Ahmed Mostafa ✍️
As we honor the memory of the Egyptian greatest victory on October 6, 1973, against Israel, the American governments and Zionists are eager to undermine such a victory
The October War of 1973 against Israel, a pivotal moment in Middle Eastern history, has been reinterpreted by forces aiming to rewrite regional dominion. The American administrations, driven by Zionist interests, have portrayed Israel as the bastion of strength and democracy, a portrayal that is incongruent with the truth. This is evident in contemporary crises like Gaza, Lebanon, and Syria, where the people’s suffering is a testament to the machinations at play. Gaza, often referred to as the world’s largest open-air prison, is struggling under a prolonged blockade, causing economic hardship and a daily struggle for survival.
Lebanon’s turbulence is exacerbated by interventions, some of which are rooted in regional power struggles. Syria’s conflict, a devastating war, is a testament to the region’s resilience and determination to preserve its rich heritage and dignity. The global community has a responsibility to acknowledge the complexity of the situation and strive for a more balanced understanding of the region’s history and current events. By staying informed and engaging in discussions that challenge skewed narratives, we can contribute to a future where the complexities of history are honored and the path to peace is illuminated.
Henry Kissinger played a pivotal role in creating the significant rift in the Middle East following Egypt’s triumph over Israel during the Six-Day War in October of 1973
Henry Kissinger, a key figure in the Middle East conflicts, played a significant role in shaping the region’s destiny. His diplomatic maneuvers, particularly after Egypt’s victory over Israel in the 1973 Yom Kippur War, widened the region’s fractures and hindered a potential path to peace. Kissinger’s interventionist strategies were not just reactions but calculated actions aimed at shaping the Middle East’s destiny according to personal ideology rather than universal harmony.
Kissinger’s involvement in the Watergate scandal, which led to Nixon’s resignation, reveals his willingness to manipulate power to protect his interests and potentially prevent peace initiatives that could have favored the Palestinians. His viewpoints and strategies contributed to the lingering instability of the Middle East, casting a long shadow on the ground and overshadowing the hopes and dreams of millions for a peaceful existence.
The complexity of Middle Eastern geopolitics cannot be understated, and understanding Kissinger’s role in the region’s history is crucial in analyzing the reverberations of historical actions. His legacy serves as a reminder of the complexities of international relations and the importance of considering the long-term implications of diplomatic actions.
From the perspective of hindsight, it is essential to question the morality and long-term efficacy of diplomatic maneuvers that prioritize short-term gains over sustainable peace and harmony. Kissinger’s actions serve as a reminder of the immense responsibility that accompanies power and the need for leaders to exercise it judiciously, considering the potential for lasting peace or perpetual conflict.
It was a big mistake from President Sadat to bet on Kissinger and USA by saying that 99% of the global game at the hands of USA
President Anwar Sadat’s decision to expel Russian military experts in 1972 was a pivotal error in international politics. Despite the support from the Soviet Union and past partnerships, Sadat believed that the fate of 99% of the global game lay with the USA alone. This decision was based on misguided logic, as he believed the Russians were duplicitous. The support from Moscow was tangible, but Sadat quickly dismissed it due to the false assertion of their malicious intent.
This move led Egypt down a path of dependency on the US, which became a double-edged sword. It showcased the intricate dance of power between nations, with consequences that extended far beyond their immediate borders. In a desperate bid to counterbalance the might of the USSR, the US fostered a new nemesis in Al-Qaeda during the Soviet-Afghan war. This move disrupted the delicate equilibrium between the superpowers and underscored the direct and indirect consequences of meddling in other nations’ affairs.
The fallout from this strategic miscalculation rippled through international relations, setting a precedent for future leaders to reconsider their alliances and dependencies. It became a case study in the unpredictability of international alliances and the lasting impacts of diplomatic decisions. The episode also highlighted the importance of maintaining a balanced view of global players, as perceptions can be as deceiving as powerful and have the potential to reshape the world in unforeseen ways.
In retrospect, Sadat’s reliance on the US and dismissal of Russian expertise was a critical misjudgment that altered the course of history. It serves as a reminder that decisions must be made with a clear understanding of global complexities.
Henry Kissinger was the reason of the emergence of Petro-Dollar term in political economy arena globally
In the post-World War II era, Henry Kissinger, the Secretary of State during the Nixon administration, played a significant role in shaping the 20th century’s geopolitical landscape. His diplomatic maneuvers led to the creation of the term Petro-Dollar, which symbolized the complex web of international relations that was dramatically altered after the Arab collective decision to sever oil exports to the West as a form of retaliation against Israel’s aggressive stance towards Egypt and Syria prior to the 1973 Yom Kippur War. This oil embargo sent shockwaves through Western economies, revealing the vulnerability and dependency on Middle Eastern oil.
Kissinger’s diplomatic maneuvers led to an agreement with Saudi Arabia, which secured the global dominance of the U.S. dollar in oil transactions. By convincing Saudi Arabia to peg the price of its oil to the U.S. dollar and accept dollars for all its oil sales, Kissinger inadvertently created a system that tied the world’s largest economy to the most valuable commodity, solidifying the dollar’s status as the world’s reserve currency and setting the stage for what would become known as the Petro-Dollar system.
The introduction of the Petro-Dollar term did more than just redefine the global economy; it also served as a tool to suppress the collective power of Arab and Muslim nations. By binding the value of oil to the U.S. dollar, Kissinger effectively neutralized the Arab world’s leverage in international politics, ensuring that their wealth would be channeled into Western economies rather than used to bolster their own regional influence. The Petro-Dollar system established an intricate balance of power, placing the U.S. at the helm of the oil market while creating a dependency for oil-producing countries on Western economic stability.
In retrospect, the birth of the Petro-Dollar term under Kissinger’s stewardship stands as a testament to the complex interplay between economic strategies and political maneuvering. Understanding the origins and implications of the Petro-Dollar is crucial for navigating the ever-evolving landscape of global economics and international relations.
The most important lesson from both Sadat, Arab and Muslims’ mistake, is to distrust the West and USA as they are embracing the double standards
The past has taught us a valuable lesson about the importance of self-determination and collective action among Arab and Muslim nations. The West and the USA have often displayed double standards in their dealings, with promises made in public forums often crumbling into dust when the global spotlight has dimmed. This disparity between word and deed has led to disillusionment and the need for a stronger sense of solidarity.
The past has taught us that true power lies in unity, standing together in defiance of external pressures and false promises. We must cultivate a stronger sense of solidarity by pooling resources and efforts to ensure our collective security and prosperity, rather than seeking validation and support from entities with questionable motives.
As we reflect on the lessons of the past, we must harness the collective will to forge a new path forward, steered by a steadfast determination to rely on our own strengths, wisdom, and the unity of our peoples. Trust in each other, leaning on our shared heritage and common goals, rather than seeking reassurance in dubious foreign assurances, is essential for building our future.
This recalibration of trust requires courage, determination, and an unwavering commitment to the principles that have guided us through the trials of the past. The lessons from Sadat’s mistake and the recent missteps of Arab and Muslim leaders should serve as a clarion call to action, urging us not to be swayed by the beguiling veneer of diplomacy but to forge ahead with a renewed sense of purpose guided by the wisdom of our ancestors and enlightened by the experiences of our contemporaries.
Arabs and Muslims should have their own strong alliance with the rising power Russia and China, and the forthcoming BRICS Kazan Summit the end of this month October 2024 is crucial
We hope that the BRICS summit in Kazan will become a transformative moment for the Arab-Islamic alliance to create a new path for the world order. Depolarization will become a central theme that challenges the hegemony of the US dollar and affirms sovereignty in the face of outdated global monetary systems. We hope that discussions will focus on financial sovereignty, with the aim of promoting alternative payment systems that can withstand unilateral sanctions.
Digital sovereignty should also come under scrutiny, with the aim of fostering a secure and independent digital ecosystem to counter cyber threats and surveillance. This will include the development of a common digital infrastructure that facilitates seamless online transactions, secure communication channels, and protects sensitive data.
Media unity will be a key focus, with the summit aiming to create a media landscape that balances Western narratives and offers an alternative perspective that reflects the diversity and richness of the Arab and Islamic world. We hope it becomes not just about media presence, but a declaration of intent to shape the global discourse and ensure that the voices of these countries are heard and respected.
Strategic cooperation in the field of satellite communications is highlighted as the cornerstone of the alliance, symbolizing a shared commitment to asserting technological independence and connectivity. Unity is recognized as the key to unlocking a future in which Arabs and Muslims can stand tall and shape their own destiny.
The BRICS Summit in Kazan is more than just a meeting, it will become a testament to the will of nations to carve their destinies in stone. It will galvanize everyone to rally around a common cause – the cause of sovereignty, freedom and a future that is rightfully theirs.
