It was not a slip of the tongue when Khaled Meshaal, former head of Hamas’ political bureau, stated, “Our losses as Palestinians are tactical, while Israel’s losses are strategic.” All attempts by Meshaal and other Hamas figures to reinterpret or explain this shocking statement to the Palestinian and Arab public, as well as the global audience, failed to bridge the impact it created on public opinion. This is simply because these remarks were not isolated incidents but aligned with similar statements made by others within the Hamas movement or the wider "Axis of Resistance," which extends from Palestine to Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and ultimately to Iran, the leader of this coalition.
For a long time, leaders and supporters of this axis have echoed rhetoric that, while varied in wording, has a single consistent message: the liberation of people from occupation requires blood and sacrifice, with Algeria and Vietnam often cited as recent examples to support this notion. However, such comparisons are used to obscure the present situation facing Palestinians and Lebanese populations, which differ greatly from those historical examples.
These statements and similar ones reflect a series of issues affecting fundamentalist resistance movements, particularly those affiliated with this axis. The fundamental root of these issues lies in the ideological framing and core narratives of these movements, which trap them within a rigid cocoon of sacred ideology, preventing them from adapting to reality. The leaders of these movements see breaking free from this ideological cocoon as a betrayal of their foundational principles, thus endangering their very legitimacy and existence. Below is a summary of the key issues with this disconnect from reality:
Sense of Entitlement Beyond Necessity: By claiming exclusive divine mandate in their ideology, these movements foster among their leaders and supporters a heightened sense of entitlement and resistance to alternative perspectives, even from compatriots. The rhetoric of blasphemy and betrayal is liberally wielded; whatever these movements decree is viewed as unquestionably correct, and the public must follow blindly and bear the consequences without question, lest they fall into the sin of doubting the sacred.
Inability to Re-evaluate: As it is impossible to re-evaluate sacred beliefs, followers of these ideologies are equally forbidden from reassessing any aspect of their agenda rooted in this sanctity. Religious decrees (fatwas) are readily available to reinforce the sacred’s inviolability and to maintain it as a set of untouchable taboos. When pressed to address issues within this framework, leaders exhibit visible hesitation, often shifting blame to other social structures, even if they themselves benefit from them.
Defining Defeat and Victory: Defeat has no place in the lexicon of these movements; they are victorious in every scenario. Regardless of human and material losses, strategic setbacks, or ground seized by the opposition, they claim victory, often using religious texts to justify their rhetoric. The objectives set forth at the start of each phase of the conflict are never used as benchmarks for measuring success or failure. In this sense, they reduce the reality of defeat to ambiguous, mystical factors or external influences.
Indifference to Civilian Losses: Civilian casualties are the last concern of these movements. In fact, they often consider high civilian losses advantageous, as it helps sustain the conflict and draws society into a perpetual cycle of violence. Those who die are assured a place in paradise, and the disabled are promised rewards in the afterlife. By framing it this way, the leadership absolves itself from responsibility for any human cost.
Denial: Denial is an inherent trait of religious movements. They can skillfully build layers of denial, defying facts that are well-known to everyone. Any group unable to face the truth of its situation cannot progress toward its goals. Ignoring problems does not negate their existence, and attempting to bury or stack these issues eventually leads to explosive revelations.
Overuse of Communication Technology: These movements have embraced communication technology as a tool to spread their ideological and operational propaganda, catering to the dreams of the less informed. However, this often creates a gap between what they promote online and what actually occurs on the ground. Furthermore, the adversaries of these movements often hold the upper hand in this technology, enabling them to penetrate these networks and cause serious breaches in their messaging.
Selective Monitoring of Opposing Media: These movements selectively monitor hostile media, taking any mention of their power and achievements as confirmation of their strength, while disregarding or downplaying factual reports that reveal their shortcomings.
The issues described above are common among various resistance movements in the Arab world, both those that have disbanded and those still active, particularly in failed states experiencing political chaos. Unless these countries change direction, break the mold, and make bold decisions to disarm these movements, they will remain stagnant, shifting from one crisis to an even deeper one until they risk complete disintegration and eventual disappearance from history
تعليقات
إرسال تعليق