Al Sayyed’s new issues in the philosophy of politics
Written by Nasser Kandil,
As in the festival of victory we wait from the leader of the resistance on the channel of the resistance to restore the course of victory and its stipulations. Al Sayyed has reassured the meanings of victory and the inevitability of the certainty of its repetition, what has been completed with the original will be repeated by the proxy, Al Sayyed shows the meaning of the partnership with Syria and the war on it. The issue is its independent decision, its choice of resisting, and the completion of the war of July which the fight stops at it but has not finished “Most of our missiles are from Syria” in this war as in the war of July the same alliance is facing the resistance and its allies, but Al Sayyed who masters the strategy the science of war, and politics does not leave any occasion for the communication with his public and the public opinion-makers in the Arab and the Islamic worlds without mentioning something new, which he want them to add to their information in order to accumulate their informational experience and an approach of understanding and analysis for the phenomenon in which they believe and for which they defend. Al Sayyed does not lead a nation of the resistance by proxy or by the organization alone but with the virtual relation which the thoughts settle and which the knowledge organizes in order to be as a philosophy for the resistance. It becomes a doctrine that combines people who do not know each other, where neither the fighters nor their leader know them, but they bread and increase through the belief in the resistance and its leader, where they give them more confidence which based on what exceeds the confidence that “who has accomplished will accomplish”, and that the eligibility for the leadership has been granted by the defeats of the enemies, and their admission of the exceptional superiority of the resistance and its leadership. The best proof of the possibility is the occurrence, what has been settled will be settled once again. Above all of that the confidence is established to become an institution, and when it is established it gets stronger and its structure advances to become more rigid. The meaning here is the establishment of a school from the concepts which are overflowed by the contemporary philosopher, the master of politics, the master of the psychological warfare, and the General of the victorious wars where there is no place for the defeat, he masters in all of these standards the science and what is more.
In the speech of victory Al Sayyed has presented his philosophy for achieving victory in the wars through elements of stability, and the decisive decision of going on despite the sacrifices to the ends of the ends without hesitation or retreat and by being confident of the reasons of power, deepening the credibility about the faithfulness and the nobility of the goals and their organic relation with the defending for the compass which was and still and will remain the fight of Israel, and protecting the people who were and still and will remain the force of the resistance and its incubator to achieve the goals. Regarding his dialogue on Al Manar TV he turned to politics to add a glamour and a luster to his speech by adding the fluency through new sayings, most importantly are two issues that are discussed by the politicians and the scientists of culture and thought in an attempt to explain the sources of the strength of the resistance and to know about their methodology. Al Sayyed stopped correcting the saying of the asceticism of power and said that it is not an asceticism of the responsibility, he mentioned the meanings of victory, its dimensions, and the conditions of its formation in the war of July to renew from a different perspective the event of the fourteenth of August and the popular crowd to the South in exchange of American decision of linking the return of people through applying the resolution 1701 with a group of conditions that make the return impossible.
In the first issue Al Sayyed reveals for the first time such an important saying that discovers the intellectual depth of the position of the resistance toward the power and toward the Lebanese internal affairs that can be a valid standard for any political action of a resistance movement or any reformist movement, so he set an equation” the corruption is not faced with what is more corrupted” its content is wider than the explanation of the issue in itself, it is the question about the outcomes of the position and not only about its reasons, because there were many reasons found by the analysts, researchers, intellectuals, and the friends of the resistance to ask it to be more strict in its position toward the Lebanese internal issues, and employing or putting the surplus of its force in the political change. But for the first time Al Sayyed surpassed the inquirers, the most important historic factor is to be sufficient to intervene necessarily to protect the resistance and its weapons and not to miss the issue and indulge into another one more attractive but less profitable. So he enters to the philosophy of politics from the realism of responding to the response, who said that the more intervention does not necessarily protect the resistance, and that the opponents in the internal game are the conspirators against the resistance in the days of war and against its weapons, and who said that in this interest and employment of the power in correcting the authoritarian reality there is a deviation of the issue of the resistance, not an insurance of better conditions for this resistance, its issue and its requirements by getting rid of the reason of the permanent attrition. So he said” the corruption is not faced with what is more corrupted” he explained that the civil war is more corruptive than the corruption it is the transition of the country, the people, their security, their livelihood and the conditions of the way they manage their lives and their freedom from the worse to the worst, so the obligatory reasons for intervening must take into consideration not to lead to the worst whatever was the nobility of the thought, the goals, and the honesty of the seek. But in an igniting sectarian background as Lebanon this accident must remain present as a taboo in order to run politics, the movement of change and the efforts of reforming under this ceiling. The deepest significance here is that the war is corruption worst than the current which the advocates of the open confrontation are driving us to. So let us remember how all our generation went to the civil war in 1976 taking into consideration that the honesty of seeking for change is enough, thus was the worst instead of the corruption, maybe today we understand the meaning of the call of the Imam of the resistance Al Sayyed Mousa Al Sadr not to engage in the war and seek to stop it at any cost, and his certainty that it occurred to stop the peaceful reformist thoughtful modest and cumulative path, as we understand the meaning of the Syria intervention to stop the war and which was described by many of the nationalists at that time as preventing the victory which was almost approaching, while when the prohibition of the civil wars and the strives fall, and when the multiple fragile social composition of the lines of its divisions as political flammable contact lines do not present then the speech of Al Sayyed allows to conclude that the resistance movements can think seriously of solving the issue of the power.
In the second issue, Al Sayyed is presenting a deep explanation; for those who seek for the points of superiority which enable the resistance to have opportunities of the winning against forces that fight it under the big title which is represented by the Islam, with evoking the atoning forces to be the proxy army which completes what has been started by Israel which failed in accomplishing it as an original army of the enemy. Many have betted on unbreakable balance in any clash between the resistance and Al Qaeda organization since the writings of Martin Indyk in the nineties about the necessity of the seek to occupy what he called as the Shiite jihadist which is represented by Hezbollah which resists Israel in endless war with the Sunni jihadist which concerns the West and confuses it of how to manage it and to contain it. The basis of the bet on the balance here is the equivalence of the two teams in the point of their superiority to the west armies including the Israeli army, it is the ability of shedding blood, but here Al Sayyed is presenting a deep explanation of the point of superiority which is possessed by the resistance against Al-Qaeda, that causes the fall of the bets of the balance and makes the victory in its favor. The value of the human according to the understanding and the concept of the two teams is not the same either the human who is affiliated in the same project, or the human who is standing on the opposite bank with the difference of the definition of the other bank. His deep understanding glows when he evokes the inherent characteristic of the resistance several times by saying “ our resistance is popular, it is the resistance of people not mere fighters “ One of the victory’s reasons in July is the people who did not get weak or did not give up, did not exert pressure to abandon, but it gets more enthusiasm and stability , the creeping on the fourteenth of August completes the victory of the resistance by breaking the barriers of the return to the south, and paving the way by blood which the people offered to ensure their decision of return back. The popular resistance which has an armed arm is a resistance that is responsible for its people, it gets strong by it, concerned of its worries and interests, the conditions of its livelihood, its security, its stability, the spirits of its sons, and its property, but it depends on the strength of this people, its loyalty, its persistence, and its willingness to sacrifice. It is the resistance of the grandfather, the father, the son, the grandson, the wife, and the daughter, thus it wins because every movement that does not have popular deep roots will be defeated even if it is an army of tens of thousands, this is the fundamental difference between the resistance and Al-Qaeda that makes the victory in its favor.
Al Sayyed is the master of politics, he has put between the hands of his lovers and the lovers of the resistance a new lesson that worth from many of who have dealt with the issues, which he gave deep answers for to have the courage of re-discuss.
Translated by Lina Shehadeh,