Transcription
Greetings to everyone. We welcome Professor Khatib Badli. I apologize for postponing the episode from Tuesday due to Professor Khatib's commitment with Professor Ayman Ajami and Professor Hamed Abdelsamad. Of course, we postponed it to Thursday. Thursday is now a backup, meaning if Monday doesn't work, Thursday will. So, welcome, Professor Khatib, and we missed you.
"Oh, welcome."
"It's been a while since we chatted."
"Yes, because this chat is a warm space and a release."
"A release, a release, a release."
"No, and we think about it calmly and without emotion."
"Exactly, exactly. Where would you like to start today? Of course, you always have an introduction ready."
"Well, first of all, regarding the victory. Now, my speech is not directed at our historical "sons of the alley" who say Iran has won and so on. These three forces that we have, the Brotherhood, the nationalists, and the remnants of the communists, are almost united in supporting the Iranian regime. Most of them used to consider it backward, or the nationalists consider it Persian, and the Brotherhood considers it Shiite, and we Sunnis and communists consider it reactionary, and they consider themselves progressive. All of this talk has now made them a laughingstock, meaning these positions, meaning people who don't understand politics. And by the way, these people don't understand politics, and they have been ruling us since 1946 until now. These currents that have been alternating in Syria and ruling it are now, you see them in their position in this war, turned into laughable groups because none of them could move from their thinking to the level of national, human, liberal thinking, human rights, etc. None of this is in their dictionary. So, our discussion is not with them, but even in the media, including Western media, and many people who have bought into Iran or the Iranian regime. Influencers with previous jobs come out, and they come out having received the information and start saying, 'Oh, Trump entered a war and was hasty and shouldn't have entered, and Iran wasn't a danger.' And this war now, it's an Israeli war, right? No one can deny it. It's not originally an Israeli war. Iran's danger, in my opinion, is a danger to the world, not just to Israel, but the danger to Israel is the greatest. This is the reality. Why is it a danger to the world? Because when it was subjected to the American-Israeli strike, it started to strike, for example, in the Gulf countries, not just American bases. It started to strike targets that were not American and had nothing to do with America. Meaning, Iran started to carry out sabotage operations to pressure the world and started to close the Strait of Hormuz to pressure the world and escalate the situation so that its position would be strong. Its position is strong through its ability to sabotage, and this ability to sabotage is a danger to the world because at any time it can do this, and it is indeed an aggressive state that expands its Syrian interests outside of Iran. This is the fundamental problem. Now, we come to say that it has won. There are types of victory: there is a phased victory, a strategic victory, a military victory, and a political victory. Military victory, if we are to think about it, we must see Iranian aircraft bombing Washington and Tel Aviv. These two countries are not the aggressors. Why aren't they saying Iran was subjected to aggression? The two countries that attacked, it should be like they entered Iran's airspace and started bombing, Iran should bomb them, or at least have fighter aircraft or anti-aircraft missiles so that they can shoot down their aircraft. Is it possible that from February 28th until now, only one plane has been shot down, and no one knows how it was shot down, and Israel hasn't lost a single plane? Is it possible? 12 days have passed, and now Israel is going back and forth like the taxis that go and work on the taxi route, going and coming to Iran, and not a single plane has been shot down, not a single plane has been lost. So, there is no military victory. There is a military victory for the two forces that attacked, Israel and America. These two have won militarily, meaning they destroyed the Iranian navy, anti-aircraft, air force, and destroyed their arms factories, missiles, ammunition, iron and steel, and killed their various leaders. All of them were killed. So, there was a military victory. But is this military victory, as Zak Harvey says, that military victory, if not translated into political victory, and political victory means Iran's surrender, then its objectives have not been achieved? Because no one goes and carries out military operations for the sake of military operations only. Why did they attack Iran? There were political reasons. Then, the political reasons for which the war was waged have changed. They came to end the nuclear issue, which is now 450 grams of 60% enriched uranium. These must be removed. When Iran got involved in the issue of the strait and closing the strait and preventing some ships loyal to the two countries that attacked from passing and allowing other countries to pass through the strait, then the war turned into a war of the strait. This action was recently translated by the American destroyers that came to blockade, to blockade the strait, meaning to blockade the ships or prevent the ships that Iran agreed to let pass from passing. It's like a ban, not a complete blockade, because a complete blockade would lead to a declaration of war, and other powers that are harmed by this matter might intervene, even against America and Israel, alongside Iran. But America is playing it like this: 'Hey, you're holding the card of the Iranians. The Iranians are holding the card of the strait. We will hold the same card. We, as a huge and powerful American force, with the possibility of expansion on a global level, with aircraft carriers, naval transports, frigates, cruisers, and I don't know what else. America is a strong country that has never been defeated militarily in the sense of military. Now, in Vietnam, Vietnam is the one that defeated America, not by militarily harming America on its own soil, but by America not being able to end or achieve the political objective for which it came. Now, also, if you calculate in the long term, Saddam Hussein's regime fell. For what reason? On the basis that they wanted to establish a democratic regime in its place. What happened is that the forces that benefited from the fall of Saddam Hussein, imagine the forces that benefited from the fall of Saddam Hussein became against America. Because our people, in our minds, have something broken or something that's going off track. You are walking on the track, and you don't see it going off track. Why are you hostile to America? This is from the agency. When we came from the agency, we came hostile to America and Israel. And why don't we ask ourselves or think about this issue? If America hadn't come and overthrown Saddam Hussein's regime, I mean, I'm not in favor of it coming and overthrowing here and there. I'm not talking about something that happened, not something that will happen. And no one is taking my opinion away from me. Now, everything we are talking about, we are talking about it to understand what concerns us. We, as people, the nature of circumstances, coincidence, history have brought us and placed us in this troubled, tense, defeated, backward, struggling, clinging to backwardness region where we are. So, when we read the Iranian event, we read it in the hope that perhaps we will benefit something. Now, the most important thing we can benefit from is that, at least, we don't take sides. Because now, what will he tell you? The American-Israeli aggression on Iran on February 28th, 2026, became an American-Israeli aggression on Iran.
"Right."
"But is this aggression spontaneous or from a vacuum? Why didn't these two countries choose another country and strike it? Why? Because this country has an expansionist project, and this expansionist project is clashing with the interests of powerful countries, which are America and Israel. Iranian expansion is not clashing with us, who are taking the blows. Iranian expansion in our countries is a dangerous expansion for us before anyone else. But we are not strong. We are not just not strong; we place our strength with those who are indebted to the people, as Ahmed Shawqi says in the play, 'Look at the people, their debts, how they are inspired. Their insides are filled with cheers for a deadly life. The lie is trapped in them, and falsehood is unleashed upon them. Oh, what a parrot, its mind is in its ears.' We are a vocal phenomenon, as the thinker Al-Qasimi said.
"Al-Qasimi, a vocal phenomenon, and an annoying vocal phenomenon. There are beautiful sounds that are pleasing. We are an annoying vocal phenomenon. Now, let's return to the issue of victory. If we have discussed this before, if America and Israel stopped the war, Iran would have to sit and look at its wounds, the destruction, the devastation, and everything around it in ruins. And it would have to look at a people. Before January, I believe, this people was demonstrating. So, how now, after the war, has it lost many of the means of living for this people? Let's go back now to the possibilities. The possibilities, the thing that Zak said is good and correct, is that this war did not have prior legitimacy and was not well prepared for. And Trump, during his tenure, made enemies with Europe and NATO and all these countries that were supposed to be with him, so they didn't stand with him because he was going his own way, and it was like a hot-headed bravado. So, this is what caused this failure, because America usually, when it strikes somewhere, it strikes a devastating blow that makes the enemy surrender. But here, it couldn't do that because it wasn't prepared for this strike. As for whether Trump was messing up and Netanyahu, I don't know what. Iran is right. No, Iran, in my opinion, is the danger to us since 1979 until now. And we must never forget what the thinker Elias Murqos said when a group of communists, including Professor Michel Kilo, may God have mercy on him, went to him in '79. Elias Murqos said to them, 'What are you celebrating? You don't know what has happened.' Now, the era of slaughter has begun with the arrival of these people in power. What happened in response? The Sunni Islamic awakening. So, when these people came to power and announced the export of the revolution and started claiming that they were with the Palestinian cause and took American hostages, this was the first act of piracy they committed as a state. The state committed an act of piracy. University students took hostages. The state started negotiating with them. It didn't say, 'These students have no right to take them hostage.' It violated international diplomatic norms. It violated...
"Aggression, aggression against the American state."
"Against the American state and international law, because it's a consulate, it has...
"Of course."
"It has people internationally protected by international law. So, here, we didn't understand Elias Murqos's message. We must think about it correctly. What happened is that when Sunni political Islam grew, ultimately, it produced ISIS. The Sunni awakening was funded with billions of dollars to strengthen the Sunni regime or Sunni political Islam. In the end, it produced ISIS, Jabhat al-Nusra, and the current Syrian regime is a product of that awakening. And Anwar Sadat, although I admire him for his action of making a peace treaty with Israel, he fostered these currents or allowed them to dominate and spread in Egypt, and Egypt was the primary breeding ground or haven for this awakening. So, this led us here, where there is a Sunni-Shiite conflict, and this Sunni-Shiite conflict has united in confrontation with Israel, as happened in the case of Hamas's relationship and October 7th. And the Hamas members always used to praise Qassem Soleimani and call him the martyr of Jerusalem, the martyr of Jerusalem. So, they were able to unite Sunni and Shiite Muslims as political Islamists against Israel. But for whose project? For Iran's project. So, the Sunnis themselves here played a secondary role, an auxiliary role, or a fuel role for the Iranian war against Israel. Now, here we must return to the idea. We are now facing several scenarios in this war. Either a ceasefire will be reached, or it will be violated, and America will intervene very strongly. This is one of the scenarios, meaning ground operations, occupying islands, landing troops, and so on. This is one of the possibilities. The second possibility is that an agreement will be reached, but this agreement will be temporary because America could not get what it wanted from Iran in Pakistan, because Iran still has cards, the most important of which is the card of the Strait of Hormuz. And the second card is that it can strike the Gulf countries, which it has already struck. Meaning, it cannot strike America, and the strikes on Israel were 15% of the missiles it launched, and 85% were on the Gulf countries, not on American targets in the Gulf countries. Places were hit, meaning these countries, which are fundamentally safe countries and are not at war with anyone. All these Gulf countries, I'm not defending them, by the way, but my information is that they are stable countries, and they are Europe. They are a market from which they get oil smoothly and so on. And the Gulf markets are for Europe, they are wide markets where billions of dollars are sold in these markets. So, these countries are now threatening Iran's security, not America or Israel. It is Iran that is threatening security. Now, we are moving towards these scenarios. The third scenario is that there will be waves, meaning, 'Okay, now we have agreed to a truce, a ceasefire. We will extend it periodically, and during this extension, a strike might happen.' You won't see Iran without America and Israel having a target list, and they come and strike them and leave. What can Iran do about it? Iran can't do anything about it. Now, today, if they come and strike again, they can, because the sky is open, the ground is open, and Iran is penetrated intelligence-wise to the core. They can't do anything unless it's, specifically, the Israelis who have penetrated them, almost intelligence-wise. So, I believe this is what we are facing. We are facing an open war, and it is very difficult for Iran to submit to the idea of handing over the uranium. And by the way, China and Russia have started offering their help. Russia said, 'We will take this enriched uranium.' Of course, Iran will not give it. And China is demanding that we want a permanent ceasefire. And tomorrow, the 17th, there is a meeting between the Chinese President and Trump. We don't know what the plan or the work program or the scheduled item they will discuss is. But most likely, the main focus will be this war. If we are to take the good omens, we are taking political analysis. The good omens, we don't want the war to happen, especially since it is affecting all countries of the world, and this is very dangerous. We hope it stops permanently, but its stopping should remove the danger of Iran from us. We don't care about the interests of America, or Trump, or Netanyahu, or Israel. And by the way, I have a position on Trump. Trump, as you know, is the one who empowered the existing regime in our country and asked for nothing and told him to do whatever he wanted, and now Syria is under the terrifying threat of jihadists.
"Certainly, Professor Khatib. Now, there is a question from Omar, as usual. I like to add to the question. Omar is asking, 'Will the Gulf countries pay the price for the American-Iranian war?' I would like to add to the question: Has this war and Iran's aggression against the Gulf countries completely changed the equation in the region, so that not only the Gulf countries bear the cost of the war, but the Gulf countries will enter into a new alliance with Israel and the United States against Iran until Iran is finished? And when Iran is finished, these countries will stand with Israel and the United States against the Turkish-Qatari alliance, especially Kuwait and the Emirates.' I have information now. The amount of popular anger in the Emirates and Kuwait exceeds imagination. 'What are we involved in, you sons of so-and-so? Where are you hitting us?' The Emirates, you know, the Emirates has about 200,000-300,000 Iranians. All of them transfer money. The Iranians control them, their professions in the Emirates. Streets were named after them. And all of this involves transfers, and all of it returns money. Where are you going? What are you doing? Today, especially Kuwait and the Emirates. Now, Saudi Arabia's position might not be very clear, but I expect that at the earliest opportunity, Kuwait will join the Abraham Accords, and Saudi Arabia very possibly. And after they finish with Iran, they will say to Qatar, 'Come here, it's your turn.' So, what do you think of this, Professor Khatib? Please."
"I expect something like this to happen. Because, as I said in my first intervention, they did not show hostility to Iran and stipulated from the beginning that the American bases in their countries would not be used against Iran, and they were not used. But Iran started striking, based on the bases. But it started striking, and the Emirates was hurt the most. Why do I expect that, given that the Emirates has relations with Israel?"
"And they want to take revenge on them. I don't know if there are other reasons. Maybe. Even if I don't want to be definitive about the matter, the position of the Gulf countries is indeed heading towards change. Even most of them dealt with Iran on the basis that it is a country that exists, has importance, has influence, has power, and so on. They dealt with it cautiously. Now, this caution has disappeared because it is the one that attacked them and caused them losses and made them need to deploy their anti-aircraft defenses and consume their missiles in confronting Iranian drones and missiles. We are heading, before February 28th, the region is heading towards major changes. And perhaps we discussed this before, you and I, that wars always end by redrawing the political map after the end of the victor. The biggest example is World War I, and even World War II. After World War I, France and Britain, after defeating the Ottoman Empire, these vast areas that were occupied by the Ottoman Empire, they sat down and drew maps and designated them: this is for whom, this is for whom, and this is for whom. They called it the Sykes-Picot Agreement. Sykes and Picot were one from France and one from Britain. They sat and drew, and these agreements remained after the victories achieved by the Allies in World War II. For example, America then managed Japan economically, and they set up a project for Europe, an economic renaissance, after it was heavily destroyed as a result of World War II. So, the victor is the one who imposes his conditions. Regarding the war of October 7, 2023, this war that is happening now in Iran is an extension of October 7th. If it weren't for October 7th, meaning October 6th. Now, some people tell you that Israel has expansionist ambitions in southern Syria and southern Lebanon. Yes. And now it has exploited these circumstances and went and took southern Lebanon and southern Syria. On October 6, 2023, was Israel occupying southern Lebanon and occupying Quneitra? Was it occupying Mount Hermon and entering and leaving Syria before October 6th? On October 6th, no. In normal circumstances, and even Gaza, was Israel occupying Gaza? No, it wasn't occupying it. So, those who trivialize the issue, trivializing the issue, we are used to it. For any issue, no matter how big, they say, 'Bashar al-Assad, someone like Faisal Qassem comes out and says Bashar al-Assad is not Syrian, not Arab, not Alawite, he is from Bahra, that's it.' The issue becomes trivial. We are not against barrels, or against arbitrary detention, or against stifling freedoms, or against inheritance, or against... no, but just because he is not from us. And more than that, there is no trivialization. Now, the trivialization of our issue, this huge conflict that has turned into an international conflict on a global level. Someone comes and says, 'Expansionist, colonial ambitions.' We should not trivialize our issues. If you see someone trivializing the issue, either he is a paid agent with an agenda he is defending, or he is stupid. One of the two. It's not necessarily that he trivializes the issue and is being paid or something. No, there are many good people, mystics, and so on, who hear from here and there, who live on ear input, as you say. 'Hey, this Ahmed Al-Shar' is illegitimate.' All the crimes committed in Syria and elsewhere, they say, 'He is illegitimate.' And if he is illegitimate, then hypothetically, he has a lineage. And they brought his father, mother, and siblings. We saw them all. He has a lineage. Yes, he is illegitimate. Yes. The judge returns, oh past, that we want a trivial issue to talk about, to talk about. We don't talk about the depth of the issue. These days, I want to make a video about this issue of conspiracy and plotting, that this Israeli officer and others. I want to make a video about this topic.
"The most important thing is that he is a good person, Professor Khatib. The most important thing is that the Golan is a good person."
"No, we, I mean, how can I say it? We...
"We must know his lineage. That's the most important thing. The most important thing is whether he has a lineage or not. All the women he seduced, all the children he blew up..."
"No one is talking about that. Yes. Yes. Meaning, they themselves, some of them are with Ahmed Al-Shar' in power, with Al-Julani. They are the same ones who, before '81, used to say, 'We don't know his lineage, who his father is, who his brother is.' And this one, I don't know."
"Yes, meaning, what does that mean? At a time when there was Idlib, and you were displacing them, you didn't find anything wrong with him other than this problem: that he has no lineage? Then, the ones ruling the world, all the countries of the world, does anyone sit and scrutinize whether this one, in his time, his father was Obama's, or his grandfather was from Nigeria? And if he was from Nigeria, you accepted him. You elected him, and he came and ruled for the first term and the second. You have to evaluate his term. What does it matter to you? But we, because we live on ear input, and they play with us. Now, today, as I told you, regarding Iran, there are people playing with us. They send me videos every day. Yesterday, peace be upon you, mercy, and blessings of God. I received a video. Someone was saying, 'Peace be upon you, mercy, and blessings of God. Now, Europe and America are up in arms against Trump, and they want to overthrow him, and Iran has won.' What's wrong with you, man? Calm down a bit, man. How did it win? How did it win? I truly assume that I see Iran going and bombing them, bombing their cities, bombing their weapons factories, bombing their navy, bombing their airports. Yes, if it's a few missiles, what are the damages? Israel wasn't destroyed, and America wasn't destroyed, and nothing happened to anyone. Only Iran fell to the ground. Now, if this war continues, you will see even more destruction. It is truly feared that Trump might get angry and start bombing their vital infrastructure, meaning bombing their water stations, their power generation stations, their... And they will go and bomb desalination plants in the Gulf, for example, and make people thirsty in the Gulf. This matter, all of this is possible and open to possibilities. So, we, we don't have, as they say, sound and logical thinking. You, my brother, are from our region. You are being attacked and targeted by the Iranian project. This is the long and short of it. And when Iran comes and takes a country like Iraq, it oppresses the people of Iraq, it oppresses them in their economy, their lives, their thinking, their conscience, their minds. It oppresses them. Then an Iraqi member of parliament comes out and says, 'We want to go and declare war on America because Iran and so on.' You and this country you live in, your country. Why? I, of course, don't interfere in Iraqi affairs. It's their private matter. But I'm talking now. An Egyptian comes out, for example, an Egyptian says, 'I am with Iran, against America.' Billions, a billion and a half, maybe two billion minus a quarter, they receive every year from America, not from Iran. Egyptians support the Egyptian army, and perhaps there is something related to supporting the economy or something related to the livelihood of Egyptians. What do you understand? Why are you with Iran against America? I told you, I'm not going to go and be with America, nor did America tell you to come and be with me. But at least, respect your country, respect your country's policy, respect your people. You are protected by America's support. Yes, the peace treaty with Israel, extended from 1979 until today, and adherence to this treaty, America played a big role in it. It sponsored the peace process between Egypt and Israel. America, meaning you Egyptians, with all due respect to the Egyptian people who follow me, you protected yourselves, and America protected you, and no bullet has been fired at you since then. What more do you want? What do you understand? That if Iran wins now and crushes America and Israel, you will use the same language and rub their noses in the dirt. You, as an Egyptian, what have you benefited from all of this? Someone explain to us, make us understand, what is the benefit you achieve? Even though you neither stood with Iran, nor stood with America, nor... I'm not even saying I'm belittling this Egyptian citizen. Now, if I stand with America, or Israel, or Iran, what is my impact? Nothing. No one. Now, we, how many of us are sitting here, 343 brothers, dear friends, are watching us? What is our impact in this huge international conflict? Nothing. At most, we are trying to offer a reading that is not paid for, not ideological, and has no background for these people. And they can go wherever they want.
"Egypt's position is concerning, by the way, before I comment on the issue. One of the theories says that the ceasefire was due to the fact that the targets ran out, meaning they no longer had targets to bomb, so they were forced to stop the ceasefire. I remember that the estimated number of targets previously was around 8,000 something. They hit over 16,600 targets. Imagine, 16,000. So, they no longer had targets to bomb. Two, regarding Egypt, by the way, there is mobilization of intellectuals and the Egyptian media against the Gulf countries, and this is very concerning. Why? Now, when I was in the Emirates, it was known, especially Syrians, used to complain, 'Look what Hosni Mubarak is doing.' Hosni Mubarak, when he used to visit the Emirates, of course, he was traveling back and forth to the Emirates, it was known and heard by many ears. When he would disembark from the plane, the last thing he would say to Sheikh Zayed was, 'These Egyptians are your children, take care of them.'
"Oh, my goodness, oh, my goodness."
"It's famous, famous, by the way. And then, the last time he was in the Emirates, traveling back and forth, the last thing before he got on the plane, and he never allowed anyone in the Egyptian media to attack the Gulf countries. You have 5 million Egyptians in the Gulf countries. You have a huge number of Egyptians in the Gulf countries. Why are you opening your mouth against the Gulf countries today? These people who are standing with Iran, and Iran has won, and Iran will win, and so on, and so on, they express nothing but hatred and schadenfreude towards the Gulf countries. Why? Why are you concerned? Brother, people built their country and organized it the way they like. What concern is it of yours to tell them what is wrong and what is right? Let them do whatever they want in their country, and you are living off them. Where are you going now? You are ruining your people and ruining yourself. I don't understand this phenomenon. I lived in the Emirates for 13 years, and you would never hear an Egyptian say a word against the Gulf, not a word. In private conversations, I'm talking about it, not a word. He's earning a living, happy, and God is good to him. What do you want? You're just burning. Today, it's hard to understand this media. I mean, I really don't understand it. Are these people who consider themselves intellectuals, enlightened, and understanding, who are you betting on? Iran today is broken, humiliated, tattered, wiped off the face of the earth to the extent that Vance told them, 'My God, tell them to stop the bombing, even if you have to use carrier pigeons.' The bombing continued because there were no communications, no mobile phones working. He told them, 'Brother, use carrier pigeons, but tell them to stop the bombing until the ceasefire is implemented.' And there are still people who believe that Iran might win. The price that will be paid will be very expensive. The Gulf countries will not forgive them, by the way. They will never forgive them after today, especially Kuwait. This is the second blow Kuwait has taken. And I would like to remind you, Professor Khatib, when the Kuwait Liberation War ended, Monte Carlo London radio announced that the Gulf countries were surprised that Egypt's debts, which were $70 billion, were removed from the bill. Their debts became zero, thanks to the United States. The United States forced the Gulf countries to pay their debts. So, in 1991, when they came out of the Gulf War, their debts were zero. But because they are a failed people and a failed country, look where they are today, and they are attacking the Gulf countries and standing with Iran. Do you have a brain? Understand. What is this? What is this? I don't understand it. I don't know. Someone explain it to me.
"I want to start from what you said, a very important point that just occurred to me: any country with less struggle is more developed.
"It has less hostility towards imperialism and Zionism, etc., so it has more potential to advance. Any country with less political Islam also has the ability to emerge, stabilize, and progress. I know a joke that was told a long time ago: in Egypt, during the time of Hosni Mubarak, instructions were issued that it was not permissible to say any news that was offensive to a country, especially Saudi Arabia. It was not permissible to offend Saudi Arabia. So, once, a wanted criminal for the Egyptians, a criminal, was going to Saudi Arabia, and from Saudi Arabia, he came to Egypt, and they arrested him at the airport. He was going, he had performed Umrah in Mecca and Medina, and he came. Look at the airport news: 'The criminal was arrested.' I don't want to say criminal, and he was in Saudi Arabia. So, they said, 'The wanted criminal, so-and-so, was arrested at Cairo Airport, and he was residing and returned to Egypt after performing Umrah in an Arab country.' Meaning, there is Umrah in other countries besides Saudi Arabia. Of course not. But even so, they didn't mention that this criminal was in Saudi Arabia. Do you understand? Today, there is also this issue of labor, a very serious issue, a huge issue, especially for Egyptians. Syrians and Lebanese who go to work in the Gulf countries are all known to say that they are superior to all other labor in terms of experience, commitment, and discipline, etc. But, my brother, Egyptians are sweeping the situation in the Gulf countries. And this Egyptian presence in such density in the Gulf countries is transferring billions of dollars to Egypt. And the people who come and spend 10 years, 15 years in the Gulf countries from Egypt, they go and build a house, build a farm, get married, have children, and have children because of the Gulf countries. So, these countries, a long time ago, we had an important writer named Buali Yassin. Buali Yassin was a first-class political writer, and he has a book called "The Forbidden Thalos." This is an important book. If you have the chance, read it. This is satirical literature, of course. He also writes in satirical literature, like barley bread. It is eaten by people during war, and they chew it. After they eat it, they say, 'What kind of bread did we eat?' Now, we are like this. The Gulf countries, for these people who have labor in the Gulf, are eaten and chewed. Meaning, yesterday, in Damascus, they went and attacked the UAE embassy, and all the chants were that these Emirates, Israel, and so on. And there is a community of 200,000-300,000, I don't know their numbers, Syrians living honored and respected in the Emirates. I, honestly, don't know the Emirates. I visited once for about ten days, and the atmosphere was good, and people were doing well, but I haven't stayed there for long periods. But these Syrians living in the Emirates are pampered in the Emirates. Add to that, the first country to invent the idea of giving golden residency to Syrian artists was the Emirates. Meaning, after 2011-2012, we had a civil war in Syria, and our artists, almost all of them, worked in acting and television production. So, they went and settled in the Emirates, and the Emirates started giving them golden residency, meaning this man doesn't need a visa or anything. Whenever he wants, he enters, and they show him the golden residency, and they say, 'Welcome,' and he stays as long as he wants in the Emirates. These are advantages. I don't know why people don't see them, or rather, they don't care. Once, a Turk told the Sheikh, 'He received Syrian artists.' After '81, they started talking about them. 'Hey, someone, you are not honoring them. You didn't tell the Syrian artists, you, their country, Syria, 'Come, let's have a party and honor you and celebrate you.' No, on the contrary, most of the Syrian artists, the thugs of Ahmed Al-Shar's regime, attack them, saying, 'This one was with the Assad regime, and this one we will separate, and this one we will punish.' So, we don't appreciate people, and we don't appreciate the people who leave us. I, when I made a video about what these Syrian artists did, they worked in television production.
"Which appeared in Syria in 1993. And after the issuance of Law No. 10 for investments in Syria, there became the possibility of investment, import, and export. You know, before Hafez al-Assad, Syria was suffocated. In '93, this law was issued, and we had production companies that brought money into the country. I remember the Al-Sham International Company, which belonged to the sons of Abdel Halim Khaddam. They made a series called "The End of a Brave Man," which cost them 200 million. They said it brought them millions in profits.
"Billions."
"Meaning, many times what they put in.
"For Syria. This is an example I witnessed. I was writing drama and so on during that period. So, we don't appreciate people, and we have a kind of contempt. Who is this Ricardo? Who is this Khatib? Who is this Bassam Kousa? Who is this Jamal Suleiman? Why? What is the harm they have caused to this community? We didn't take up arms, or insult, or take knives and slaughter, or participate in the civil war. And our role, I was in Syria, our role was to put out fires. Here, there was a kidnapping, we went and returned the kidnapped. Here, two villages were about to clash, we went and reconciled them. This is how I worked from 2011. From mid-2011, when there was some armament and so on, the problems started. We started taking the kidnapped and bringing the kidnapped, and we were exposed to danger for this matter. So, what is this contempt? Someone comes out and writes you a threat, saying, 'If you come, I'll show you the stars of the afternoon.' We don't know why. What upset him? I come out and talk about public affairs. This person who is threatening me, what is the phrase or sentence that made him... get agitated and start threatening? I don't know the truth. There is a lot of this model, and the people who attack artists from this model, and who attack writers from this model. And I say that writers and artists must have a clear position, because what is burning now and what is being destroyed is their country. And whoever does not play this role is historically a coward, because the role of intellectuals in all wars and crises in the whole world is the role of intellectuals, it is the role of leadership. And whoever does not play his role is not just a coward, but he goes and stands with the people."
Those who are destroying their country, their role is much more dangerous, meaning their classification has become beyond negligence, for sure. And then, we must not forget that practically, the Turk, the Sheikh, is doing business with them, this broadcast, meaning now he is also, meaning they are all in business together, meaning what's the shame if he invites them or honors them or I don't know how people think about it, really, there's a very important question. We've stolen time, but the matter is very, very important. Please, what's your opinion about the Ottoman endowment and the looting, displacement, and starvation practiced against businessmen and merchants in Syria? Isn't this the final beginning, meaning when they start to clash with the merchants, especially the merchants of Damascus, what's your opinion on the matter?
Of course, we've spoken before. I said that there are two projects that have affected us negatively and were the most dangerous for us, more dangerous than all types of colonialism: the Iranian and the Turkish, meaning the Ottoman and the Iranian. And now, with the receding of the Iranian project, the most dangerous thing for current Syria is Turkish ambitions. And these Turkish ambitions have begun to clash with the Israeli presence or the Israeli project, and skirmishes have begun. For example, yesterday, the Turkish president was speaking against Israel and so on, but this talk is for media export, it's not real because the volume of trade between the two countries is still around 10 billion, I believe, annually.
Yes. So, a huge number. Well, instead of you threatening in the media, first, cancel economic, tourist, and commercial relations with Israel, so we can be convinced. So, this issue of Islamic endowments and Ottoman endowments and so on, it needs to come after 812. Turkey gained a big name or role in Syria, and whenever there was a problem, a Turkish official would come to Syria and meet with them, or they would bring them to him, and he would ask them to do something. So, Turkish influence in Syria is increasing and becoming more dangerous. And the greater danger comes, where is the greater danger? If they clash with the Israelis, we will become the arena of collision or conflict. And God protect us, we don't want this to happen, but everything is predictable because the conflict with political Islam in general is ongoing. Today, the war on Iran is at the same time a war on Shiite political Islam, and Shiite, as we said, has an influence on Sunni. And once the Safavid state or the Mullah regime ends or weakens significantly, the Sunni danger, which Turkey is currently representing, will emerge. Theoretically, the starting point or the place from which Sunni Islam originated is the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. However, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is not playing the role that Turkey is playing. Perhaps Saudi calculations are more rational than Turkish calculations. Turkey, if it turns into an expansionist state, it will become targeted even by the powers that are America and Israel specifically. We don't know. Now, we are thinking, as you say, out loud. Each one represents a wing, and this is one of the theories that even within the Syrian authority, there is a division between the Muslim Brotherhood wing and the Salafist wing. The Salafist wing is represented by Golani and the Jabhat al-Nusra gang, supported by Saudi Arabia, and the Muslim Brotherhood, represented by Abu Aishi, Abu Qasra, Abu Amshi, and Al-Raqi. All of these are supported by Turkey. I tell you, even today, on the issue of whether Syria will enter the war in Lebanon or not, they are also divided. The Turkish Muslim Brotherhood wing is the one smuggling weapons to Hezbollah, and the Salafist wing wants to enter and fight. They are divided among themselves from within. So, this is it. I don't know the details, honestly, but this is one of the theories we hear, and it's somewhat close to reason. That's why you find that there are two states in Syria. One is shaking hands with Israel and America, and receiving perfumes, and there are people in the street who want to liberate Jerusalem and all of us are Homsi. It's clear that there are two wings, and he can't silence them, he can't silence them, he can't take a stance against them, he can't do anything at all. So, the talk might be true. I don't know, I don't have direct information.
And I honestly don't have information. Personally, I don't have much knowledge of these details, given that we are living abroad. But your observation is correct that there are conflicts, and perhaps there is a third party, which is the ISIS group, who are not satisfied with either of these. If they gain strength now with America's withdrawal from Syria, they might become stronger and intervene in events. Of course, look, a final word: countries ruled by a religious system will have divisions because there is no single religious narrative. If there were a single religious narrative, they would all rally around it. And the divergence of religious narratives is what led to the existence of sects, groups, and branches in Islam itself, where each group says, "Those are wrong, we are right." This means they have become one team and those are another team. Therefore, this matter will continue, this internal conflict between them. And the Syrian people, who are the ones who have an interest in having a secular, democratic state that upholds human rights and so on, their voice is still somewhat faint. This people is the one that must address the issue, the one that must come out and get the country out of this situation. But how? The cost of this change, the cost of change, is like the costs that occurred after 2011. Syria was destroyed and torn apart, and many were killed. Now, salvation from this regime has truly begun to take hold. It now has power, an army, and militias, and there is a capacity in Syria for the current authority to maintain power. But we don't know where this will lead.
Excuse me, there was a question, if you allow me, Mr. Khatib. The matter might not be directly related. There was a question about scabies. Of course, there are important comments, honestly. They tell me that they have raised electricity prices, people are not bathing. I was listening to Alaa today saying that benzocaine, which is the main medicine that comes in emulsion form, comes in liquid form, is so expensive that if you want to treat the family two or three times, the amount comes to the family's salary. I just want to make an observation, perhaps based on my experience. When I was in the Emirates, for example, I was on a project to expand the Adco artery, and I had the same problem. The workers were sleeping, 12 people in one room. So, we had an epidemic of scabies among the workers. We had about 3,000 workers, and we couldn't keep up with their medications. So, the medications ran out. I had nothing but sulfur soap. Sulfur soap, which is the main medicine. So, I tried only sulfur soap and discovered that it is practically stronger than any other medicine. So, my advice for Syria, if sulfur soap or sulfur soap is available, usually, usually they can get it one way or another. If someone can import it, if someone can, of course, here in Australia, one buys it through eBay or it's simply not available. But it seems that there is even Turkish sulfur soap that can be imported. Of course, its method of use, it shouldn't be on the face. One must be careful not to get it near the mucous membranes. It should be applied from the neck down. So, practically, those who are bathing, it's enough to leave it on their body for about five minutes and then wash their body. First, it's very, very cheap compared to any medicine. You're talking about a cost that might be less than 1%. Second, it's the only way to get rid of scabies because scabies is self-infectious. Therefore, it must be treated twice every few days. When you treat it the first time, you kill the adults. And there are eggs. The eggs hatch. You have to do a second round before these babies become adults again and reproduce again. So, you have to treat it twice. When you are using the soap and the whole family uses it for six weeks, you don't have scabies that can lay eggs again. Even the eggs on the sheets and the adults on the sheets will die. So, the best way to get rid of it, honestly, is sulfur soap. Don't think that even here in Australia, there is scabies. I have many cases due to infection and what is called the "ping pong" effect. When one person in the family infects the others and gets reinfected by them, practically only sulfur soap solves the problem. Of course, there is a pill medication, which is Ivermectin, but I doubt if Ivermectin is available in Syria, and it would be very expensive. So, please, a medical piece of advice, please take it from your well-wisher.
I suggest that you make a short video.
You can summarize in a minute and a half or two minutes. What you just said. Many people will benefit from it. But if you make a short video, people will share it.
It could be dedicated to this topic. I hope you do something like that because this is what we can do to serve these people who are in the country. And we abroad can serve them through anything, even by giving advice.
Because the problem seems to be big, honestly. And as the young people here are saying, people are not bathing because there is no electricity. No, look, in all civil wars, international wars, and world wars, epidemics occur. Epidemics occur. In olden times, you know, cholera, yellow fever, and so on, and plague, and scabies, and everything. And they later found medications for them. And even, what else was there besides plague and scabies? There was cholera. Cholera is definitely a disaster. God protect us, as they say. No, I don't rule it out. Scabies is just the beginning. By the way, the situation is very, very bad in Syria. Anyway, it's a good idea. I might make a quick video, a minute or a minute and a half. It might be easy to share.
Even a short video can be up to three minutes, 180 seconds.
Exactly, exactly.
Do it for them. You do it. Say, "This is how it is."
They will take it and circulate it, I believe, for people who have this problem.
Okay, Mr. Khatib, is our next meeting on Monday or Thursday?
Honestly, what do you think, let's set it for Thursday.
Let's keep it for Thursday at the current time, and let Monday be a backup, an alternative.
Yes, alternative.
Okay, done.
We'll meet next Thursday at the same time. Thank you to everyone who followed us today, and we hope next Thursday will be better than today, based on that. Okay, bye-bye.
Peace.
Bye-bye. See you. Bye-bye. Bye-bye.