Respond, Even with a Rocket

by Dr. Abdul-Sattar Kassem

Netanyahu, prime minister of the Zionist entity, did not hesitate to travel to China according to a pre-arranged visit, despite the Zionist aggression against Syria on May 5, 2013. Netanyahu turned his back as though nothing had happened, leaving the Arab masses, and some of their rulers, parties, and public figures, to denounce and condemn the aggression however they pleased.

Many Arabs, at the level of rulers, leaderships, and parties — with the exception of Hezbollah — did not hesitate to repeat the tired, regurgitated phrases of condemnation, denunciation, and cursing of Israel and its allies, phrases that are, in themselves, messages of reassurance to Israel. The Arabs have reassured Israel that the record of condemnation and denunciation is always ready to play, and that all it needs to do is kill and destroy without any regard for consequences and repercussions.

While fully recognizing that the Israeli aggression was not confined to an Israeli vision alone, but came within an American-Atlantic-Arab vision meant to send a clear message to Russia, Iran, and Hezbollah, the Arab regimes’ history of not responding to attacks constitutes the clear framework behind Israel’s boldness in attacking without deterrent or hesitation. The aggression carried no strategic value in terms of the type of weapons and munitions destroyed, but its value stems from the angle of the Americans affirming that the Western states, Israel, and their Arab allies will not allow the Syrian army to advance at the opposition’s expense either. But this affirmation could not have come about so easily had Israel calculated that a response would come immediately, whatever the cost. To clarify: Israel does not dare attack Hezbollah’s positions in Lebanon, because it understands fully that the Party’s response would be immediate, regardless of the resulting consequences.

Israel has grown accustomed to the regime’s cowardice, and to its traditional line that the response will come “at the appropriate time and place,” and Netanyahu found no problem leaving his fortress without a backward glance. Had Israel not grown accustomed to a certain military conduct from Syria, it would never have carried out the strikes in the first place, and its prime minister would never have shown such contempt for the Arabs in deciding to strike.

While fully recognizing the danger any Syrian response could pose to Syria and the region generally, not responding carries an even greater danger, embodied in the Arab’s contempt for himself, the loss of his morale, and a drift toward surrender and submission. I have listened to many military experts, Amin Hteit and Walid Sukkaria foremost among them, but I look at the matter from the angle of political construction, not military capability. There is a danger of war breaking out at the regional level should Syria respond to the aggression, a danger that would strike everyone — but not responding carries a danger that strikes no one but the Arabs still standing firm against Israel and the United States.

In political thought, the destruction of morale and the feeling of humiliation and abasement are far more dangerous than the loss of installations and lives, because moral destruction amounts to a collective moral killing of the human being. This is the greatest calamity to befall the Arab nation — its rulers showing contempt for its dignity and pride, always using the pretext of preserving what they call “material achievements,” and of preserving people’s lives from death. They have killed most people morally, leading the nation from defeat to defeat, from failure to failure, from frustration to frustration, until it became a laughingstock before the world. Those who never rise above shoes do not make history, do not achieve glory, and do not achieve accomplishments in the various fields of life.

There is no war without losses in lives and property, but whoever refuses to accept this loss is simply submitting himself to defeat.

Whoever wants to build a strategic balance with an enemy, or to forge his path toward progress, construction, and justice, must be careful to build the human being — otherwise his efforts go to waste. Responding to the enemy sends a clear message to the world, but the more important message is directed at the people, affirming freedom, dignity, and readiness for sacrifice in defense of rights. Then leadership and people unite, and their strength grows geometrically.

For this reason, it is important to fire a bullet at the enemy, or a rocket carrying no explosive warhead at all. What is required is delivering a message to the nation’s masses that the Arabs are not merely a gathering of condemnation clowns.

Source: Translated from the original Arabic, “الرد ولو بصاروخ” by Dr. Abdul-Sattar Kassem.