[ad_1]
The subject is very complicated, not a bit. Some may say that Kuwait is supposed to be more willing than others to normalize with the occupiers, given the deep Kuwaiti wound that has not yet healed, in contrast to what is being commercialized, from the position of some influential Palestinian parties to that invasion. that wiped Kuwait off the map, before it recovers. By force, depending on the American power that entered the Gulf, and turned some of its countries into giant aircraft carriers.
This invasion resulted in a Kuwaiti withdrawal and a break in Kuwait’s faith in its Arab environment, provided this neighborhood does not hesitate to dismiss the state, “which did not stop serving the Arabs and their causes,” as they see themselves. same Kuwaitis. Kuwait’s wound was compounded by the fact that this cancellation was achieved through military invasion, and by an Arab neighbor, Kuwait provided tremendous support in its hostile and fabricated war against Tehran in the 1980s. Furthermore, the invasion was carried out with the support or understanding of the official and popular Palestinian, Jordanian, Yemeni and Sudanese parties, and those Kuwaiti countries were called “the opposition countries”.
We read “beautiful” words about the overcoming of Kuwait for that resounding fact, and I do not agree with that. I believe that the Kuwaiti wound in front of the Palestinians is very deep, and perhaps more bloody than any other country that reproached the Palestinians, such as Lebanon, in which some Palestinian parties practiced what should have been avoided, or Jordan, where the contrast with the convulsed monarchy it led to the massacre of “Black September”. Kuwait’s wound is bloodier than the Damascus government says from the position of “Hamas”, which was involved in the domestic scene after 2011.
It can be said that some of these events are ambiguous and carry aspects, including the Syrian event, at least in its first moment, although it has not been since the intervention of the Americans, Saudi Arabia and “ISIS” that coincide in hostility. to democracy and do not find in national liberation an objective worth fighting for. As for the Kuwaiti event in the early 1990s, it was a very clear case, as the Iraqi army launched a barbaric invasion of an Arab country recognized by the United Nations. Occupy it and abolish the sanctities, without justification, since disputes are resolved through discussions.
From the Kuwaiti point of view, the Palestinians, suffering from the occupation, are supposed to be more aware of the crime of “shock” than any other Arab, regional or international party. However, not a few Palestinian sectors, led by Yasser Arafat, were classified from Kuwait’s point of view as supporters of Saddam and his invasion. Even when some Palestinians said they were against the invasion, but against the US military intervention in the Gulf, the Kuwaiti government pointed out that this was a justification for the occupation to remain on its people. In addition to the above, the Kuwaiti guilt begins with a view to the presence of some 400 thousand Palestinians living in Kuwait, at the time of the occupation, since the rich capital of the Gulf is home to the largest Palestinian community in the Gulf, whose population lives a life of well-being, often with sweat from the brow, right, but under Embrace the state and its people. Kuwait was also distinguished by a special relationship with the Palestinian cause, in which the “Fatah” movement was born, and on the pages of its newspapers Naji Al-Ali created his immortal drawings.
In light of this wound, why did Kuwait not normalize?
Well, the point, in my opinion, is that Kuwait has adopted, since the withdrawal of Iraqi forces from its lands, a policy closer to distancing itself from regional differences and axes of play. The small capital of the Gulf chose a path that satisfies “everyone”, Arabs and Muslims in general, thus supporting Arab causes along the agreed lines. We can note, for example, Kuwait’s caution in addressing Yemen’s bitter history. Kuwait distinguished itself by its position, so that it was able to obtain the satisfaction of the Yemeni, Saudi, Iranian and international parties alike, sending military forces in response to Saudi Arabia, avoiding the merger with the Sanaa army, in addition to opening its lands. to the Yemeni-Yemeni dialogue and provide the poorest country with abundant financial support. In 2011, as another example, Kuwait decided to send forces to Bahrain, as part of what was said to have been an intervention by “Peninsula Shield” forces, but those forces were free and did not join the crowd in the Pearl Rotunda, while Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates sent military forces that killed the defenseless.
However, we note that the American does not understand. We see Jared Kushner, an adviser to President Donald Trump, criticizing Kuwait, considering its biased position towards the Palestinians. It can be said that Kuwait has more than justification to join the normalization train, but the Kuwaiti leadership, with its long experience, where Sabah Al-Ahmad held the post of Foreign Minister for almost three decades, realizes the magnitude. of the error in this and of the burden it imposes on the state that is in an Iraqi triangle: A red-hot Iranian-Saudi, has not yet recovered from an invasion that continues to haunt the decision maker. The statements of the President of the National Assembly of Kuwait, Marzouq Al-Ghanim, are nothing more than an expression of the position of Prince Sabah Al-Ahmad, who wants to keep Kuwait within the Arab and Islamic “fortress”, however fragile. be this fortress.
And at the present time, the following points can be recorded that push Kuwait to postpone the normalization file for a long time to a point that should be reaching, if the Arab context continues at this degraded rate:
First: Kuwait does not want to be seen as tweeting outside of the Arab squad, for its misery.
Second: Kuwait seeks to differentiate itself from the Saudi-Emirati-Bahrain axis, which is moving towards normalization.
Third: Kuwait is working to avoid being seen as favoring the Republican candidate Donald Trump, over the Democratic candidate, Joe Biden.
Fourth: Kuwait takes into account its good relations with the Iranian side, which is concerned about the current wave of normalization, which is interpreted as a military alliance directed against Tehran.
By the way, I suspect that Oman cannot come to normalization at the moment either, although nothing is guaranteed, because it does not want its position to be interpreted as a bias towards the Saudis. I estimate that Oman could have wished to go to normalization at an earlier time, or choose its moment for itself, in light of its rhetoric that “opens lines with everyone” and refuses to be a battlefield, but the history of Oman needs special treatment.
Kuwait has had “murderers” at the hands of Saddam, and it knows that getting too involved in other people’s problems means the possibility of exposing itself to other “murderers.” This is what the Emiratis do not realize, and the Qataris realized before it was too late, amidst the “Arab Spring” crowd. Kuwait’s experience is cautious. Your lesson gives you wisdom. Does that cancel Kuwait’s belief in the Palestinian cause? No. But we have to read the scene in more depth. The belief of the Kuwaitis in the justice of the Palestinian cause does not eliminate the need for a special political reading of the case of Kuwait.
The summary of the scene is that Kuwait’s bitter experience leads him not to be against the Palestinians, who, in the eyes of all Arabs, are victims of Israel.
The Kuwait event is an outstanding lesson for the Palestinians, and on this we have other words.
Subscribe to «News» on YouTube here
