Why did Egypt withdraw its ambassador from Damascus?!
22 Feb 2012 - 5:10
Islam Times - Arabism has two wings, Egypt and Damascus. Thus, the status of the Arab nation cannot be corrected, but with the survival of cooperation and coordination between the Arab Republic of Egypt and the Syrian Arab Republic. This was the case since the great victory achieved by Salah al-Din over the invasion of the Crusaders and liberating Jerusalem. Long time later, Saif ad-Din Qutuz prevailed over the Mongols, and liberated both Damascus and Iraq.
Three days ago, Egypt withdrew its ambassador from Damascus, a step that was not anticipated or desired. As a result, Syria responded by recalling its ambassador from Cairo, and thus the Arab scene started its highest levels of tragedy. The people’s feelings and emotions are responsible now for the formulation of the relationship that was formed over time to guarantee the Arab presence and the dream of people in one Arab homeland that is respected by the world and can regain its usurped rights.
When the Israeli army killed the Egyptian officers and soldiers in Sinai deliberately, and before that in less than two years, it invaded the Gaza Strip after bombing it with planes made in the U.S. and with the bombs of different types and weights, including those that are internationally banned, and killed and injured thousands of people, neither the former government of Mubarak, nor the later government of the Military Council withdrew their ambassador from Tel Aviv or expelled the Zionist ambassador from Cairo.
Not only this, but everything the occupation authorities did such as killing and torturing the Palestinian people, as well as looting the Arab lands, violating the Islamic and Christian sanctities, and Judaicizing Jerusalem, did not push the Egyptian leadership to cut its ties with the Zionist entity. Hence, why is it doing so with Syria?
The Egyptian Foreign Ministry said: “There was no other step in front of Egypt, but only to withdrew its ambassador from Syria in response to the pulse of the Egyptian street”. Thus, it is the pulse of the Egyptian street, which was expressed by a few hundreds of young Muslim Brotherhood people who were demonstrating in front of the Syrian embassy demanding the expulsion of the Syrian ambassador to protest against the Syrian authorities that are using violence to suppress the demonstrators.
We will accept this logic, (thought it is fragile and has weak political and behavioral pillars), and take it back to its integrity to go back to the scene that truly stated that the incident reflects honestly the pulse of the street, when thousands of young rebels attacked the Israeli embassy in Cairo and one of them climbed more than ten floors and took the Israeli flag down and threw it to the angry public that torn and burned it. It was a meaningful and unmistakable scene, when they also called for the expulsion of the ambassador, cutting the relationship with the Hebrew State, and the abolition of the Camp David agreement that abused Egypt and its national role. Hence, did the government and the armed forces respond to the pulse of the street?
The issue here is not related to Egypt and what it has done, but it is related to every Arab behavior through the league of rulers, who left their leadership over to the states of oil and the American bases. This behavior is destroying every possibility to overcome the present dilemma and to overcome what the American administration and its allies are doing in the region so that to end the effects of the Arab revolutions or the so-called the Arab spring, and to stop its expansion towards the huge oil reserves therein.
The argument to stop the violence in Syria and to force the Syrian leadership to change its position on the peaceful movements of the Syrian people, if we accepted that this argument is true and considered that violence stems from the erratic behavior of this leadership, would require keeping relations with Syria and embarrassing this leadership to stop killing the people in the words of the records of those countries, and this is in itself an indictment of the incidents of withdrawing the ambassadors, cutting the ties, and stopping the dialogue with the regime in Syria.
Accordingly, all the calls for maintaining the security of the Syrian people and the lives of their sons fell when the League of oil states withdrew the Arab observers from Syria, and then finishing the work of the mission entirely and resorting to the UN Security Council. In fact, if the UN adopted the Western-Arab project about Syria a true disaster will take place in the region.
Some do believe that opening all the roads in front of the Zionist enemy to pass in our great Arab nation and throwing a lifeline to it whenever the ring is narrowed on its neck and whenever the determination of peace and restoring the rights approached, despite all what the Syrian people and their government are suffering of the siege and boycott that led dramatically to a decline in the standard of living and caused the impoverishment of many of those, whom the boycotting countries are allegedly showing solidarity with and saving, would be normal in the eyes of the Arab citizen.
Some others also believe that granting the Zionist entity the opportunity to monopolize the Palestinian people by claiming that they are busy with the Syrian affair will pass unnoticed and will not have any attention by anyone. I would say to all those that this is an illusion that will fade soon, and all the countries that bowed to the rich countries that belong to America will recognize that what they have done was a big mistake that does not help in formulating any future for the Arab region.
The withdrawal of the Egyptian ambassador from Damascus probably came in response to the pressure imposed by the Muslim Brotherhood on the ruling military junta in Egypt, and this is supported by several proofs the most important is the fact that the Egyptian People’s Assembly, which has a majority of Muslim Brotherhood and Salafi members, has cut the ties with the Syrian People’s Council, in a strange and incomprehensible step. Then, it asked the junta to withdraw the Egyptian ambassador from Syria.
Anyone following up the Arab affair, as well as the conflict with the American-Zionist project in the region, will realize the seriousness of the mistake made by the Egyptian government, when it marginalized its relationship with Syria and withdrew its ambassador from Damascus.
Even during the very tensed relationship and when President al-Assad accused the ousted President Hosni Mubarak of succumbing to the Israeli-American dictates and rushing towards satisfying the alliance that is opposing the interests of the Arab nation, the Egyptian Foreign Ministry did not call its ambassador, because it was aware of the importance of keeping the bridges between the two pillars of Arabism and of maintaining the Arab national security, as well as the Egyptian one in particular. Here, the case cannot be as just responding to the humanitarian and fraternal spirit towards the Syrian people, maintaining their life, and saving their sons.
If this was the case, then the entire nation would be with this, would call for reconciliation and dialogue in favor of this, and would deplore violence wherever it comes from. However, as we see, the issue is hitting the foundations of the joint Arab action and putting everyone at grave risk.
We are awaiting the return of the ambassadors of the two countries, for this is the interest of the nation and its national security, in favor of which all the urgent conflicts between Egypt and Syria should be lessened.