When three Gulf countries recalled their ambassadors from Qatar, some newspapers claimed that it was because of security issues within the Gulf. But this is a mere claim. Added to it was another claim about Qatar’s desire to expand its influence in the Arab world.
Some people claimed that the former Emir of Qatar had tried to run a Sunni-dominated empire by putting some of the revenues of the oil-rich country in the pockets of members of fundamentalist movements, and by promoting the ideology of Salafisim and the Muslim Brotherhood through Al Jazeera. They claimed that Qatar had provided the pulpits of Al Jazeera and Friday sermons to these fundamentalist groups.
On analysing the situation, we can underline the Saudi fear of Qatar’s growing political and diplomatic clout as well as the change in the balance of power between Qatar — a small country in terms of size and population — and the kingdom, which is a large country in terms of size and population.
Second, the Emirati fear that rests on the assumption that Qatar supports the Muslim Brotherhood, which seeks to overthrow its regime, even as this assumption is groundless. It cannot even explain why the UAE has ignored its claim on islands occupied by Iran, which has turned into a friend in a relationship that aims to serve the interests of soldiers amid new political and economic gains.
I am not a fan of mixing politics with religion, and by politics I mean party politics, which was replete with sermons about the Arab Spring over the past few years. Some of these orations had come before and were stronger than those of Sheikh Yousuf Al Qaradawi, such as the diatribes of Sheikh Ahmed Al Kubaisi against the Father Emir. This sheikh was hosted by some mosques and channels in the United Arab Emirates even though he was outspoken in his enmity to Qatar — enmity that existed even before the Arab Spring began.
Despite this, I side with those who say that Islam is both a religion and a way of life. I also believe in the importance of discussing the important problems of Islam and Muslims as well as any brutal aggressions during Friday sermons anywhere in the world. This will enable Muslims to have a clear idea of their problems as well as the dangers facing this nation so that they can be united against those who want to harm them and their religion.
At the same time, I am not one who can accept political dictations aimed at trimming the freedoms of mosque preachers, who for more than half a century disregarded major events in the Islamic world, although they can play the role of the media and deliver an international message. All channels broadcast mosque activities during the two Muslim feasts, which are strongly connected with the fasting month of Ramadan and the Haj pilgrimage.
Sermons used to focus strictly on religious matters and important issues like Jerusalem have not found their way into sermons. Muslims were only allowed to raise their hands to plead with God at the end of the prayer as far as this issue was concerned. We have to thank our preachers, who we hold in high esteem, for allowing us to do this, but still, we need more.
Meanwhile, the role of mosques in the United Arab Emirates was only to promote the Sufi order, allowing it to mess with the ideals of our religion. Together with this, the tomb of a virtuous man who we love greatly — God bless his soul — has turned from a mosque to a site. All of us know that this is not acceptable for Sunnis anywhere in the world because it takes the Islamic religion away from its main course.
On the other hand, some people like to broaden the meaning of the word “terrorism”. We rejected this when the United States took it as a pretext for fighting against everything that was Islamic. Every evil in the world was linked to Islam. Some people had gone as far as saying, “If you are not with me, you are against me”. Everything Islamic was branded “terrorist”.
“Terrorism” as a term has lost its meaning and turned into a garment tailored by everybody as they like. This has encouraged the media in the West to label Sunnis, whose beliefs are directly derived from Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) as sectarian. Does the current polarization aim at degrading the ideals of the Prophet, degrading Islam itself, and making it prone to sarcasm on social media like Twitter?
I do not really know which religion those who fight Sunnis subscribe to. We are not defending a specific political or religious party here. But let us be rational and discuss things from the angle of religion itself. Do the ideas of Sunnis pose a danger to a particular group of Muslims, which makes it necessary for them to fight them?
I hope I have managed to drive my point home in the previous argument.
Some people presume that the Father Emir had sought to extend Qatar’s leverage with the aim of undermining neighbouring countries. To realise this the Father Emir used the influence of Al Jazeera channel and support to Muslims Brotherhood and Salafists.
Here I need to mention some veteran analysts who have overlooked a general fact of political and international relations theories. It is about the effective role of the media in bringing about social and political change. This applies to the media in general, whether in the Arab world or elsewhere. This means that Al Jazeera did not invent this role. It is the accumulated effect of the influence of the Western media, including CNN and BBC. The Gulf war is proof of this.
The Arabs inherited this role, especially after they were blessed with open media. This role would never have changed the media map in the Arab world without the unprecedented revolution brought about by Al Jazeera. This opened the door for competition. Each country owns its media organs, not only in this region, but also in non Arabic-speaking countries such as Russia and the United States, where there are channels like Al Hurra American and Al Hurra Iraqi.
Every channel worked hard to cater to the needs of its viewers, but Al Jazeera was different, because it is not a personal project but a project for renaissance designed to serve a whole nation. Other Arab news projects, on the contrary, could only see the aims of their owners, not of their viewers. In doing this, these channels focused on Arab trivialities, ignoring the serious concerns of Arab countries. Still, these channels managed to attract many viewers and amass huge amounts of money. But viewers have found what they craved for in channels that address their brains, not those that address their waists. This is the heart of the influence.
