Syria’s MB Controller to talk about his angry message on Islamic movements close to power
Syria’s Muslim Brotherhood underscored the importance of supporting their brothers in Palestine, Iraq and Syria. He urged them to take advantage of the political paradoxes to serve their cause”. They, at the same time, stated that they are closely watched with deep concern and doubt any relations will take place between the Syrian ruling regime and any organization belonging to the Brotherhood or other Islamic movements.
In an attempt to understand the details and dimensions of this complicated issue and the movement’s position, “Islamists.Net” reporter contacted Controller General of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) in Syria, who lives in exile in London, asking him these questions as follow:
Q: Is it true that the declared unilateral truce between the MB and Syrian regime break-down?
– The talk about a truce, in fact, was exaggerated. Indeed, the group considered the truce in light of the brutal Israeli aggression on Gaza as they clearly realized international conspiracies and schemes and efforts to impose hegemony on the Middle East to suspend all opposition activities against Syrian authorities. They, in turn, called for the ruling regime to make reconciliation with citizens and provide the necessary reasons to liberate the occupied territories by force and face the IOA aggression and support the steadfastness of our people who resist the usurpers of the land of Palestine.
– We believe that these unfortunate conditions and suspicious schemes still exist and will unfold in the near future. The movement’s position is clear aimed to stop the enforcement of such malicious conspiracies. This is a principle position we firmly stick to.
– Our brothers in the Islamic countries are not far from this opinion were they firmly agree with us.
– Syria’s deteriorating internal situation was not out of our sight when the decision was taken to suspend political activities. We stress that significant strategic factors were behind the decision, including our Brother’s positions intended with the message.
This is, in fact, a great simplification of Syria’s existing situation. Consequently, the mere raising of this issue between the ruling regime and the movement is under consideration. It is a departure from the text on the understanding of Syria’s complex strategic situation. We believe measuring the balance of strengths and weaknesses requires other measures.
We have observed in history that totalitarian regimes and independent parties are always demanding freedom of opinion and expression. The revolutions always end dictatorships. However, the Syrian people, including the Islamist, secularists, Arabs and Kurds are outside the attention of the ruling regime.
There is no doubt that our political options are not easy with adopting a firm stand rejecting the taking of shelter with external forces under any pretext. This strategic measure may limit our activity and our tactics but we are determined to adhere to it and are willing to pay a price for it.
Tyrants have two choices (either moderated or retired).
Q: What are the movement’s current options in facing the so-called government intransigence?
– I said earlier that our strategic choices are very clear and stable and we insist on moving towards achieving our sublime goals. The West have bet on the authoritarian regimes for over a century at a time when Arab and Muslim masses were still steeped in illiteracy and ignorance.
– Once again, it is not permissible to think solely in the context of a political party or organization, or even opposition but we must think about the people’s choices and build our options on this basis, believing that Allah is above all. Allah is the Truth, Justice and Peace. Surely Allah is with us.
Q: What benefits may be attained after the Islamists boycott Damascus’s Arab Parties conference?
– I said that the message was primarily political and was intended to recall all parties. If there is a political presence of Arab parties in Damascus, it is assumed that we and all Syrian political parties be present at this conference. Furthermore, we must be among the conference organizers and the first recipients of the guests.
Islamic organizations participation in the Arab countries are expected to vary; some will boycott the conference while others will attend. We intend to write up an open letter to the Secretariat of the Conference explaining our point of view, this is, in fact, the nature of political action.
Q: Do you have direct contacts with the Islamic parties in this regard?
– The relationship between the national Brotherhood’s organizations are outlined in consultation and coordination developments. The regional contrasts overshadow the general situation of national and organizational circumstances. Iraq, for example, has become more complex and the situation in a small country like Lebanon may be difficult to understand.
Is it possible that the Syrian regime’s relationship with the Brotherhood in other Arab countries may be used as factor to ease tension with the Brotherhood internally?
– First I would like to emphasize that there is no regulation allowed for the Brotherhood at home because the Law no. 49 (1980) criminalizes membership in the Muslim Brotherhood and states that affiliation with the group is punishable by death and is still in force. The law includes their children, descendants, friends, and all of their relatives.There is no doubt that the relationship between the Syrian ruling regime with the other Muslim Brotherhood can be kept in balance and can be put to the interest of the parties.
All indicators confirm that Syria sectarian situation are
increasingly intensified and deeply rooted and it has been noted in the message. It is not intended to raise excitement or woes. We have-and still- stressed in our future project that Syria needs to overcome the sectarian situation in building a citizenship in which all are equal before the law.
* There are decent relationships between many brotherhood movements and the Iranian regime as in the case of Hamas in Palestine and Egypt’s Brotherhood. Iran’s Muslim Brotherhood is always defending Tehran. How do you see this paradox?
With regards to Iran we must distinguish between Iran (the State) as the existence of a civilized and Islamic political power and Iran, as a doctrinal trying to control and expand the Sunni communities. No one in the Islamic organizations are hostile to Iran (the State) at first, always raises concerns on the second level in regards to the expansion of doctrinal and cultural invasion. In fact, there is a fanatic group in Iran trying in these difficult circumstances to ignite strife in Muslim societies. However, Iran will certainly lose more than they would gain.