‘Muslims sacrifice souls for West’

‘Thousands working in US Army’

“THE American writer Edward Cortes in his article in The Washington Post defended Muslims saying ‘tens of thousands of Muslims are currently working for the US Army and for the American armed forces in Europe’,” columnist and former Kuwaiti ambassador Ahmad AlDawas wrote for Al-Seyassah daily.

“In the middle ages, he went on to say, both the Muslims and the Christians were fighting together in South Italy and Turkey against a joint enemy, Hungary, which during that time was part and parcel of the Ottoman Empire, and the Muslims fought bravely in the Warsaw battle in 1656 for the sake of Poland.

“Speaking of the Crimean War between 1853 and 1856, the writer said, the Muslims actively participated in this war. Likewise, he added, the Muslims be they slaves or free men participated in the American independence war within the American Federation Army, and many of them carried the name “Muhammad” who participated in the World War I.

“In Europe there were as many as four hundred thousand men who worked for the army of the British Empire – part of the Allied troops during the above war. Moreover, tens of thousands were working for the French armed forces, given the fact that France in order to honor these Muslims built a Grand Mosque of Paris in 1926.

“Likewise, the Muslims worked for the Allies during World War II and one of them was called John Omar who is American from Massachusetts. He was working for the tanks force during the ‘Battle of Bulge’ and earned the merit of honor medal. However, Omar post the war went on a pilgrimage to Makkah.

“Apart from the above, the American Muslims participated in the Vietnam war as well as the Gulf War in 1991 for the liberation of Kuwait in addition to Afghanistan and Iraq and one of them was Major James Ahern who embraced Islam while serving in Iraq and went on to receive many military honors before he was killed by a bomb in Baghdad in 2007.

“In conclusion, the writer said, ‘Many Muslims are ready to sacrifice their souls for the sake of the West, not to hurt it.’

“For his part, Stewart Ferris a British writer from Chichester in an article to the British ‘The Guardian’ newspaper defended Muslims by saying ‘we see here something what the Muslims had done for America with their deeds which call for admiration indeed’.

“He further elucidated by saying, ‘The Muslims have begun their activities from the very beginning of the establishment of America under the leadership of the then American army military commander General George Washington who went on to become the first American president post independence and this period witnessed the appearance of two Muslim military leaders – Bambit Muhammad and Yusuf Ben Ali and George Washington did not oppose the Muslims within his Army.

“However, the British writer went on to say that all these Muslim heroes are not considered by the US President Donald Trump in his calculations, ignoring the fact that the Kingdom of Morocco, was the first in the world which had recognized America’s independence.

“He further talked about the role played by the Muslims in building America, hinting that were it not for the likes of American Muslims of Bangladeshi origin engineer Fadhl Al-Rahman Khan – dubbed ‘Einstein’ of the architecture – America would not have enjoyed its current structural shape.

“It is also known that when the former US president Ronald Reagan was striving to deter the expansion of the Soviet Union in the world under the so-called ‘Reagan Doctrine’, he found that America had no funds to meet the cost because it had just exited from the Vietnam War.

“Such being the case, the US administration of Reagan with the director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) William Casey began studying the financial impasse, but it is the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia which extended the required funds to offset the danger of the Soviet Union and its ideology through the support for the Nicaraguan revolutionaries and support for Sudan against the then communist Mengistu Haile Mariam.

“In other words, it is the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, which during the reign of the US president Ronald Reagan encountered the danger of the communists in five states including Afghanistan, Angola, Ethiopia, Nicaragua and Cambodia.”

Also:

Al-Dawas

“Some experts affirm that, since the end of the Cold War and the lapse of the previous objectives of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) which were aimed at preventing the expansion of the Soviet Union and the containment of its threats against the Western European states, among other objectives, the NATO did not find any new strategic objective until a terrorist operation was carried out against the United States in 2001,” columnist Adel Abdullah Al-Mutairi wrote for Al-Anba daily.

“In the wake of such an operation, the new major task of NATO became fighting terrorism. This conduced to a war on both the Taleban movement and Al-Qaeda network in Afghanistan followed by the invasion of Iraq.

“Recently, NATO started paying attention to the danger of the Russian expansion in Eastern Europe and attempted to contain the same by requesting its members to boost their military potentials for defending the Baltic States and Poland against any prospective Russian danger.

“Turkey rejected such a development for many reasons, including its condition to the NATO to support its battle against Kurdish People Protection Units in North Syria. As a matter of fact, Turkey had showed no enthusiasm towards NATO’s schemes against Russia. In fact, it is Turkey that concluded a military deal with Russia for the latter to sell one type of its former strategic weapons, namely S400 missiles, let alone the current coordination between Ankara and Moscow over the Syrian dossier.

“At the same time, the Turkish-American relations during the reign of the US President Donald Trump are steadily deteriorating to such an extent that Washington had imposed economic sanctions on Ankara in a bid to harm Turkey’s national economy.

“Prior to that, there was a European-American lackluster attitude towards the failed military coup that had occurred in Turkey. This coup had actually negatively affected Turkey’s general security and destabilized the ruling regime. Some of the relevant opposition members who were behind this coup still stay in the United States of America.

“Apart from the above, Turkey had repeatedly requested the NATO members to actualize Article No. 5 of the NATO charter, which stipulates that any aggression on any of the NATO members will be considered as an aggression on all of the organization’s members.

“In other words, while Turkey believes the Labor Party of Kurdistan and its Syrian branch constitutes a security threat against its security, as such Ankara classifies this party as terrorist, we find that the French, American and Britain deal with the Kurdish Democratic Troops of Syria and their support of the latter as a force involved in fighting the terrorist organization of “DAESH”. Here the major problem of NATO member states emerges as these members do not seem to be in agreement over the definition and specification of terrorist organizations.”

“A month has passed since the resignation of the government and the assignment of His Highness the Prime Minister Sheikh Sabah Al-Khaled to form a new one, but the country is still experiencing a kind of void due to the urgent government matters,” Sattam Ahmed AlJarallah wrote for Al-Seyassah daily.

“The reality is that majority of those who were offered ministerial positions rejected the portfolios because of the short lifespan of the upcoming government, which is very strange and represents lack of feeling towards national responsibility as though the minister needs years, not days or months, to prove his worth.

“National responsibility is not limited to a specific period. A minister for one day, one month, or one year must prove his worth and ability to change. He should not be afraid of any accountability or grilling if he is actually doing what he is required to do, and works with the principle of “do not trump nor fear”.

“He should be ready to face parliamentary maliciousness, which that is active in such circumstances, and proving goodwill and performance; otherwise it does not make sense to be present in the ministry, if it is required to register over the years of victories, and not in weeks and days, because the responsible decision does not need a long period to prove its validity.

“Therefore, the attitude of rejection that some exercise in assuming this national responsibility is proof that these people give their own interest precedence above the national interest. This is not a good sign in the practice of public work.

“The ministers or candidates who are offered the ministerial portfolios have to be convinced of the principle of “If others have it forever, it will not be your turn” and that they are at the goodwill of the Kuwaitis. They should prove that they deserve the responsibility even if it is just for one day, otherwise they will confirm their failure before they bear the national responsibility.

“Kuwaitis wonder about reasons that prevent a prominent person from assuming national responsibility for a short period. Is it that this minister will come just to implement his own policy by trying to gain the maximum personal benefits at the expense of the national interest, or will he work to serve the country? If the purpose of assuming a ministerial portfolio is to “purge” and collect private benefits but the age of the future government does not “extend” the minister to achieve his dreams, this is evidence of his ineligibility to hold any public office. This is because he has “wind in his stomach” and this will not work in serving the public interest.

“On the other hand, if the goal is to prove his worth in the national service, he will be satisfied with taking the position, even if it is for just one week, because the goal is public service and not personal benefits.

“Therefore, we say to those who refuse to take ministerial portfolios that you failed the exam before you even sat for it. Anyone among you who wishes to prove his worth must accept the ministerial portfolio, even if it is for one day, because the lesson is in deeds, not time period.”

“The assault on the National Assembly Speaker Marzouq Al-Ghanim is unprecedented and deemed a violation of civil rights and norms of the Kuwaiti society in the history of political work,” Saoud Al-Samakah wrote for Al-Seyassah daily.

“The incident constitutes danger since it violated the fundamentals of politics and democracy. Dispute and opposing points of view are part of democracy but they should not develop into physical attacks. I wonder how some individuals on social media will praise that awful act. I also wonder about the silence of our civil society organizations, which should be shedding light on the devastating consequences of such attitude becoming part of our culture.

“I would like to draw attention to our neighboring country in the north, which is suffering a great deal for allowing politics to degenerate into aggressive acts that make killing as easy as drinking water. We have to take a look at Lebanon where disputes are unresolved through legal channels. The attack did not only target the Speaker of Parliament, Brother Marzouq Al-Ghanim. It actually targeted our tradition and culture, which allows dispute but refuses barbarian means of resolving them in the absence of law and tradition.

“The State is urged to confront such aggression and prevent its recurrence to protect the society and its citizens.

“The idea of terrorizing whoever does not agree with them must not be allowed to gain ground in Kuwait in order to preserve a civilized state represented. This does not mean we must abandon our opinions unwillingly. It means that everybody has the right to adopt whatever he deems right without defying the opinions of others.”

“Parachute appointment in Kuwait is defined as appointment of a person from outside the institution or organization into a leadership position. It is natural for staff members especially citizens in such institutions to resent this kind of appointment, as leadership positions should be for people within the same institution because of their familiarity of the operations in such institutions and as far as technocracy is concerned,” Saqer Al-Ghailani wrote for Al-Anba daily.

“However, such “parachute” appointments are natural process in commercial enterprises. Sometimes, it is for the best, especially when faced with great challenges such as the existence of fierce competition in the market or bankruptcy. Such a person should be able to convince the board of the enterprise about his/her ability to positively change the direction towards success.

“An example of a success story is Henkel Chemicals Company which appointed someone from outside the company. His name is Kasper Rorsted. The appointment came at a time when the company was struggling. Due to his strategy of operations, Rorsted managed to change the failing story of the company into a successful one.

“Indeed, parachute appointments should be aimed at salvaging the situation and achieving success in any institution for the sake of the public interest. However, if such appointments are done to please any particular individuals or tribes or sects at the expense of the public interest, there is no doubt that it will spark anger because it gives an explicit message that “Those you know are more important than what you know”.

“Therefore, transparency is vital when selecting a leader or rather an official in any position and in any institution. The resume of the one selected should be clear in terms of his/her achievements and accomplishments. In this case, such selection will receive more acceptance, and almost everyone will work as a team, perhaps without reservations towards the new competent and deserving leader.”

— Compiled by Zaki Taleb