Arab and Islamic Summit Outcomes: A Reflection of Weakness or Complicity?
The leader, Sayyid Abdul Malik Badr Al-Din Al-Houthi, expressed his severe dissatisfaction with the outcomes of the Arab and Islamic summit held in Riyadh a few days ago.
In a speech few days ago during the inauguration of the annual martyr’s anniversary events, he said, “The Arab and Islamic summit, although it is an emergency summit for 57 countries, did not come out with a practical position or action, which is shameful and sad.” He pointed out that “the summit, which they say represents all Muslims, only comes out with a verbal demand statement without any practical position,” wondering, “Are these the capabilities of more than one and a half billion Muslims?”
He added that “57 Arab and Islamic countries with their weight and capabilities came out with a statement that could be issued by a primary school and one person,” noting that “some countries have advanced a formula that includes some practical steps and other countries, led by Saudi Arabia, have rejected it, to make the summit’s outputs a very ordinary statement that the Israeli ridiculed.”
He pointed out that “the Zionist entity understood from the statement of the Arab and Islamic summit that they are considerate of it and shackling the nation; so as not to take any practical action or take a firm position at the very least,” stressing that the position of some Arab countries did not rise to the position of non-Arab and non-Islamic countries such as Colombia and some South American countries that boycotted the enemy entity.
He said: “Some Arab countries are not satisfied with the slackness, but they have collusion under the table with the American to let the Israeli do what he wants in Gaza, and that Arab countries want to get Gaza out of the control of the Mujahideen, and be under direct Zionist control, or through the Palestinian Authority, which does not have control in the West Bank until it has control in Gaza.”
The leader’s dissatisfaction with the outcomes of the Arab and Islamic summit coincides with the dissatisfaction of the free peoples of the world, who have now begun to curse their rulers openly and publicly; considering them tools of global Zionism and that they receive instructions and directives from the Zionist entity.
During the past days, a number of activists wrote through social media many posts expressing dissatisfaction with the summit, describing its statement as frail and slack, and that its results are in line with the desires of the Israeli enemy, considering condemnation, denunciation, and demand a clear evasion of responsibility, which is at the same time expected and not surprising.
In this context, the scholar Dr. Khaled Al-Qarouti says: “The leaders and rulers of the Arabs and Muslims met to tell their peoples “we refuse, we condemn, we denounce, we fear, we demand”, describing the summit as “the summit of slaves, and the slave is the one who says those phrases, but the free do not say but do.”
He adds that it is “not an Arab or Islamic summit, as it was absent from it the real men of the Arab and Islamic nation; Sayyid Hassan Nasrallah, and Sayyid Leader Abdul Malik bin Badr Al-Din Al-Houthi, and the leaders of Hamas and Palestinian Jihad, the leaders of the Islamic resistance in Iraq.”
On his part, the activist and journalist Mazen Heba confirms that “history will record the strongest word said in the Islamic summit by the Iranian President Ibrahim Raisi; because his word is the only one that left the square of denunciation to call for taking practical positions, represented in confronting Israel and boycotting it and arming the Palestinian resistance.”
As for the writer Abu Al-Az Al-Saadan, he says: “The final statement of the joint Arab and Islamic summit did not exceed condemnation and denunciation and the call to bring aid to Gaza, and the summary of the final statement was to condemn the Israeli aggression and the brutal and inhuman crimes and massacres on the Gaza Strip, and to reject the characterization of the retaliatory war; in defense of the self and justify it, and call to break the siege on Gaza and impose the entry of humanitarian aid; while the hope from this summit was to exceed the condemnations and denunciations and take a decision to lift the unjust siege and tyranny and blackmail for a long time, and form an Arab and Islamic legal body to prosecute the criminals of the occupying Israeli enemy entity and present them to the relevant international courts.”
For his part, the journalist Basil Al-Rifai saw that the maximum 57 Arab and Islamic countries can do is what they did, and that they wish to exterminate the resistance and bury the Palestinian cause under the rubble of hospitals in Gaza, considering that these results are the highest that those countries have, and that the obstacles are between impotence and complicity.
The Islamic Jihad movement had commented on the Arab and Islamic summit by confirming that the statement was as if it was issued by a body unrelated to the massacres against the Palestinian people in Gaza and the West Bank, and not about a meeting of 57 countries.
It pointed out that “the statement reflects the extent of the disavowal of the Arab and Islamic countries combined from their tasks and distancing themselves from their duty to protect Arab and Islamic national security, and abandoning Palestine and its people to the Zionist entity and its Western patrons.”
The movement expressed its severe surprise at what was stated in the final statement of the summit, emphasizing adherence to the Arab Peace Initiative of 2002, and reminding that the precondition for peace with Israel and the establishment of normal relations with it is the end of its occupation of all Palestinian and Arab lands, especially in light of the rush of some Arab regimes to normalize relations with the entity.
The movement said, “Perhaps the statement would have gained some credibility if the Arab and Islamic countries normalizing relations with the entity had initiated cutting off their relations with it, following the example of some Latin American countries that are not linked to Palestine and its people, neither by Arabism nor by Islam.”
It concluded, “What was decided in the final statement sends a message to the Arab and Islamic nation that these regimes have become incapable of protecting their peoples and defending the sanctities of the nation, and that their peoples are left as a prey to the Zionist entity and the American administration.”
This is the same as what was expressed by the official of Arab relations in the Islamic Jihad movement, Abu Issa, saying, “The wording of the final statement of the Arab-Islamic summit expresses a position of weakness and disavowal from these regimes towards the central issue of the nation,” adding that “what indicates the credibility in their solidarity is the expulsion of the ambassadors of the Zionist enemy from those Arab and Islamic countries.”
Abu Issa adds, “We rely on the Arab peoples and the free people of the world, not on their regimes,” noting that “this summit is no different from the previous summits despite all the massacres committed by the usurping Zionist enemy against the people of Palestine.”
Meanwhile, the leader of the Hamas movement, Osama Hamdan, expressed his disappointment with the final statement of the Arab-Islamic summit in Riyadh, saying that the participants in it “did not activate their power cards,” affirming that “Gaza will only be ruled by its people and the blood of its people will be the price for its freedom.”
The speech of the leader, Sayyid Abdul Malik Badr Al-Din Al-Houthi, exposed the presidents and rulers of the Arab and Islamic countries, and their words are “dead” in front of the strong speech delivered by the leader, with his clarity, credibility, courage, promise, and threat.
The whole world now realizes very well that the leader, Sayyid Abdul Malik Badr Al-Din Al-Houthi, is a man of word and deed, and that he does not utter words just to threaten, or to boast in front of various media outlets, but his words come from faith-based, ethical, and humanitarian positions as he confirmed in his speech; and for this reason, the enemies are the most keen to scrutinize all the details of the speech, and take what was stated in it seriously.