Al-Haya and Hamas and Political Islam
It is widely believed that no other term in the world mirrors “political Islam,” as there is no such thing as “political Christianity,” “political Judaism,” or even “political Buddhism” or “political Hinduism.” Rather, there are merely parties bearing religious-political labels. Consequently, the term “political Islam,” common across all spheres of discourse, pertains specifically to Islamic countries and societies, and is often used to refer to Islamic or hardline, extremist, or armed groups. Westerners employ this term to highlight the tendency of such hardline or Salafi groups toward extremism and violence.
What these observers overlook is that medieval churches in Europe represented the supreme political authority during that period, and their control was not dismantled until the French Revolution; they were indeed characterized by rigid, fundamentalist ideology. Similarly, American presidents, clergy, and others have long harbored beliefs or inclinations that they are divinely sent. Jews in Israel have also worked to establish a Jewish identity, and for that purpose, they have waged dozens of religious and racist wars, committing every form of violence and crime against the indigenous inhabitants, thereby qualifying them as representatives of “political Judaism,” just as “political Christianity” existed before and after them.
“Political Islam” has been embodied in no movement or organization as it has in the Muslim Brotherhood, whose primary and ultimate goal in any country they found themselves in—including all Western nations—has been to seize power. It is therefore not surprising that the newly elected head of Hamas’s Political Bureau, Khalil al-Hayya, after his “election,” offered thanks to Iran, the Houthis, Hezbollah, and some armed factions in Iraq, crediting them with providing weapons and blood in support of Hamas, a movement that emerged from the very flesh and blood of the Muslim Brotherhood. He completely forgot, and likely deliberately, to thank the state and people of Kuwait, for example. Despite this, Kuwait was among the first to stand with the Palestinian cause from day one. I speak from my own experiences spanning nearly seventy years: neither I nor tens of thousands of others have ever failed to sympathize with the cause, continuously contributing financial support in its defense, following the stance and generosity of the people of Al-Dayera and our successive governments since the mid-1950s and earlier. We have also witnessed similar support from Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and others. What is the reason for this omission?
Especially since al-Hayya is not a naive politician who would overlook such matters, which are of great significance and known to any Palestinian. Thus, he did not act arbitrarily, but likely out of malice, in a clear move intended to erase all our previous positions and suggest that what we did was “forced upon us.” At the same time, Iran, to whom he expressed sincere gratitude, is sending its destructive missiles and lethal drones to target our desalination plants, airports, border centers, power generation stations, and homes. Moreover, it is instructing its proxies in Iraq to threaten us with invading our territory and attacking us, in a manner that has recently become almost daily. Space does not permit listing the rest of Iran’s crimes against other states in the region.
We reiterate that al-Hayya’s behavior did not come out of nowhere; rather, it stems from the Muslim Brotherhood’s ongoing efforts to seize power in Arab countries, particularly Gulf states, in service of their expansionist projects. This aligns with the original goal for which the Brotherhood was founded. Perhaps the name of the new movement’s president was not chosen from… nowhere!
Khalil al-Hayya, Hamas, and Political Islam
Ahmad Al-Sarraf
