By Editor in Chief: Ali Kassem
عنوان البريد الإلكتروني هذا محمي من روبوتات السبام. يجب عليك تفعيل الجافاسكربت لرؤيته.
The view about the Sultanate of Oman tended to believe that it had played a somewhat different role from others, including those in the Gulf Cooperation Council. According to this, the Sultanate had accumulated - by experience - many positions in favor of that view.
But, suddenly, Muscat abandoned all that accumulated in its political dealings and relinquished what its diplomacy achieved in the interest of opening up to the Israeli entity, which crowned by Netanyahu's visit and the warm reception of Sultan Qaboos, to shuffle the cards and raise dozens of difficult questions about the dimensions, objectives and goals of this step, which is followed by a more interesting set of positions, adding more questions instead of answering them.
The scene was completed with the Omani foreign minister call on the Arab countries to take measures to reassure Israel. He demanded for more than reassurance. He added more political and diplomatic confusion to the complex scene inside and outside the region. The role that the Sultanate has taken away from its history and accumulated legacy in complex diplomacy, has taken it beyond the regional trend to reach the global level.
It is clear that this coup leaves Oman without its most important functional role in which it has built a legacy it has been arguing for. It is also clear that it is a regression of the approach built by Omani diplomacy for decades, where the justifications it adopted seem to be contradicted even to themselves.
We do not want to take what is promoted about the port of Duqm and the American presence there, with its implications, but there is a need to ask the question: Which countries that Minister Ben Alawi wanted to do these measures, and what Arabs he was talking about?!
In this context, the answer to these questions seems to be based on a real understanding of the role of Oman in the previous stage, which constituted a coup in form and content, which requires minimal consideration of the background of the situation and the role that the Sultanate plays in the new situation in and outside the region.
If he meant the Arab League, it has lost its qualifications. If he meant the Arab countries, there are no countries that correspond to this status. If he indicated those countries that confiscated the Arab League and disgraced the Arab identity, he does not need a demand, these countries have initiated and exaggerated providing all the measures that it can adopt, but they were unable to plant confidence in the hearts of Israelis .. !!
Traditionally, the weak reassures the strong one. So, if Israel has that political and military power with the Western support, according to his point of view, which we oppose to the contrary, why does it need reassurance?
We do not want to make descriptions of the scene or the twisted and confused logic by which he approaches the issue, but to say the least: it is an exit from the context in which we used to Oman.
His words were not like Oman's ones. It was good that he spoke in English, because we do not want to believe that what he uttered was in Arabic, and we do not wish it to be one day.
What we were waiting for from Oman differs from what its Foreign Minister uttered. We were looking to him to invest the Omani accumulated diplomatic legacy in the service of the Arab cause, and not elsewhere, which would be understood to serve Israel's interests, justify its aggression and market its false factors of power, which we see as an illusion dispersed by the will of the believers and those who clung to their cause.
Translated by Amal Suleiman Ma'rouf