders. Which side Western governments are, with the demonstrators or the dictators? The answer is simple: the side of those who generate millions for the benefit of Western multinational corporations.
But that does not surprise anyone. It is well known that the West has funded more than a century of dictatorships in the Middle East and the Arab world because it is through the autocracies that [the West] were able to control the resources of this region. Even if this leads to the exploitation and misery of people facing decommissioning, orchestrated by the International Monetary Fund, their social services in order to repay foreign debt generated by the millions in arms purchases in the West ... As the aspirations of civil society, increasing poverty, torture and repression, lack of civil liberties and human rights ... No Western leader does not care at all. And all have shown, continuously, without exception, for over a century. Remarks made recently by Henry Kissinger are revealing in this regard: "We've had five presidents who have considered Hosni Mubarak as the best ally of the U.S. objectives in the region. "
Just out of the archives all the statements of Western leaders who praise the Arab tyrants: their economic policies, their continued political stability, their contributions to international security, that they safeguard secularism and prevent the advance of Islamist movements ... In short, for submission to the dictates of Western financial markets and the International Monetary Fund.
This overview does only one variable: whether or not the connivance with the State of Israel. This underscores the critical role of Israel vis-à-vis the maintenance of dictatorships in the Arab world, a fact corroborated by the comments made by Netanyahu in support of Ben Ali and Mubarak as well as decades of collusion with the family Royal Saudi monarchy and other issues of colonialism. No surprise then to learn that Israeli diplomacy has done everything possible to save Mubarak. It is true that Israel has cause for concern, not only for the danger posed by the rise of political Islam, but also because the democratic governments that might arise would maintain not only their country's complicity in the genocide of the Palestinian people. The open border between Gaza and Sinai is crucial for the survival of the Palestinian people. This is a convincing argument in favor of democracy in Egypt and the Middle East! And
"Islamism" in all this? It serves as a bogeyman to justify the support of dictatorships "secularists." However, it obscures the fact that the majority of parties "Islamists" in the Arab world accepted the idea of parliamentary democracy.
An example of this paradigm is that the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. In 1944 the founder, Hassan al-Banna, supported the participation in parliamentary elections, saying that the Egyptian constitution was "Islamic" because it recognized that the authority resides in the people, ensured the decision-making through consultation (Shura) and respect for individual freedoms. In some of his writings, he defends parliamentary democracy: "The bases of political organization based on the system of parliamentary representation does not contradict the fundamental principles that Islam has set in organization of power. "Since its founding, the Muslim Brotherhood have repeatedly stated that their intention is not to take power, but to educate society and to influence the system for Islamic ideals in justice being implemented. Despite this, they are portrayed as villains by the media manipulation and by Western governments. (I'm not a fan of the Muslim Brotherhood, but I am against their demonization. For their positions, see their website in English).
There is talk now of returning to Tunisia Rachid al-Ghannouchi, founder and historic leader of the party-Nahda in Tunisia, after 22 years of exile. According Ghannouchi, Islam provides a more fertile than that of the West to carry out democracy. There is a book of Azam Tamimi, where he studied his thought in detail, Rachid Ghannouchi: A Democrat within Islam, published by Oxford University Press. Among his ideals: "an Islamic system based on the will of the majority, free elections, free press, minority protection, equality between laity and religious parties, and achieving complete women's rights in all areas, participation in elections to the freedom to dress as they wish, the right to divorce, and even the right to be head of state. The role of Islam is to provide an ethical system. "
An ethical system that necessarily involves the abolition of usury Financial, which provides a minimum of social services for the entire population and the establishment mechanisms that prevent the accumulation of capital in the hands of a few individuals. An equally valid for Spain than for Egypt.
In Brief: Islamist movements are champions of democracy against tyranny corrupt funded by the West. It is curious to see how the terms were reversed at the point of passing the opposition, which demands democracy, for ... absolutists, and dictators that suppress civil liberties as saviors. The world upside down? The world seen through a mass media manipulation. That is to say, from a perspective of the interests of major Western financial corporations.
Translation: Amy Fetchman
0 comments:
Post a Comment