By: Naji Ali Amhaz

In the Arab Levant, there is a bleeding wound that transcends the boundaries of politics, striking at the very core of human dignity. What minorities are enduring today exceeds all imagination, shattering the moral codes known to humanity even in its darkest ages of ignorance and backwardness.

We live in a part of the world where the values of "citizenship" have collapsed before the tyranny of "sectarian identity." While civilized nations measure their citizens by the standards of merit and justice, we insist on measuring a human being by the scales of lineage, ancestry, and denominational affiliation. This is a quintessential existential dilemma.

Even if you were the "Einstein" of your time, excelling in science and thought, you would remain, in the eyes of this society, confined within the narrow frame of your sect. Here, the mind holds no value against the roar of blind allegiances.

This raises a perennially bitter question:
How can we build nations or believe in a tomorrow when we transform every national turning point into an existential battlefield, where death itself becomes a mere detail compared to the terror of permanent annihilation?

Look at our tragedies through the eyes of truth:

• What is the crime of the worshippers in Homs, targeted by treacherous terrorist bombings under the banner that they are "Alawite infidels"?
• What is the sin of the people of Suwayda, branded as "apostates"?
• Even simple human joy has not been spared; offering Christmas greetings—a symbol of humanity’s first glory—has become a crime under the pretext of "not imitating polytheists."

While the world conquers space and harnesses Artificial Intelligence to serve humanity, our minds remain huddled in the dark corners of Takfir (excommunication), draining the nation’s energy in absurd conflicts that kill nothing but our very existence.

In contrast, the public scene is filled with performative displays of "coexistence" and slogans like "Long live the Crescent with the Cross"—gatherings that remind us more of the movie Hassan and Morqas than the reality on the ground. Nothing changes in the souls.

The bitter truth is that Islamic minorities—Shias, Alawites, and Druze—do not carry the seeds of religious Takfir toward others. Yet, they find themselves facing a massive indoctrination machine, where the "other" finds a thousand fatwas and a thousand clerics to blind hearts in religious polemics that will not end until the end of time, fueled by a delusional belief that God’s forgiveness is reserved only for those belonging to a specific sect.

Faced with this grim reality, the Alawite minorities have been left with no choice but to pursue autonomy as a shield for self-preservation, following the historic decision made by the Druze to confront the imminent threat of genocide.

As for Shias and Christians, despite their desperate attempts to maintain their historical role amidst the waves of the majority, the catastrophe lies in their failure to unite with one another on a final formula and a shared vision that guarantees their survival and preserves their authentic Levantine role. Without this, their very existence is threatened.

The Strategic Dilemma: Is "ISIS" a U.S. Creation?

This dilemma has not remained confined to the corridors of strategy; it has extended into the halls of the Pentagon and the aisles of Congress. Here, the major question arises:
Is "ISIS" a U.S. creation?

Many Muslims, in their attempt to absolve Islam from the brutality of Takfiri organizations, have rushed to accuse Washington of fully manufacturing this ideology. However, a deep reading of the global system reveals a greater complexity.

The world is managed with a precise balance akin to "nanotechnology," designed to pace the rhythm of eight billion people and prevent total chaos. This balance requires the presence of two opposing forces in perpetual conflict to ensure the continuity of interests according to American and global visions.

In American politics, there is a clear division of roles:

• The Republican Party historically leans toward supporting "majorities" in the region.
• The Democratic Party adopts the "minorities."

When the scales tip in favor of one side, change arrives in Washington to restore the balance. The arrival of Democrats aims to empower the minority, and the arrival of Republicans aims to enable the majority, in an endless cycle.

However, the story with "radical Islam" took a different turn. When minorities failed to produce a strong authority that could guarantee the international balance desired by Washington, decision-makers changed the game. The conflict was no longer between "minority and majority"; instead, it shifted to a conflict "within the majority itself," making the division clearer and the battle fiercer, as we see today in the infighting among extremist factions in Syria.

The Democratic Party, the heir to "British Orientalism" with its deep religious and social insights, wanted to provide proof to the world that its idea of supporting minorities is the only necessity for stability. Thus, it essentially "unleashed" radical Islam, providing an indirect cover for their gatherings, as if saying to the world:
"This is the Middle East without the role of minorities... look at what these people will do."

Indeed, Al-Qaeda emerged from the womb of Afghan militancy, and from Al-Qaeda’s womb, ISIS was born to commit atrocities. No one knows what will be born from the womb of ISIS tomorrow.

So, did America manufacture "ISIS" in its laboratories?
The truth is, it did not manufacture the ideology, but it "unleashed its hand" to practice its Sharia as it sees fit. ISIS is not a purely strategic creation; it is the product of a local ideology that rejects and excommunicates the "Other" for the mere crime of being different.

Was America present when the Mamluks massacred Shias in Syria and Lebanon based on fatwas that branded them infidels?
America simply lifted the dam and let the flood sweep everyone away, to prove its theory in conflict management and to confirm that the alternative to current balances is a brutality that knows no moral or international borders.

The Real Battle: Against the Culture of Takfir

The real confrontation is not about ISIS, but about how we abolish the texts that ISIS exploits—texts that make the "mind" accept being an instrument of slaughter.

The battle is against a culture that cancels the "Human" to revive an "Idea" that has become more terrifying, painful, and fleeting than death itself.

It is shameful for the world to speak of human rights—and even animal rights— while it remains incapable of standing against this Takfiri death, which is driving our nation, civilization, progress, and humanity toward the grave while they are still alive.

Share

Comments

Add your comment