Druze of Syria within the Takfiri Storm
Mistaken is the one who thinks, even for a moment, that the "Nusra Front" and its sister groups distinguish between a Muslim and a Christian when carrying out their terrorism. These groups in fact make their living off the smell of blood. They enjoy dancing on the bodies of humans. Their act of takfir does not prevent them from burning down entire cities, or destroying homes over the heads of their inhabitants.
The massacre by the ‘Nusra Front' in Qalb Lawzah, Idlib, did not surprise the Druze community. They were aware that the ‘razor' will reach their necks someday. The history of the Takfiris demonstrated this. However, what fueled the anger (of the Druze community) was the manner in which Lebanese MP Walid Jumblatt reacted to the news of the massacre.
Many of the children of his religious community, as well as his supporters, are beginning to see the bottom of the abyss that their leader led them to, according to a leadership source in Chouf. Many of the sons of the Druze sect are ashamed by the ‘Beik' for what they call the great crime that he virtually committed by courting the ‘Nusra Front', and denying the occurrence of the massacres (that they were committing), thus giving them a verdict of innocence, freeing them of responsibility for their terrorism.
However, the insistence of Jumblatt on providing justifications for these terrorist gangs, and stripping off the label of ‘takfir' from them, pushed (Jumblatt's community) to consider that ‘their leader ‘ has lost the ability to distinguish between friend and foe. Therefore, they felt certain that there is no alternative to bearing arms in order to confront the upcoming threats.
Instead of following the logic of providing justifications for these terrorist groups, it would have been better for Abu Timor (Jumblatt) to follow the approach of his father, Kamal Jumblatt, and to take (lessons from) from his pan-national history, in which he said: "the one who escapes from the battle of life, is like the one who escapes from the battle of truth".
Perhaps it would have been better if he had weaved together a statement categorically denouncing what the hand of terrorism has carried out, that perhaps - according to the leadership source -would have washed away the sin of continuous courtship of the ‘Nusra Front'. The Unitarians (Druze), who have long put their faith in the son of the sect (Jumblatt), were surprised by the reaction of Jumblatt, causing the Mokhtara Palace (belonging to Jumblatt) to lose much popularity.
The [Druze community] thought for a long time that the ‘Beik' will protect them by relying on the influence he has within the (Syrian) ‘opposition' on the one hand, and within the leading capital cities of ‘NATO' on the other. Today, their hope has been lost. According to the leadership source, they have become disillusioned. They repeated in their meetings, whether private or public, (questions such as) ‘in which era does this man live in', and ‘to which denomination does he belong?'.
This has put Jumblatt before a major challenge, having found himself in a "dilemma", his wrong bets leading him to this situation. His call for the Druze Religious Council to convene is only aimed at covering up his "weak" stances. According to the source, Jumblatt seeks through this council, which is only made up of "his group", to minimise the fallout and justify his positions before his community, but in vain.
One who reflects on the archive of the statements of the ‘Beik' since the outbreak of the Syrian crisis until recent days, can see that he views the ‘Nusra Front' as a harmless child. Probably Abu Timor acted based on the principle of "whichever hand you cannot bite, then kiss it". He forgot that the pound requires a pound and an ounce (traditional Arab saying). These types of creatures [Nusra Front] can only be dealt with on the basis of a life or death battle. He thought that through these stances, he will protect the people of his community.
The writer and political analyst Ghalib Abu Muslih goes further than this. He says that the fate of the Druze, especially those in the Summaq Mountain are not even on the list of concerns of the Mokhtara leader Jumblatt. He called more than once for the Druze of the Mountain of the Arabs to adopt neutrality and a non-combative stance towards the ‘Nusra Front', towards which he has shown affection.
Abu Muslih was not surprised by all the tweets and statements that Jumblatt cleverly made. In his opinion, the history of this man testifies to betting on Saudi Arabia, and the United States, and on other states which brought up the Takfirists in Syria. He puts his interests above any national interest, and he bets on the hope that the people of his community do not stand in national ranks that are hostile to those aforementioned states.
What matters most for this man, is that he protects his head, and nothing else matters after that. Abu Muslih regrets - though is not surprised - by the approach adopted by the resident of Clemenceau [Jumblatt], which is far removed from the path of his father, the pan-Arab Kamal Jumblatt. In his opinion, the only son of Kamal resorted to similar positions during many historical stations under the pretext of defending the Druze community, just like what happened during the ‘Israeli' occupation.
It is Walid Jumblatt, and do not expect from him anything other than that, concludes the writer.
Source: al-Ahed news