BAKU, Azerbaijan, May 16. As much as the Battle of Al-Aqsa Flood, on the seventh of October, was a shock to the friend rather than the enemy, it removed the mask from the face of the blatant contradiction between the language and morals claimed, on the one hand, and the justifications and interests practiced, on the other hand. This demonstrated, in an unprecedented way, the authenticity of any victorious act for freedom, justice and dignity. There is no action today that represents the victory of those values greater than the Palestinian resistance against the Zionist entity, and behind it the entire alliance of enslavement, oppression, and arrogance. That alliance that has always used language to tamper with meanings and distort facts, and has also used morals to cover up the shame of its crimes.
The deception of language in politics:
At a certain moment in history, the winds of politics blew in a way that the ships of language did not desire, so the word “ normalization ” became one of the opposites of the word “resistance . ” The word "resistance" has become synonymous with " terrorism." Although the opposite of “resistance” is originally “surrender,” and the opposite of “normalization” is “ artificiality , ” which means that normalization, in true meanings, may be, linguistically, synonymous with terrorism. It is the same as what we are experiencing today, in different forms.
But all the blame is attributed to the French deconstructionist Michel Foucault, who unintentionally inspired the politician with this metaphor in 1978, when he used the term “normalization.” / Normalisation In his 1975 book, Surveiller et punir , he described “the ways in which power relations function to standardize behaviors and practices across societies, making certain forms of social order appear natural and inevitable.”
This is what the Camp David Accords sought to achieve in 1978, which culminated in the “peace” agreement the following year. In order to ensure that his Arabic website would remain a reference, controlling the interpretation of the term of which he was one of the main pioneers, Anwar Sadat was removed from the scene of politics and life. He was replaced by someone who would comply with the interpretation of the term as its creators wanted. Hosni Mubarak was brought in, and then someone was brought after him who would bring the interpretation to the level of conformity : Abdel Fattah al-Sisi.
This is the same thing that happened to those who followed his path of normalization : Yasser Arafat, when he signed the Oslo Accords, when he wanted to monopolize its interpretation, in 2004 , and he was also removed . Mahmoud Abbas was brought in to perform the same function as Mubarak... and soon someone will come who will parallel, Palestinians, Sisi’s function in implementing the third and final stage of interpretation. This is the fate of everyone who signs the end of the justification for his existence with the initial letters, and then tries to overturn the linguistic meaning that he accepted the first time. This is the same as Jordan's relationship with Israel, and who is now following its path within the Abrahamic Accords .
On the Camp David Bridge, Oslo, Wadi Araba, and elsewhere , “the relations between the WMA and the Authority worked to inaugurate a new era, with a project to unify the behavior and practices of the rest of the Arab regimes, to make the implementation of the Zionist project in Arab societies seem natural and inevitable.”
Returning to the problem of the term “normalization” shifting from its original meaning, the linguistic reviewer realizes that this term was only displaced in order to achieve itself in the end, in a stronger and fiercer way, and to become the meaning: “Normalization of resistance can only be achieved by standing against the artificiality of peace ".
And in this lies the cunning of language: whenever a politician tries to deceive it, it backfires on him more strongly than ever before, a victory for the originality of meaning, and an opposition to the ferocity of displacement, which is what was embodied in the battle of the “Al-Aqsa Flood” on October 7 :
Men came out from under the tunnels , to re-establish the original interpretation of the natural relationship with the usurper and occupier, in the same arena (Gaza) that was intended to be an example for those who stand in the face of the Zionist lexicon... and it stands today, a specter that blows up the walls of the city . And the connotations of the Israeli entity. Rather, it heralds the imminent end of the liberal interpretive project , which was imposed on the entire world by the Atlantic allies , on the eve of their victory in their war against the Axis powers , in the year 1945 .
The revenge of morals on politics:
Why did these allies involve themselves in a system of laws that they knew in advance would embarrass them?
A question that we find an answer by referring to the history of philosophy: Since ancient times, the relationship between ethics and politics has remained tense, due to the restrictions imposed by the former, and the unruliness that the latter tends to lead to. However, this tension was more severe in European thought: while we find Plato in his “Republic” stipulating that philosophers should rule... and we find Machiavelli in his “Prince” stipulating that the politician must have the ability to transcend morals... we see, on the other hand, Both Al-Farabi in his “Madina” and Taha Abd al-Rahman in his “ Thaghariyya ” agreed on the priority of principles over interest. Indeed, they worked to resolve the conflict between the two parties, considering that the goal of morality is to achieve the legitimate interest, revealing a social law that the Atlantic allies do not have. They exceeded it, which is that “ethics represents the legitimacy of establishment and management.” This explains why these allies constantly fall into a bitter contradiction between establishing legitimacy and achieving an interest that violates morals.
Influenced by the predominance of the syncretic school in Western thought, today, under the auspices of Habermas’s philosophy , we find WMA , for example, “suffering” from both issues as it uses the right of rejection for more than 84 of the past 78 years, against moral laws, in order to achieve its immoral interests. In order to invade Iraq, in pursuit of its oil and strategic location, it is also “forced” to engage in lying to the entire world by marketing the lie of “weapons of mass destruction,” and it is also “forced,” chronically, to defend Israel’s defiance of all resolutions and charters that conflict with its practice. In the occupation of Palestine..
Therefore, it was not possible for the Allies to establish the world order , after their war against the Axis, except by relying on a moral justification, with which to guide the systems and peoples of the world. Although these were allies , he was worried They themselves were the ones who spread the land colonizing and raping peoples for more than three centuries. However, they approved a system that completely contradicts their previous practices, just as it contradicts their subsequent positions today.
These international treaties were based on the so -called “ Wilson ’s Fourteen Principles ”, which date back to the speech of US President Woodrow Wilson before Congress in 1918. Among what was legitimized based on them were several treaties related to “ the right of peoples to “Resisting the occupation,” there is no harm in mentioning four of them:
-
Recognizing the right of peoples to self-determination, through the United Nations Charter in 1945, in its introduction and Article 1. This right is considered fundamental to international relations, and its meaning confirms the right of peoples to resist against occupation, when they are deprived of their right to self-determination.
-
The right of peoples to determine their political status and achieve their economic, social and cultural development was recognized in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, in 1966, in its first article.
-
Recognizing the right of peoples to resist and combat colonialism, occupation and foreign domination, in the Declaration of the Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, in 1970.
-
Establishing protection for civilians and combatants in armed conflicts, including conflicts of a liberation nature against foreign occupation, and affirming the right of peoples to struggle for self-determination, in the Additional Protocols to the Geneva Conventions, in 1977.
From the sum of these texts, the national liberation movements, after the Allied war with the Axis, gained their legal legitimacy, including the Palestinian resistance, and behind it all forms of support and support.
However, the process of implementing these laws was evidence of the contradiction between the texts and the behavior of those forces controlling the global system themselves. It has become clear to everyone that the Zionist project in itself is deeply in contradiction with those values that were announced on the eve of the founding of the United Nations in October 1945.
There is no clearer evidence of this than the positions of the Secretary-General of the United Nations, the decisions of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, and the course of the trial of the Zionist entity in the Hague Court. Today, it is going against the whims of the Atlantic allies, who have no choice but to get involved in standing against it and paralyzing its apparatus. The yen is exhausting its “moral” balance , to make way for other international powers, such as China, Russia, South Africa, and other countries... to appear to the world as a potential moral alternative to the United States.
It is the revenge of morals on politics, as it reveals the truth about the moral structure of that global system, as it falls within the fraud of politics on morals, to gain false legitimacy .
Conclusion:
The combination of the cunning of language and the vengeance of morals proves today the authenticity of the resistance, the originality of its interpretation, and the legitimacy of its principles. This is the resistance, which revealed, in the flood of Al-Aqsa, in front of the whole world, the barbarism and barbarism of this entity , with the perversion of its linguistic deviation, and the impudence of its legal challenge, through its continued playing the role of the victim, and its practice of genocide against the Palestinian people ... Thus , the resistance has It put the global system of allies, 78 years after its founding , before the greatest test of the truth of this system’s loyalty to the principles upon which it built its moral justification for world leadership, before its peoples first, before the rest of the world’s peoples. This explains this flood of protest in the Western world, the likes of which it has not witnessed since the Vietnam War .
The Allied system is now faced with either disintegration and disintegration , to make way for a new world order, and this is the most likely possibility, or a return to harmony and compatibility with its principles, before the Zionist project becomes a black hole that will soon swallow the Allied system entirely.
Written by: Maher Al-Malakh/academic journalist
