Extremist forces in our region have declared war on the US President-elect
Donald Trump even before he has entered the White House under the pretext that
he has an agenda to fight Islam and Muslims. They are trying to incite around
one billion Muslims around the world against the new administration and the
United States. Religious pulpits and media affiliated to extremist Islamic
organisations including the Muslim Brotherhood and the Iranian regime are
being used to do this.
Is President-elect Trump really hostile to Muslims in general? Do his
secretaries of state really hold hostile positions against Islam as a
religion? Since the US President-elect's choices for his cabinet have been
made public, a campaign has started in our region that relies on articles and
video clips attributed to members of Trump's new cabinet, and declares that
there are preparations to fight a war on a billion Muslims in Washington.
Trump's Defence Secretary General James Mattis has voiced hostility clearly,
but against terrorist organisations such as Al-Qaeda. He is also explicitly
against what Iran is doing in Iran, Syria and Lebanon. Trump's National
Security Adviser General Michael Flynn has made fierce speeches against
extremist Islamist groups and many have used these speeches to indicate that
he is hostile to Islam and Muslims.
In fact, what General Flynn said is what we keep on saying to ourselves – that
there is a dangerous virus within the Muslim community called extremism that
is killing Muslims and threatening them everywhere, more than it is harming
the west and followers of other religions. Doesn't this dangerous disease
exist in Muslim societies around the world? Of course it does. Look at what
happened in Turkey and Egypt during the last few days, and the heinous crimes
that extremists groups that Flynn and Mattis demand to confront have committed
in Saudi Arabia, Morocco and Jordan.
Trump chose Mike Pompeo to be director of the Central Intelligence Agency
(CIA), and he has the same views on the need to confront extremism and is
aware of the destructive role that Iran plays in the region and the world.
If we realise that those who are angry with these three appointments are Iran,
Al-Qaeda and Islamist groups like the Muslim Brotherhood, we will be able to
understand that the problem does not lie in Trump's choices but in the project
of these men to confront terrorism that these parties sponsor or benefit from.
The majority of Islamic countries agree with the proposals of these
secretaries of state and their view of the crisis that threatens the whole
world.
We, as Muslims, have been fighting a war against extremism and extremist
ideology and groups for the last fifteen years, and we want the world to
differentiate between Muslims and not generalise. We want the world to stand
with the majority of peaceful Muslims against the evil minority. It is in our
interest to repel regimes, such as Iran, that support terrorist groups,
whether Sunni or Shiite, and those that become their allies and intervene in
regional wars under false slogans such as defending Islam or standing against
the west.
On the other hand, we understand that Hillary Clinton's defeat in the election
angered the Muslim Brotherhood, and their outrage was intensified when the
President-elect Trump greeted the Egyptian President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi in
New York. It is on this basis that the group is trying to portray Trump's
administration as racist and an enemy of Islam and Muslims. It also wants to
build a popular bloc that exerts pressure to confront the new US government in
order to intimidate it and force it to change its positions. They are doing so
by entrenching themselves behind Islam and Muslims.
However, the Muslim Brotherhood should be aware that we do not agree with it,
that its ambitions for power do not concern us and that we do not want to
stand with it. At the same time we support any government in the world that is
ready to be allies with us against extremism and terrorism, and this was the
case even before Trump entered the political arena. These groups should
realise the gravity of media, political and religious incitement against Trump
and the west and how this will cause new waves of violence under false
justifications.
Over forty years, Iran has led extremist groups, whether they are armed,
politicised, Sunni or Shiite and whether they are in Lebanon, Palestine or the
Gulf, and it continues to do so. Today, it is partly responsible for the
sectarian chaos that engulfs Iraq and the rivers of blood that flow in Syria.
For the first time, we see officials in Washington who know the facts on the
ground and have explicitly announced that they will not accept blackmail or
remain silent on the practices of extremist and terrorist regimes and groups.
We must understand the motives behind groups that wage campaigns to incite
against the new US administration. Iran knows that two of the appointed
generals know it through personal experience, and ISIS knows that the stage of
truce will end with President Obama's departure. The Muslim Brotherhood, which
enjoyed Obama's support and bet on Clinton being elected as president, is now
facing a new phase that may not be in its interest.
These are the reasons for the anger towards and hasty judgments against the
new US administration, and they reflect the stance of all three groups; Iran,
ISIS and the Muslim Brotherhood, and those who sympathise with them. As for
the majority of Islamic countries, they will be very happy if the president in
the White House wants to fight extremism and terrorism.
Al Rashed is the general manager of Al -Arabiya television. He is also the
former editor-in-chief of Asharq Al- Awsat, and the leading Arabic weekly
magazine, Al Majalla. He is also a senior Columnist in the daily newspapers of
Al Madina and Al Bilad. He is a US post-graduate degree in mass
communications. He has been a guest on many TV current affairs programs. He is
currently based in Dubai.
Add Comments