The elections to both chambers of the US Congress brought important changes that deserve attention, though what happened is what always happens: in a president's second term, the midterms go to the opposition party. Presidents who wage wars, whether they win or lose them, lose Congress time and again. Yet history, with all its events and reversals, tells us that states do not prevail through majority opinion or through the interests of masses who are selfish by nature. They prevail through wise leadership and the counsel of the wise, the sensible, and the specialists in every field.
The Vietnam War brought down Lyndon Johnson. George Bush senior, fresh from his resounding victory in the second Gulf war, the fall of the Soviet Union, and triumph in the Cold War, lost to a young man named Bill Clinton, whose slogan was "It's the economy, stupid." George W. Bush, on the other hand, waged vast wars after September 11 and still served two terms.
The Republicans' resounding defeat in both chambers this week reflects the ordinary American's personal rejection of war. It also reflects the ability of the American "liberal left" to close ranks, mobilize the masses, and rally the rabble behind it to reach the seat of power in America, in whatever form.
It helps to understand that the world is divided between right and left, conservatives and liberals, monarchies and republics, those who support stability and those who support chaos. The division shows itself clearly in politics and even more clearly among the public; it takes shape in parties, groups, and organizations, and in the partisanship of writers, intellectuals, and researchers.
America's elected politicians are, first and foremost, American citizens who speak for their voters, parties, and political and intellectual leanings. Their positions on the Middle East and Arab and Islamic world flow from that first, and only then from whatever they inherited from their countries of origin.
Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib, both elected as Democrats, have always sided with most of what runs against the Arab countries and their interests. If Abdul El-Sayed has now joined them, Arab readers should understand that people like them in the US do not represent the Arab and Islamic world in its religion, peoples, or countries and their political interests. Some of them, indeed, belong more or less openly to everything hostile to our nations, stability, values, and culture.
It is highly striking to any observer, monitor, or researcher that there exists a class of mercenary Arab intellectuals who combine ignorance with audacity. They serve as a blatant example of those whom Arabs historically referred to as "the vile at the tables of the noble." Throughout their entire lives, they subsist on the magnanimity and values of Gulf rulers, only to pivot at every turn and crisis toward adopting completely hostile stances against the Arab Gulf countries, their leaderships and policies. They write mockingly of the Arab culture and values embodied by the peoples of the Arabian Gulf, disparaging them while pledging allegiance to others, in positions that would cause any honorable person, regardless of their lineage, to hang their head in shame.
The extensive intellectual, ideological, and political ties between the "Western "eft" and the groups of political Islam, in their "foundations,principles,discourse,groups,organizations," and "movements," and in their near-identical positions on every event in our region, large or small, point to a broad strategic alliance that could do great harm to the countries and people of the region.
The same is true of the supporters of Shiite political Islam in America. The "mullah regime" in Iran has succeeded on two important fronts. First, it has backed and created Sunni terrorist "groups" and "organizations," paying for their training, building their strategies, appointing their leaders, and directing their missions to serve its expansionist regional project. Second, it has built the organizations and militias of the "savage minorities," that have brutally expressed the "extremism" of Shiite political Islam, whether in the Lebanese Hezbollah, Shiite terror organizations in Iraq, or the Houthi militia in Yemen
As for the fifth column associated with political Islam groups, both Shiite and Sunni, which aligns with the "western Left," they are too numerous to recount. Some of these individuals outwardly reject affiliation with these groups, yet they never fail to latch onto and exploit any cause that serves them, any event that benefits them, or any narrative that harms the Gulf countries, their leaderships, and peoples, regardless of whether it unfolds in the East, West, North, or South.
In the end, what happened in these American elections was historically familiar and predictable, and it matters because it affects every country in the world.
