Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Layla Al-Qudsi's avatar

If I may, saying “Hamas opposed Assad (Iran’s ally), therefore Hamas is indirectly aligned with Israel” wouldn't be a logical distortion? In the Syrian civil war there were multiple independent and shifting conflict axes (regime, rebel factions, ISIS, Kurdish forces, and foreign states), so shared opposition to Assad does not imply alignment or cooperation with Israel. It’s like saying “I can be against Trump like many Republicans or conservatives, therefore I am aligned with them", which clearly doesn’t follow from simply opposing the same figure. Another point is that moral analysis of Hamas should not be separated cleanly from the population’s constrained reality, and external actors in conflict zones often behave in strategically constrained, rather than freely “ideological,” ways.

Rob11's avatar

I’ve always felt Hizbollah and Assad were the most honorable and principled among the “Resistance Axis” and I was proven right. Iran’s problem is that it still operates in the paleo conservative “Israel controls America” narrative, which predictably leads them to minimize the American threat and trust them. And as you correctly said, Hamas’s is that it is way too influenced by the Brotherhood and Qutbism, in addition to betraying Assad obviously. In contrast, Hizbollah and Assad always understood that the Zionist entity, as evil as it is, is nothing but a symptom of the bigger problem of American and Western imperialism. Plus, they maintained the correct stances on the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan. While my sadness about the fall of Assad will remain for a long time, I am at least happy Hizbollah is still active and arguably stronger than ever before, to finally end the Zionist occupation once and for all.

2 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?